This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS ROME  003477 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR IO/EDA SURA JOHNSON 
 
FROM FODAG 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: AORC EAGR FAO
SUBJECT:  ROME GENEVA GROUP:POST WFS5YL AND TERM LIMITS 
 
REFTEL: ROME 3214 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY. ROME GENEVA GROUP (MAJOR DONORS) MEMBERS 
CHARACTERIZED THE RECENTLY CONCLUDED WORLD FOOD SUMMIT:FIVE 
YEARS LATER (WFS5YL) AS NEITHER A SUCCESS NOR A FAILURE. 
MEMBERS DISCUSSED WAYS TO REVITALIZE THE WFS5YL FOLLOW-UP 
MECHANISM IN ORDER TO AVOID HOLDING ANOTHER SUMMIT-LEVEL 
MEETING IN 2006 (THE YEAR ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED FOR HOLDING 
THE "MID-TERM REVIEW" OF THE FIRST WORLD FOOD SUMMIT.)  EU 
MEMBERS OF THE GROUP ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WOULD BE STARTING 
CONSULTATIONS ON A TERM LIMIT INITIATIVE SHORTLY.  END 
SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  THE ROME-BASED GENEVA GROUP MET JUNE 25, 2002 TO REVIEW 
THE RECENTLY CONCLUDED WORLD FOOD SUMMIT: FIVE YEARS LATER 
(WFS5YL) AND DISCUSS OTHER GENEVA GROUP BUSINESS. 
 
WFS5YL POST MORTEM - LIVING UP TO (LOW) EXPECTATIONS 
--------------------------------------------- ------- 
 
¶3.  ON BALANCE, GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS FELT THAT THE WFS5YL 
WAS "NOT A SUCCESS, BUT NOT A FAILURE."  FRANCE FELT THAT 
PRESS COVERAGE HAD HELPED FOCUS ATTENTION ON THE ISSUE, BUT 
WAS DISAPPOINTED WITH THE NGO/CSO REACTION TO THE SUMMIT 
(SPECIFICALLY THAT THEY FELT THEY WERE "NOT LISTENED TO.") 
WHILE DIRECTOR GENERAL (DG) DIOUF HAD REPORTEDLY TOLD THE 
NGO FORUM THAT "THE ABSENCE OF OECD LEADERS IS AN INDICATION 
OF THE LEVEL OF PRIORITY THEY ATTACH TO HUNGER," GENEVA 
GROUP MEMBERS AGREED WITH THE U.K. REPRESENTATIVE THAT THIS 
WAS 1) IRRESPONSIBLE AND 2) NOT TRUE.  THE OVERALL LEVEL OF 
ATTENDANCE MATCHED THEIR EXPECTATIONS; AND GENEVA GROUP 
MEMBERS WERE SATISFIED THAT THEIR GOVERNMENTS HAD BEEN 
REPRESENTED AT SUFFICIENTLY SENIOR LEVELS. 
 
¶4.  GERMANY EXPRESSED SATISFACTION THAT THE EVENT DIDN'T 
"TAKE ANY STEPS BACK." SWEDEN OPINED THAT THE NEW FOCUS ON 
AGRICULTURE AS AN ENGINE OF DEVELOPMENT WAS POSITIVE, BUT 
NOTED HIS COUNTRY'S DISAPPOINTMENT THAT PARTICIPATION OF 
OTHER UN AGENCIES HAD NOT BEEN AS BROAD AS IT COULD HAVE 
BEEN.  THE BELGIAN AND SWISS REPRESENTATIVES NOTED THAT 
THEIR NATIONAL PRESSES HAD BEEN CRITICAL OF THE SUMMIT FOR 
WASTING MONEY (SWITZERLAND) AND FOR NOT HAVING HIGHER-LEVEL 
OECD REPRESENTATION (BELGIUM).  THE SWISS REPRESENTATIVES 
INFORMED THAT GROUP THAT HE WOULD ASK FOR A FULL ACCOUNTING 
OF WFS5YL COSTS AT THE SEPTEMBER FINANCE COMMITTEE SESSION. 
 
