Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 05GENEVA2781, WTO HEADS OF DELEGATION MEETING - NOVEMBER 10, 2005

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #05GENEVA2781.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
05GENEVA2781 2005-11-16 03:15 2011-08-25 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED US Mission Geneva
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 GENEVA 002781 
 
SIPDIS 
 
PASS USTR FOR DWOSKIN 
EB/OT FOR CRAFT 
USDA FOR FAS/ITP/SHEIKH, MTND/YOUNG 
USDOC FOR ITA/JACOBS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD WTRO USTR
SUBJECT: WTO HEADS OF DELEGATION MEETING - NOVEMBER 10, 2005 
 
 
1.  Begin Summary. Following a report by Director-General Lamy 
on the lack of movement in recent informal consultations, WTO 
heads of delegation decided on November 10, 2005 to 
"recalibrate" their expectations for the upcoming Ministerial 
Conference in Hong Kong, China.  At the same time, they also 
stressed their conviction to maintaining a high level of 
ambition for the negotiations as a whole as well as the 
importance of using the Hong Kong meeting as an intermediate 
step in reaching a high-quality agreement by the end of next 
year.  Several delegations said they would intensify their 
negotiating efforts prior to Hong Kong and urged others to do 
the same. 
 
2.  There was disagreement, however, over the nature of texts 
for Hong Kong.  Some such as Australia called for primarily 
factual texts identifying areas of convergence and divergence, 
saying the remaining gaps appear too wide to be bridged by 
chairs in numbers or a range of numbers.  Others, including 
the United States and Hong Kong China, felt chairs should have 
greater flexibility in bridging gaps and empowering Members to 
stretch toward the ambitious agreements they are asking for. 
In his conclusion, Lamy expressed the view that chairs should 
be able to decide an approach on a case-by-case basis in order 
to maximize the potential for progress. 
 
3.  In substantive themes, the EC found its immobility on 
agriculture criticized by many Members, with Brazil blaming 
the lack of trust in negotiations to a situation in which one 
partner makes a proposal but a key partner responds that it 
cannot move because it is already at its bottom line.  Many 
Members expressed the view that development should be a key 
theme in Hong Kong.  Egypt (for the Africa Group) argued that 
development is being neglected and criticized recent proposals 
for creating few new commercial opportunities for Africa.  The 
EC and China called for development deliverables in Hong Kong, 
both mentioning cotton and duty-free quota-free market access 
for LDCs and China adding TRIPS/public health.  END SUMMARY 
 
Lamy's Remarks 
 
4.  Director-General Lamy opened with some thoughts about 
process.  He recognized that some delegations are unhappy with 
his exclusion of certain participants from recent informal 
consultations.  He apologized for any hard feelings, saying he 
is committed to a transparent and inclusive process and no 
offense was intended to anyone - his goal, he explained, was 
simply to try to find a consensus among the smallest of 
concentric circles that could then be broadened to the overall 
membership.  He regretted a "trust deficit" among Members 
handicapping the entire negotiation. 
 
5.  Turning to substance, Lamy reported "some bad news and a 
little good news."  In terms of bad news, there has not been 
enough convergence in recent consultations to reach full 
modalities on all of the elements in the July 2004 framework. 
The question now, he said, is whether Members should try for 
full modalities by Hong Kong - "if we try this jump and we 
miss it," he warned, "we might lose what has already been 
achieved."  The alternative, he explained, is to "recalibrate" 
expectations for Hong Kong to what can reasonably be achieved. 
 
6.  In terms of good news, Lamy felt that no Member wants to 
reduce the level of ambition for the round as a whole.  There 
is clearly the will to achieve ambitious results, he said, and 
when there is a will there is a way - "we just have to find 
that way."  He pointed out that what has already been achieved 
in the negotiations is not negligible; much more is needed, he 
emphasized, but if what has already been achieved is lost 
Members would have a big problem.  In informal consultations, 
everyone is expressing the clear desire to preserve what has 
been accomplished so far. 
 
