146. Telegram From the Mission in Geneva to the Department of State and the Mission to the United Nations1
8839. IO for Asst Secy Maynes, USUN for Amassador Young. From Ambassador Vanden Heuvel. Subject: Human Rights—Proposed Strategy Session.
1. At the IO Chiefs of Mission meeting,2 we discussed the possibility of a strategy session on human rights so that policies and objectives could be formulated in support of President Carter’s initiative at every possible level. It is not too early to begin planning our concerns for the 35th Human Rights Commission session, especially as its agenda relates to ECOSOC and the General Assembly.
2. I suggest that we take advantage of Ambassadors Young and Wells’ presence in Geneva during July to convene such a strategy session. We should plan several days, understanding that only part of those days will be available for our discussions because of other ECOSOC and Mission responsibilities. The dates should be set in terms of the convenience of Ambassadors Young and Wells, as well, and after consultation with other key suggested participants, such as, Assistant Secretary Maynes (and/or George Dalley), Representative Mezvinsky, Assistant Secretary Derian, Ambassadors Torres and McGhee. I would also suggest that the presence of Warren Hewitt, Brady Tyson and the White House representative concerned with human rights would help the accomplishments of such a meeting.
3. Among the agenda items, I would suggest the following:
A. The possibilities and limitations of the UN and its specialized agencies in the human rights field,
(1) The UN Human Rights Commission and the UN Human Rights Division,
(2) UNESCO,
(3) WHO and ILO.
B. The U.S. proposal for a UN High Commissioner for Human Rights—is this idea still worth fostering after fifteen years of effort, or should we think in terms of an amended proposal and a different strategy?
C. How can we enhance human rights by greater accountability and enforceability in national and international institutions?
[Page 482]D. Political limitations on U.S. objectives because of Senate inability to ratify human rights commitments.
E. Accepting U.S. commitment to cultural, economic and social rights as parts of human rights, how can we identify the fora for these various rights and how can they best be defined and defended?
F. Should we not be working more diligently for regional institutions for the protection of human rights? Does OAS give us an example of such a regional approach?
G. Should the U.S. Government recommend programs of technical assistance in the human rights field?
H. How can we better support non-governmental organizations in the human rights field and what new initiatives might we propose to strengthen their objective intervention in this problem area?
4. There are clearly many other items that could be discussed in such meetings, such as, our strategy regarding a convention on torture, but I would appreciate your advice as to the concept for such a meeting and if you approve the appropriate time.