

Currently released so far... 51122 / 251,287
Articles
Brazil
Sri Lanka
United Kingdom
Sweden
00. Editorial
United States
Latin America
Egypt
Jordan
Yemen
Thailand
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
2011/05/01
2011/05/02
2011/05/03
2011/05/04
2011/05/05
2011/05/06
2011/05/07
2011/05/08
2011/05/09
2011/05/10
2011/05/11
2011/05/12
2011/05/13
2011/05/14
2011/05/15
2011/05/16
2011/05/17
2011/05/18
2011/05/19
2011/05/20
2011/05/21
2011/05/22
2011/05/23
2011/05/24
2011/05/25
2011/05/26
2011/05/27
2011/05/28
2011/05/29
2011/05/30
2011/05/31
2011/06/01
2011/06/02
2011/06/03
2011/06/04
2011/06/05
2011/06/06
2011/06/07
2011/06/08
2011/06/09
2011/06/10
2011/06/11
2011/06/12
2011/06/13
2011/06/14
2011/06/15
2011/06/16
2011/06/17
2011/06/18
2011/06/19
2011/06/20
2011/06/21
2011/06/22
2011/06/23
2011/06/24
2011/06/25
2011/06/26
2011/06/27
2011/06/28
2011/06/29
2011/06/30
2011/07/01
2011/07/02
2011/07/04
2011/07/05
2011/07/06
2011/07/07
2011/07/08
2011/07/10
2011/07/11
2011/07/12
2011/07/13
2011/07/14
2011/07/15
2011/07/16
2011/07/17
2011/07/18
2011/07/19
2011/07/20
2011/07/21
2011/07/22
2011/07/23
2011/07/25
2011/07/27
2011/07/28
2011/07/29
2011/07/31
2011/08/01
2011/08/02
2011/08/03
2011/08/05
2011/08/06
2011/08/07
2011/08/08
2011/08/09
2011/08/10
2011/08/11
2011/08/12
2011/08/13
2011/08/15
2011/08/16
2011/08/17
2011/08/18
2011/08/19
2011/08/21
2011/08/22
2011/08/23
2011/08/24
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Antananarivo
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Alexandria
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embasy Bonn
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Brazzaville
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangui
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Belfast
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Cotonou
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chiang Mai
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Chengdu
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
DIR FSINFATC
Consulate Dusseldorf
Consulate Durban
Consulate Dubai
Consulate Dhahran
Embassy Guatemala
Embassy Grenada
Embassy Georgetown
Embassy Gaborone
Consulate Guayaquil
Consulate Guangzhou
Consulate Guadalajara
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Hong Kong
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kolonia
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Krakow
Consulate Kolkata
Consulate Karachi
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Lusaka