7.  If Members do decide to recalibrate their expectations for 
Hong Kong, Lamy urged them to carefully reflect about process 
so there is not a lessening of ambition for the overall 
negotiations.  By Hong Kong, Lamy felt there still could be a 
range of numbers or parameters in key areas, together with 
corresponding texts on rules so the overall package is 
balanced and can consolidate the progress achieved since the 
July 2004 frameworks.  Lamy then posed two questions to 
Members on the way forward: 
 
-   First, do Members agree with his assessment of the 
    situation? 
 
-   Second, do Members agree on the need for an intermediate 
    stage in Hong Kong before an attempt is made to reach full 
    modalities? 
 
Member Statements 
 
8.  More than thirty Members made statements, using words such 
as "sobering", "realistic", and "disappointing" to describe 
Lamy's diagnosis but agreeing with him that expectations for 
the upcoming Ministerial Conference must be recalibrated.  At 
the same time, many Members underscored the importance of 
maintaining a high level of ambition for the negotiations as a 
whole.  Ambassador Allgeier emphasized that the Hong Kong 
meeting must be as substantive as possible and serve as a 
launching pad to a high-quality agreement by the end of next 
year, and he affirmed that the United States would intensify 
its efforts in the run-up to Hong Kong.  Other Members hit 
similar themes: 
 
-   Ambassador Gosper of Australia stated that any 
    recalibration must not compromise the ambition set out in 
    the Doha Declaration. 
 
-   Ambassador Valles Galmes of Uruguay recalled previous 
    recalibrations in July 2004 and July 2005 and warned of 
    diminishing overall expectations. 
 
-   India's ambassador described Lamy's assessment as "somber" 
    and said it would go along with recalibration but was not 
    a demandeur of it. 
 
-   Chile, China, and Hong Kong China emphasized the 
    importance of maintaining the intensity and avoiding 
    slippage in the negotiations. 
 
9.  Members disagreed over the nature of texts for Hong Kong. 
Australia called for primarily factual texts identifying areas 
of convergence and divergence, saying remaining gaps appear 
too wide to be bridged by chairs.  Argentina, the EC, Brazil, 
Switzerland, and others opposed the use of numbers in the 
absence of agreement on full modalities.  Hong Kong China felt 
chairs should be free to advance the process in any way they 
can, narrative or numerical.  Ambassador Allgeier opined that 
chairs must strike a delicate balance, representing Member 
views on the one hand but also empowering them to stretch 
toward the ambitious agreements Members are asking for. 
 
10.  The EC's agriculture stance was implicitly or explicitly 
criticized by many Members.  Ambassador Hugueney of Brazil 
attributed the lack of trust to difficulties created when 
proposals are made and the response from a key partner is that 
it cannot move because it is already at its bottom line. 
Costa Rica said it is looking for a sign from the EC that 
ambitious outcomes are possible in all areas.  Uruguay said 
some Members are showing more flexibility than others and 
added that the talks could be in trouble if some Members have 
no room to maneuver - "if that is the case, recalibration 
won't solve the problem." 
 
11.  Many Members hit development themes.  On behalf of the 
Africa Group, Egypt strongly argued there has been little 
progress on issues of commercial importance for African 
countries, citing preference erosion, cotton, TRIPS/public 
health, and the five LDC-specific proposals as of critical 
importance.  Zambia (for LDCs), Tanzania, and Kenya all argued 
that development should be the main theme in Hong Kong.  The 
EC and China called for development deliverables including 
cotton and duty-free, quota-free market access for LDCs. 
China also mentioned TRIPS/public health. 
 
