Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 51122 / 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

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 05PARIS5921, USUNESCO: GUIDANCE REQUEST: DISCUSSING THE

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. #05PARIS5921.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
05PARIS5921 2005-08-31 16:04 2011-08-24 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Paris
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS PARIS 005921 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
FROM USMISSION UNESCO 
STATE PASS USTR BALASSA 
IO/UNESCO FOR JANE COWLEY 
EUR/ERA FOR PETER CHASE 
L/EUR FOR PETER OLSON 
 
E.O. 12958:     N/A 
TAGS: SCUL ETRD EU CJAN UNESCO
SUBJECT:  USUNESCO: GUIDANCE REQUEST: DISCUSSING THE 
PRELIMINARY DRAFT CULTURAL DIVERSITY CONVENTION WITH 
EU REPS 
 
REF:  PARIS 5116 
 
1.  (U) As reported ref, the UK Perm Delegate to 
UNESCO, Ambassador Timothy Craddock, suggested that 
USG lawyers meet with lawyers from EU member states 
so that the USG can better understand why the EU 
Member States have concluded that the preliminary 
draft Cultural Diversity Convention does not damage 
the financial and trade interests of EU Member 
States.   Craddock emphasized that this would not be 
a negotiation but an information session that enable 
a better understanding of view. 
 
2.  (U) We have suggested the date of September 16 
and request that US Mission Geneva Senior Legal 
Advisor T. Michael Peay, and an appropriate 
representative of the U.S. Trade Representative's 
Office be part of the team representing the USG. 
 
3. (U)  We see potential value in maybe having the 
Japanese delegation at such a meeting for additional 
leverage value.  A senior lawyer from the Japanese 
foreign ministry will be in Paris on the 16th. 
 
4.  (SBU) We would welcome detailed instructions 
that address a range of procedural and substantive 
issues.  As an initial matter, should the U.S. 
delegation seek to expand the scope of the meeting 
to go beyond the EU's stated premise?  Should we 
seek to inform the EC that, in order to be 
meaningful, the meeting must also address U.S. 
problems with the current text and explore what 
might be possible to convert it to a more consensus- 
based text?  Toward that end, after hearing their 
presentation, should we explore specific, Washington- 
cleared textual revisions that would arguably 
protect both our and their financial/trade 
interests, without calling the discussion a 
"negotiation"?   What should we aim to achieve as 
the desired outcome from the meeting, insofar as 
enhancing protection of U.S. interests over and 
above the current convention text? 
 
5.  (U) We would appreciate Washington's 
consideration of these questions in formulating 
instructions. 
 
Oliver