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 PARIS 001721 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/14/2015 
TAGS: PHUM PHUM PREL FR UNCHR
SUBJECT: FRENCH RESPONSE TO UNCHR 61 DEMARCHE 
 
REF: A. STATE 42847 
 
     ¶B. PARIS 1713 
 
Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Josiah Rosenblatt, reasons 
1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (U) SUMMARY: Poloff delivered reftel A demarche to 
Francois Vandeville, responsible for human rights in the 
United Nations and International Organizations bureau at the 
MFA.  Vandeville welcomed the U.S. intention to participate 
"vigorously" in the sixty-first session of the Commission on 
Human Rights and encouraged the U.S. to engage further and 
write more resolutions.  End Summary 
 
Priorities 
---------- 
¶2.  (SBU) Vandeville noted that France had several 
priorities, including three thematic resolutions on forced 
disappearances, arbitrary detention, and extreme poverty, as 
well as a declaration on Haiti, to be made with the Friends 
of Haiti.  In addition, the EU's priorities would be thematic 
resolutions on the death penalty and religious intolerance, 
while working with the GRULAC for a resolution on child's 
rights.  Anti-Semitism is indeed a cause for concern, 
Vandeville continued; however, it would be difficult to go 
beyond the strong language achieved in the General Assembly 
on religious intolerance.  Vandeville clarified that although 
the Netherlands was doing much of the work for the religious 
intolerance resolution, it would in fact be introduced by the 
EU. 
 
Country Initiatives 
------------------- 
¶3.  (C) Vandeville stated that the EU currently had seven 
country initiatives, with the possibility for more.  The EU 
would table resolutions on North Korea, Burma, Uzbekistan 
(Note: this is not yet public.  End note.), Belarus (with the 
U.S., see reftel B), and Israeli settlements.  The EU will 
seek consensus declarations by the chair on Colombia and 
Afghanistan.  There is no decision yet on Sudan and the DRC. 
Vandeville understood that the African Group will put forth 
resolutions on both; engagement would depend on the texts. 
For Sudan, Vandeville noted that the recommendations of the 
International Commission of Inquiry should be included.  The 
EU will not table a resolution on Zimbabwe.  Vandeville's 
comments on the Cuba draft resolution will be reported septel. 
 
Israel and the Occupied Territories 
----------------------------------- 
¶4.  (SBU) While France shares the U.S. position that there 
are too many resolutions on Israel and the Arab-Israeli 
conflict, Vandeville stated that they have no control over 
initiatives made by the Arab groups.  (Note: This 
acknowledgment and the pledge to urge consolidation are 
somewhat disingenuous, as the EU intends to introduce its own 
draft resolution on Israeli settlements.  End note.) 
Vandeville thought that there were proposed Pakistani and 
Saudi Arabian resolutions on the Arab-Israeli conflict that 
could be merged, but that ultimately, the GOF wielded little 
influence over this outcome, noting, "We are not as powerful 
as you think." 
 
No-Action Motions 
----------------- 
¶5.  (SBU) France "fully shares" U.S. concerns on no-action 
motions.  However, Vandeville questioned whether the U.S. was 
fully committed in its opposition to no-action motions. 
Vandeville pointed to the U.S. voiding a report motion last 
year and asked if we would refrain from a no-action motion 
-on arbitrary detention. 
 
Death Penalty 
------------- 
¶6.  (SBU) In regard to multiple death penalty resolutions, 
Vandeville remarked that the GOF understood the U.S. point in 
principle; however, it felt that some country situations -- 
DRC, Sudan, etc. -- merited emphasis.  In addition to the 
thematic resolution, there was a need to put specific 
situations on the table. 
 
Miscellaneous 
------------- 
¶7.  (SBU) Vandeville stated that France supported in 
principle a Romanian democracy resolution, though it would 
have to see the text first.  Finally, Vandeville asked for 
more information regarding the U.S. hope that there would be 
a resolution on elections at the CHR, asking if the 
resolution would be solely on such elections. 
Leach