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

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 003190 
 
SIPDIS 
 
IO/UNP (NARANJO) 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/22/2014 
TAGS: PREL ECON PHUM KDEM AORC KSEP OVIP OTRA UN UNGA EUN USEU BRUSSELS
SUBJECT: EU ON UNGA PRIORITIES, ATTENDEES 
 
REF: A. STATE 152009 
 
     ¶B. STATE 132748 
 
Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Kyle Scott for reasons 1.4 
(b/d). 
 
¶1.  (C) Summary:  EU officials welcomed early consultation on 
UNGA priorities and highlighted shared interest in combating 
human trafficking and reducing the number of Middle East 
resolutions -- although they underscored several times that 
this would be best achieved by resolving the underlying 
regional crisis.  The EU is unlikely to agree on a common 
approach on human cloning, leaving delegations to follow 
national policies; the same will probably apply to any 
discussion of UN Security Council reform.  Neither the 
Council nor the Commission has decided who will attend the 
UNGA but will let us know when their delegations are set, 
probably in early September.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  (C) We met July 19 with Jim Cloos, Council Secretariat 
Director for Transatlantic Relations, the United Nations, and 
Human Rights, to discuss ref A and B demarches on UNGA 
preparations. Cloos was joined by Council UN experts Paulo 
Oliveira and Morten Knudsen as well as Transatlantic 
Relations administrator Margarita Comamala.  Cloos thanked us 
for providing our points and said the EU looked forward to 
further discussion in New York.  He noted that the UNGA would 
also include important political issues -- particularly the 
Middle East but also elements of Iraq policy, terrorism, and 
crisis management -- which, although not part of the formal 
UNGA agenda, the EU would want to discuss on the margins. 
Asked for clarification on crisis management, Cloos said that 
this meant peacekeeping rather than humanitarian issues -- 
the EU wanted to work with the UN on coordinating operations 
in Congo as well as response to the Darfur crisis in Sudan, 
and sought to move beyond case-by-case decisions to make 
coordination "systemic." 
 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
Advancing Economic Freedom; Trafficking in Persons 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
 
¶3.  (C) Regarding the specific priorities listed in the U.S. 
nonpaper, the EU had no substantive comment on economic 
development and our proposed focus on emphasizing in UN 
resolutions the need for improved investment conditions.  On 
trafficking, Oliveira thought the U.S. and EU could probably 
work together given our broad areas of agreement.  We noted 
that the U.S. has had problems with the Dutch on trafficking, 
although this was based on differences with regard to 
prostitution laws rather than the involvement of minors. 
Cloos agreed, saying that the Dutch delegation had been firm 
on the need to implement UN protocols, including those 
relating to the age of consent. 
 
------------------------------- 
Hesitation on Democracy Caucus 
------------------------------- 
 
¶4.  (C) The EU responded cautiously to our points on the 
proposed Democracy Caucus.  Asked for more detail about U.S. 
ideas, we explained that we envisioned a broad-based approach 
to support common ideas and to encourage more effective 
efforts -- from a greater number of countries -- on human 
rights.  It should not always be the Cubans pushing human 
rights resolutions, we remarked.  Cloos replied that the EU 
was hesitant about creating new groupings; use of the term 
"caucus" -- which was even more definitive than a "group" -- 
would be problematic for the EU.  He said that this was a 
purely institutional issue, however -- there was no 
difficulty with the concept's substance.  His second concern 
was about how membership would be determined, pointing to the 
liberal criteria applied to invitations for participation in 
the Community of Democracies.  Who would say which countries 
qualified as members of such a caucus at the UN?  The 
important thing for the EU, Cloos continued, was working for 
"effective multilateralism," which he described as a "worthy 
and important objective." 
 
------------------------------------- 
EU Still Divided on Human Cloning Ban 
------------------------------------- 
 
¶5.  (C) Noting continued U.S. support for a ban on all human 
cloning, we asked what effect the apparent lack of EU 
consensus would have on the European position on this issue. 
Cloos said he did not know how internal EU disagreements 
would play out; no one expected the issue to be settled, and 
he thought that member states would probably end up following 
their own policies at the UN. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
Middle East Resolutions Require Political Solution 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
 
¶6.  (C) Cloos said that the EU was looking into how to reduce 
the number of Middle East-related resolutions while retaining 
their substance.  He pointedly noted that resolving the 
Arab-Israeli crisis would put an end to the problem but 
acknowledged the difficulties involved.  According to 
Oliveira, the number of Middle East-related resolutions had 
been reduced in at least the last two UNGAs relative to 
previous sessions.  He said that the point in the EU's UNGA 
priority paper stressing the need for UNGA revitalization 
tied into U.S. efforts to reduce the number of resolutions 
dealing with the Middle East.  The EU agreed with the U.S. on 
the need to cut back, he said, but re-emphasized Cloos' point 
that the issue was linked to the situation on the ground -- 
easing regional tensions would, he said, result in fewer UN 
resolutions.  Reviewing more specific elements of our points, 
Oliveira questioned the proposal to abolish organizations the 
U.S. considers biased against Israel, noting that some of the 
organizations listed did useful work.  On the proposed 
anti-Semitism resolution, Cloos said that the EU was willing 
to promote a general resolution on religious intolerance 
provided it was "balanced" but did not want a separate 
resolution dealing solely with anti-Semitism. 
 
------------------- 
EU Priorities Paper 
------------------- 
 
¶7.  (C) Oliveira reviewed key points in the EU's paper, which 
he said presented the EU's major objectives within the 
overall UN framework.  Cloos, pointing to the paper's 
reference to EU interest in encouraging universal 
participation in the International Criminal Court, said that 
EU found "worrisome" Congress' push to strengthen sanctions 
against Rome Treaty signatories who had not signed Article 98 
agreements with the U.S.  Oliveira thought the U.S. and EU 
were in agreement on the EU goal of reforming UN staff 
recruitment and assignment of posts.  He also pointed to the 
final point, in which the EU pledged to "support appropriate 
improvements in security for the UN, including the allocation 
of the necessary resources," as another area where the U.S. 
and EU could work together.  Asked whether this meant 
increased budgets, Cloos and Oliveira replied that the idea 
was to reallocate resources within the current budget rather 
than increasing the total.  Noting the reference to UN reform 
in the EU's paper, we asked if there was an EU position on 
UNSC reform.  Cloos said that he could not discuss this with 
third countries due to internal EU disagreement and the 
position of "one country" in particular.  Given the lack of 
EU consensus, this -- like human cloning -- remains an issue 
for national governments. 
 
------------------ 
UNGA Attendees TBD 
------------------ 
 
¶8.  (U) We asked our Council contacts as well as Kristin de 
Peyron of the Commission's UN office for information about 
likely UNGA attendees (ref B).  Both told us that European 
participants would not be determined until after the August 
break.