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Lome
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy Libreville
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Leipzig
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Mission Geneva
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Mogadishu
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maseru
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Merida
Consulate Melbourne
Consulate Matamoros
Consulate Marseille
Embassy Nouakchott
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Nuevo Laredo
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Consulate Nagoya
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Praia
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Moresby
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Podgorica
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Hillah
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Surabaya
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy Tirana
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
Consulate Thessaloniki
USUN New York
USMISSION USTR GENEVA
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Mission CD Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
UN Rome
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vientiane
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AMGT
ASEC
AEMR
AR
APECO
AU
AORC
ADANA
AJ
AF
AFIN
AMED
AS
AM
ABLD
AFFAIRS
AMB
APER
ACOA
AND
AA
AE
AADP
AID
AO
AL
AG
AORD
ADM
AINF
AINT
ASEAN
AORG
ABT
APEC
AY
ASUP
ARF
AGOA
AVIAN
ATRN
ANET
AGIT
ASECVE
ABUD
AODE
ALOW
ADB
AN
ADPM
ASPA
ARABL
AFSN
AZ
AC
AIAG
AFSI
ASCE
ASIG
ACABQ
ADIP
AFGHANISTAN
AROC
ADCO
ACOTA
ANARCHISTS
AMEDCASCKFLO
AK
ARABBL
ASCH
ANTITERRORISM
AGRICULTURE
AOCR
ARR
ASSEMBLY
AORCYM
AFPK
ACKM
AGMT
AEC
APRC
AIN
AFPREL
ASFC
ASECTH
AFSA
AINR
AOPC
AFAF
AFARI
AX
ASECAF
ASECAFIN
AT
AFZAL
APCS
AGAO
AIT
ARCH
AEMRASECCASCKFLOMARRPRELPINRAMGTJMXL
AMEX
ARM
AQ
ATFN
AMBASSADOR
AORCD
AVIATION
ARAS
AINFCY
ACBAQ
AOPR
AREP
AOIC
ASEX
ASEK
AER
AGR
AMCT
AVERY
APR
AEMRS
AFU
AMG
ATPDEA
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AORL
ACS
AMCHAMS
AECL
AUC
ACAO
BA
BR
BB
BG
BEXP
BY
BRUSSELS
BU
BD
BTIO
BK
BL
BE
BMGT
BO
BM
BX
BN
BWC
BBSR
BTT
BC
BH
BILAT
BUSH
BHUM
BT
BTC
BMENA
BOND
BAIO
BP
BF
BRPA
BURNS
BUT
BBG
BCW
BOEHNER
BOL
BASHAR
BIDEN
BFIN
BZ
BEXPC
BTIU
CPAS
CA
CASC
CS
CBW
CIDA
CO
CODEL
CI
CROS
CU
CH
CWC
CMGT
CVIS
CDG
CTR
CG
CF
CHIEF
CJAN
CBSA
CE
CY
CB
CW
CM
CHR
CD
COE
CV
COUNTER
CT
CN
CPUOS
CTERR
CVR
CVPR
CDC
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
