DRL DAS BARKS-RUGGLES AND IO ACTING DAS REES EU

C O N F I D E N T I A L USEU BRUSSELS 001475

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/03/2018
TAGS: PREL PGOV PHUM EU
SUBJECT: DRL DAS BARKS-RUGGLES AND IO ACTING DAS REES EU
HUMAN RIGHTS CONSULTATIONS FOCUS ON STRATEGY FOR UPCOMING
UN THIRD COMMITTEE

Classified By: Political Minister Counselor Christopher Davis for reaso
ns 1.4 (b, d).

--------------
Summary
--------------


1. (C) Summary: DRL DAS Erica Barks-Ruggles and IO Acting
DAS Grover Joseph Rees met September 1 in Brussels with the
EU Working Party on Human Rights (COHOM) Troika as part of
ongoing consultations. The EU-hosted meetings were led by
Jacques Pellet, French MFA Deputy Director for Human Rights
and Humanitarian Affairs, Riina Kionka, Personal
Representative for Human Rights of SG Javier Solana, Rolf
Timans, Head of the European Commission's Human Rights and
Democratization Unit, and Martin Boucek, Deputy Director of
the Czech MFA Human Rights and Transition Policy
Department. The day-long discussions covered U.S.-EU
coordination
on UNGA Third Committee priorities as well as the Mauritanian
coup,
human rights and humanitarian problems in Central Asia, plans
for the
October BMENA Forum for the Future, and the state of EU and
U.S. human
rights dialogues with Vietnam and China. The Czechs urged a
U.S. return to the
Human Rights Council (HRC),and the French provided a brief
update on the EU,s
priorities during the HRC,s ninth session from September
8-26. End Summary.

--------------
U.S. International Human Rights Priorities
--------------


2. (C) DAS Barks-Ruggles led off the consultations with a
review of several
top U.S. human rights concerns (leaving aside issues that
would be dealt with
during the UNGA Third Committee agenda item). She expressed
concern over
developments in Mauritania, thanking the EU for its strong
condemnation
of the recent overthrow of the democratically elected
government, and expressing U.S. disappointment, especially
given the real strides that were being taken by the former
government. She described the legally mandated steps the
U.S. will make
in cutting off security assistance, and our efforts to work
with the Community
of Democracies (CD),to condemn the coup, noting that India
and South Africa
had blocked a CD statement. The Europeans echoed their
disappointment at
this coup, but wondered at our decision to pursue a statement
from the CD
rather than other bodies. Timans said the EU response would
include a partial suspension of assistance and then
establishment of
formalized mechanism for consultations to set benchmarks
for the restoration of democracy. He anticipated that
Mauritania would be on the agenda of the September
semi-annual EU-AU meeting, noting that in general it is
difficult
to convince African states to agree to criticism of other
Africans.


3. (C) On Central Asia, DAS Barks-Ruggles alerted her EU
interlocutors
that the U.S. is already considering how we can help
Tajikistan and Kyrghystan should
there be humanitarian need in the event of another difficult
winter. Fears of food and fuel
shortages are well-founded; the U.S. hopes other countries
will also start
thinking now about provision of assistance. The Europeans
expressed interest in the
approach, noting attention to dire humanitarian needs can
help our focus on other
issues as well. Barks-Ruggles expressed concern about
Kazakhstan's failure to
make progress on commitments it made in Madrid in 2007 for
its OSCE chairmanship in

2010. The U.S. is concerned over likely continued Russian
attempts to exclude NGOs
from the OSCE Human Dimension meeting in Warsaw in October.
We need to be united in
pressing the Kazakhs now so they will not give in to Russian
pressure. The
Europeans agreed and added that the Kazakh government has not
lived up to
commitments it made on media and religious freedom.
Barks-Ruggles noted our concerns
with Uzbekistan's efforts to convince its neighbors to refoul
the Andijan refugees.
On Central Asia generally, Pellet noted that at a July
meeting in Tashkent of EU
Ambassadors to Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan,
Kazakhstan and Tajikistan,
human rights was the main concern discussed. The EU is
having human rights
dialogues with each of these countries, including dialogues
with civil society
alongside. The meeting with Kyrgyzstan is scheduled for
October 28. Pellet said
the EU tries not to "shame" the countries but to look for
tools for urging them
forward. All agreed we should look at the potential impact
of events in Georgia
on Central Asia.


