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 06USUNNEWYORK2263, UN BUDGET: FIFTH COMMITTEE VOTES ON DRAFT DECISION

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. #06USUNNEWYORK2263.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
06USUNNEWYORK2263 2006-12-19 15:47 2011-08-24 01:00 UNCLASSIFIED USUN New York
VZCZCXRO8974
PP RUEHROV
DE RUCNDT #2263/01 3531547
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 191547Z DEC 06
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0975
INFO RUEHXK/ARAB ISRAELI COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV PRIORITY 1343
RUEHJM/AMCONSUL JERUSALEM PRIORITY 0816
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 USUN NEW YORK 002263 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AORC UNGA KUNR PREL IS
SUBJECT: UN BUDGET: FIFTH COMMITTEE VOTES ON DRAFT DECISION 
ON REGISTER OF DAMAGES 
 
REF: A. USUN 02231 
 
     B. SECSTATE 197203 
 
 
1.  SUMMARY: On December 11th and 15th, the Fifth Committee 
(Administrative and Budgetary) voted on draft decisions 
regarding the program budget implications (PBIs) of 
A/ES-10/L.20 and A/ES-10/L.20/Rev.1, a draft resolution 
(reftels) to be acted on at the December 15th Emergency 
Special Session.  The Fifth Committee had to reconsider the 
additional PBI after changes were made to the underlying 
resolution that changed the budget implications.  END 
SUMMARY. 
 
December 11th decision 
----------------------- 
 
2.  The Fifth Committee on December 11 considered the program 
budget implications of draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20.  The 
budget implications were related to operative paragraphs in 
the draft resolution regarding the creation of a Register of 
Damage caused by the construction of the wall in the Occupied 
Palestinian Territory.  After various language amendments 
(related to whether the Committee should reaffirm Rule 153 of 
the rules of procedure) were discussed amongst delegations 
during the various suspensions of the meeting during the 
morning session, the Committee decided to return to the issue 
in the afternoon, so that delegations would have time to 
consult internally.  The Japanese delegate indicated to 
delegations during the morning session that he needed to seek 
instructions from Tokyo and would not be ready to act until 
the next day given the time difference between New York and 
Tokyo. 
 
3.  Upon reconvening, Israel requested a vote on the UN 
Register, saying the technical nature of the Fifth 
Committee's decision was tainted by political considerations. 
 Evidence of the political nature of the budget implication 
statement was demonstrated by the detailed description of the 
Registry, as well as the exorbitant figure and large staffing 
requested.  He was also concerned about duplication, as a 
mechanism for compensation already existed in Israel, with 
140 cases reviewed and more than $1.5 million paid by Israel 
to individuals and organizations.  Another mechanism, paid 
for by the taxpayers of the Member States, would be a waste 
of money, he said.  A solution to the conflict would only by 
settled through negotiations of the two parties.  If the 
technical Fifth Committee had not accepted the infiltration 
of politics in its debate, the current debate would not have 
been necessary. 
 
4.  As Japan did not request more time to seek instructions, 
the Committee, acting by a vote of 116 in favor to six 
against (U.S., Australia, Canada, Israel, Nauru, Palau) with 
one abstention (Republic of Moldova), decided to inform the 
Assembly that the adoption of the text would require an 
appropriation of up to $3.1 million of the 2006-2007 budget 
for the establishment and maintenance of the Register.  Both 
Niger and Armenia asked the Secretariat to record their votes 
in favor of the draft resolution, since they were not able to 
vote earlier for technical reasons. 
 
5.  Japan's representative offered an explanation of vote, 
saying the decision to vote "for" the UN Register had been 
taken while discussion on the draft resolution L.20 was 
ongoing, which should not be used by delegations for 
political purposes.  He said if the need arose the Fifth 
Committee would act in accordance with established procedure. 
 
 
6.  The Finnish representative (on behalf of the European 
Union) explained the EU's vote in favor of the draft 
resolution, saying the EU supported the draft decision on the 
budget implications statement submitted by the 
Secretary-General.  It also supported the report by the 
 
SIPDIS 
Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions 
(ACABQ), particularly in paragraphs six and seven (document 
A/61/614).  The EU noted the discussions on the substance of 
L.20 were still ongoing, and the position on the budget 
implications was without prejudice to those details.  Any 
substantive changes to the text would give rise to the 
application of rule 153 of the rules of Procedure.  She added 
it was time to restore the working methods (i.e., "principle 
of consensus") of the Fifth Committee. 
 
7.  Australia's representative said her country opposed the 
draft resolution on the legal consequences of the building of 
the wall and continued to oppose the Assembly's treatment off 
the matter.  Israel already had a mechanism for settling 
damages as a result of the construction of the wall, and the 
 
USUN NEW Y 00002263  002 OF 002 
 
 
proposed registry would not advance the issue of peace.  As 
Australia did not support the draft resolution, it also did 
not support the required resources. 
 
8.  The South African representative (on behalf of the Group 
of 77 and China) said the G-77 had the long-standing position 
that the Committee was a technical, not political body.  As a 
rule, the G-77 supported the budget implication statement 
before it.  The G-77 strongly backed rule 153 of the rules of 
procedure, and supported the current statement on budget 
implications as it would any other budget implication 
statement. 
 
9.  Ambassador Wallace spoke on behalf of the U.S. delegation 
regarding the draft decision on the UN Register.  The text of 
his statement is as follows: 
 
BEGIN TEXT: 
 
Mr. Chairman, 
 
The United States has consistently opposed the creation of 
the UN Register of Damage as contemplated by A/ES-10/L.20. 
This clearly political mandate comes at a destructive time 
and diverts attention from practical efforts to achieving 
peace and security for both the Palestinian and Israeli 
peoples.  Moreover and unfortunately, the draft decision 
before us today supports a resolution that goes well beyond 
what was requested in resolution A/ES-10/15. 
 
The resolution called upon the Secretary-General to establish 
a register of damage.  Now this body seeks to approve funding 
for a draft resolution that includes components- verification 
and assessment- that both further politicizes this body and 
costs substantial sums to all Member States. 
 
As the report of the Secretary-General states:  "The  act of 
registration of damage, as such, would not entail an 
evaluation or an assessment of the loss or damage claimed." 
In addition to our continuing opposition to the establishment 
of any Registry, my delegation strongly opposes the expansion 
of the mandate of the registry by the action that we are 
taking today.  At nearly $4 million per year, with no 
provision for the mandate to be either reviewed or concluded 
this body is committing scarce financial resources- for a 
political statement.  This action today continues to raise 
questions regarding the efficacy of the UN at a time when we 
are failing to institute reform and the world faces so many 
challenges that go unaddressed in this building every day. 
 
In conclusion, my delegation voted against this draft 
decision because the U.S. opposes the establishment of the 
Registry, the expansion of the Registry's mandate in today's 
action and we reiterate our real concerns about the large and 
open-ended financial commitment to this politically charged 
mandate. 
 
END TEXT. 
 
December 15 decision 
---------------------- 
 
10.   On December 15, the Committee considered a revised PBI 
and ACABQ report, as the underlying resolution had changed 
since Monday's action.  The result of the Committee vote was: 
128 votes in favor; five against (U.S., Australia, Israel, 
Micronesia, Palau); with one abstention (Cote d'Ivoire). 
Finland (on behalf of the EU) was the only Committee member 
to register an explanation of vote, saying the EU trusted 
that any effects of the resolution would be funded through 
existing resources of the 2006-2007 programme budget.  She 
was sorry, however, that the Committee deviated from the 
long-standing practice of consensus on this issue. 
 
WOLFF