CONS
COM
CACS
CR
CONTROLS
CAN
CACM
COMMERCE
CAMBODIA
CFIS
COUNTERTERRORISM
CITES
CONDOLEEZZA
CZ
CTBT
CEN
CLINTON
CFED
CARC
CTM
CARICOM
CSW
CICTE
CYPRUS
CBE
CMGMT
CARSON
CWCM
CIVS
COUNTRYCLEARANCE
CENTCOM
CAPC
COPUOS
CKGR
CITEL
CQ
CITT
CIC
CARIB
CVIC
CAFTA
CVISU
CDB
CEDAW
CNC
CJUS
COMMAND
CENTER
COL
CAJC
CONSULAR
CLMT
CBC
CIA
CNARC
CIS
CEUDA
CHINA
CAC
CL
DR
DJ
DEMOCRATIC
DEMARCHE
DOMESTIC
DISENGAGEMENT
DB
DA
DHS
DAO
DCM
DAVID
DO
DEAX
DEFENSE
DEA
DTRO
DPRK
DOC
DTRA
DK
DAC
DOD
DRL
DRC
DCG
DE
DOT
DEPT
DOE
DS
DKEM
ECON
ETTC
EFIS
ETRD
EC
EMIN
EAGR
EAID
EFIN
EUN
ECIN
EG
EWWT
EINV
ENRG
ELAB
EPET
EIND
EN
EAIR
EUMEM
ECPS
ES
EI
ELTN
ET
EZ
EU
ER
EINT
ENGR
ECONOMIC
ENIV
EFTA
ETRN
EMS
EUREM
EPA
ESTH
EEB
EET
ENV
EAG
EXIM
ECTRD
ELNT
ENVIRONMENT
ECA
EAP
EINDIR
ETR
ECONOMY
ETRC
ELECTIONS
EICN
EXPORT
EARG
EGHG
EID
ETRO
EINF
EAIDHO
ECIP
EENV
EURM
EPEC
ERNG
ENERG
EIAD
EXBS
ED
EREL
ELAM
EK
EWT
ENGRD
EDEV
ECE
ENGY
EXIMOPIC
ETRDEC
ECCT
EUR
ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID
EFI
ECOSOC
EXTERNAL
ESCAP
ETCC
EENG
ERA
ENRD
ECLAC
ETRAD
EBRD
ENVR
ECONENRG
ELTNSNAR
ELAP
EPIT
EDUC
EAIDXMXAXBXFFR
EETC
EIVN
EDRC
EGOV
ETRA
EAIDRW
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ESA
ETRDGK
ENVI
ELN
EPRT
EPTED
ERTD
EUM
EAIDS
EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM
EDU
EV
EAIDAF
EDA
EPREL
EINVEFIN
EAGER
ETMIN
EUCOM
ECCP
EIDN
EINVKSCA
ENNP
EFINECONCS
ETC
EAIRASECCASCID
EINN
ETRP
ECONOMICS
ENERGY
EIAR
EINDETRD
ECONEFIN
EURN
ETRDEINVTINTCS
EFIM
ETIO
EATO
EIPR
EINVETC
ETTD
ETDR
EIQ
ECONCS
ENRGIZ
EAIG
ENTG
EUC
ERD
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EEPET
EUNCH
ESENV
ECINECONCS
ETRDECONWTOCS
ECUN
FR
FI
FOREIGN
FARM
FIR
FAO
FK
FARC
FAS
FJ
FREEDOM
FAC
FINANCE
FBI
FTAA
FM
FCS
FAA
FORCE
FDA
FTA
FT
FCSC
FMGT
FINR
FIN
FDIC
FOR
FOI
FO
FMLN
FISO
GM
GERARD
GT
GA
GG
GR
GTIP
GH
GZ
GE
GB
GY
GAZA
GJ
GEORGE
GOI
GCC
GMUS
GI
GLOBAL
GV
GC
GL
GOV
GKGIC
GF
GWI
GIPNC
GUTIERREZ
GTMO
GANGS
GAERC
GUILLERMO
GASPAR
HR
HA
HYMPSK
HO
HK
HUMAN
HU
HN
HHS
HURI
HUD
HUMRIT
HUMANITARIAN
HUMANR
HL
HSTC
HILLARY
HCOPIL
HADLEY
HOURANI
HI
HUM
HEBRON
HUMOR
IZ
IN
IAEA
IS
IMO
ILO
IR
IC
IT
ITU
ID
IV
IMF
IBRD
IWC
ICAO
ICRC
INF
IO
IPR
ISO
IK
ISRAELI
IQ
ICES
IDB
INFLUENZA
IRAQI
ISCON
IGAD
IRAN
ITALY
IRAQ
ICTY
ICTR
ITPGOV
ITALIAN
IQNV
IADB
INTERNAL
INMARSAT
IRDB
ILC
INCB
INRB
ICJ
ISRAEL
INR
IEA
ISPA
ICCAT
IOM
ITRD
IHO
IL
IFAD
ITRA
IDLI
ISCA
INL
INRA
INTELSAT
ISAF
ISPL
IRS
IEF
ITER
INDO
IIP
IND
IEFIN
IACI
IAHRC
INNP
IA
INTERPOL
IFIN
ISSUES
IZPREL
IRAJ
IF
ITPHUM
ITA
IP
IRPE
IDA
ISLAMISTS
ITF
INRO
IBET
IDP
IRC
KMDR