4. (C) On the Middle East, Barks-Ruggles said that the dates
of October 18-19
have been set for the BMENA Forum for the Future, with an
October 16 civil society
meeting in Dubai. She said the UAE has come a long way and
expressed hope
that there would be high level representation from G-8
countries, especially
by French FM Kouchner.

--------------
UNGA Third Committee Priorities
--------------


5. (C) Barks-Ruggles said our biggest concern for the UNGA
Third Committee was the proliferation of No Action Motions
and the use of the tactic to attempt to defeat Canada,s
resolution against Iran,
the top U.S. priority. We want to coordinate closely with
the
EU in identifying countries whose votes could be influenced.
The EU has yet to decide which member country will lead the
EU,s efforts
to combat no-action motions, but Pellet pledged that we would
work together.
Acting DAS Rees expressed concern about the increasing
tendency of
countries to support No Action Motions as a matter of
principle, claiming that the UN has no right to
interfere in internal matters, when in fact the protection
of human rights is a key, and overriding principle.
Barks-Ruggles
suggested to the French that they reach out to Francophone
African countries to lobby hard for "no" votes on the
no-action motion,
or for abstentions from those who cannot do so. She noted
that there
are some countries who will not want to vote against Iran,
but could be convinced
to "take a coffee break" during the voting, thus helping
defeat the no-action motion. All agreed that Iran is already
actively
lobbying countries to defeat the resolution.


6. (C) Barks-Ruggles said we continue to press
North Korea on human rights issues. There was
general agreement that there has been no progress on human
rights in DPRK, and there is continuing concern over returned
refugees and abductees. The EU stated that it plans to run a
Third
Committee resolution on the situation in DPRK again this
year.


7. (C) On Burma, Pellet opened with the EU's concerns
about the performance of UN Special Envoy Gambari and UN
Human Rights Rapporteur Gambari. Acting DAS Rees noted we
had heard that Gambari assured the regime there would be no
resolution in the UN Security Council. Barks-Ruggles added
that we are concerned that Gambari is feeding into the
regime's
efforts to take the focus off its commitment to dialogue with
Aung San Sui Kyi
and shift attention to its planned "roadmap to democracy."
All
these concerns point to the importance of the EU's Burma
resolution,
which it will run again this fall.


8. (C) The COHOM Troika expressed surprise at
Barks-Ruggles,s statement that, for the time being, the
U.S. has decided not to run a resolution on Belarus this
year. She
informed them that a high level decision not to run the
resolution
had been taken in the wake of the GOB,s August release of
all remaining political prisoners. The Europeans expressed
the hope that
if the September 28 elections go badly or if there are
renewed arrests after the elections, that the U.S. would
take another look at the resolution. Barks-Ruggles and
Rees assured them this was the case and emphasized that we
wanted to
use this moment to press the Belarus government to take
further steps to
improve the human rights situation and perhaps to
reconsider Belarusian dependence on Russia. The EU expressed
concern
about the U.S. decision, and suggested running a softer
resolution or using the
decision to press for more gains. At the end of the
discussion, they
agreed that the release of prisoners needed to be
recognized and that there would be sufficient time for
reconsideration should the situation take a turn for the
worse.


9. (C) On Zimbabwe the U.S. delegation noted that the human
rights
situation had not received attention in the UN except for the
UNSC
discussion. The Europeans noted some improvements, including
the election
of an opposition party speaker of parliament and the
reauthorization of
NGOs to distribute humanitarian aid. While all agreed the
situation on
the ground remained difficult, there was agreement with
Acting DAS
Rees's point that it would not help if a resolution on human
rights in
Zimbabwe was run and then lost. Barks-Ruggles agreed with
Pellet,s assertion
that any resolution on an African country would have to have
African support.
Pellet agreed to ask EU partners if they would be willing to
have the EU run a
Zimbabwe resolution should the then-ongoing negotiations
fail. The U.S.
delegation noted the U.S. would take on the task of running
the Burma
resolution in that case. (Note: A power-sharing agreement,
mediated by
South African President Mbeki, was signed by opposition
leader Tsvangirai
and President Mugabe,s party on September 15 in Harare. EU
human rights
officials subsequently met and determined that they would NOT
run a Zimbabwe
resolution, but would support a U.S. resolution, depending on
how the political
process in Zimbabwe progresses.)

