CONVERSATIONS ON PA ON BID FOR WTO OBSERVER STATUS

UNCLAS GENEVA 000961 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED SIPDIS DEPT PASS USTR TEL AVIV FOR AMB, DCM, AND ECON USTR FOR CKLEIN, AVENKATARAMANSFRANCESKI, MMOWREY E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ETR WTRO ECON PREL KWBG IS SUBJECT: CONVERSATIONS ON PA ON BID FOR WTO OBSERVER STATUS Reftels: (a) Jerusalem 1607 (B) Secstate 99831 (c) Geneva00783 (d) Tel Aviv 02166 (e) Geneva 00839 1.(SBU) Summary - Charge was approached today both by General Council (GC) Chair Matus and the Israeli Ambassador. It appears that we stand a good chance of managing the November 17 session of the GC successfully but only if the Israeli Ambassador receives new instructions on the issue of Ministerial Conference observer status by tomorrow. However, there is also a new nomenclature issue for which we need Washington guidance soonest. End Summary ¶2. (SBU) Matus told Charge that he is not inclined not to place the issue of GC observer status on the agenda for the November GC meeting. However, he is certain that someone else will do so unless we settle the issue of MC observership and he is still a bit nervous that the Egyptians might do it on their own regardless of what happens on the MC. The signals that Matus has received from the Israeli's thus far have not been encouraging. ¶3. (SBU) The Israeli Ambassador called Charge this morning to discuss the same issue. Charge told him that it looked like we could head off the GC observership issue at the November GC, and ensuing potential fallout at the MC itself, if we could secure agreement on MC observer status. He responded that his current instructions were to object to MC observer status. However, he indicated that he thought there was a possibility to change this and he wondered what would be the optimal time for such a change. Charge strongly urged him to seek fresh instructions by tomorrow when the GC agenda closes. ¶4. (SBU) Regarding nomenclature, Matus told us that the PA is insisting that they be seated at the MC as "Palestine" as opposed to the "Palestinian Authority". At the Hong Kong MC 4 years ago Members agreed to observer status under the latter title but when they arrived they insisted that their name plaque be changed to the former. The Secretariat told them this would not be possible. Please advise soonest what our stance is on this issue and what this might mean in terms of Israel's acceptance of MC observer status. ¶5. (SBU) There has also been a bit of a shift as to the type of observer status they want for the MC. It seems that the PA has realized that arguing that they want a decision for this and future MCs undercuts their position that they must be a GC observer by the time of the next MC, in which case they would receive MC observer status automatically. Hence, they only want a decision on MC observer status for the upcoming meeting, though they still have an allergy to the term "ad hoc". This should be manageable.