DRL DAS BARKS-RUGGLES HOLDS HUMAN RIGHTS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 08 LJUBLJANA 000116 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/06/2018 TAGS: PHUM PREL EUN SI SUBJECT: DRL DAS BARKS-RUGGLES HOLDS HUMAN RIGHTS CONSULTATIONS WITH SLOVENIAN EU PRESIDENCY Classified By: CDA Maryruth Coleman for reasons 1.4 (b,d) ¶1. (U) SUMMARY: On February 15, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Erica Barks-Ruggles and Director of Office of Human Rights, Humanitarian and Social Affairs, Bureau of International Organizations, Doug Rohn held bilateral and U.S.-EU consultations with Slovenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials. Barks-Ruggles and Rohn met with State Secretary/Political Director Matjaz Sinkovec, MFA Director SIPDIS General Anita Pipan, COTRA Chair Roman Kirn, COLAT Chair Stefan Bogdan Salej, COHOM Chair Smiljana Knez, MFA OSCE Office Director Damjan Bergant, and EUROMED Chair Veronika Stabej to discuss U.S. and EU priorities for international human rights policy, United Nations Human Rights Council 7th Session priorities, human rights dialogues and consultations, and other issues. END SUMMARY -------------- -------------- U.S. Priorities for International Human Rights Policy -------------- -------------- Prisoners of Conscience Declaration -------------- ¶2. (C) Barks-Ruggles and Rohn discussed the proposal for a joint U.S.-EU declaration and public affairs event at the UN in New York relating to prisoners of conscience. Barks-Ruggles emphasized the importance of having the event focus on countries that have atrocious human rights records, but have not been scrutinized in recent years by the UN, such as Cuba, Burma, and Zimbabwe. COHOM Chair Smiljana Knez stated that due to recent COHOM meetings there had been little time to review the U.S. draft declaration and the side event non-paper, but that she expected full comments from EU colleagues soon. Knez noted that initial comments from colleagues had raised two concerns: 1) that this effort not be interpreted as infringing on the independence of special rapporteurs); and 2) that the declaration and event should not focus on any one country, but should have a global focus. Knez also asked why the declaration and event should not be carried out in the HRC in Geneva rather than in the UN Third Committee in New York. ¶3. (C) Barks-Ruggles and Rohn agreed that special rapporteurs must maintain their independence, but also cited U.S. concerns that special rapporteurs are not giving �0A;equal attention to all countries. They agreed that the declaration and event should have a broad focus, but stressed the importance of highlighting the most egregious cases including Cuba and Burma. On the location, Barks-Ruggles pointed out that when this project was first conceived the Portuguese EU presidency advised that with a focus on Cuba and other gross violators, this effort would not succeed in Geneva due to the make-up of the HRC. Pursuing this effort in New York would allow for positive involvement by all countries - not just HRC member states - and could lead to a resolution at the next UN General Assembly. Knez promised to be in touch and to relay additional EU comments as soon as she received them. ¶4. (C) COTRA Chair and Head of the MFA Division for the Americas, Ambassador Roman Kirn stressed that Slovenia would like to see the U.S. in the HRC. He noted that Slovenia decided to run last year because of its upcoming turn as EU president and because of a desire to see change in the HRC. He said that Slovenia has high expectations for progress and needs like-minded partners such as the U.S. to help fix the Council. Barks-Ruggles assured Kirn that the U.S. has not thrown in the towel on the HRC and works with others to improve the HRC, but stressed continuing skepticism from the U.S. She underlined the need for the universal peer review process starting in April to be meaningful. LJUBLJANA 00000116 002 OF 008 ¶5. (C) Barks-Ruggles stressed the EU needs to join in pressing for the renewal of the mandate for the Independent Expert on the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). ¶6. (C) Regarding a possible resolution on Sri Lanka, Knez stated that the HRC will probably keep it in reserve as a threat against further deterioration of human rights. Knez noted that EU political directors will travel to Sri Lanka in mid-March. She also stated that Slovenia and the EU strongly support the effort to open an office of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour in Sri Lanka, despite the government's poor treatment of her during her visit. Knez pointed out that Sri Lanka will soon be subjected to the new Universal Periodic Review (UPR) (Note: at the May UPR session, end note) process in the HRC and that she hoped that it would bring new focus and pressure to the issue. Barks-Ruggles stated that the U.S. shares these concerns and has sent a firm message to the government of Sri Lanka on the need to improve its human rights record. ¶7. (C) Knez noted the need to press for human rights improvements in Kenya and would not rule out the possibility of