US embassy cable - 02ABUJA1218

C O N F I D E N T I A L ABUJA 001218 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
DEPT FOR AF/W AND IO 
 
 
E.O. 12958: 18/04/02 
TAGS: PREL, PHUM, NI, UNHRC-1 
SUBJECT: NIGERIA: RESPONSE TO UN RESOLUTION ON CUBA 
 
 
REF: A.) ABUJA 1164 B.) STATE 64509 C.) STATE 65639 
 
 
CLASSIFIED BY CDA ANDREWS FOR REASON 1.5(D) 
 
 
1. (C) MFA Permanent Secretary Hart was surprisingly 
open to the possibility of a Nigerian abstention after 
hearing our points April 17.  Hart agreed that the 
language was mild, saying, "Cuba should have nothing 
to fear" from it."  He said that he would discuss the 
resolution with Foreign Minister Lamido when he 
returned from Dakar. Hart also planned to contact 
Nigeria's Ambassador in Geneva. 
 
 
2. (C) Hart was particularly interested in the degree 
of support the resolution had within GRULAC.  Embassy 
April 18 sent him a second copy of the resolution, 
with co-sponsors appended, under cover of a Note 
requesting Nigeria to vote "yes" on Friday. 
 
 
3. (C) Hart told us afternoon of April 18 that 
Nigeria's Ambassador in Geneva had not returned his 
telephone call from mid-morning.  The original 
instructions had been to vote in line with Nigerian 
practice (i.e., against the resolution), but there had 
been a discussion with Lamido and others following our 
demarche (para one) and receipt of our Note.  It had 
been agreed that the Uruguayan draft offered an 
approach to Cuba new enough that further study was 
merited.  Hart said someone from his office was 
enroute to Geneva and that he would speak with that 
officer evening of April 18 if Nigeria's Ambassador 
did not return his call in the interim.  The 
Ambassador, said Hart, had been asked to consult with 
the Kenyan, Senegalese and Sierra Leonean delegations, 
as well as to report on Latin sentiment. 
 
 
4. (C) COMMENT: Nigeria's Ambassador is Geneva was 
provided instructions based on the GON's experience 
with past Cuba resolutions.  We do not know whether he 
is playing a useful or negative role.  The knowledge 
that he has not returned Hart's call leaves us ill at 
ease, notwithstanding Hart's comment that the 
Ambassador is doubtless very busy with his leading 
role in the African Group.  Clearly, there is at least 
some thought in Abuja of abstaining, but Nigeria's 
Ambassador -- perhaps having staked out a position in 
the African Group that he does not want to give up -- 
appears not to be engaging in that dialogue with his 
capital.  We have no objection to USDEL informing 
Nigeria's Ambassador that Embassy Abuja has held 
fruitful discussions with very senior levels of the 
GON and encouraging him to call home.  We would 
strongly encourage USDEL to motivate supportive 
members of GRULAC to approach the Nigerian delegation 
and urge Nigeria to take the lead within the African 
Group and vote "yes."  We have intimated in our 
conversations, but not stated directly, that the 
Latins are doing on Cuba what Africa should be doing 
through NePAD and that the wishes of the responsible 
regional group deserve respect. 
 
 
ANDREWS