TelegramC O N F I D E N T I A L   UNESCOPARI   12052209 
VZCZCXRO9632
PP RUEHFL RUEHKN RUEHMJ RUEHMR RUEHPA RUEHPB RUEHQU RUEHRN
DE RUEHFR #2209/01 3401509
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 051509Z DEC 08
FM UNESCO PARIS FR
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY
INFO RUCNSCO/UNESCO COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 PARIS FR 002209 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/15/2018 
TAGS: UNESCO PREL FR CH SP PK KU
SUBJECT: UNESCO DIRECTOR GENERAL SUSSESSION: CONVERSATIONS 
WITH CHINA, SPAIN, PAKISTAN, KUWAIT 
 
REF: A. (A) PARIS FR 2202 
     ¶B. (B) PARIS FR 2144 
     ¶C. (C) PARIS FR 2153 
 
Classified By: AMBASSADOR LOUISE V. OLIVER FOR REASON 1.4 (b) AND (d) 
 
 ¶1.  (C) Summary:  UNESCO's Assistant Director General for 
Africa told Ambassador Oliver that he does not believe that 
African countries will endorse Egypt's candidate for Director 
General of UNESCO Farouk Hosni at the African Union 
Conference in mid-January.  Ambassador Oliver also discussed 
the Egyptian candidacy with the Chinese, Pakistani, and 
Spanish Ambassadors to UNESCO, all of whom said that their 
countries had not yet formally endorsed Mr. Hosni.  In 
addition to meeting with the Kuwaiti Ambassador to UNESCO, 
Ambassador Oliver spoke with the Lithuanian, Moroccan, and 
Greek Ambassadors to UNESCO concerning the Director General 
race. End Summary. 
 
¶2.  (C) During a lunch with Ambassador Oliver on December 3, 
UNESCO's Assistant Director General for Africa, Mr. Noureini 
Tidjani-Serpos, said that many African countries have 
concerns about the candidacy of Egypt's Minister of Culture 
Farouk Hosni.  Although he knew that the Egyptians were 
exerting pressure on African countries to endorse Mr. Hosni 
at the mid-January meeting of the African Union, he is 
advising them not to do so.  He said that at the last 
election for Director General in 1999, the African Union 
endorsed the Egyptian candidate, Ismail Serageldin, who ended 
up pulling out of the race after getting only six votes in 
the Executive Board's secret ballot.  He said that it was a 
big embarrassment for the African countries.  Therefore, he 
is urging them to wait until the July meeting of the African 
Union before making any kind of endorsement, as by then they 
will know who all the candidates are. 
 
¶3.  (C) When Ambassador Oliver asked whether there was 
anything that the U.S. should do in this regard, Mr. 
Tidjani-Serpos replied that it might be helpful for the U.S. 
to contact Mali, the Chair of the Nominating Committee for 
the AU, to reinforce his message about not making any 
endorsement at the January AU meeting.  He added that 
contacting the head of the AU, Madagascar, would also be a 
good idea, as well as one or two additional countries that 
had close relationships with the U.S. and leadership 
positions in the AU.  He did not recommend contacting too 
many African countries, as he thought that the U.S. role 
should be as discreet as possible.  (Mission agrees with 
these suggestions.  End Comment) 
 
¶4.  (C) During a breakfast with Ambassador Oliver on December 
4, the Chinese Ambassador to UNESCO, Mrs. Shi Shuyun, said 
that she did not think that China had endorsed Mr. Hosni's 
candidacy, as had been mentioned in the weekly Egyptian 
magazine, Al-Ahram, and that she thought it was too early for 
China to endorse any candidate.  When Ambassador Oliver said 
that she had been told that a Chinese official had indeed 
expressed China's support for Mr. Hosni, Ambassador Shi asked 
whether the Chinese official was based in Cairo or came from 
Beijing.  Ambassador Oliver said that she did not know and 
would try to find out.  (Comment:  Since it was clear that 
the Chinese Ambassador knew nothing about China's support for 
Mr. Hosni, we should find out exactly what was said to the 
Egyptians.  End Comment) 
 