¶5.  THE U.K. REPRESENTATIVE STATED THAT THE WFS5YL HAD ALL 
ALONG BEEN A "PERSONAL PROJECT" FOR DIOUF: IT HAD BEEN "NON- 
INCLUSIVE" OF MEMBERS AND OF OTHER UN AGENCIES (INCLUDING 
UNDP, THE "SCORE-KEEPER FOR THE MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENT 
GOALS.") HE NOTED IN THIS REGARD THAT THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM 
AND THE INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT HAD 
BEEN DENIED PERMISSION TO HOST EVENTS. THE U.K. 
REPRESENTATIVE CALLED THE WORLD BANK'S 2002 RURAL 
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY A "MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT FOCUS ON 
AGRICULTURE" AND CONCLUDED THAT AGRICULTURE HAD MOVED UP 
"THE AGENDA" BECAUSE OF THE WORLD BANK AND THE UPCOMING 
WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (WSSD) -- NOT 
BECAUSE OF THE FAO. 

¶6.  U.S. DEL GAVE A MORE POSITIVE IMPRESSION OF THE SUMMIT, 
REFLECTING THE FACT THAT THE UNITED STATES CAME TO THE 
WFS5YL WITH NEW INITIATIVES AND A RENEWED FOCUS ON 
AGRICULTURE AND WAS THUS ABLE TO STAGE SUCCESSFUL SIDE- 
EVENTS AND ENGAGE IN PRODUCTIVE BILATERAL MEETINGS. 
 
¶7.  GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS EXCHANGED VIEWS ON THE SIDE EVENTS 
(GENERALLY CONSIDERED POORLY ORGANIZED) AND THE ROUNDTABLES 
(GIVEN A "B" GRADE FOR EFFORT).  THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER 
DIALOGUE WAS NOT CONSIDERED PRODUCTIVE, ALTHOUGH THE U.K. 
SPECIFICALLY PRAISED THE U.S. INTERVENTION.  FAO'S EFFORTS 
ON BEHALF OF AGRICULTURE FOR NEPAD (MUCH OF IT A PLUG FOR 
THE FAO'S SPECIAL PROGRAM FOR FOOD SECURITY) WERE 
CHARACTERIZED BY THE U.K. AS "OLD-THINKING." 
 
WHITHER THE DIRECTOR GENERAL? 
----------------------------- 
¶8.  GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS AGREED THAT THE DG'S STANDING HAD 
PROBABLY BEEN WEAKENED WITH THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, 
PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE WFS5YL HAD NOT 
BEEN ABLE TO GENERATE NEW RESOURCES (ALTHOUGH DONORS HAD 
LONG WARNED DIOUF THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE A "PLEDGING 
CONFERENCE.") ON G-77 VIEWS OF THE SUMMIT AS A WHOLE, GENEVA 
GROUP MEMBERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD HEARD VIEWS RANGING 
FROM "WASTE OF TIME" TO "FIASCO" FROM G-77 COLLEAGUES. 
 
¶9.  GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS NOTED THAT THE DG'S USD 100 MILLION 
TRUST FUND SEEMED PRETTY MUCH A MORIBUND ISSUE (THE ONLY 
COUNTRY OTHER THAN ITALY THAT HAS PLEDGED IS NIGERIA) AND 
THAT THE DG IS NOW PUSHING HARD ON CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE 
SPECIAL PROGRAM FOR FOOD SECURITY (SPFS).  THIS SEEMED 
INFELICITOUS TO GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS, PARTICULARLY IN VIEW 
OF THE POOR MARKS THAT THE SPFS EARNED IN A RECENTLY 
CONCLUDED EVOLUTION. 
 
WFS5YL DECLARATION -- THE ALLIANCE AGAINST HUNGER -- ROLE OF 
CFS 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶10.  GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS AGREED WITH SWEDEN THAT THE 
NEGOTIATIONS OF THE DECLARATION HAD NOT BEEN PARTICULARLY 
CONFRONTATIONAL. THE U.K. REPRESENTATIVE RECALLED THAT 
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES HAD SHOWN NO INTEREST IN INDICATING 
THE LEVEL OF RESOURCES THEY THEMSELVES SOUGHT TO DEVOTE TO 
AGRICULTURE AND THAT THIS RELUCTANCE HAD FATALLY WEAKENED 
THE G-77'S EFFORTS TO HAVE THE DONORS COMMIT TO A SPECIFIC 
LEVEL FOR AGRICULTURAL ODA.  THE U.S. NOTED ITS RESERVATION 
ON THE NEGOTIATION OF VOLUNTARY GUIDELINES ON THE RIGHT TO 
FOOD. (COMMENT:  WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE UNITED STATES, NO 
GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS SPOKE ON OR ALLUDED TO THE RIGHT TO 
FOOD DISCUSSIONS. END COMMENT). 
 