--------------
Thematic Resolutions
--------------


10. (C) Freedom of Expression: All sides expressed
concern about attacks on universally recognized freedoms of
expression and opinion. Acting DAS Rees expressed concern
that the
concept of "defamation of religion" had been twisted to
restrict freedom of expression, and that many countries had
supported resolutions on the matter without thinking
through the consequences. Rees noted that the U.S. has been
considering
whether a resolution on freedom of expression in the Third
Committee
could help to take back some of the ground that has been lost
on
this fundamental freedom, but is concerned that such a
resolution could be watered down
or hijacked for other purposes. Pellet asked for a proposed
text as soon as
possible. Rees said that we could provide a "concept paper"
but noted that
our view was that a core cross-regional group of countries
should draft and
co-sponsor any Freedom of Expression text, in order to ensure
success. The
French confirmed that they will be running a resolution on
religious tolerance, and said
they plan to consult broadly so that the resolution will
pass. Barks-Ruggles reminded the COHOM group that we
needed to work together to ensure that any religious
tolerance resolution does not contain provisions
criminalizing "incitement to
hatred" language that would not square with the U.S.
constitution,s free speech guarantees.


11. (C) Human Rights and Sexual Orientation: The French,
supported by
the EU, stated they will solicit support at the UNGA for a
declaration
on human rights and sexual orientation that will call for the
decriminalization
of homosexuality. Pellet noted that homosexuality is illegal
in some 85
countries in the world. He said that they are seeking a
cross-regional
group to help build support for the Declaration but are
having difficulty
in lining up an African country. Pellet indicated that they
are hoping
to persuade at least 54 countries to sign the Declaration
(including the
27 EU members) by International Human Rights Day December 10.
The French
described the Declaration as a less ambitious text than some
would like, with no
reference to discrimination, and hoped the U.S. would be able
to support it.
Rees asked for a text, noting we had signed on to an earlier,
tightly
negotiated, Norwegian declaration on sexual orientation. He
also suggested
France delay the timing for the declaration until after the
country-specific
resolutions in the Third Committee and UNGA plenary
--especially the Iran
resolution--were finished. Both he and Barks-Ruggles
emphasized the
potential of the Declaration to create animosity toward other
Third Committee
priority resolutions, particularly the country-specific ones,
that are
perceived as western-led.


12. (C) Death Penalty: Pellet confirmed that the EU will
run another death
penalty resolution this year, "a procedural resolution" that
will merely
address the expected Secretariat's report that was requested
in last
year's EU-led death penalty moratorium resolution. Pellet
said that the
EU has had confirmation from the Secretariat that the report
will be released
by the Secretariat this fall. Barks-Ruggles noted the U.S.
preference for
thematic resolutions to be run biannually. Pellet suggested
that after
this year, the EU will only do so with its death penalty
resolution, but
that it must address the report this year. Barks-Ruggles
signaled that a short,
procedural resolution on the report would be better than a
comprehensive,
substantive resolution, but reiterated U.S. concerns that any
death
penalty resolution will distract and endanger our efforts on
the Iran
resolution. Rees added that it would be particularly
difficult if the resolution seemed targeted at the U.S.
Pellet
acknowledged the resolution takes considerable EU effort but
said the EU
members want to see the resolution adopted. Over lunch,
Pellet
sought DAS Rees' insight into the political climate
surrounding the death penalty in the U.S. Rees noted that
the death
penalty has bipartisan support in the U.S.


13. (C) Rights of the Child: Pellet said that GRULAC will
offer a resolution focused on trafficking and child labor.
Barks-Ruggles said we would be interested in a narrow
resolution focused on those issues. DAS Rees reminded the
group that there are some red lines for us since we have
not signed on to the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
and
asked that any resolution be carefully worded and worked with
the U.S. so
that we could hopefully agree to it.


