US embassy cable - 05PARIS1959

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 001959 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/08/2006 
TAGS: AORC, ELAB, KIPR, IS, FR, WIPO, ILO 
SUBJECT: FRENCH RESPONSE ON ISRAEL'S MEMBERSHIP IN GROUPS 
AT WIPO, ILO, UNEP, UN-HABITAT AND CND 
 
REF: STATE 35846 
 
Classified By: Political Minister Counselor Josiah Rosenblatt 
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
1. (C) SUMMARY:  France is resistant to Israel's 
participation in political consultation groups in UN bodies 
outside New York, believing that there is no automatic right 
of participation outside of natural geographic groupings, and 
is reluctant to establish such a precedent.  (Israel's 
"temporary" participation in WEOG in New York did not serve 
as a precedent, since it was for electoral, not political 
consultation purposes.)  While asserting that France is 
willing to find pragmatic solutions to address issues of 
Israeli participation, the only concrete solution suggested 
to us by MFA officials, was for Israel to participate in a 
"group of one."  END SUMMARY. 
 
2. (C) Poloff met March 4 with MFA IO DAS-equivalent 
Jean-Pierre Lacroix and on March 21 with MFA desk officer 
Didier Gonzalez to discuss Israel's participation in various 
UN organizations.  Both told us that France believed that 
Israel had a right to participate in elections and the 
organizational work of UN bodies.  However, they said, 
participation in political consultation groupings was not 
automatic.  The situation in each organization was different, 
and needed to be addressed on a case-by-case basis. 
 
WIPO 
 
2. (C)  Lacroix told us that France had suggested that Israel 
adopt the "Chinese solution" whereby Israel would participate 
in the WIPO as a "group of one."  Israel, he said, was not 
interested in this solution and wanted to be part of the 
WEOG.  As a political consultation group, membership in the 
WEOG, he continued, was not necessarily a right, but France 
was ready to continue to discuss how Israel should 
participate in the WIPO. 
 
ILO 
 
3. (C) Repeating that membership was not a right, Lacroix 
said that the IMEC group at the ILO was also a political 
consultation group. 
 
CND 
 
4. (C) Lacroix said that France had not excluded the 
possibility of considering Israel's participation in the WEOG 
as Israel was unable to participate in any other regional 
group.  Lacroix offered no explanation for the apparent 
greater flexibility in the French position on the CND. 
 
UNEP AND UN-HABITAT 
 
5. (C) Lacroix said that Israel's participation as part of 
the WEOG was not satisfactory, again saying that there was no 
automatic right to participate in political consultation 
groups. 
 
6. (C) In closing, Lacroix said that France had assured 
Israel of its willingness to help to find pragmatic solutions 
to address Israel's participation in international 
organizations on a case-by-case basis. 
 
7. (C) On March 21, we pursued the issue of France's attitude 
to Israeli participation in groups in international 
organizations with MFA/IO desk officer Didier Gonzalez, who 
reports to Lacroix.  Gonzalez offered what he asked us to 
treat as an unofficial response.  He repeated the French view 
that there was no "right" for Israel to participate in 
political consultation groups, or even electoral groups 
outside Israel's "natural" geographic group.  Gonzalez noted 
that the arrangement for Israel's participation in the WEOG 
in New York was temporary, and subject to conditions.  Since 
2000, Gonzalez continued, it had been clear that this 
arrangement in New York did not create a precedent for other 
situations. 
 
8. (C) Gonzalez informed us that if Israel had an effective 
right, it was to be able to participate in elections and in 
procedures necessary for the work of the organizations of 
which Israel was a member.  The New York arrangement, he 
said, was designed precisely to address this issue.  There 
was no reason, according to Gonzalez, for that arrangement to 
be expanded to informal political consultation groups as 
Israel's absence did not deprive it of any "right." 
 
9. (C) In response to our pressing for French solutions, 
Gonzalez told us that France's policy was to maintain the 
existing situation as a matter of principle.  Like Lacroix, 
Gonzalez suggested that the Chinese "group of one" solution 
appeared to offer a satisfactory solution, adding that he did 
not understand why Israel rejected this formula.  Gonzalez 
closed by reiterating that the issue needed to be addressed 
on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the 
circumstances of each situation. 
 
10.  COMMENT: The responses of Lacroix and Gonzalez were 
consistent with previously-expressed French opposition to 
Israeli participation in WEOG groupings outside New York and 
reflect a desire to avoid creating a precedent.  We note that 
despite conciliatory expressions of willingness to search for 
solutions, the MFA officials offered no specifics beyond the 
"group of one" formula.  END COMMENT. 
Leach