KPAO
KOMC
KNNP
KFLO
KDEM
KSUM
KIPR
KFLU
KE
KCRM
KJUS
KAWC
KZ
KSCA
KDRG
KCOR
KGHG
KPAL
KTIP
KMCA
KCRS
KPKO
KOLY
KRVC
KVPR
KG
KWBG
KTER
KS
KN
KSPR
KWMN
KV
KTFN
KFRD
KU
KSTC
KSTH
KISL
KGIC
KSEP
KFIN
KTEX
KTIA
KUNR
KCMR
KCIP
KMOC
KTDB
KBIO
KBCT
KMPI
KSAF
KACT
KFEM
KPRV
KPWR
KIRC
KCFE
KRIM
KHIV
KHLS
KVIR
KNNNP
KCEM
KLIG
KIRF
KNUP
KSAC
KNUC
KPGOV
KTDD
KIDE
KOMS
KLFU
KNNC
KMFO
KSEO
KJRE
KJUST
KMRS
KSRE
KGIT
KPIR
KPOA
KUWAIT
KIVP
KICC
KSCS
KPOL
KSEAO
KRCM
KSCI
KNAP
KGLB
KICA
KCUL
KPRM
KFSC
KQ
KPOP
KPFO
KPALAOIS
KREC
KBWG
KR
KTTB
KNAR
KCOM
KESS
KINR
KOCI
KWN
KCSY
KREL
KTBT
KFTN
KW
KRFD
KFLOA
KHDP
KNEP
KIND
KHUM
KSKN
KOMO
KDRL
KTFIN
KSOC
KPO
KGIV
KSTCPL
KSI
KPRP
KFPC
KNNB
KNDP
KICCPUR
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KDMR
KFCE
KIMMITT
KMCC
KMNP
KSEC
KOMCSG
KGCC
KRAD
KCRP
KAUST
KWAWC
KCHG
KRDP
KPAS
KTIAPARM
KPAOPREL
KWGB
KIRP
KMIG
KLAB
KSEI
KHSA
KNPP
KPAONZ
KWWW
KGHA
KY
KCRIM
KCRCM
KGCN
KPLS
KIIP
KPAOY
KTRD
KTAO
KJU
KBTS
KWAC
KFIU
KNNO
KPAI
KILS
KPA
KRCS
KWBGSY
KNPPIS
KNNPMNUC
KNPT
KERG
KLTN
KPREL
KTLA
KO
KAWK
KVRP
KAID
KX
KENV
KWCI
KNPR
KCFC
KNEI
KFTFN
KTFM
KCERS
KDEMAF
KMEPI
KEMS
KBTR
KEDU
KIRL
KNNR
KMPT
KPDD
KPIN
KDEV
KFRP
KTBD
KMSG
KWWMN
KWBC
KA
KOM
KWNM
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KRGY
KNNF
KICR
KIFR
KWMNCS
KPAK
KDDG
KCGC
KID
KNSD
KMPF
KWMM
MARR
MX
MASS
MOPS
MNUC
MCAP
MTCRE
MRCRE
MTRE
MASC
MY
MK
MG
MU
MILI
MO
MZ
MEPP
MCC
MEDIA
MOPPS
MI
MAS
MW
MP
MEPN
MV
MD
MR
MC
MCA
MT
MIL
MARITIME
MOPSGRPARM
MAAR
MOOPS
ML
MA
MN
MNUCPTEREZ
MTCR
MUNC
MPOS
MONUC
MGMT
MURRAY
MACP
MINUSTAH
MCCONNELL
MGT
MNUR
MF
MEPI
MOHAMMAD
MAR
MAPP
MNU
MFA
MTS
MLS
MEETINGS
MERCOSUR
MED
MNVC
MIK
MBM
MILITARY
MAPS
MARAD
MDC
MACEDONIA
MASSMNUC
MUCN
MQADHAFI
MPS
NZ
NATO
NI
NO
NU
NG
NL
NPT
NS
NA
NP
NASA
NSF
NEA
NANCY
NSG
NRR
NATIONAL
NMNUC
NC
NSC
NAS
NARC
NELSON
NATEU
NDP
NIH
NK
NIPP
NR
NERG
NSSP
NE
NTDB
NT
NEGROPONTE
NGO
NATOIRAQ
NAR
NZUS
NCCC
NH
NAFTA
NEW
NRG
NUIN
NOVO
NATOPREL
NV
NICHOLAS
NPA
NSFO
NW
NORAD
NPG
NOAA
OPRC
OPDC
OTRA
OECD
OVIP
OREP
ODC
OIIP
OAS
OSCE
OPIC
OMS
OFDP
OFDA
OEXC
OPCW
OIE
OSCI
OM
OPAD
ODPC
OIC
ODIP
OPPI
ORA
OCEA
OREG
OMIG
OFFICIALS
OSAC
OEXP
OPEC
OFPD
OAU
OCII
OIL
OVIPPRELUNGANU
OSHA
OPCD
OPCR
OF
OFDPQIS
OSIC
OHUM
OTR
OBSP
OGAC
OESC
OVP
ON
OES
OTAR
OCS
PREL
PGOV
PARM
PINR
PHUM
PM
PREF
PTER
PK
PINS
PBIO
PHSA
PE
PBTS
PA
PL
POL
PAK
POV
POLITICS
POLICY
PO
PRELTBIOBA
PKO
PIN
PNAT
PU
PGOVPREL
PALESTINIAN
PTERPGOV
PELOSI
PAS
PP
PTEL
PROP
PRELAF
PRHUM
PRE
PUNE
PIRF
PVOV
PROG
PERSONS
PROV
PKK
PRGOV
PH
PLAB
PDEM
PCI
PRL
PRM
PINSO
PERM
PETR
PPAO
PERL
PBS
PETERS
PRELBR
PCON