¶11. MEMBERS WERE PLEASED THAT THERE WAS NO NEW STRUCTURE OR 
BODY UNDERLYING THE "ALLIANCE AGAINST HUNGER" AND WERE 
SATISFIED WITH THE ALLIANCE'S FOCUS ON BRINGING IN THE 
PRIVATE SECTOR AND NGO'S.  THEY AGREED THAT FAO'S COMMITTEE 
ON WORLD FOOD SECURITY (CFS) NEEDED TO BE STRENGTHENED TO 
FOLLOW UP ON THE WFS5YL. 
 
¶12.  ITALY LINKED THE NEW ALLIANCE WITH THE OLDER "POLO 
ROMANO" IDEA (WHICH SOUGHT TO LINK INSTITUTIONALLY THE THREE 
ROME AGENCIES DEALING WITH FOOD AND AGRICULTURE).  HE STATED 
THAT THE CFS WOULD BE A GOOD PLACE TO WORK ON THE "SYNERGY 
BETWEEN THE AGENCIES."  THE U.K. AGREED THAT MORE "OOMPH" 
NEEDED TO BE GIVEN TO THE CFS AND NOTED THAT THE CURRENT CFS 
"DOESN'T WORK," NOT LEAST OF ALL BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF 
REPORTING (PARTICULARLY FROM DEVELOPING COUNTRIES) ON THE 
WORLD FOOD SUMMIT PLAN OF ACTION.  THE U.K. NOTED THAT CFS 
HAD A NUMBER BUILT-IN ADVANTAGES: IT WAS OPEN TO ALL UN 
MEMBERS, IT HAD A STANDING BUREAU: IT COULD BE TURNED INTO A 
BODY WHERE THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY MET ONCE A YEAR TO 
FOCUS GOOD ATTENTION ON THE ISSUES.  EXPANDING THE BUREAU 
WAS DISCUSSED (THE BUREAU DOES NOT HAVE REPRESENTATIVES OF 
ALL REGIONAL GROUPS) ALTHOUGH IT WAS NOTED THAT THIS WOULD 
CREATE MORE G-77 POSITIONS THAN OECD POSITIONS. 
 
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN 2006 
------------------------- 
¶13. MEMBERS RECALLED THAT THE FIRST WORLD FOOD SUMMIT CALLED 
FOR A MID-TERM REVIEW IN 2006.  GENEVA GROUP MEMBERS SPOKE 
WITH CONCERN ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE DG WOULD CALL 
FOR A "WORLD FOOD SUMMIT: 10 YEARS LATER" TO COMMEMORATE THE 
OCCASION, AND DISCUSSED WAYS TO ENSURE THAT A "REINVIGORATED 
CFS" MIGHT FORESTALL SUCH A POSSIBILITY.  THE POSSIBILITY OF 
WORKING THROUGH THE CFS BUREAU (FRANCE AND THE REPUBLIC OF 
KOREA ARE THE OECD MEMBERS ON THE BUREAU FOR THE NEXT TWO 
YEARS) WAS RAISED, AS WELL AS WORKING THROUGH INFORMAL 
CONTACTS AND REPRESENTATIONAL EVENTS.  THE U.K. NOTED THAT 
PART OF THE CFS REVITALIZATION WOULD INVOLVE KEEPING CLOSE 
CONTACT WITH WHAT WAS HAPPENING AT THE UN IN NEW YORK WITH 
THE MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (FAO HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR 
FOOD AVAILABILITY -- A SUB-SECTOR OF POVERTY) SO AS "NOT TO 
FALL INTO ISOLATION." 
 
EU INITIATIVE ON DG TERM LIMITS 
------------------------------- 
 
¶14.  THE U.K. STATED THAT THE EU WAS EXPECTING CLEARANCE 
SHORTLY IN ORDER TO INITIATE CONSULTATIONS WITH OTHER GROUPS 
ON REINSTATING FAO DIRECTOR GENERAL TERM LIMITS BEFORE THE 
SUMMER HOLIDAYS. U.S. (ACTING PERM REP) AND NEW ZEALAND 
NOTED THAT THIS WAS AN EXISTING GENEVA GROUP ISSUE AND 
REMINDED THE EU REPS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CONSULTING WITH 
OTHER GROUPS BEFORE DELIVERING A "FAIT ACCOMPLI." THE U.K. 
TOOK NOTE OF THE COMMENTS. HEILEMAN