calling a special session of the HRC, nor would she exclude the possibility of sanctions. She voiced strong support for the efforts currently being made on the ground in Kenya. Barks-Ruggles noted that Secretary Rice would travel to Kenya to support the efforts of former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to broker peace. Knez also SIPDIS noted that the mandate for Somalia must be extended. She added that the HRC may issue a declaration soon. HRC Thematic Initiatives -------------- ¶8. (C) Barks-Ruggles and Rohn stressed that although the U.S. shares the EU's concerns on religious intolerance, the U.S. could not support an EU resolution on religious intolerance that contained problematic references to hate speech that cross U.S. Constitutional lines and impinge on freedom of speech. Barks-Ruggles and Rohn urged the EU to revert to the traditional, previously agreed language on hate speech, a move that would allow the U.S. to support the next resolution on eliminating religious intolerance. Knez stated that she would relay these concerns to EU partners, but again stressed that the EU always works at the level of the lowest common denominator and tends to balance between active and cautious positions. ¶9. (C) Knez raised the Mexican initiative of promoting human rights in the fight against terrorism and noted that they intend to raise this at the HRC as well. Barks-Ruggles stated that the U.S. is concerned about duplication on this issue in the UNGA Third Committee where Mexico has run this resolution for years and the HRC, and is urging Mexico to refrain from introducing the resolution at the HRC. Knez said that she thought it was too late to avoid its introduction in Geneva and expressed concern that the consequence could be worse than mere duplication - it could lead to deteriorating language. She also noted that the Mexicans have expressed great enthusiasm for moving items from the Third Committee to the HRC. HRC Institutions - Universal Periodic Review -------------- -------------- ¶10. (C) Barks-Ruggles and Rohn made clear to all MFA officials that the U.S. is skeptical but hopeful that the new Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process of the HRC will be a real innovation that will lead to more robust reviews of serious human rights abusers. The U.S. is particularly concerned that certain nations are attempting to dumb down the process in order to avoid close scrutiny. Barks-Ruggles also stressed that UPR should not swamp the High Commissioner for Human Rights nor intrude upon her independence. Kirn expressed strong support for the UPR LJUBLJANA 00000116 003 OF 008 process, stating that it is a real opportunity to examine human rights in all countries. Knez noted that there is an on-going discussion in the EU on the UPR process, but that efforts are being made to ensure that the EU avoids acting as a block. Although EU nations want to work in "light coordination" in order to burden share, they do not wish to be seen as a block. Knez affirmed that the independence of the High Commissioner is an important priority for the EU, but that this must be a joint effort that also involves coordination with Latin America, Asia, and others. MFA Director General Anita Pipan expressed appreciation for U.S. support for UPR and noted that the EU has invested a great deal in UPR to ensure that it is an effective mechanism, including outreach to countries that lack resources to effectively fight human rights abuses. Knez stated that the first UPR session in April will be important as it will set a precedent. HRC Elections -------------- ¶11. (C) Barks-Ruggles stated that although we have not yet received the list of candidates for the next round of HRC elections, the U.S. is concerned that Zambia and Ghana are rotating off the HRC. She also noted that there are indications that both Egypt and Senegal are interested in running for the HRC presidency. Knez agreed with her that an Egyptian presidency could be disastrous for the HRC. Barks-Ruggles suggested that the Egyptians need to understand the unwanted scrutiny that the HRC presidency will bring to their domestic human rights situation. Pipan agreed with this assessment and suggested close coordination between the EU and the U.S. to ensure a positive composition of the HRC. When asked for updates on HRC candidacies, Knez revealed that the Czech Republic had just announced its intention to withdraw its candidacy due to pressure from other EU states. She also stated that Africa has yet to announce its candidates but opined that either Botswana or Mozambique would be good candidates. ¶12. (C) Barks-Ruggles and Rohn urged Slovenia to support the U.S. candidate for the HRC Advisory Committee, Andre Surena. Sinkovec indicated that he would have Slovenia's support. (Note: it was unclear that Sinkovec knew anything about the election and his statement of support could be in spirit rather than in fact. End note.) ¶13. (C) Rohn urged Slovenia to give close scrutiny to the recently announced list of candidates for the 14 HRC Special Rapporteur terms that will soon expire. He expressed U.S. concern that none