BELGIUM'S PERSPECTIVE ON UNHRC

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 000985 SIPDIS STATE PASS EUR/WE, IO/RHS, DRL/MLGA, USUN-W FOR JENNIFER SIMON, MISSION GENEVA FOR MARK CASSAYRE, ANNA CHAMBERS, MELANIE KHANNA AND ANNA MANSFIELD, USUN/NEW YORK FOR CRAIG KUEHL, JOHN SAMMIS AND LAURIE PHIPPS E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/15/2019 TAGS: PREL PHUM UN PINR BE SUBJECT: BELGIUM'S PERSPECTIVE ON UNHRC REF: A. BRUSSELS 292 ¶B. BRUSSELS 491 Classified By: Robert Kiene for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (U) This is an action request, please see paragraph six. ¶2. (U) Poloffs met July 13 with MFA Director for Human Rights France Chainaye. Chainaye discussed Belgium's role as President of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and the GOB's perspective on its work. ¶3. (U) Chainaye said Belgium had no choice but to run for the Council once it became clear that there was no other viable candidate from the Western European and Others Group (WEOG), as the Netherlands and Italy were not eligible due to their rejection of the Durban text. Belgium also stepped up to ensure that a WEOG country would be elected President. Belgium was not seeking this role when it ran for the UNHRC because it felt it would be handicapped in pursuing its own agenda by the neutral role required of the Council Presiden moderates, phe chall now the GOB actively participated in the UNHRC's Universal Peer Review (UPR). The MFA is already thinking ahead to the review of the Democratic RepubliQ of the Congo (DRC) in December 2009, and to Qeviews of the U.S. (Dec 2010) and Belgium (May 2011). During the UPR process, Belgium has on average commented on ten of the sixteen countries reviewed each session. The MFA prepareQ critiques at its embassies abroad, and then #oordinates with other countries prior to the UPR sessions to ensure that a wide and effective angccepted Belgium's UPR recommendations. Chainaye commented that the process is open to abuse. Certain countries, specifically Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and China, lobby friendly, non-critical countries to fill the docket during their UPR hearings. She singled out Cuba's use of a "coffee and croissant" strategy, whereby several small Carribean nations filled most of the reviewing slots right after the Cuban reception when the docket opened. Thus, only a few challenging questions were asked by WEOG and other like-minded countries that managed to get on the tail-end of the docket. ¶5. (C) Chainaye reaffirmed Minister De Gucht's statement to Secretary Clinton at their March meeting that Belgium is pleased that the United States is on the UNHRC for the next three years. She predicted the U.S., Belgium, and the E.U. would be partners on most issues, but warned there might be some disagreements on certain Middle East questions. ¶6. (C) ACTION REQUEST: The MFA asked for a list of U.S. priorities and the U.S. evaluation of the UNHRC so far. Post requests talking points and background we can provide to the GOB by August 17. We should provide this information prior to September for it to be useful in Belgian planning for the fall human rights meetings. Post views this as an excellent opportunity to share with the GOB U.S. UNHRC priorities and the U.S. vision on human rights. The GOB is open to working closely with us, and Post belives we should actively engage them. BRUSSELS 00000985 002 OF 002 BUSH .