NORWEGIANS COMBATIVE ON ISRAEL UNRWA SPEAKING ROLE

C O N F I D E N T I A L OSLO 000536

SIPDIS

FOR PRM/ANE (MONIQUE RAMGOOLIE),IO/RHS (CARI ENAV),IO/UNP
(ANDREW MORRISON),EUR/NB

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/01/2019
TAGS: PREF PREL UNGA IS KPAL NO
SUBJECT: NORWEGIANS COMBATIVE ON ISRAEL UNRWA SPEAKING ROLE

REF: STATE 90251

Classified By: Charg d'Affaires James T. Heg for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d
)


1. (C) Summary: The Head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
(MFA) Middle-East Section, Jorn Gjelstad, was surprisingly
engaged, sensitized, and generally combative upon
presentation of reftel demarche concerning a speaking role
for Israel at the upcoming "UNRWA at 60" event (UNRWA is the
UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near
East). Norway appears to be unwilling to favor Israel's
speaking slot unless there is already consensus on the issue
within the UNRWA steering committee, because it sees a link
between this issue and the issue of Arab League participation
in the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) meeting chaired by
Foreign Minister Stoere which takes place two days before.
At least based on this meeting, it appears that the
Norwegians are afraid of the Arab response, and are afraid of
being seen as delivering for Israel in UNRWA but not
delivering for the Arabs in the AHLC. End Summary.


2. (C) Poloff scheduled a meeting with Torun Viste, the new
deputy of the Middle East Section of the MFA, on August 31.
When poloff arrived at the MFA for the meeting, however, Jorn
Gjelstad, head of the section, met poloff at the door and did
100% of the talking during the meetings, perhaps reflecting
the level at which Gjelstad wanted to convey the GON's
response. Gjelstad on several occasions stated "this is the
message I want you to take back to Washington," seemingly
aware that he was talking directly to Main State on this
issue.


3. (C) Gjelstad characterized an Israeli speaking role at the
"UNRWA at 60" event as "a difficult idea" that "risks
politicizing the exercise." He stated he saw "no good
rationalization for inclusion" of the Israelis (although of
course, poloff made and explained reftel USG points). He
pointed out the Israel has "heavily criticized" UNRWA.

"PUT YOURSELF IN OUR SITUATION"
--------------


4. (C) Over the course of the discussions, it was clear that
Gjelstad saw a "linkage"--a word he used four times--between
the issue of Israeli participation in the UNRWA event and the
representation of the Arab League at the Ad Hoc Liaison
Committee (AHLC) meeting chaired by Norway that would be held
two days before in New York. Gjelstad said that the
representation of Israel by Avigdor Lieberman already was
presenting the possibility of a "reduced level of
representation from the minister to the senior official
level" for the AHLC meeting. He said that it was Norway's
priority not to come out of the AHLC meeting with "a setback
rather than progress." He said that Norway wanted the U.S.
to "see these two things in connection," and commented that
"the Israelis are calling us anti-Semites and the Arabs are
mad at us for failing to get the Arab League a speaking role
at the AHLC." Gjelstad pleaded with poloff to express to
Washington the need for our political pressure on Jerusalem
(sic) to open up the door for the Arab League at the AHLC.


5. (C) Continuing, Gjelstad said that it was just as
appropriate for the Arab League to have a role on the AHLC as
for Israel to have a role in UNRWA. He pointed out that the
Arab League asked to participate in the AHLC when the process
was reinvigorated a few years ago, and Sweden, the UK,
Germany, Italy, Spain and Turkey, among others, all had
representation at the AHLC, and drew a comparison to our list
of steering committee countries on UNRWA. Gjelstad said that
he wanted to see "a more positive Israeli attitude," and,
crucially, said, "it is not natural for Norway to be the
first one to decide" to support an Israeli speaking role
given Norway's chairmanship of the AHLC. Rather, Norway
"wants to see consensus on the steering committee before
deciding."


6. (C) Comment: We were somewhat surprised at Gjelstad's
strong negative position on this issue, especially given
reftel's information that USUN had found the Norwegian
delegation in New York to be "positively inclined." Our
sense from the meeting was that the Norwegians are going to
be reticent on this issue, because of how they fear being
seen by the Arabs. At one point Gjelstad said that if Israel
were included at UNRWA and no progress was made on the Arab
League at the AHLC, the Arabs would be "infuriated." While
Gjelstad appeared to listen to our points, he saw little
downside to Israel's non-inclusion aside from our own
domestic
political consequences, but great downside for
Norway in Israel's inclusion, given what he saw as Norway's
precarious position in Arab eyes concerning the AHLC. End
Comment.
HEG