of seven U.S. nominees had made the short list. While some of the final candidates are very qualified, Rohn noted that others threaten to bring a very unbalanced perspective to what should be an objective office. Knez promised to study the list closely and to keep U.S. concerns in mind. OSCE/ODIHR - Russia -------------- ¶14. (C) Regarding the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE),Barks-Ruggles said the U.S. supported the independent decision made by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) to decline Russia's invitation to observe the March presidential election due to overly restrictive conditions demanded by the GoR. Although MFA officials agreed with Barks-Ruggles' assessment that Russia has played a very negative role in the OSCE, they said it would be necessary to discuss Russia's objections to ODIHR missions in order to avoid a complete stagnation of the organization. Damjan Bergant, Director of the OSCE Office at the MFA and former DCM to the Slovenian OSCE mission, argued that the current conflict with Russia over ODIHR missions arises out of two factors: personality conflicts between ODIHR Director Christian Strohal and the Russian delegation and the LJUBLJANA 00000116 004 OF 008 Russian perception of unequal focus by ODIHR observation missions. He also expressed concern regarding the difficulty of arguing with some of Russia's legal arguments, noting that the Russians are correct in certain aspects of their legal analysis. Bergant suggested that the West needs to be flexible in order to find a solution that will both protect current missions, but also allow for a review of observation rules. He offered that Slovenia could play a positive role by facilitating a discussion that could allow for change without sacrificing principals. ¶15. (C) Barks-Ruggles responded that we should be wary about Russian demands for "reform," and stressed that OSCE/ODIHR election observation standards are the gold standard for the world and should not be diluted. Pipan agreed, but suggested that Russia's call for change could be an opportunity to strengthen OSCE/ODIHR standards even further. Knez suggested that the message to Russia should also be that it is so strong it has no reason to fear opening itself to civil society and media. OSCE/ODIHR - Kazakhstan -------------- ¶16. (C) Barks-Ruggles cited U.S. concerns that Kazakhstan live up to its promised reforms before taking the OSCE chairmanship in 2010. Director General Pipan stated that Kazakhstan's OSCE chairmanship could have great potential and that it was important to help Kazakhstan to implement its promises. She also noted that Kazakhstan had recently prepared a paper asking for closer relations with the EU and that the EU is inclined to react positively. Barks-Ruggles assured Pipan of U.S. support for Kazakh reform efforts, but stressed it must follow up its promises with actions. OSCE/ODIHR - Slovenian Candidate for ODIHR Director -------------- -------------- ¶17. (C) State Secretary Sinkovec and Director General Pipan put in a plug for the Slovenian candidate for the ODIHR directorship, Janez Lenarcic. Bergant affirmed that Lenarcic would not leave his current post as State Secretary for EU Affairs until after the close of the SIPDIS presidency and stressed that in addition to U.S. support, Slovenia would ask that the U.S. lobby on his behalf. Barks-Ruggles stated that she would pass the message. Support Needed for Upcoming Elections - Iraq and Afghanistan -------------- -------------- ¶18. (C) Barks-Ruggles thanked Slovenia for the EU pledge to provide $20 million in assistance to the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) and thanked Slovenia for its debt forgiveness and assistance to Iraq. She noted that the upcoming Iraqi elections will require substantial support from the international community and urged Slovenia as the EU Presidency to work with the GOI, the UN and the U.S. to ensure the needed resources for elections are available. ¶19. (C) Noting ongoing debates in Afghanistan on the form of future elections, Barks-Ruggles stressed that the U.S. is not taking a position but is working to ensure support for the elections is sufficient. Knez gave assurances that Slovenia and the EU support positive elections in both Iraq and Afghanistan, but stressed the need to look beyond the elections, noting that they are a critical part of the process, but not the end goal. Country Specific Issues -------------- Iran -------------- LJUBLJANA 00000116 005 OF 008 ¶20. (C) Barks-Ruggles and Knez agreed that the human rights situation in Iran has deteriorated significantly. Barks-Ruggles outlined U.S. policy, noting that after the elections the U.S. will issue a strong statement on the entire process' failure to meet international norms for democratic elections, and urged that the EU do the same. Knez noted that there is some debate within COHOM regarding whether to reengage in a human rights dialogue with Iran, with some arguing for reengagement and others insisting on Iran first taking substantial steps based on past dialogues before any further engagement occurs. Barks-Ruggles