CZECH COMMENTS ON DRAFT U.S.-EU SUMMIT DECLARATION

C O N F I D E N T I A L PRAGUE 000328 SIPDIS EUR/ERA FOR CDEAN AND JGIAUQUE, EUR/NCE FOR ATRATENSEK, NSC FOR JAINSLEY AND ASTERLING E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/30/2013 TAGS: EUN EZ CU PGOV PREL SUBJECT: CZECH COMMENTS ON DRAFT U.S.-EU SUMMIT DECLARATION REF: A. STATE 57696 ¶B. CARNIE-DEAN E-MAIL DATED 5.27.08 ¶C. CARNIE-DEAN E-MAIL DATED 5.7.08 Classified By: POLEC Counselor Michael Dodman for reasons 1.4 (b) and ( d). ¶1. (C) Emboff spoke with Czech MFA Department of the Americas official, Jan Buben, who is coordinating the Czech positions and comments on the draft U.S.-EU summit declaration. With reference to the specific elements (Latin America and Missile Defense) highlighted in Ref A, Buben reiterated the Czech preference for the USG language on Cuba (Ref B),rather than the EU suggested edits. He emphasized that in the segment on Latin America it is important to be specific and reference Cuba, rather than make a general reference to the plight of political prisoners in the region. The Czechs feel the same way about the need to reference Venezuela, and the FARC. In Buben's opinion, the Czechs "stand alone" on this issue, so he does not expect that a specific reference to Venezuela, the FARC, or most particularly Cuba, will fly. ¶2. (C) On Missile Defense, the Czechs do not consider this paragraph to be significant, or particularly useful, in an EU document. This is not one of their top priorities for the declaration, indeed, on two previous discussions related to the declaration (Ref B and C),this was not even raised by the Czechs. They have reliably resisted domestic attempts to debate missile defense in an EU context, and prefer to keep this topic firmly within NATO. Thus, they feel that referencing Missile Defense in a NATO document is one thing, but in a U.S.-EU declaration it means very little to them. Graber