12.  Many delegations including Chile, the EC, Hong Kong 
China, and Switzerland stated that the Ministerial Conference 
can still be a success by consolidating progress made since 
the July 2004 package.  Many Members used the term "launching 
pad" to describe the Ministerial Conference's importance in 
kick-starting the final phase of negotiations in 2006.  Korea 
and Singapore added that Lamy's transition to a more 
integrated approach in the negotiations has been a positive 
development.  Other points made by Members that might be of 
interest to Washington agencies include: 
 
-   India, Brazil, and China highlighted the need for balance 
    across issues, with India repeating Nath's statement that 
    the negotiations turn on more than one pivot. 
 
-   India, Egypt on behalf of the Africa Group, and Mexico 
    said they would oppose attempts to reinterpret existing 
    mandates in the negotiations. 
 
-   Singapore and Thailand saw the need for members to have a 
    program and list of priorities to give them a clear sense 
    for what they need to accomplish in 2006. 
 
-   Jamaica worried that progress on its priorities is lagging 
    and an intermediate step in Hong Kong could deepen 
    existing imbalances. 
 
-   The Philippines highlighted the importance of gaining 
    greater clarity on issues set out in annex B, paragraph 8 
    of the July 2004 decision. 
 
-   Bulgaria noted the importance it attaches to GIs and 
    expressed concern that Hong Kong, as an intermediate 
    stage, might lock in concessions made conditionally. 
 
-   Colombia stated that agriculture equates to development 
    and argued that more countries should recognize the gains 
    that will come from better market access. 
 
-   Argentina asked Lamy whether changing expectations for the 
    Ministerial Conference also meant a delay in the mid- 
    November target date for texts. 
 
-   The Democratic Republic of the Congo asked Lamy how he 
    planned to put development back at the center of the 
    negotiations. 
 
Lamy's Assessment 
 
13.  Following Member statements, Lamy said he heard 
widespread agreement that Members share his disappointment but 
see a need to recalibrate their objectives for Hong Kong.  At 
the same time, however, they clearly do not want to reduce 
their ambitions for the negotiations and want the Hong Kong 
meeting to be a positive step toward completion of the 
negotiations in 2006.  There is also strong agreement on the 
need for texts to prepare capitals for Hong Kong, he judged, 
but he regretted the insistence on a bottom-up approach that 
he felt implies a lack of confidence in the process. 
 
14.  There the consensus stops, Lamy felt, creating a problem 
for chairs in devising texts.  There seem to be two views - 
one that chairs should prepare factual reports with no 
numbers, and another that chairs should do whatever they can 
to capture progress achieved since July 2004 and one way to do 
that is to give them the option of including numbers.  The 
first view is defensive and tactical, he judged, while the 
second is oriented toward narrowing gaps and covering as much 
distance as possible.  He concluded that chairs should be able 
to decide an approach on a case-by-case basis in order to 
maximize the potential for progress. 
 
15.  Then Lamy responded to the questions on timing (from 
Argentina) and development (by Democratic Republic of the 
Congo).  On timing, Lamy said the date for some texts is 
slipping, but it cannot go beyond late November if ministers 
and capitals are to have sufficient time for review.  On 
development, Lamy emphasized that Hong Kong must reaffirm the 
development aspect of the negotiations and credibly advance 
issues such as S&DT and the package of LDC-specific issues, 
but he repeated his view that progress here can be no 
substitute for progress elsewhere and stressed that the 
greatest development gains will come from the pillars of the 
negotiations. 
 
16.  The EC asked whether Lamy's approach might "introduce 
modalities through the back door" and cause confusion if 
chairs issue texts that do not emanate from convergence among 
Members.  Lamy responded sharply, first "thanking" the EC for 
so clearly expressing the suspicion that he'll be heavy-handed 
in preparations for Hong Kong and then opining that "one 
doesn't need to be clairvoyant" to understand why the EC 
doesn't want numbers in texts.  He urged Members to trust the 
chairs they've appointed, to try to improve confidence in the 
process, and to continue working hard to achieve balanced 
texts by Hong Kong.  Allgeier