¶5.  (C) During a conversation with Ambassador Oliver on 
December 4, the Spanish ambassador to UNESCO, Maria Jesus San 
Segundo, said that although it was correct that the Spanish 
Minister of Culture had expressed support for Mr. Hosni's 
candidacy, as was mentioned in Mr. Hosni's interview in the 
Al-Ahram magazine, his statement had also said that Spain 
appreciated the qualities of all the candidates for Director 
General.  Ambassador San Segundo said that Spain's position 
was that it was too early to make a final decision on a 
candidate for Director General, and that there had been no 
official note from Spain to Egypt regarding Mr. Hosni's 
candidacy.  The Spanish Ambassador also stressed the good 
bilateral relationships that Spain  had with Egypt. 
 
¶6.  (C) During a meeting with Ambassador Oliver on December 
4, the Pakistani Ambassador to UNESCO, Ms. Asma Anisa, said 
that she had been surprised to learn that Mr. Hosni also had 
stated in the Al-Ahram interview that Pakistan was one of the 
countries supporting his candidacy.  After repeating that she 
had no knowledge of Pakistani support for Mr. Hosni, 
Ambassador Anisa said that she felt that it was too early to 
make a decision on any candidate, and that Pakistan would 
wait until after the May 31 deadline for new candidates had 
passed before endorsing a candidate. 
 
¶7.  (C) During a meeting with Ambassador Oliver on December 
4, the Kuwaiti Ambassador to UNESCO, Mr. Abduirazzak 
 
UNESCOPARI 12052209  002 OF 003 
 
 
Al-Nafisi, said that although the Arab Group might have been 
able to find a stronger Arab candidate for the Director 
General position, the fact was that for better or worse Mr. 
Hosni was the Arab candidate.  Ambassador Al-Nafisi added 
that although he himself had some concerns about Mr. Hosni, 
he would fight hard to get Mr. Hosni elected, as he wanted to 
see an Arab Director General.  When Ambassador Oliver asked 
him whether there was any chance that Egypt might decide not 
to move ahead with Mr. Hosni's candidacy if it learned that a 
number of countries had doubts about Mr. Hosni, Ambassador 
Al-Nafisi said no.  The Kuwaiti Ambassador said that the Arab 
countries had united behind one candidate to aviod splitting 
their votes as had happened in the 1999 Director General 
election, and that they would all support Egypt's choice. 
Ambassador Al-Nafisi added that it was highly unlikely that 
there would be another Arab candidate, at least not until 
May, and that would depend on how things were going with Mr. 
Hosni's candidacy. 
 
¶8.  (C) When Ambassador Oliver mentioned that the U.S. had 
serious concerns with Mr. Hosni's candidacy, the Kuwaiti 
Ambassador asked exactly what those concerns were. 
Ambassador Oliver replied that the U.S. did not think that 
someone who made the kinds of provocative statements such as 
those made by Mr. Hosni was the right kind of person to serve 
as Director General.  Ambassador Oliver added that the U.S. 
was also disturbed by some of the statements made about Mr. 
Hosni in the Al-Ahram magazine interview.  Ambassador 
Al-Nafisi asked if the U.S. had proof that Mr. Hosni had 
actually done the things that he was being accused of. 
Ambassador Oliver said that although she was unable to 
provide details at that time, the fact that many other 
countries also had concerns about Mr. Hosni indicated that it 
was not just the U.S. that had negative impressions of the 
Egyptian candidate.  The Kuwaiti Ambassador then suggested 
the possibility that the accusations were the result of 
domestic politics and came from those within Egypt who did 
not like Mr. Hosni.  He said that he had advised the Egyptian 
Ambassador to tell Mr. Hosni that he should spend more time 
at UNESCO so that people could get to know him better.  He 
added that he was concerned about the fact that Mr. Hosni's 
campaign had not been very active recently. 
 