strongly urged the latter. Burma -------------- ¶21. (C) Barks-Ruggles stated that the U.S. has been pressing UN Special Envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari to give the Burmese regime a deadline for starting a real dialogue with the opposition, including ASSK and the NLD, and ethnic groups. Knez affirmed that the EU is 100 percent on the same page with the U.S. regarding Burma. She noted COHOM disappointment with the brief length of the visa Special Rapporteur Paulo Pinheiro received from the Burmese regime. She does not expect any change in the message Pinheiro will present to the HRC upon his return from Burma in March, if he is allowed to go. Knez stressed that regional players such as China and India must do more and noted that China has recently shown positive signs. Cuba -------------- ¶22. (C) Discussions turned to Cuba at many points throughout the day, with Barks-Ruggles repeatedly stressing the need to avoid a simple Castro to Castro transition and to help facilitate real political dialogue on the island. Kirn affirmed that the issue of political prisoners is always very high on the list of EU priorities for Cuba. Hestated that both the EU and individual EU member sates - even those one might not expect - press te Cuban regime on this issue. But he acknowledge that EU discussions regarding Cuba take place wthin the EU common foreign policy framework and herefore it is not always easy to reach agreement. State Secretary Sinkovec mentioned that he may visit Cuba in the run-up to the EU - Latin America and Caribbean Summit in May. ¶23. (C) COLAT Chair and MFA Special Representative to Latin America Ambassador Stefan Bogdan Salej requested greater clarification on U.S. human rights policy in Cuba, stating that there is much misunderstanding in the EU on this issue. He also noted that all EU missions, even the Spanish, press Cuba to release political prisoners, and stressed that this is the basis for EU common policy. Salej stated that a positive Cuban transition will only occur if the EU, the U.S., and other important players such as Brazil, Mexico, and other Latin American countries work together to show Cuba that relations with the international community will only improve with human rights advancements. ¶24. (C) In her meeting with Knez, Barks-Ruggles inquired about the EU Common Position on Cuba that will come up in June. Knez stated that the usual problems will apply and that it is still too early to predict what would be the result of the discussions. However, she did say that the EU wants Cuba to demonstrate cooperation with the international community by inviting special rapporteurs to the island. Knez stated that although it would be understandable if Cuba began by inviting less controversial rapporteurs, such as those who deal with housing or food, it would take the invitation of more critical rapporteurs to convince the EU that Cuba is taking human rights more seriously. Barks-Ruggles stressed that the U.S. hopes to LJUBLJANA 00000116 006 OF 008 see the EU Common Position preserved. Belarus -------------- ¶25. (C) Barks-Ruggles noted rumors that Germany may press for a lifting of EU sanctions against Belarus due to the recent release of several political prisoners. Knez stated that the EU is very cautious regarding Belarus and wishes to see the release of all political prisoners. She said that she had not closely followed the internal discussions on sanctions, but that she agrees that sanctions should not be dropped based on the release of three prisoners. Zimbabwe -------------- ¶26. (C) Barks-Ruggles expressed deep U.S. disappointment in the invitation of Robert Mugabe to the EU - Africa Summit. She noted that we need to be press the AU to exert more influence over Zimbabwe and press for international monitors to observe the March 29 elections. Knez agreed, noting that the intervention of a key player such as South Africa is necessary. Uzbekistan -------------- ¶27. (C) At her lunch with Pipan, Barks-Ruggles informed the Director General that the U.S. is skeptical but hopeful that the EU can make progress with Uzbekistan, and stressed the need to push Uzbekistan to take concrete and positive action to improve human rights. She inquired about reports that the EU may lift sanctions this spring. Knez stated that she had not heard about any plans to lift sanctions and that she agreed that it would not be wise. She stated that there will be a sanctions discussion in either March or April before the EU dialogue with Uzbekistan in May. -------------- EU Priorities -------------- EU Guidelines on Human Rights -------------- ¶28. (C) Knez listed the EU Guidelines on Human Rights as being: children and armed conflict; promotion of international humanitarian law; the death penalty; human rights defenders; and torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Regarding the guideline on the death penalty, Knez stated that the EU is currently working on Saudi Arabia, Cuba, and Iran. She also noted that the EU is particularly concerned about the present case of the young Afghani journalism student who has received a death sentence