POLITICAL
PMIL
POLM
PKPA
PNUM
PLO
PTERM
PJUS
PARMP
PNIR
PHUMKPAL
PG
PREZ
PGIC
PAO
PROTECTION
PRELPK
PGOVENRG
PATTY
PSOC
PARTIES
PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ
PMIG
PAIGH
PARK
PETER
PHUS
PKPO
PGOVECON
POUS
PMAR
PWBG
PAR
PGOVGM
PHUH
PTE
PY
POLUN
PDOV
PGOVSOCI
PGOVPM
PRELEVU
PGOR
PBTSRU
PHUMA
PHUMR
PPD
PGV
PRAM
PARMS
PINL
PSI
PKPAL
PPA
PTERE
PGOF
PINO
PREO
PHAS
PAC
PRESL
PORG
PS
PGVO
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PINT
PRELP
PREFA
PNG
PTBS
PFOR
PGOVLO
PHUMBA
PREK
PHJM
POLINT
PGOVE
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PECON
PEACE
PROCESS
PLN
PEDRO
PF
PGPV
PCUL
PGGV
PSA
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PGIV
PHUMPREL
POGOV
PEL
PBT
PAMQ
PINF
PSEPC
POSTS
PAHO
PHUMPGOV
PGOC
PNR
RS
RP
RU
RW
RFE
RCMP
RIGHTSPOLMIL
REFORM
RO
ROW
ROBERT
REACTION
REPORT
REGION
RELATIONS
RAY
ROBERTG
RIGHTS
RM
RATIFICATION
RREL
RBI
RICE
ROOD
REL
RODHAM
RGY
RUEHZO
RELIGIOUS
RELFREE
RUEUN
RELAM
RSP
RF
REO
REGIONAL
RUPREL
RI
REMON
RPEL
RSO
SCUL
SENV
SOCI
SZ
SNAR
SO
SP
SU
SY
SI
SMIG
SYR
SA
SW
SF
SR
SYRIA
SNARM
START
SPECIALIST
SG
SNIG
SCI
SGWI
SE
SIPDIS
SANC
SELAB
SN
SETTLEMENTS
SCIENCE
SENVENV
SENS
SPCE
SPAS
SECURITY
SENC
SOCIETY
SOSI
SENVEAGREAIDTBIOECONSOCIXR
SEN
SPECI
ST
SL
SENVCASCEAIDID
SC
SECRETARY
STR
SNA
SOCIS
SADC
SEP
SK
SHUM
SYAI
SMIL
STEPHEN
SNRV
SKCA
SENSITIVE
SECI
SCUD
SCRM
SGNV
SECTOR
SAARC
SENVSXE
SWMN
STEINBERG
SOPN
SOCR
SCRS
SWE
SARS
SNARIZ
SUDAN
SENVQGR
SAN
SM
SFNV
SSA
SPCVIS
SOFA
SCULKPAOECONTU
SENVKGHG
SHI
SEVN
SH
SNARCS
SNARN
SIPRS
TBIO
TW
TRGY
TSPA
TU
TPHY
TI
TX
TH
TIP
TSPL
TNGD
TZ
TS
TC
TK
TURKEY
TERRORISM
TPSL
TINT
TRSY
TERFIN
TPP
TT
TECHNOLOGY
TE
TAGS
TRAFFICKING
TJ
TN
TO
TD
TP
TREATY
TR
TA
TIO
TECH
TF
TRAD
TNDG
TWI
TPSA
TWL
TAUSCHER
TRBY
TL
TV
THPY
TSPAM
TREL
TRT
TNAR
TFIN
TWCH
THOMMA
THOMAS
TERROR
TRY
TBID
UK
UNESCO
UNSC
UNGA
UN
US
UZ
USEU
UG
UP
UNAUS
UNMIK
USTR
UY
USUN
UNEP
UNDC
UV
UNPUOS
UNSCR
USAID
UNODC
UNRCR
UNHCR
UNDP
UNCRIME
UA
UNHRC
UNRWA
UNO
UNCND
UNCHR
USAU
UNICEF
USPS
UNOMIG
UNESCOSCULPRELPHUMKPALCUIRXFVEKV
UR
UNFICYP
UNCITRAL
UNAMA
UNVIE
USTDA
USNC
UNCSD
USCC
UNEF
UNGAPL
USSC
UNMIC
UNTAC
UNCLASSIFIED
USDA
UNCTAD
USGS
UNFPA
UNSE
USOAS
UE
UAE
UNCHS
UNDESCO
UNC
UNSCS
UKXG
UNGACG
UNHR
UNBRO
UNCHC
UNFCYP
UNIDROIT
WHTI
WIPO
WTRO
WHO
WTO
WMO
WFP
WEET
WS
WE
WA
WHA
WBG
WILLIAM
WI
WSIS
WCL
WEBZ
WZ
WW
WWBG
WMD
WWT
WMN
WWARD
WITH
WTRQ
WCO
WEU
WB
WBEG
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 09USUNNEWYORK553, UNGA: UNSC REFORM: START OF SECOND ROUND OF
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.
