PROCESSING OF G VISAS AND MEETING U.S. HOST

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 001939 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS VISAS DEPARTMENT FOR IO/UNP - EDMONDSON/ E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/10/2026 TAGS: OFDP CVIS UN SUBJECT: PROCESSING OF G VISAS AND MEETING U.S. HOST COUNTRY OBLIGATIONS REF: A. A) STATE 132282 ¶B. B) STATE 124954 Classified By: Deputy U.S. Representative, Alejandro D. Wolff, reason 1 .4 (C,D) ¶1. (SBU) Summary and Action Request. The USG's time frame for responding to SAO clearance requests for G visa applicants appears to some governments and UN lawyers to conflict with USG obligations as host country to the UN not to impede travel of individuals coming to the UN on official business. USUN asks Department, to the extent possible, to consider as a solution giving much higher priority to expeditously clearing SAO requests involving G visa applicants and seeks Department's guidance in responding to repeated charges by affected UN Missions that USG delays in visa issuance violate international law, including the US-UN Headquarters Agreement. Finally, recognizing the importance of security considerations in the administrative processing of all visas, including G visas, post seeks Department's determination of what period of time, from the submission of the G visa application through to visa issuance, would be sufficient to conclude necessary administrative processing and also meet our host country obligations to issue visas promptly and not to impede travel. See action request at paragraph 9. End Summary and Action request. The view from the UN - the 15 day "rule" in a post-9/11 era - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ¶2. (SBU) Over the past two to three years, several UN delegations, whose nationals are subject to SAO clearance requirements (e.g., Russia, Cuba, Syria) have sharply and repeatedly criticized the U.S. in meetings of the 19-member UN Committee on Relations with the Host Country (a/k/a the Host Country Committee-HCC) for its failure to issue visas in a timely manner consistent with our host country obligations under international law. Over a period of many years, an unwritten understanding has arisen among other UN delegations and the UN Secretariat (including its Office of Legal Affairs),that 15 working days, from the date a visa application is submitted until it is issued, is a reasonable time frame for the host country to issue visas to those coming to the UN on official business, and that the host country's issuance of visas within the 15 working days time 
frame is consistent with its obligations under the US-UN Headquarters Agreement and other relevant international instruments. ¶3. (U) The Russian Mission, in particular, continues to press for a shorter time period for issuing visas to G applicants (e.g., 10 working days),asserting that the long time period required for 'administrative processing' of its delegates' visa applications makes it virtually impossible for the Russian Federation to assign late substitutions to its delegation lists for UN meetings, thus depriving the Russian Federation of its desired and most effective representation at these UN meetings. ¶4. (SBU) In an effort to meet our host country obligations and to eliminate or at least reduce the volume of complaints from affected delegations, USUN devotes considerable effort to fielding inquiries from affected delegations regarding applicants who, near or just after the 15 working days from the time applications were submitted on their behalf, have not yet received their G visas and are therefore unable to proceed to official UN meetings. When necessary, USUN requests expedited SAO clearances. USUN has cautioned delegations in the Host Country Committee and by circular diplomatic note that the post-9/11 security environment makes it necessary in some cases for visa issuance to take longer than 15 working days, and delegates should apply for visas as soon as possible. However, we remain concerned that if the Committee were to submit the issue to the UN Office of Legal Affairs (OLA),the OLA could issue a legal opinion noting that host country visa issuance for diplomats coming to the UN that takes longer than 15 working days is not prompt, that it constitutes an impediment to their transit to and from UN headquarters, and that the U.S. thus violates Article IV Section 11 of the U.S.-UN Headquarters Agreement and/or some other provision of international law. Recent developments in SAO requests - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ¶5. (SBU/NOFORN) Ref A provides, inter alia, for inserting the UNGA acronym into SAO requests so that prospective UNGA attendees to the fall session (September 12 through mid-December) can have their visa applications processed more quickly. But Ref B notes that the current processing time for Visas Bear requests (which includes G visa applicants coming to the UN throughout the year, not only during the fall session of the UNGA) averages about 18 days. This 18 days refers solely to the time required for obtaining SAO clearance. The actual visa process from submission of application to issuance is, of course, even longer. Ref B also reports that CA is very concerned about processing student visa applications that are subject to Visas Donkey SAO requests in a timely manner, and that the Department will now give priority in providing SAO Visas Donkey clearances to applicants for student, vocational school and exchange visitor visas. The provisions of 9 FAM Appendix G relating to special clearance procedures clearly assume a period for SAO clearances that make it difficult in many cases for a consular officer to issue a G visa within 15 working days from the submission of an application, as is currently assumed and expected by UN delegations and the UN Secretariat in New York. ¶6. (C) USUN has also noticed that bilateral or other considerations also can delay visa issuance in a manner which appears to some governments and UN lawyers to conflict with our obligations as host country to the UN. In some cases, clearance is not sent to the issuing post until the day the visitor proposes to travel or the day his or her meeting is to convene. In other cases, actors in the clearance process do not signal their agreement to issue a visa until after the meeting in question has ended. Both types of action can be seen to constitute a "pocket veto," which also appears to contravene our host country obligations. Under a longstanding "modus vivendi" with the UN, it is understood that we can deny issuing a visa to an individual coming to the UN on official business provided that the Department, at the highest level, has decided that issuance would be inimical to our national security. Such a decision is reached by means of an action memorandum to the seventh floor. Over the past four to five years, the "pocket veto" has eroded the "modus vivendi," again putting the host country at odds with the UN. U.S. obligations as Host Country to the UN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ¶7. (U) The U.S. as host country to the UN has obligations under the U.S.-UN Headquarters Agreement (1947),the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (1946),and other documents. Specifically, the Headquarters Agreement in Article IV - Communications and Transit, Section 11 states that "(t)he federal...authorities of the United States shall not impose any impediments to transit to or from the headquarters district of (1) representatives of Members or officials of the United Nations...or the families of such representatives or officials." Section 13(a) states that "(l)aws and regulations in force in the United States regarding the entry of aliens shall not be applied in such manner as to interfere with the privileges referred to in Section 11. When visas are required for persons referred to in that Section, they shall be granted without charge and as promptly as possible." ¶8. (U) Article IV, Section 11 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations states that "Representatives of Members to the principal and subsidiary organs of the United Nations and to conferences convened by the United Nations, shall, while exercising their functions and during their journey to and from the place of meeting, enjoy the following privileges and immunities:...(d) exemption in respect of themselves and their spouses from immigration restrictions...in the state they are visiting or through which they are passing in the exercise of their functions." Section 16 states that in this article the expression "representatives" shall be deemed to include all delegates, deputy delegates, advisers, technical experts and secretaries of delegations. SIPDIS ¶9. (SBU/NOFORN) Action request - USUN is concerned that the FAM and time frames applied by the Department in clearing SAO requests for G visa applicants coming to the UN or its specialized agencies on official business may be deemed inconsistent with our obligations as host country under various relevant international instruments. To minimize that risk, USUN urges that G visa applicants be given higher priority in expediting SAO clearances, to contain allegations that the USG does not fully comply with its obligations, and so that we can eliminate or reduce significantly the complaints of affected delegations in this regard. USUN also seeks Department's guidance in responding to repeated charges by affected delegations that USG delays in visa issuance violate our host country obligations. Finally, USUN seeks Department's determination of what time period, (from the time an applicant submits an application for an official G visa until it is issued, including all the required administrative processing),is sufficient and necessary for the U.S. to meet its host country obligations. BOLTON