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

UNCLAS PARIS 002791 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KPAO EAID UNESCO
SUBJECT: UNESCO: EXECUTIVE BOARD DECISION ON EFA 
 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY:  UNESCO adopted a decision on a Report by the 
Director-General on the Global Action Plan to achieve the Education 
For All (EFA) Goals at the 174th Executive Board.  In late March, 
the U.K. together with Program and External Relations Commission 
chair Norway convened a working group to redraft the Secretariat 
draft decision in advance of the board meeting.  Participants were 
Brazil (representing GRULAC) India (representing the g-77) and 
France and the U.S. as Group I members.  Negotiations were primarily 
driven by a strong desire among member states to maintain EFA 
momentum and to add myriad laundry lists of priorities to the plan, 
including pressure on the G-8 for funds.   Strong advance efforts in 
the working group avoided a potentially brutal and contentious 
debate during the Executive Board.  END SUMMARY. 
 
------------------------ 
WORKING GROUP PROPOSALS: 
------------------------ 
 
¶2.  (SBU) The UK and Norway told participants that they had convened 
the working group, which met periodically from March 30 to April 6, 
out of dissatisfaction with the draft Global Action Plan report in 
and of itself and the vague text of its accompanying draft decision. 
 All working group members expressed frustration that the plan was 
incomplete, and Ambassador Oliver steered discussion toward the 
importance of getting the 5 convening EFA agencies to agree on their 
appropriate roles rather than moving forward with a detailed plan 
that might set unrealistic goals in haste.  ADG Peter Smith, she 
noted, has been told by previous Executive Boards that the plan 
should be conceptual and concise.  (COMMENT:  This helped to deflect 
most attempts at departing long laundry lists of initiatives and 
goals that member states wanted to add to the decision.  END 
COMMENT.)  The UK wanted clearer language about the plan being 
endorsed by the Executive Board in October and then by the heads of 
5 convening agencies, but Mission maintained the argument that we 
would not want to pressure the next Executive Board to endorse a 
plan that might not be ready. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Brazil, speaking on behalf of GRULAC member states and 
supported by India, still wanted more references to South-South and 
other triangular modes of cooperation, and to a myriad of issues 
outlined at the November 2005 Beijing meeting.  Speaking on behalf 
of the g-77, India pushed hard for language that recognized the need 
to mobilize extra funds to achieve EFA goals and called upon 
potential donors to make increased commitments.  Mission argued that 
the plan should not be seen primarily as a fundraising vehicle. 
Although sympathetic to India, the UK maintained that a deadline was 
necessary to maintain momentum.  After much negotiation, Mission 
succeeded in moving the deadline to mid-July, noting that this would 
be a deadline for review only and deleting the word "acceptance" 
from the text.  At the end of the working group negotiations, 
France, UK, Brazil, Norway and India offered to co-sponsor the new 
draft decision and lobby other member states.  Mission noted that 
while it would not break consensus with the working group's draft 
decision, it would not be a co-sponsor. 
 
---------- 
PX Debate: 
---------- 
 
¶4.  (SBU) During interventions, member states almost universally 
lamented the fact that the plan was not yet ready and cited the 
importance of maintaining momentum.  Requests to amend the text 
beyond the working group's proposed changes were few because the 
working group's co-sponsors built significant support for the new 
draft decision in advance.  Russia expressed strong concern that a 
mid-July deadline for the GAP was too late for the G-8 meetings, but 
Ambassador Oliver was able to work out last minute compromise 
language stating "as soon as possible, at the latest by mid-July 
2006."  The Ambassador from Mali requested references to "the 
convening 5 agencies of Bamako and Jomtien", where EFA meetings were 
previously held.  Mali also inserted language calling for the 
inclusion of civil society, which we supported. 
 
¶5.  (U) The text of the adopted draft decision can be found on the 
UNESCO Website as Executive Board document 174 EX/48 parts I and II, 
or on page 5 of the overall document list entitled EX Main Series, 
under Executive Board documents. 
 
Oliver