NETHERLANDS/UNGA: THIRD COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 THE HAGUE 002426 SIPDIS SIPDIS DUBAI FOR J. BURNS E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/08/2011 TAGS: PHUM PREL KTIA UN NL SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS/UNGA: THIRD COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS REF: A. STATE 183547 ¶B. STATE 182267 THE HAGUE 00002426 001.2 OF 002 Classified By: Political Officer Ted Burkhalter; reasons 1.4 (b, d). ¶1. (C) Summary: MFA Human Rights Division chief expects the GONL to oppose the Iranian retaliatory resolution and the Belarusian measure on country resolution mechanisms. He believes the GONL will, in the end, find itself reluctantly supporting the resolution on detentions. He expressed a strong preference for watering down the anti-U.S. resolution, rather than taking an up or down vote. The Netherlands will definitely support the U.S.-led resolution on Belarus and, though supportive also of the resolution on Uzbekistan, must await the outsome of Nov 8 EU-Uzbek discussions. End summary. ¶2. (C) Poloff delivered ref A demarche Nov 7 to MFA Head of Human Rights Division Pieter Raemer and his deputy, Birgitta Tazelaar. MFA officials are still discussing their approach, but Raemer (who previously was Head of the UN and IFIs Political and Legal Affairs Division) outlined what he thought the likely Dutch position. Retaliatory resolutions -------------- ¶3. (C) Raemer described the Belarusian resolution on the use of the country resolution mechanism as "ridiculous," and suggested that the ideal strategy, if possible, would be to ignore it. In any event, he said that The Netherlands would oppose the measure. On the second Belarusian measure - described as openly anti-U.S. - his preference would be to try to water it down. He preferred reaching a consensus, rather than taking an up or down vote. He did not rule out such a vote, but he pointedly avoided further discussion of it. ¶4. (C) Turning to the next measure - the joint Uzbek-Belarusian resolution on detentions - Raemer noted that it avoided naming the U.S. and that it opened Western countries who opposed it to accusations of employing a double standard. He suggested a two track approach - exploring possibilities for altering the language, while simultaneously pressing our argument that these matters are the subject of resolutions already before the UNGA. He said that the U.S. could help by carefully examining the text and suggesting ways in which it might be rendered acceptable. Although Raemer felt the best outcome would be for the Belarusians and Uzbeks to withdraw the resolution, he felt this unlikely. He predicted that The Netherlands would, in the end, have to vote in favor of the resolution. ¶5. (C) Raemer said that The Netherlands would unequivocably oppose the Iranian sponsored resolution on Canada. Supporting the U.S.-led resolutions -------------- ¶6. (C) Raemer confirmed that the resolution on Belarus will receive full Dutch support. Dutch support for the resolution on Uzbekistan would, however, be determined following the November 8 EU consultations with Uzbekistan. Dutch MFA officials covering Uzbekistan and human rights have said repeatedly in recent days that they are adamantly opposed to the German effort to weaken sanctions, and they have indicated that they favor the U.S.-led resolution. They have not, however, committed to fighting it out in EU fora. Comment: No going to the mat for the U.S., alone -------------- --- ¶7. (C) The Dutch are approaching November 22 national elections and are unlikely to go to the mat for us on human rights. If, however, the November 8 Uzbek-EU meetings go poorly and the November 14-15 Foreign Ministers meeting in Brussels comes out strongly against a weakening of EU sanctions on Uzbekistan, our hand may be strengthened considerably. GONL: Please support draft on Violence Against Women -------------- -------------- THE HAGUE 00002426 002.2 OF 002 ¶8. (SBU) Tazelaar asked that we consider lending our support to the Draft Resolution on the Intensification of Efforts to Eliminate Violence Against Women, cosponsored by The Netherlands and France. The resolution should come up for a vote, she said, in the next few weeks. Tazelaar was cognizant of U.S. and Israeli objections (as she phrased it) to mention of territories under "foreign occupation." In all other respects, though, she thought U.S. concerns could be assuaged. The Dutch are open to further discussion on this. ¶9. (C) Comment: In light of the strong Dutch support for Israel's right of self defense, this past August - and the beating taken by FM Bot in Parliament for this support - post recommends we make every effort to show the Dutch that, even if we do not support the resolution, we are listening to their arguments. ARNALL