VZCZCXYZ0003
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHC #8881 1331711
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 131658Z MAY 09
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO USMISSION USUN NEW YORK IMMEDIATE 6094

UNCLAS STATE 048881 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: IS KPAL KWBG LY PREL UNSC
SUBJECT: GAZA BOARD OF INQUIRY: GUIDANCE FOR UNSC 
CONSULTATIONS, MAY 13, 2009 
 
REF: USUN NEW YORK 0489 
 
¶1. (SBU) This is an action message.  USUN is authorized to 
draw from the points in para 2 below as a basis for its 
participation in the discussion of the Gaza Board of Inquiry 
during Security Council consultations on May 13, 2009.  USUN 
is also authorized at its discretion, either in the 
consultation session or in separate discussions with 
individual Council members, to note the potential for a U.S. 
veto of the draft Libyan resolution and our opposition to 
raising the Board of Inquiry in the General Assembly.  Based 
on the results of the consultation, Mission should advise the 
Department if demarches in capitals would be helpful. 
¶2. (U) Talking points: 
 
-- The United States appreciates the work of the Board of 
Inquiry into incidents involving UN personnel and facilities 
in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009.  The process 
initiated by the Secretary-General and carried forward by the 
Board has proceeded effectively and continues to do so 
without any outside intervention. 
 
-- The United States strongly opposes any action on these 
incidents by either the Security Council or the General 
Assembly for two equally important reasons. 
 
-- First, the matters in question are clearly serious and as 
such are being addressed soberly and diligently by the 
Secretary-General and Israeli government.  It is not 
realistic to think that Council adoption of the resolution 
before it would in fact contribute to international peace and 
security. 
 
-- The rationale for the Board of Inquiry process is to 
safeguard UN personnel.  To that end, the Government of 
Israel cooperated extensively with the Board, and is 
continuing to work with the Secretary General to address the 
Board,s recommendations.  The Council should not be used as 
a device to exploit this process as a platform to castigate 
one party to a conflict. 
 
-- In his cover letter to UN members, the Secretary-General 
stated that he did not intend to pursue further investigation 
into this matter.  Nor has he asked the Council to take 
action. 
 
-- We need to avoid politicizing the UN presence in conflict 
zones, and to facilitate the Secretary General in his efforts 
to gain the cooperation of the parties involved.  This is 
true not only for this Board of Inquiry, but also to ensure 
the cooperation of member states with future Boards in a 
professional and non-political atmosphere. 
 
-- Second, the unnecessary request for the Council to insert 
itself into the Board of Inquiry process flies directly in 
the face of the positive message we sent just two days ago. 
In our May 11 Presidential Statement we reached out to the 
parties, calling them to serious negotiations.  The sudden 
consideration of an entirely one-sided resolution does not 
conceivably fit into that positive message. 
 
-- We called for &vigorous diplomatic action8 not to blame 
one party, but rather to help both parties embrace a lasting 
peace based on an enduring commitment to mutual recognition, 
freedom from violence, incitement and terror, and the 
two-state solution. 
 
-- To achieve progress in these difficult peace negotiations 
there must be mutual trust and a recognition of mutual 
responsibility.  The resolution we are considering would only 
serve to drive one party away from negotiations, and would 
only sow distrust. 
 
End talking points. 
CLINTON