VZCZCXRO6193
RR RUEHAT RUEHBW
DE RUEHGV #0392/01 1501701
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 291701Z MAY 08
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6513
INFO RUEHZJ/HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2734

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 GENEVA 000392 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR IO/RHS, DRL/MLGA, L/HRR 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM UNHRC EAGR EAID FAO
SUBJECT: HRC SPECIAL SESSION ON FOOD 
 
REF: STATE 054658 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY: The Human Rights Council (HRC) special session 
on the right to food, called by more than 30 countries, took 
place on May 23.  Per reftel, USDel attended as notetaker 
only.  The session featured interventions from many 
countries, as well as from international organizations and 
other UN entities.  All speakers agreed that attention to the 
human rights element of the current food crisis was essential 
to a proper response, but differed on the degree to which 
they thought the HRC could properly diagnose the problem. 
Some insisted that political motivation behind economic 
policies was clearly to blame, while others felt a thorough 
analysis of the complex worldwide issue required more 
technical expertise than the HRC possessed.  After 
modification to Cuba's original text (reducing the 
obligations created for other UN bodies), the resolution, 
with 78 co-sponsors from all regions, passed by consensus. 
END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour opened 
the HRC 7th Special Session, saying that the HRC was throwing 
a light on the human rights dimension of the global food 
crisis and expressing concern that the crisis could further 
entrench long-standing patterns of discrimination.  The new 
Special Rapporteur (SR) on the Right to Food, Olivier de 
Schutter, said the causes of the food crisis were political; 
other international organizations were approaching the crisis 
as a humanitarian or macroeconomic problem, rather than as an 
issue of rights.  In de Schutter's view, the right to food 
should shape national policies to better shield vulnerable 
populations from rising food prices. 
¶3.  In the end, 78 countries cosponsored the resolution. 
European Union (EU) delegations that had participated in 
negotiations on the draft resolution widely agreed that Cuba 
had been even-handed and dogged in its pursuit of 
cross-regional consensus; while Cuba did not allow many of 
the edits proposed by the Western European and Other Group 
(WEOG), it also rejected the African Group (AG) push to 
assign blame more specifically for the food situation.  The 
EU did not cosponsor as a bloc; in their interventions, 
holdouts like Sweden, Denmark, and Germany cited worries that 
by addressing the causes of the crisis, the HRC overstepped 
the bounds of its expertise.  Canada regretted the 
"preponderant emphasis on international cooperation and 
assistance over national obligations" in its explanation of 
the vote but went on to say that, given the scale of the 
problem, it would not block consensus. 
 
¶4.  USDel deployed reftel talking points when asked 
informally by several delegations (e.g., Slovenia, Canada, 
UK, Mexico, Sweden, Australia, and Egypt) about why our seat 
was empty.  Representatives of several of those delegations 
expressed surprise that the US did not speak on a topic on 
which it clearly enjoyed the high ground in terms of aid and 
attention. 
 
¶5.  Common themes in country statements fell into two general 
categories: on one hand, the deleterious effects of biofuel 
production, agricultural subsidies and unequal global wealth 
distribution and, on the other, the responsibility of 
individual governments to provide for their populations. 
Cuba stated that the unjust distribution of wealth worldwide 
was the real cause of the crisis.  Egypt for the AG focused 
on structural problems, including the inadequacy of the World 
Trade Organization (WTO), biofuel production, and 
agricultural subsidies.  India and South Africa also pointed 
to biofuels and rising oil prices.  Pakistan for the 
Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) emphasized 
underlying structural failings and the need for a sustainable 
solution.  Brazil said food subsidies were indeed a problem, 
but argued that blaming biofuel production was shortsighted. 
 
¶6.  Slovenia for the EU noted the role of other international 
organizations in addressing the food crisis and mentioned 
that the HRC was not the proper venue to address all aspects 
of the problem.  Canada's remarks shifted the focus to 
governments' responsibility to their own citizens and also 
called on all donors to allow the food aid they donate to be 
purchased locally (to "untie" the aid), a practice that 
Canada had just carried out.  The Holy See pointed to issues 
of financial and logistical access and called for a renewed 
commitment to African agriculture and for the balance of land 
use for food and other purposes to be governed by the common 
good, rather than relying exclusively on market forces. 
There were multiple calls for the international community to 
move beyond emergency stop-gap measures to address the 
underlying long-term causes. 
 
¶7.  In a number of interventions, international organizations 
 
GENEVA 00000392  002 OF 002 
 
 
lauded the HRC for highlighting the human rights aspect of 
the crisis and highlighted several themes.  The World Food 
Program, the Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural 
Rights, and the Food and Agricultural Organization argued 
that the question of cause was a complex technical one, but 
that there was a human element, and expressed hope that the 
special session would help governments better to distribute 
food to their populations.  The International Monetary Fund 
noted its technical advisory role in the debate.  The World 
Bank  said that imposing export bans was not the proper 
response to food shortage; Ukraine was lauded for lifting its 
food ban and Thailand drew praise for continuing to export 
rice. 
 
¶8.  Post has sent the final resolution by email to IO on May 
¶28.  That resolution "invites" the FAO to invite SR de 
Schutter to its June Rome meeting and otherwise urges 
countries to redouble their coordinated efforts to supply 
adequate food to all regions. 
TICHENOR