¶9.  (C) Ambassador Oliver then told the Kuwaiti Ambassador 
that she was disturbed that Mr. Hosni had said in his 
Al-Ahram  magazine interview that "The Americans have so far 
withheld their support.  What I feel, and I hope that I am 
wrong, is that they don't want an Arab Muslim to be the next 
UNESCO director general."  Ambassador Oliver said that 
statement was not correct, and emphasized that U.S. concerns 
were focused on Mr. Hosni himself, and not on the fact that 
he is an Arab Muslim.   She also said that she would be 
disappointed if Mr. Hosni's campaign started to make those 
kinds of comments, but that if he did, how should the U.S. 
respond.  Ambassador Al-Nafisi replied that he had not seen 
the Al-Ahram interview, but that he also would not want to 
see that kind of statement made during the campaign. 
However, he added that even if Mr. Hosni did not repeat those 
remarks, it was likely that there would be those who would 
interpret U.S. lack of support for Mr. Hosni in that manner. 
The Kuwaiti Ambassador also said that it was  important to 
distinguish between official and unofficial statements.  He 
went on to state that Mr. Hosni must focus on explaining his 
vision and ideas to the UNESCO community in order to  prove 
that he is in fact the best candidate, and that the Egyptians 
should not discourage other candidates from entering the 
Director General race. 
 
¶10.  (C) During dinner on December 3, Ambassador Oliver had 
several conversations that related to the Director General 
race.  The Greek Ambassador to UNESCO, George 
Anastassopoulos, said that it was very important to find some 
way to stop Mr. Hosni's candidacy, as he would be a disaster 
for UNESCO.  The Lithuanian Ambassador, Ms. Ina 
Marciulionyte, who at the moment is the only formal 
candidate, said that she had almost finalized her brochures 
and would soon be sending them out.  The Moroccan Ambassador, 
Mrs. Aziza Bennani, said that it had been very difficult for 
her to have had to withdraw from the Director General race. 
When Ambassador Oliver asked her whether she would consider 
reentering the race if the current situation changed, she 
was noncommittal, but added that anything was possible. 
 
¶11.  (C) Comment:  It is clear from these conversations that 
the situation of the Director General race is far from clear. 
 Although Ambassador Oliver had been told that the Kuwaiti 
Ambassador is very unhappy with the choice of Mr. Hosni, it 
turns out that his desire for an Arab Director General is 
much stronger than his concerns about Mr. Hosni.  This is 
probably true for other Arab states as well.  It is also 
clear that Kuwait, as the current Chair of the Arab Group, 
will work closely with Egypt on Mr. Hosni's campaign.  In 
 
UNESCOPARI 12052209  003 OF 003 
 
 
addition, it seems that Spain is playing a double game by 
having a statement of support for Mr. Hosni made by its 
Minister of Culture, not its Foreign Minister, and carefully 
wording it in such a way that it thinks it will keep the door 
open if Spain decides to change its position later on in the 
race.  However, Spain would probably pay a heavy price with 
Egypt if it actually did that.  Since other countries may try 
to do that as well, the U.S. must closely examine statements 
of support for Mr. Hosni.  It is also clear that as capitals 
get more involved in the Director General race, UNESCO 
Ambassadors will not always be completely up to date about 
what is going on in their home countries.  Moreover, given 
their bilateral relations with Egypt, many countries will 
prefer to say that it is too early to make a decision than to 
suggest that they have serious concerns about Mr. Hosni's 
candidacy.  Finally, since it is generally agreed that the 
lack of an endorsement for Mr. Hosni at the AU meeting in 
January would be a real set-back for his candidacy, the 
Egyptians might decide to wait until after that meeting 
before finalizing Mr. Hosni's candidacy. 
OLIVER