VZCZCXRO7617
OO RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHBS #0238/01 0510802
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 200802Z FEB 09
FM AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 8612
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA IMMEDIATE 1088

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 000238 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE PASS EUR/WE, IO/UNP, DRL/AEE AND L/HRR 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM PREL UNHRC BE
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE RESPONSE: BELGIAN OFFERS EUROPEAN VIEW ON 
DURBAN REVIEW CONFERENCE WORKING GROUP SESSION 
 
REF: SECSTATE 14201 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: Belgian MFA human rights expert Nathalie 
Rondeux called Poloff February 19 from Geneva to provide the 
European view, with Belgian nuance, on the Durban Review 
Conference Working Group.  Rondeux said the Durban process 
was very important to Europe; Europeans are excited the U.S. 
is participating.  She said having partners at the conference 
like the U.S., Australia and Switzerland is better than 
Europe alone against the world.  Europe wants a successful 
conference, as long as certain red-lines are not crossed. 
The key concerns Europeans have parallel U.S. concerns 
provided in reftel, particularly attempts to use defamation 
of religion arguments to limit freedom of expression and a 
several issues pertaining to the Middle East (Israel bashing, 
Holocaust denial, or backward movement on anti-Semitism). 
Outcomes Europe will attempt to achieve are clear references 
to fighting anti-Semitism, the denying the Holocaust, and 
censuring sexual orientation.  The Europeans also support 
discussing the link between racism and conflict.  The 
Europeans also think education and democracy should be 
mentioned as positive forces in ending racism.  Basically, 
Europe will oppose the discussion of new issues and focus on 
implementation of what was agreed to in Durban.  Europe and 
Belgium will work hard to obtain a positive outcome, and walk 
out if this is not possible.  End Summary. 
 
¶2. Belgian MFA human rights expert Nathalie Rondeux provided 
an informative response to reftel demarche February 19 when 
she called Poloff from Geneva.  She made clear she was 
speaking for the European Union, with Belgian nuances. 
Belgium, she said, was playing an organizing role as the 
burden sharer for the preparation of a unified position 
within the EU.  She heads the Belgian team preparing the 
draft paper for internal EU debate.  She added that Belgium 
had the most expertise on this issue, having held the EU 
presidency in 2001 during the Durban conference. 
Furthermore, Belgium was a member of the preparation 
conference for the Geneva Review Conference, and remained at 
the table in Durban after U.S. departure in 2001 to attempt 
to achieve a desirable outcome. 
 
Basic European Position and Concerns 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶3. (SBU) The EU views the conference as a review exercise to 
implement agreements based on the document agreed to in 
Durban in 2001.  Rondeux said that Belgium fully agrees the 
process will be difficult and understands U.S. concerns.  The 
main concerns the EU and Belgian delegations will be watching 
for are Middle East issues and moves to limit freedom of 
expression through defamation of religion arguments.  Rondeux 
promised that Belgium would stay and fight as hard as 
possible.  The European position is that remaining engaged is 
important.  Leaving is a serious option, but only for the 
right reason and at the right moment. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Europeans agree with the U.S. on past reparations. 
Finding a compromise in 2001 was challenging.  Rondeux 
mentioned a paragraph accepted in 2001 on addressing the 
colonial past.  As part of its implementation, Belgium 
received a visit by Durban parties who looked the treatment 
of people of African descent in Belgium.  Belgium will also 
mention a recent exposition it held on its colonial past. 
The European delegation will not accept claims that nothing 
has been done since Durban. 
 
¶5. (SBU) The Middle East is an area where several challenges 
could arise.  The Middle East was mentioned in Durban, so the 
EU would consider discussing the region.  However, 
inflammatory language should be avoided.  Particular concerns 
are anti-Israel statements, Holocaust denial, or a push to 
weaken the fight against anti-Semitism.  The crisis in the 
Middle East should not be a focus of discussion.  She asked 
rhetorically, why not bring up Sudan or any number of other 
regions? 
 
European Goals 
-------------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) Agenda items Europe will push for at the conference 
include a clear reference to the fight against anti-Semitism 
and an agreement that discussion of the Holocaust should not 
be diminished.  Europe will also push for the mention of 
sexual orientation in the text, which Rondeux admitted would 
be tough.  She said it was also important to bring up racism 
as a source of conflict linked to genocide and ethnic 
cleansing, and the related responsibility of states to 
 
BRUSSELS 00000238  002 OF 002 
 
 
protect populations from war crimes and crimes against 
humanity.  Europe will also raise the importance of education 
and democracy in combating racism. 
 
BUSH 
.