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. #09USUNNEWYORK553.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
09USUNNEWYORK553 | 2009-06-02 21:52 | 2011-07-11 00:00 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | USUN New York |
VZCZCXRO8824
OO RUEHTRO
DE RUCNDT #0553/01 1532152
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 022152Z JUN 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6659
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN IMMEDIATE 1091
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA IMMEDIATE 1139
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD IMMEDIATE 2361
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID IMMEDIATE 6407
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI IMMEDIATE 2660
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME IMMEDIATE 1112
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL IMMEDIATE 1126
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO IMMEDIATE 8747
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 USUN NEW YORK 000553
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
DEPARTMENT FOR USUN/W AND IO/UNP; NSC FOR POWER
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL KUNR UNGA UNSC GE JA BR IN
SUBJECT: UNGA: UNSC REFORM: START OF SECOND ROUND OF
INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATIONS IN INFORMAL PLENARY
REF: USUN NEW YORK 432
¶1. (SBU) Summary and comment: The informal plenary of the
General Assembly met on May 22 and 26 for the start of the
second round of intergovernmental negotiations on Security
Council expansion. The two sessions, during which 51
delegations spoke, focused on the Chair's agenda for the
second round of intergovernmental negotiations and his
overview paper which attempted to encapsulate the main
options presented on the five key issues during the first
round of negotiations. The Group of Four (G4) largely
accepted the Chair's overview paper while the Uniting for
Consensus (UFC) bloc called it overly simplified and not
sufficiently comprehensive. The African Group also rejected
it, saying it did not properly capture their position on the
veto and categories of membership. The Chair also asked the
membership to discuss the concept of "review and challenge."
The G4 largely suggested that a review could be meaningful
after reforms had been in effect for at least 15 years and
said that any "challenge" to the position of longer-term
Council members should be commensurate to the bar which they
had to pass to become longer-term Council members. The UFC
said it was premature to discuss a review without first
clarifying the actual reforms and rejected the concept of
"challenge" since it implies a step towards a permanent seat
which they do not support. Many African states also refused
to discuss the concept of a review, saying it only applied to
the intermediate option which they did not favor. While
France and the UK voiced support for the review concept,
Russia, China, and the U.S. suggested caution.
¶2. (SBU) Summary and comment cont.: As expected, much of the
debate focused on procedural aspects of the Chair's agenda
and overview paper and not on the substance of the reform
process. While Ambassador Tanin continues to strike the
right tone in emphasizing that member states drive the
process and he is trying to help catalyze it, we do not
foresee any breakthroughs during this round. Both the
African Group and India remain focused on additional
permanent seats with veto rights while the UFC will have
nothing to do with additional permanent seats. The stand-off
will continue for at least another round as the African
position will not change before the next African summit at
the end of June. As a result, there is little pressure for
the U.S. to do more than continue to urge all parties to
participate in the process "in good faith with mutual respect
and in an open, inclusive and transparent manner," as called
for in General Assembly Decision 62/557. End summary and
comment.
¶3. (SBU) The first meeting of the second round of
intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council expansion
took place on May 22 and 26. 51 delegations spoke at least
once during the six-hour discussion over two days of the
informal plenary and only one state (Italy) took the floor a
second time during the interactive portion at the end of the
session. Most of the discussion focused on Afghan Perm Rep
and Chairman of the Intergovernmental Negotiations Zahir
Tanin's May 18 letter and overview paper. (Note: USUN
e-mailed a copy of the letter and paper to IO/UNP on May 19.
End note.)
Chair's May 18 letter and overview
----------------------------------
¶4. (SBU) In his letter, Ambassador Tanin outlines a three
meeting schedule for the second round of intergovernmental
negotiations (May 22, June 11, and June 23). In his
19-paragraph overview paper, he first reviews the first round
of intergovernmental negotiations and then places the five
key issues under the headings of Chapter V of the UN Charter,
clustering the five key issues into two groups for the second
round: (1) composition and (2) functions and
powers/voting/procedure. For each of the five issues he
lists the main options presented during the first round.
¶5. (SBU) Ambassador Tanin also proposes that the first
meeting of the second round discuss the concept of any
"review or challenge," a concept raised by a few delegations
during the first round; followed by a focus in the second
USUN NEW Y 00000553 002 OF 005
meeting on the "composition" issues of size, categories of
membership, and regional representation; and a discussion in
the third and final meeting of the relationship between the
General Assembly and the Council, the veto, and working
methods. In his letter, Tanin stressed that the overview is
to serve as a "point of departure and reference for the
second round" and "meant to catalyze, not circumscribe." He
also notes that there will be a third round.
G4 welcomes overview and
schedule for second round
-------------------------
¶6. (SBU) Brazil spoke first for the Group of Four (G4) and
said it was okay with the overview though it would have
preferred a more intensive negotiating schedule for the
second round. The German Perm Rep also voiced support for
the overview paper but said the section on regional
representation should also note the Charter's focus on both
equitable geographical distribution and a member state's
contributions to the maintenance of international peace and
security as the yardstick for their eligibility to serve on
the Council. The Japanese Perm Rep voiced strong support
for the overview paper, noting the interconnected nature of
the clusters and the need not to repeat the debates of the
first round. He urged the membership to cease arguing over
the overview paper and focus on the actual substance of the
reform process. The new Indian Perm Rep called on the Chair
to note in the future the degree to which each proposal
receives support.
