US embassy cable - 05PARIS3156

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 003156 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/09/2015 
TAGS: SCUL, ETRD, UNESCO 
SUBJECT: USUNESCO: FRANCE PULLS OUT THE STOPS ON 
CULTURAL DIVERSITY 
 
1. (C) Classified by Andrew C. Koss, Deputy Chief of 
Mission, U.S. Mission to UNESCO in Paris, REASON-1.4D. 
 
2.   (C) Summary:  France has made it clear that 
passage of a cultural diversity convention at this 
fall's UNESCO General Conference is a top foreign 
policy priority.  The push for increased EU 
participation at the just completed Executive Board is 
but one part of a broader strategy to get the 
convention passed no matter what it takes.  With the 
last round of negotiations in February unable to reach 
agreement on key topics, such as the convention's 
relationship to other (namely trade) agreements, much 
hangs on the results of the next round scheduled May 25 
to June 4 in Paris.  The French badly need for that 
round to succeed if the convention is to be adopted by 
the next General Conference in October. End Summary. 
 
 
3.    (U) The May 3 edition of Le Monde carries a short 
article about President Chirac's remarks to a large 
cultural meeting in Paris the previous day.  Le Monde 
notes that "without mentioning Hollywood nor speaking 
about American hegemony, Mr. Chirac warned about the 
immense danger of uniformity..." The article also 
quotes Chirac as saying, "France will push with all its 
weight to ensure that an international convention on 
cultural diversity is signed at UNESCO this fall."  We 
have seen the complete remarks and they are strong on 
the need for Europe to stand for the cultural exception 
and against a free market in "cultural goods." 
 
 
4.    (C) The Mission also interprets the clash during 
UNESCO's recent Executive Board over the European 
Union's attempt to expand its participation in the 
cultural diversity negotiations as one more sign of 
French determination to push for the convention.  It 
was clear that the French had lobbied member states 
(especially the Francophonie) hard, and successfully to 
support their resolution.  We were informed by members 
of other EU delegations that France was so confident of 
its success that it resisted the consensus resolution 
and was determined to push for a vote.  (Note:  UNESCO 
prides itself on being a consensus organization and 
seldom relies on votes.) 
 
5.    (SBU) At a Group I (WEOG) meeting on April 13, 
the United States and France both presented candidates 
for the chairmanship of the General Conference Legal 
Committee.  This is an important position because this 
committee will need to make the decision to waive 
UNESCO's rule that stipulates that in order for the 
General Conference to adopt a convention, it must be 
ready seven months before the start of the Conference 
in October.  In an unusual secret ballot, a strong 
majority selected the French candidate.  (Comment: 
clearly most EU countries were unwilling to vote 
against another EU member, though we do know that the 
UK, Italy, and the Netherlands supported us.  Other 
support came from Canada, Turkey and Switzerland.) 
 
6.    (C) The importance France placed on that vote 
became clear earlier that week when French Ambassador 
to UNESCO, Jean Guigenou, made a transparent suggestion 
to Ambassador Oliver that the US consider seeking 
positions on other bureaus or as a vice chair of the 
Executive Board rather than the chair of the General 
Conference legal committee.  After the April 13 Group 
One meeting, Guigenou told Ambassador Oliver that "we 
had made a mistake."  Note:  We understand that 
Guigenou, a former Ambassador to the UK and one of 
France's highest ranking diplomats, was personally 
chosen by Chirac to push the cultural diversity agenda 
at UNESCO.) 
 
7.    (C) Comment:  Much UNESCO business is now being 
looked at through the prism of the cultural diversity 
negotiations.  We interpret the French desire to have 
the EU take over negotiations on cultural diversity as 
a way to keep wayward states in line.  Our Greek, UK, 
Czech and Polish counterparts tell us privately that 
they are not pleased with the way France is steering 
the process.  Of course, we never do get a straight 
answer why the EU has to be at the negotiations.  The 
Commission's cultural types are the ones sitting at the 
table, when the competence the Commission claims is 
over trade. 
 
8.   (C) Comment continued:  We are disappointed with 
the outcome of the vote on the chairmanship of the 
legal committee.  While we still have a seat on the 
committee, the chairman will be key in setting the 
agenda for the General Conference and could conceivably 
push a flawed convention forward for consideration.  We 
also take the strength of support for France as a sign 
that certain countries do not want to cross France. 
Portugal, which has been actively seeking US support 
for a seat on the Executive Board, still chose to vote 
against our candidate despite our heavy lobbying.  We 
also had hoped to pick up votes among the Nordic 
countries. 
 
9.    (C) Comment continued:  We have been at pains not 
to depict our presence at UNESCO as a battle between 
French and US influence.  Though the tensions have been 
clear in the cultural diversity negotiations, we have 
publicly sought to downplay them.  Recent events are 
bringing these tensions into the open.  In a sense, 
UNESCO has been France's playground for many years, and 
it enjoys huge influence in the organization.  We 
cannot avoid the reality that French influence is 
enhanced because UNESCO is in Paris where the French 
can draw on almost unlimited resources, including the 
frequent appearance of President Chirac to push their 
agenda.  France is also skillfully using the EU and 
other groups like the Francophonie to thwart US 
interests.  We expect that France will continue to see 
UNESCO as the "soft underbelly" of the UN system to 
push an agenda counter to US interests and we will push 
back firmly.  End Comment. 
 
OLIVER