US embassy cable - 04BRUSSELS432

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 000432 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/02/2014 
TAGS: PHUM, PREL, MASS, ETRD, IR, CH, EUN, USEU BRUSSELS 
SUBJECT: EU HUMAN RIGHTS AGENDA PREVIEW: CHR-60 AND CHINA 
 
REF: A. A) DUBLIN 135 
     B. B) BRUSSELS 346 (ALL NOTAL) 
 
Classified By: USEU POLOFF Harry O'Hara, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 
 
1. (C) Summary: Further to ref A, European Council human 
rights experts stressed the importance of earlier bilateral 
consultations on country-specific resolutions, while noting 
that a number of EU member state human rights experts 
continue to have trouble dealing with the US "thematics" 
paper. Recent EU discussions on lifting the EU arms embargo 
on China (ref B) have led to some internal discomfort among 
some EU human rights experts.  End Summary 
 
China 
----- 
 
2. (C)  The EU Secretariat has decided to split its internal 
February 4 COHOM session into two meetings. In the morning, 
the human rights experts will meet by themselves.  In the 
afternoon, in an unusual step, EU COHOM experts will be 
joined by EU Asia experts (COASI) (agendas below). This is 
being driven by recent thinking in the EU to lift the arms 
embargo on China and the need to consider how to deal with 
China at CHR-60.  This is leading to unhappiness among some 
Brussels-based EU human rights experts who are being subject 
to human rights NGO pressure. 
 
3.  (C) One of our interlocutors noted that discussion about 
lifting the Chinese arms embargo is being conducted in the 
Political and Security Committee (PSC) without COHOM 
participation.  She said that the Irish Presidency/PSC had 
asked for three papers on China from the Council: codes of 
conduct, overall EU/China relations and China human rights. 
She said that she had written the human rights paper and has 
said while China is making progress on economic rights, it is 
difficult to argue that progress is being made in political 
and civil rights in China.  EU support for a CHR resolution 
this spring is going to be very difficult to see, she opined, 
but in any case, it is highly unlikely that the EU will agree 
to anything until after the next round of the EU/China human 
rights dialogue in Dublin February 26-27.  Furthermore, 
anything that is decided on EU support for a CHR resolution 
on China will most likely come from the Council of Ministers 
(heads of state) level. We note that the Council 
Secretariat's draft agenda (below) proposes China/human 
 
SIPDIS 
rights as a separate item to discuss with the US. 
 
Draft US/EU COHOM agenda; Internal EU COHOM Agendas 
--------------------------------------------- ------ 
 
4. (SBU) The Council Secretariat has suggested to the Irish 
Presidency that the agenda for the February 11 US/EU COHOM 
meeting cover: 1) CHR-60 prep (including the thematics 
package); 2) CHR membership reform; 3) Corporate Social 
Responsibility; 4) China/Human Rights; 5) "Caucus of 
Democracies"; 6) Death Penalty. The Irish have agreed to this 
proposed agenda and we can be expect to be asked for our 
reaction before the February 4 EU human rights experts 
meeting. 
 
5. (U) The EU agenda for their internal meeting is: 1) Review 
of draft norms for Transnational Corporations; 2) CHR-60 
preparations with a focus of getting agreement for countries 
that EU will seek resolutions or lesser measures; 3) US/EU 
troika meeting (including an effort to get a response to the 
US thematics paper); 4) preparation for other troikas 
(EU/Canada experts meet in NY February 10); 5) internal 
review of overall EU human rights policy; 6) Implementation 
of guidelines on children in armed conflict; 7) Death penalty 
in Belize, and 8) draft juvenile amicus curiae brief. The 
last item would be to review a proposed EU friend of the 
court brief in US courts opposing the application of the 
death penalty against minors. For the second, joint 
COHOM/COASI, meeting February 4 (afternoon), the EU will also 
discuss 1) CHR-60, 2) preparing for the next round of the 
EU/China human rights dialogue, and 3) implementation of EU 
guidelines on torture. 
 
EU/Iran human rights dialogue remains stalled 
--------------------------------------------- 
 
6. (C) One of our EU interlocutors confirmed that the 
Iranians still have not replied to an EU request to go ahead 
with a next round of the EU/Iran human rights dialogue (which 
had been scheduled for March 8-9).  Currently the EU is not 
pushing for a response, we were told, pending what happens in 
the February 20 Parliamentary election in Iran. 
 
Schnabel