for alleged blasphemy against Islam. Knez pointed out that this case clearly falls under the EU guideline, but that at present the EU has decided to take a quiet approach through a private demarche to Afghani President Hamid Karzai urging him to commute the sentence. However, Knez noted that there are some in the EU who are pressing the EU to go public with its concerns. She stated that the EU would discuss the issue at the February 18 GAERC. She also affirmed that the EU will continue to push for the global abolishment of the death penalty. ¶29. (C) Regarding human rights defenders, Knez revealed that the EU is building on the German initiative to facilitate visas for human rights defenders, with a key goal being harmonization of visa processes for fast admission of human rights defenders who are under threat to all EU countries. She noted that the EU is interested in coordinating with the U.S. to assist human rights defenders on the ground. Barks-Ruggles noted that the U.S. had initiated a global human rights defenders fund that is now successfully providing small grants to human rights LJUBLJANA 00000116 007 OF 008 defenders to cover medical care, travel, and other forms of assistance. She offered a briefing at upcoming troika COHOM meetings in Washington. UNHRC 7th Session Priorities -------------- Human Rights Dialogues and Consultations -------------- China -------------- ¶30. (C) Knez stated that the EU - China dialogue will take place in Ljubljana in mid-May and will again feature a seminar. The dialogue will focus on freedom of expression, human rights defenders, and the right to health, while seminar topics will be protection of children's rights and the right to health. Barks-Ruggles raised the Human Rights Exchange (HRE) scheduled for late March and offered to have DRL's China expert Susan O'Sullivan attend the upcoming COHOM troika meeting in order to discuss the HRE. Russia -------------- ¶31. (C) Knez addressed the upcoming EU - Russia dialogue in April by revealing that these dialogues are far more frustrating than those carried out with China. She expressed bewilderment with Russia's extreme paranoia towards civil society. African Union -------------- ¶32. (C) Knez stated that exploratory talks between the EU and the African Union (AU) had revealed good will and good structures within the AU, but that there is a huge gap between AU aspirations and its capabilities and therefore the AU will need a great deal of support. She noted that when the EU - AU dialogue begins, there will be a heavy focus on capacity building. She requested close coordination between the EU and the U.S. to avoid duplication and to create synergy. Barks-Ruggles agreed. EUROMED -------------- ¶33. (C) Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EUROMED) Chair Veronika Stabej noted that the group has not yet carried out the expected restructuring, but is under new pressure to do so due to French President Nicolas Sarkozy's EU for the Mediterranean initiative. She stated that, nonetheless, the Barcelona Process continues and that EUROMED has been able to maintain a positive dialogue on human rights. Stabej asserted that Slovenia can be a positive player in this forum (the only body besides the UN in which both Israel and the Palestinian Territories participate) because Slovenia does not carry any historical baggage in the Mediterranean. ¶34. (C) Barks-Ruggles emphasized the importance of supporting civil society in many of the EUROMED member states, especially by helping civil society to strengthen its networks. Stabej fully agreed. She stated that the Anna Lind Euro-Mediterranean Foundation is serving well as a network of networks in the region and noted that the Slovenian Peace Institute currently heads the foundation. Comment -------------- ¶35. (C) Throughout the human rights consultations, Slovenian officials demonstrated a strong interest and dedication to human rights and a willingness to cooperate with the U.S. on a host of issues. They will likely LJUBLJANA 00000116 008 OF 008 continue to be a positive influence in the HRC and in their role as EU President. However, the seemingly innocent questions put forth by State Secretary Sinkovec in his introductory meeting with Barks-Ruggles and Rohn may reveal the few areas where the U.S. - EU relationship on human rights will continue to hit small bumps in the road. Sinkovec questioned whether progress in Africa was possible; he noted that he is more optimistic about Cuba and Burma than countries such as Kenya and Zimbabwe. He mentioned that he will likely travel to Cuba and Venezuela in advance of the EU - Latin America and Caribbean Summit in May. He also inquired how we can balance human rights, civil liberties, and the need for security. Lastly, he asked whether the use of the death penalty has been an effective tool against crime in the U.S. and elsewhere. Although Slovenian officials appear distrustful of Russian intentions in ODIHR, they seem more willing to engage in a debate that could end in results that neither one of us wants. End Comment. ¶36. (U) DRL DAS Erica Barks-Ruggles has cleared on this cable. COLEMAN