UFC disputes overview
paper and rejects agenda
------------------------
¶7. (SBU) Uniting for Consensus (UFC) bloc members
overwhelmingly agreed that the Chair's overview was "too
simplistic" and not sufficiently comprehensive since it
failed to incorporate the various proposals suggested during
the first round, including the Italian/Colombian proposal;
the S-5 proposal on working methods reform; and the proposal
to include a seat for small, island, developing states.
Spain said it was premature to reduce all proposals to just
three options under each issue. Turkey said that the veto
should be linked to categories of membership, a point echoed
by the African Group and other UFC members. A number of UFC
states, including Costa Rica, also stressed that member
states, not the Chair, should be outlining the format for the
next round. The Pakistani Perm Rep specifically stated that
he was unable to support the format and agenda proposed in
paragraph 19 of the overview paper and called for an overview
and agenda consistent with Decision 62/557.
African Group also not pleased
------------------------------
¶8. (SBU) Sierra Leone spoke on behalf of the African Group
and said that it had "difficulty with the reordering of the
issues" under the Chapter V UN Charter headings since the
order of the five key issues had been established in Decision
62/557. He also voiced concern with the selectiveness of the
overview, saying that the references to size should be more
specific instead of only the two options -- low-twenties and
mid-twenties. The African Group's most significant concern
was that the African position on the veto was not properly
reflected within the options of both the veto and categories
of membership. Sierra Leone and a number of other African
states emphasized that their first preference is for
abolition of the veto and this is not reflected as an option
in the Chair's overview paper. This point was also noted by
a number of non-African states, including the Philippines and
Italy. Nigeria, along with several other African states,
stressed that member states' proposals should not be
considered on equal footing. Those proposals that have the
support of 53 countries (i.e., the African Group) should
take precedence over those with more limited support.
¶9. (SBU) African Group member and UFC bloc member Algeria
heavily criticized the Chair's overview report, saying that
it did not measure up to the African Group's own report sent
USUN NEW Y 00000553 003 OF 005
to the African Union. The Algerian Perm Rep did presciently
note that the informal plenary was in more of a "debating
mood rather than a negotiating mood." The Egyptian Perm Rep
reminded the informal plenary that the African Group would
select its own representatives for any African seats in the
Council.
¶10. (SBU) The Perm Rep from St. Vincent and the Grenadines
reminded the membership of the Chair's statement that his
"pithy" overview paper "does not purport to be the sole basis
for moving forward" and urged those that are using the paper
as a "wedge" to "not give it the importance it does not seek
nor deserve." He cautioned against a retreat to the
methodology of the OEWG and said the informal plenary is at a
"crossroads of progress and stagnation" where it can continue
its "aimless and endless debate" or move forward. The Cuban
representative also warned the membership to be careful not
to let the intergovernmental negotiations become a repetition
of well-known positions and arguments, as was the case in the
OEWG. He urged the membership to "shed proposals that do not
enjoy real support" and said it would not be acceptable for
real reform to be postponed indefinitely.
Concept of review/challenge
---------------------------
¶11. (SBU) A number of countries raised general questions
about the concept of a review conference, including timing,
duration, and scope, but did not suggest concrete answers to
their questions. The Belgian representative suggested that
there should be a period of 20 years between when the reforms
take effect and the holding of a review conference. The
Liechtenstein representative also attempted to respond.
While the Chair had grouped "review" and "challenge"
together, he suggested that "challenge" might be an outcome
of a future review. He said that any review of Council
reform should be scheduled for a defined moment and the scope
of that review should be defined in advance. He also
suggested that the scope might encompass further enlargement;
categories of seats; and use of the veto. He said it would
be better to have a one-off review event and not create a
system of endless reviews of the Council.
¶12. (SBU) G4 member Brazil suggested that a review,
scheduled for at least 15 years after any reform takes
effect, should "encompass all aspects of reform." Germany
also stressed that for a review to be "meaningful" it needs
to take place after the reforms have been in effect for a
significant period of time and suggested a minimum of 15
years, saying that new longer-term Council members must be
allowed time to grow into their role. In terms of the
concept of "challenge" to longer-term Council members,
Germany and India both suggested that the bar for any
challenge be commensurate with and not less than the bar for
permanent membership on the Security Council.
