VZCZCXRO6061
PP RUEHSL
DE RUEHGV #0684/01 2311147
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 191147Z AUG 09
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9105
INFO RUEHZJ/HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
RUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV 4619
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 3136

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 GENEVA 000684 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/16/2019 
TAGS: PHUM PREL PGOV KDEM IS
SUBJECT: ISRAEL TO TRY NEW TACK ON GOLDSTONE REPORT, UPSET 
WITH PILLAY'S REPORT 
 
Classified By: CDA Douglas M. Griffiths, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (U) This is an action request.  See para 6. 
 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶2.  (C) For the first time since the creation of the Human 
Rights Council (HRC), Israel is considering engaging in 
substantive negotiations on a resolution about the 
Palestinian territories.  The resolution, if tabled, would 
respond to the anticipated report by the Fact Finding Mission 
to investigate the Gaza conflict ("Goldstone Report") 
established by the HRC during its Ninth Special Session held 
in January of this year.  Israel has decided it will either 
work with the European Union and (assuming we engage) the 
United States to propose amendments to a likely draft 
resolution by the Palestinians or related group, or encourage 
a counter-resolution that the EU or another delegation could 
present.  As the USG has not negotiated similar resolutions 
in the past, Post seeks guidance on U.S. posture in light of 
this new Israeli approach. 
 
¶3.  (C) Separately, Israel is deeply disappointed with the 
High Commissioner's August 14 report on the situation in 
Gaza, drafted as a result of the HRC's resolution resulting 
from its Ninth Special Session.  Despite multiple discussions 
with the High Commissioner and her staff, Israel found that 
that the report failed to correct almost all of the factual 
errors and misrepresentations they brought to her direct 
attention several times.  The GOI has consequently decided to 
suspend its already limited interaction with the Ramallah 
field office of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human 
Rights (OHCHR), although Israel will continue its budding 
dialogue with High Commissioner Pillay.  End Summary. 
 
Testing the HRC Waters 
---------------------- 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Israeli Political Counselor Walid Abu-Haya and 
Israeli Mission Legal Officer Amanda Grudinskas met with 
PolCouns and Mission Legal Advisers on August 14.  Abu-Haya 
informed us that Israel had not yet received an advance copy 
of the report by the Fact Finding Mission for the Conflict in 
Gaza, which Justice Richard Goldstone will present at the 
12th Session of the Human Rights Council this September. 
Reportedly, however, the Israeli Mission in The Hague has 
learned that the first draft won't be released until 
September, leaving the countries concerned very little time 
to provide input before Goldstone officially presents his 
report on September 29.  Abu-Haya said he expected his 
delegation would make a statement at the HRC in reply to 
Goldstone's report presentation.  Although he could not 
predict the content or tone of the report and even allowed 
that "Goldstone may surprise us (positively)," Abu Haya 
thought the GOI would use its remarks to outline the efforts 
it has made to investigate alleged abuses and express 
concerns about Goldstone's public hearings (the Gaza hearings 
were widely publicized, contrary to the Geneva hearings). 
 
¶5.  (C) Abu-Haya said that Israel was preparing to engage in 
negotiations on the expected follow-up resolution that the 
Palestinian Observer or other delegations, such as the 
Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), would almost 
inevitably draft as a follow-up to the Goldstone report. 
Abu-Haya said his capital had informed him that Israel would 
take one of two approaches: 1) work with EU members and the 
U.S. to present amendments to the anticipated OIC/Palestinian 
text, or 2) work with the Swedish EU Presidency to promote a 
counter-resolution to an eventual OIC or Palestinian draft. 
Israel's bottom line is that they do not/not want the issue 
or discussion of the Goldstone report to move outside the HRC 
and migrate into other fora, such as UNGA.  Engagement by 
Israel on the Goldstone report resolution would mark the 
first time that Israel has participated in such negotiations. 
 He said the GOI would use this effort as a "test case" to 
determine if it should engage more broadly on Middle East 
resolutions in the HRC. Abu-Haya reiterated the basic message 
they have made over the past several weeks in connection with 
the GOI's own newly-released report on the Gaza Operation: in 
engaging on a resolution, Israel is not seeking a resolution 
that reflects positively or sympathetically on Israel.  To 
the contrary, Israel welcomes an opportunity to openly and 
honestly discuss the issue, but in a manner that represents 
fairly the responsibilities and obligations of both sides. 
 
¶6.  (U) The USG has historically not engaged on the many HRC 
Middle East resolutions.  Post requests Washington guidance 
 
GENEVA 00000684  002 OF 002 
 
 
on USG's engagement posture with respect to an expected 
resolution on the Goldstone Report and on other OPT-related 
resolutions that may arise during the upcoming HRC session in 
light of Israel's decision. 
 
Israel Displeased with Pillay's Gaza Report 
------------------------------------------- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) On August 14, High Commissioner for Human Rights 
Navi Pillay released the advanced version of her report on 
the Gaza conflict, a report called for by HRC Resolution 
S-9/1 (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/ hrcouncil/docs/ 
12session/a%20hrc%2012%2037 AEV.pdf).  The report was 
originally scheduled for presentation at the June HRC 
session, but Pillay delayed its release after Israel 
intervened with her to allow more time for responses by the 
country concerned.  Like the Goldstone report, the High 
Commissioner's report will be presented at the HRC's 
September session. 
 
¶8.  (C) Abu-Haya explained in detail the fruitless efforts 
the GOI had undertaken to work with Pillay and her staff to 
improve and correct the report since June.  Despite noting 
numerous factual errors and what Israel views as 
misrepresentations, Pillay submitted the report without 
taking into account most of Israel's input, which included 
clarification on applicable legal standards, factual 
corrections, and policy points.  According to Abu-Haya and 
Grudinskas, the report also selectively employs a 
self-imposed timeframe for reporting, claiming that it only 
reviews the situation in Gaza through April 2009; 
nevertheless, the report goes on to include input by selected 
NGO's on events that took place after April, while ignoring 
counter-arguments by the likes of Human Rights Watch and 
other NGOs that reported on Hamas actions in the same time 
period.  They expressed dismay that Pillay appeared as though 
she had not read the report, which they believe - and have 
some evidence to suggest - the OHCHR field office in Ramallah 
drafted.  Israel's ambassador in Geneva told the Charge that 
he met twice privately with Pillay in an effort to educate 
her on the report's many errors.  He said that the 
conversations were remarkably cordial.  Pillay acknowledged 
the weaknesses of the report, but was disappointingly passive 
in explaining that she was compelled to release the report, 
even though she acknowledged that it was flawed.  As a 
consequence, Abu Haya told PolCouns separately, the GOI would 
cease its already limited contact with the OHCHR Ramallah 
Office.  They would nonetheless continue to pursue the 
dialogue they have recently begun with the High Commissioner. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶9.  (C) As Israel is in the early phases of developing this 
new approach, it remains to be seen how publicly engaged they 
will want to be on a Goldstone follow-up resolution, if they 
will actually sit in the informal negotiations, or if they 
will opt to provide their input through and seek the support 
of friendly delegations.  Regardless, Israeli engagement, 
even if done vicariously through the EU or by asking for U.S. 
support, could signal a shift in Israel's approach to the HRC 
and leave open the door for its broader participation on 
Middle East resolutions.  Without overstating the case, such 
engagement could provide an opportunity to begin bridging one 
of the many divides in the Human Rights Council.  End Comment. 
GRIFFITHS