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

UNCLAS PARIS 005116 
 
SIPDIS 
 
USMISSION UNESCO PARIS 
 
STATE FOR IO/T, L/UNA, EB, EUR/ERA 
 
E.O.12958: N/A 
TAGS: SCUL UK EU UNESCO
SUBJECT:  USUNESCO:  MEETING ON CULTURAL DIVERSITY WITH UK 
AMBASSADOR AND EU OBSERVER 
 
¶1. UK ambassador to UNESCO (and EU president) Tim Craddock 
and Michel Vanden Abeele, the head of the EC observer 
mission, requested a meeting with Ambassador Oliver on July 
¶22.  Craddock came with a message that 99 percent of the EU 
countries' agenda at UNESCO, especially in areas like 
education and science, is the same as that of the US.  He 
also expressed hope that the divergence of views on the 
cultural diversity convention would not have repercussions. 
He added that despite a wide range of national positions 
among EU countries, all EU members have examined the draft 
convention and found it acceptable.  (Note:  actually two 
central European countries have told us they hate the 
convention but their hands are tied).  The EU does not want 
the convention reopened and expects it to be adopted at the 
General Conference in October 
 
¶2. In response to a question about Washington's reaction, 
Ambassador Oliver told Craddock that Washington was 
concerned by the tone of the last negotiation.  She pointed 
out that the US went out of its way to be collegial but 
collegiality and a search for consensus were totally lacking 
during the last negotiating session.  Ambassador Oliver also 
indicated that she did not know yet to what degree this will 
affect our re-engagement with UNESCO.  When Craddock 
remarked that the situation was not good, she responded that 
it is serious. 
 
¶3. Craddock suggested that Department lawyers speak to 
lawyers from EU members states and from the Commission so 
that we can better understand why the EU members can live 
with the draft.  He emphasized that this would not be a 
negotiation, simply an exchange of views, because the member 
states did not want to reopen the convention. 
 
¶4. Craddock also said something that was interesting.  He 
said, "One international organization does not have a remit 
for everything in trade.  It does not matter if there's 
overlap (of competencies) in such a broad convention." 
(Comment:  We are really surprised that Craddock took such a 
casual view of WTO competencies and about the disturbing 
tendency for UNESCO to insert itself in the areas of 
competency of other international organizations.)  Craddock 
also mentioned that the EU were quite pleased that the 
convention would funnel more assistance to Africa, though he 
did not have an answer when we asked him how it would help 
Africa. (Note:  in a conversation the previous day an 
African delegate told the DCM that Africa got nothing out of 
the convention; the only winners were "northern" countries.) 
 
¶5. Comment.  Craddock and the EC observer were quick to try 
to put some of the blame for the outcome of the negotiations 
on the US, but we pointed out that neither had spent much 
time in the room and knew how hostile things really were. 
While we do not think that the EU countries are going to 
back down, we take this meeting as a sign that they are 
worried that they may have pushed the US too far.  They are 
also anxious to continue working with the US on the 
important parts of UNESCO's agenda, such as education. 
Since the EU does not want to reopen negotiations, we are 
wary about holding consultations on the draft convention. 
Still, in the unlikely event, the EU could be budged, we 
would suggest a meeting of lawyers, including Geneva Legal 
Adviser Peay, here in Paris.  We know that Japan would also 
be interested in attending such a meeting. 
 
OLIVER