¶13. (SBU) Most UFC countries expressed their position that
it was premature to discuss a review conference before
clarifying the actual reforms. They rejected the concept of
"challenge" as a G4 concept since it implies a step towards a
permanent member seat and they continue to not support
additional permanent members. Any longer-term members under
an intermediate option would not be possible future permanent
members, in their opinion. The Italian Perm Rep noted that
"review and challenge" were not one of the five key issues
noted in Decision 62/557. The Republic of Korea Deputy Perm
Rep said he was not convinced that "review/challenge" was an
integral part of the reform process and that it was premature
to discuss it before broad agreement takes shape.
¶14. (SBU) Many African states also refused to examine the
concept of "review," saying that it applied only to the
intermediate approach and they do not subscribe to that
option. Others, like Namibia, questioned what could be
discussed on review if there still was no agreement on the
concepts for a reformed Council. The South African
Ambassador said that a review process would be needed and
that it should not be linked to just an intermediate
approach.
USUN NEW Y 00000553 004 OF 005
¶15. (SBU) The Singapore Perm Rep stressed in his
intervention that Singapore does not support a review for its
own sake. A review should mean the possibility of a
permanent seat and suggested that if an aspiring permanent
member passes three separate reviews spaced ten years apart
then that member state should become a permanent member of
the Council.
P-5
---
¶16. (SBU) The French representative again stated France's
support for permanent seats for the G4, an African state, as
well as an Arab state. He voiced their readiness to consider
the intermediate solution and said that any review would
depend on the type of reform selected but the bottom line
objective is lasting and effective reform. The UK Deputy
Perm Rep called on member states to show flexibility on all
sides and recommended strong consideration of the
intermediate model for which a review mechanism would be key
to assessing its effectiveness. He said that by the end of
the 63rd session the UK hoped the basic objectives of reform
would be agreed.
¶17. (SBU) The Russian Perm Rep stressed that the overview
should be treated as a point of departure, not as a
substitute for negotiations which are up to the member
states. He noted that the overview does not include options
not to change the current configuration of the veto or
Council working methods. (Note: The third veto option in the
overview paper (no extension of the veto to any new permanent
members) is essentially no change to the current veto
configuration. End note.) He also stressed that it is too
early to discuss a review and suggested it would be more
logical to do so after a decision had been taken in favor of
the interim model. The Chinese Deputy Perm Rep noted that
the five key issues are interconnected, regardless of how
they are grouped. He described the overview as a "highly
generalized summary" that falls short of reflecting new
proposals and solutions. He said it may be hard to reach an
agreement on a "review" before reaching general agreement on
the five key issues.
¶18. (SBU) Ambassador Wolff delivered the U.S. intervention
and welcomed the Chair's letter and overview paper, noting
that no paper could ever fully meet the objectives of each
and every member state but that it is a fair attempt to
highlight the key options on the table from the first round.
Noting the difficult underlying issues, he said that the
Chair's distillation of the five key issues into two clusters
for the membership's focus is workable. He noted that
"should negotiations on one cluster move more swiftly, that
could be helpful to the overall process." He said there is
no reason to complicate discussion of "composition of an
expanded Council -- which we see as the crux of the
effort...with a theological debate on the relationship
between the General Assembly and the Council" as the latter
is already settled by the Charter. Similarly, he stressed,
"a discussion of Council working methods continues to proceed
with concrete results in the Council's active Informal
Working Group on Documentation and other Procedural
Questions." He said that insisting on "changing the current
veto structure is not a productive use of time for our
deliberations," though the U.S is prepared to discuss any or
all of these issues for as long as is needed. On the concept
of a review, Ambassador Wolff urged prudence, saying "we
believe it is unlikely that we will have more than one
opportunity to amend the Charter on the issue of Security
Council composition in the foreseeable future" and urged a
focus on a set of reforms that "do not depend on recourse to
a future review conference or the abstract notion of
'challenges.'"
Questions about how to wrap up
current session/OEWG Report
------------------------------
¶19. (SBU) Portugal raised the question of how to conclude
the work of the informal plenary during the 63rd session and
referred to Decision 62/557's call for a report from the OEWG
USUN NEW Y 00000553 005 OF 005
at the end of the session. Indonesia also questioned what
the product would be at the end of the present round.
Neither suggested an answer. The Chair did not tackle this
issue in his closing remarks.
Chair's closing thoughts
------------------------
¶20. (SBU) In his closing remarks, the Chair noted that the
point of the overview paper was to reflect the main thrust of
the first round and to "catalyze, not circumscribe" the
process. He underscored that the member states are still
leading the process. He said that the member states should
feel free to raise whatever issues they deem are important
during the next two discussions of each of the clusters, so
that by the end of June all five key issues will have been
considered separately and jointly during the first and second
rounds of the intergovernmental negotiations.
RICE