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 07GENEVA551, RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT WORKING GROUP

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. #07GENEVA551.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
07GENEVA551 2007-03-07 14:57 2011-08-25 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED US Mission Geneva
VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHGV #0551/01 0661457
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 071457Z MAR 07
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3026
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2048
INFO RUEHZJ/HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
RUEHAR/AMEMBASSY ACCRA 0496
RUEHAS/AMEMBASSY ALGIERS 1625
RUEHAM/AMEMBASSY AMMAN 0980
RUEHGB/AMEMBASSY BAGHDAD 0219
RUEHKB/AMEMBASSY BAKU 0173
RUEHBP/AMEMBASSY BAMAKO 0079
RUEHDK/AMEMBASSY DAKAR 0700
RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 0402
RUEHDJ/AMEMBASSY DJIBOUTI 0220
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 4940
RUEHLS/AMEMBASSY LUSAKA 0314
RUEHMK/AMEMBASSY MANAMA 0140
RUEHML/AMEMBASSY MANILA 0546
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 2628
RUEHMN/AMEMBASSY MONTEVIDEO 0295
RUEHPL/AMEMBASSY PORT LOUIS 0225
RUEHPG/AMEMBASSY PRAGUE 0734
RUEHSA/AMEMBASSY PRETORIA 4531
RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO 0384
RUEHRB/AMEMBASSY RABAT 0550
RUEHRH/AMEMBASSY RIYADH 0683
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 3782
RUEHTU/AMEMBASSY TUNIS 0629
RUEHWR/AMEMBASSY WARSAW 1208
RUEHYD/AMEMBASSY YAOUNDE 0067
UNCLAS GENEVA 000551 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR IO/RHS, DRL/MLA, L/HRR 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM UNHRC
SUBJECT: RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT WORKING GROUP 
 
REF: 3/2/2007 SMELLER-IO/RHS EMAIL 
 
Summary 
-------- 
 
1.  The inter-governmental Right to Development (RTD) Working 
Group completed its Feb. 26-March 2 session with an unusual 
compromise "consensus" agreement on the chair's conclusions 
and recommendations that left it up to various states to 
decide whether or not the report opened the door for a new 
legally-binding international instrument on the right to 
development. (NOTE: Final conclusions and recommendations 
e-mailed to IO/RHS. END NOTE.) After several failed attempts 
to get more explicit wording for a legally-binding instrument 
inserted into the proposed text, the Non-Aligned Movement 
(NAM), led by Cuba, said it would only join consensus if it 
could include a NAM declaration stating that it understood a 
particular sentence in the document to mean that the working 
group could begin consideration of a new RTD convention. 
After several hours of back-and-forth discussions, the RTD WG 
chair finally relented but not before giving all other 
delegations the same option to include their own separate 
statements of interpretation.  The European Union, Australia, 
and Canada quickly said they would include annexes expressing 
their own view that an outcome did not necessarily mean a 
convention or anything legally-binding.  The working group 
also agreed to extend the mandate of its high level task 
force for an additional two years.  End Summary. 
 
NAM Versus the Western Group 
---------------------------- 
 
2.  From the outset, there were two sides during the meeting: 
NAM, which wanted to begin work on an RTD convention, and the 
Western Group (EU, Australia, Canada, and Japan), which, 
though not speaking as a group, said it would rather have 
more (read indefinite) discussion and research done on the 
issue.  Memories of last November's contentious RTD vote in 
New York occasionally surfaced during the negotiations, and, 
at one point, the German delegate -- on loan from the German 
Mission in New York -- warned the chair not to mention New 
York again unless he was prepared to have a repeat 
performance in Geneva.  For his part, RTD WG Chair Salama 
(Egypt) did a good job in keeping discussions focused and 
presented at least three draft versions of the working group 
report's conclusions and recommendations, which included 
suggestions on: 1) where the working group's work on the 
elaboration and implementation of a comprehensive and 
coherent set of standards might lead; 2) the focus of high 
level task force technical missions; and 3) renewal of the 
working group and high-level task force's mandate.  At 
Salama's request, Polcouns met with him and task force chair 
Stephen Marks during a consultation period to discuss the USG 
position on right to development and reiterate our strong 
opposition to a legally-binding RTD instrument. 
 
EU Tactic Gets NAM Nervous 
-------------------------- 
 
3.  During discussions with Poloff on the margins of the 
working group meetings and at two Western Group meetings, the 
German delegate suggested a strategy of indefinite engagement 
with the NAM on right to development.  He reasoned that since 
NAM had the numbers, it would be better to engage them for 
several more years, which would hold off actual work on a 
convention, while at the same time allowing donor countries 
to put more of the onus of good governance and rule of law on 
the developing countries.  While not initially supportive of 
Salama's text, Germany and several Western Group countries 
said that it was probably the best we could hope for.  The 
EU's eventual acceptance of the text, however, only seemed to 
raise NAM suspicion.  NAM demanded more specific language in 
the last sentence of paragraph five that would explicitly 
mention an international legally-binding convention. (NOTE: 
The actual sentence mentions the possibility of "an 
international legal standard of a binding nature." END NOTE.) 
NAM also wanted -- and got -- a watered-down version of a 
paragraph on technical missions for the task force to study 
the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), the ECA/OECD-DAC 
Mutual Review of Development Effectiveness, and the Paris 
Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and demanded that a 
three-year extension of the task force's mandate be reduced 
to one (it was eventually changed to two years).  Japan said 
that its main concern was about any additional costs the 
working group or its high level task force would incur. 
4.  During one of several breaks called for by NAM, an OHCHR 
Secretariat staff member told Poloff that NAM wanted to 
 
SIPDIS 
extend the working group's mandate by only one year, because 
it feared losing control of the process.  The staffer went on 
to say that the EU's tactic of engagement had caught NAM 
off-guard and its members were now scrambling to figure out 
what the EU was up to.  Throughout the afternoon and into the 
early evening (the interpreters had already departed), WG 
Chair Salama urged NAM to accept the EU's "incredible offer," 
but, in the end, NAM continued to insist on specific wording 
for a legally-binding international convention. 
 
Everyone's a Winner 
------------------- 
 
5. After several more breaks, NAM said it could only join 
consensus if it could include as part of an annex to the 
report a "NAM Declaration" explicitly stating that it 
interprets the last sentence of paragraph five to mean an 
international legally-binding convention.  Salama pleaded 
with NAM not to take this unusual step and warned that he 
would have to open the door for other delegates to do the 
same if they so wished.  NAM refused and, as expected, the 
EU, Australia, and Canada immediately stated that they, too, 
would have their own annexes explaining their understanding 
of the text was that an outcome could take on other forms 
instead of a convention.  Salama then congratulated everyone 
for reaching consensus. Germany said it just bought everyone 
two and possibly three more years without talk on a 
convention and that this time should be used to get more 
actively involved with the issue to control it.  The report 
along with the chair's conclusions and recommendations will 
now go to the upcoming Council session for adoption. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
6.  The chair's conclusions and recommendations put the RTD 
issue one step closer toward a convention, which makes the 
NAM's actions during the last two days of negotiations even 
more bewildering.  Cuba has continued to flex NAM's muscle, 
stating on several occasions during the meeting that it 
already had the numbers and did not need consensus.  The EU's 
maneuvering, however, put NAM in the awkward position of 
possibly not joining consensus on an RTD issue, so, as a 
last-minute, face-saving measure, NAM had no choice but to 
join consensus (albeit only with inclusion of its 
declaration).  Look for NAM to use some of the language in 
this report, especially in its declaration, to advance an RTD 
convention in other fora in New York. END COMMENT. 
 
TICHENOR