GUATEMALA: DEMARCHE ON RESOLUTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

C O N F I D E N T I A L GUATEMALA 001429 SIPDIS DEPT FOR DRL/MLGA LYNN SICADE AND ALYSON GRUNDER E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/13/2018 TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL UN GT SUBJECT: GUATEMALA: DEMARCHE ON RESOLUTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN IRAN REF: A. STATE 118278 ¶B. GUATEMALA 1162 ¶C. GUATEMALA 736 Classified By: P/E Officer Mordica Simpson for reasons 1.4 (b&d). ¶1. (SBU) Per ref A, the Ambassador met with FM Rodas November 11 to urge GOG support for U.S. priority resolutions on Iran, Burma, and the DPRK. Rodas stated that he would review the issues relating to these country resolutions and inform the Ambassador of a decision. Embassy also delivered ref A talking points to Luis Carranza, Director for Multilateral Policy at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. ¶2. (C) We thanked Carranza for the GOG's principled opposition to no-action motions. Carranza stated that the GOG had received pressure from the Government of Iran to vote in favor of no-action motions, but conveyed that the GOG would not change its policy on this issue. Embassy also solicited GOG support for country resolutions on Iran, Burma, and the DPRK at the upcoming Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). Carranza stated that if the Canadian resolution has balanced language that includes both positive and negative aspects of the human rights situation in Iran, the GOG may consider voting in favor of the resolution. He also stated that the GOG may consider voting in favor of country resolutions if the UN Secretary General issues a report stating that there are gross human rights violations in these countries. Carranza said he had heard reports that the language in the draft resolution on the DPRK would be balanced and if this is the case, the GOG may also be able to vote in favor of this resolution. Carranza underscored that the GOG would never vote against these country resolutions, but may abstain. Carranza also highlighted that the GOG has a policy of not co-sponsoring country resolutions and noted that the GOG will make a final decision on any resolution only after reading the proposed language. ¶3. (C) Embassy also expressed the USG's disagreement that substantive resolutions be heard through the Universal Periodic Review process at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). According to Carranza, the GOG had "thoroughly discussed" the fact that Universal Periodic Review only allows countries to be reviewed every five years. However, he stated that there are other mechanisms available through the UNHRC, such as an emergency session, that would allow members to discuss a country's alleged human rights violations at any time. Carranza also highlighted that the GOG would vote against any amendment that attempts to shift attention from the key issues in a resolution. McFarland