INSTRUCTIONS ON RESPONSE TO UN REGARDING

UNCLAS STATE 056782

SIPDIS
USUN FOR ECOSOC SNOWDEN
NAIROBI FOR UN PERMREP

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: UNGA SENV UNGA AORC
SUBJECT: INSTRUCTIONS ON RESPONSE TO UN REGARDING
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT EVENT

REF: SNOWDEN-WEBBER EMAIL


1. This is an action request. See paragraphs 2-3.


2. USUN is requested to deliver the U.S. response in
paragraph 3 to the UN regarding its views on a "possible
high-level event on sustainable development" under cover of a
Diplomatic Note. This response was requested in a note
verbale from the UN Division of Economic and Social Affairs
dated March 6, 2009 (ref A) in compliance with UN General
Assembly resolution A/63/212.


3. BEGIN CORRESPONDANCE: The United States appreciates the
opportunity to express its views on the possibility of
convening a high-level event on sustainable development. The
United States is dedicated to the pursuit of
sustainable development and we strongly believe that
international cooperation is essential to this important
endeavor.

The outcomes of previous events, including the World Summit
on Environment and Development in Rio and the World
Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, have
offered vital contributions to our global efforts towards
sustainable development. Indeed, the Commission on
Sustainable Development, the UN Forum on Forests, the various
multilateral environment agreements and the work of UNEP
continue to contribute actively to the global sustainable
development agenda.

Our understanding of the still-current decision in ECOSOC
Resolution 2003/61, which was agreed at CSD-11 in 2003,
is that the international community already anticipates an
overall appraisal of the outcomes of the previous World
Summits on Sustainable Development in 2017 at the end of the
CSD's multi-year program of work. This review is
important to a thorough discussion of all the aspects of
sustainable development as elaborated in The Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development, Agenda 21 and the
Program of Further Implementation of Agenda 21.
This review will complete our work and allow us to assess the
way forward. In keeping with this, we believe we
have effectively already agreed to convene a high-level event
on sustainable development in 2017, i.e. a "Rio 25"
meeting.

In the language of UNGA resolution A/RES/63/212, the General
Assembly acknowledged the proposal to convene a world
summit on sustainable development in 2012 and then invited
member state opinions on the possibility of a high-level
event on sustainable development. During discussion on this
resolution, some countries shared their desire to host
a "Rio 20" summit in 2012. On this particular subject, we
continue to have questions, including: what would a 2012
high-level event aim to accomplish; how will it add value to
the ongoing work in sustainable development; how would
the proposed high-level event fit in with the multi-year CSD
program of work and how would it avoid disrupting the
conclusion of the CSD process? In particular, we are
concerned that the preparatory process for Rio 20 would
require
commitments of time and energy that will potentially conflict
with the 2010-2011 and 2012-2013 CSD cycles. In
considering our position on the possibility of a 2012
meeting, we need more information to understand the purpose
of
the proposed high-level event, to what end our efforts would
be engaged and how the preparatory process might proceed.

One of our primary concerns is the timing of the two proposed
high level events or summits, one of which, 2017, has
already been agreed by governments. If a Rio 20 event is
held in 2012, would we still convene a 2017 Rio 25 event?
If the purpose of the two high-level events is the same,
member states should consider postponing any summit until
2017 at which time we would have an unprecedented opportunity
to review and assess the entire history of sustainable
development agreements and achievements in order to inform
our next steps and embark on new sustainable development
goals. Many member governments, including the United States,
do not have the resources to prepare for and staff two
major summits within five years.

We thank you for the opportunity to express our views on this
subject and we look forward to additional fruitful
discussion on this and other sustainable development
priorities, but most especially on implementation of
agreements
already made and our efforts to improve the lives of people
and protect the environment. END CORRESPONDANCE.
CLINTON