14. (C) Prisoners of Conscience: Barks-Ruggles described
the
U.S.-sponsored public affairs event at UN headquarters in
July,
and expressed appreciation for the EU member country
representatives who
attended. Barks-Ruggles solicited EU thoughts on how to
follow up on the
achievement of the Declaration on Prisoners of Conscience
(for which the
U.S. and EU had jointly persuaded 64 countries to sign). The
Europeans
did not have any immediate views, but said they would raise
the issue at
EU human rights official consultations on September 5.


15. (C) Human Rights Council: The Czechs, who will take
over the EU presidency in January 2009, made a plea for the
U.S. to return to active engagement with the HRC, despite
its flaws. "We miss you," they said, and asked that the U.S.
engage in the Universal Periodic Review in 2010, saying
that U.S. non-participation could undermine the whole
process.
Rees and Barks-Ruggles confirmed that the U.S. will undergo
UPR in 2010.
They noted that disengagement from the HRC had been a
difficult decision
at senior levels in the U.S. government. Barks-Ruggles noted
that the
U.S. is already considering the 2011 mandated review of the
HRC, and
sought EU ideas on ways the Council could be reformed
structurally. The Europeans
asked how the U.S. will be able to engage in the 2011 review
if
we have not been engaged prior to that time. Pellet noted
that the
U.S. has said it will pursue a robust human rights agenda in
other
fora, including the Third Committee, but he pointedly stated
that
the EU will not necessarily be able to robustly support our
agenda as
the EU has its own priorities and objectives.


16. (C) In the upcoming ninth session of the HRC, on Sudan,
the French said there were two draft
resolutions for the Human Rights Council, one on human
rights in the country and one on the renewal of the Special
Rapporteur's mandate. France has been working countries with
African
countries to win their support for the rapporteur mandate
renewal, but is
not sure two resolutions are possible. "We may have to
make a compromise on the human rights resolution to get the
rapporteur," said Pellet. Barks-Ruggles urged that the
rapporteur's mandate be strong.


17. (C) Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights: EU
Representative Kionka spoke to "register concern" over
several issues related to counter-terrorism, including
questions on whether the CIA secret detention program
continued. She
stated that the program is not in conformity to international
law,
and asked about the impact of Supreme Court rulings on the
continued operation of Guantanamo and for an
assessment of the recent Hamdan trial. Barks-Ruggles
declined to speculate on ongoing legal cases and suggested
this discussion would be more appropriate for ongoing U.S.-EU
legal
consultations. Timans noted that the EU raised the question
because it continued to
affect European public opinion of the U.S. commitment to
human
rights. The EU group pressed the issue at length over
lunch, asking about the potential transfer of Guantanamo
prisoners to third countries, with DAS Rees explaining some
of the difficulty the U.S. has had in releasing some
prisoners back to their home countries.


18. (C) Human Rights Dialogues: A brief discussion of
ongoing human rights dialogues focused on China, which
resumed a number
of such dialogues just before the Olympics, according to
DRL Office Director Grunder. Pellet presented to her the
list of prisoners the EU has raised, stating that the Chinese
replies to their queries were being translated. The EU had
concluded there was
no human rights advances surrounding the Olympics and that
the resumed dialogue was "pro forma." It was fine on the
surface but short on substance; Tibet is still closed and
the Chinese deny any problems there. There was concern
over China's handling of North Korean refugees, with China
not recognizing most of them as refugees, and South Korea
not automatically accepting them as South Korean
nationals. Grunder asked whether the EU has discussed
reconvening
the Human Rights Exchange on China to discuss the
post-Olympic
Games climate in China for human rights. Timans replied that
the
UK and Belgium have been identified as possible hosts but
that
he would be sending out a message to EU members soliciting
volunteers in September. The Europeans indicated interest
in having a digital video conference to further discuss our
dialogues with both Vietnam and China.


19. (U) DAS Barks-Ruggles cleared this message.

.
.