I plan to meet this week with the bureaus and agencies in the Department to
discuss questions and problems they may be encountering in responding to the
tasking memos they have received, which are referred to in the attached
report.
To keep pressing forward but also to be coherent and responsible is a
difficult balance, especially with a PRM in
the works. I want to be sure the bureaus and agencies have an opportunity to
express their concerns.
Attachment
Briefing Memorandum From the Coordinator for Human
Rights and Humanitarian Affairs (Derian) to Secretary of State Vance
2
Status Report on U.S. Policy on Human Rights: Actions Being
Taken
Since May 3 the following actions have been taken in accordance with the
memorandum from the Deputy Secretary.3
1. Communication of Policy to All Posts
A. The Atlanta Law Day speech was dispatched to all posts. Ambassadors
and Embassy personnel informed the highest level of host governments of
the speech and of U.S. human rights policy and reported on the
reaction.
B. A cable has been sent to the posts directing the Ambassador to take
personal responsibility for human rights reporting and for assuring
Embassy personnel awareness of our human rights policy developments and
of recent legislative and international legal developments in the human
rights field.4
C. The results of the policy review memorandum process now underway will
be communicated to the posts at an appropriate time.
2. Action with Respect to Individual Countries
A. All regional assistant secretaries have been requested to submit draft
reports on human rights conditions and appropriate recommendations for
achieving human rights improvements.5 Each region is currently preparing three draft
reports for submission by June 15 with the remainder due on July 1.
Bureaus will both prepare draft reports for comment by individual posts
and in other instances permit posts to prepare the initial report for
review and comment by the bureaus.
[Page 153]
B. This process of defining conditions, obligations, and recommendations
in accordance with the directives enunciated in your Law Day speech and
the President’s Notre Dame speech6 appears
the best way to avoid the concept of a country “hit” list since it will
provide positive individual human rights strategies for each country
rather than a pariah list.
3. Coordination of Policy
A. The State Department continues to maintain overall direction of the
human rights policy coordination within the executive branch. The
Interagency Committee on Human Rights and Foreign Assistance, which the
Deputy Secretary chairs, met several times with full representation from
other agencies to consider issues involving human rights and the
International Financial Institutions.7
B. A special coordinating committee, which the Deputy Secretary is
chairing, has been designated by the NSC to complete a policy review memorandum (PRM 28) on human rights and foreign
policy.8 The Department is taking the lead in developing
a response to the PRM with initial
drafts due June 7, committee review by June 15 and final review by June
22.9
C. Internally the HRCG, which you
previously established and which the Deputy Secretary chairs,10 has met to review action on human rights and IFIs prior to their consideration by the
Interagency Committee on Human Rights and Foreign Assistance.
D. An ad hoc working committee which D/HA and EB co-chair has
been formed to provide initial recommendations to the HRCG and ultimately to the interagency
committee, on bilateral and multilateral assistance issues relating to
our human rights policy. In addition to co-chairing this group, D/HA also provides staff support to the
HRCG and the inter-agency
committee and acts as secretariat for those entities.
E. In the area of security assistance policy, D/HA has been named a full member of the proposed Arms
Export Control Board and its
[Page 154]
various working groups. Policy guidelines can be discussed in this
setting prior to further consideration of human rights and security
assistance issues within the HRCG and
the interagency committee.
F. D/HA has cooperated with the Foreign
Service Institute in organizing the first seminar on human rights and
will collaborate with the institute in future efforts to strengthen the
understanding of our human rights policy within the Department and
receive the counsel of on-line foreign service officers as to how best
to implement that policy.
4. Economic Assistance
A. AID will be submitting drafts of its
“New Initiatives in Human Rights” program as part of its response to the
PRM, with a final report by
mid-June.11
B. D/HA has met with the representatives
of several other industrial nations, to discuss ways of cooperating on
human rights. The consultation process will be continuing and will be
bolstered by the recommendations from appropriate posts on how to
accomplish this goal.
C. AID is drawing up a program covering
what has been done and what will be done to promote women’s rights.12
D. With regard to multilateral programs:
(i) a procedure ensuring long lead time notice for IFI loans is near
completion with the previously mentioned ad hoc working committee as the
first source of screening for human rights considerations.
(ii) EB is developing a paper on the
implementation of our human rights policy through the IFI’s. A summary
draft will be completed by June 7 as part of the PRM exercise.
(iii) the implementation of our human rights policy in the IFIs has gone forward at the same time as
we have responded to upcoming loans in the various IFIs. In two instances (Ethiopia and
Benin), we have abstained on World Bank votes on human rights grounds;
in two other instances (El Salvador and Argentina) we have indicated
that human rights considerations would likely produce a negative vote
and suggested the appropriateness of a delay in considering the
loans.13 In the case
of El Salvador, the delay was requested by that government. Our Embassy
reported that the IFI action had engendered the first clear recognition
on the part of the GOES of our
seriousness in seeking [Page 155] human
rights improvements.14 In the case of Argentina,
our concern was communicated by the Secretary of Treasury at the IBD
annual meeting.15 No final decision by the Argentine government in this
matter has yet taken place.
In several other instances, demarches have been made to indicate that we
are considering human rights factors as we evaluate IFI loans in keeping
with the President’s stated intention of using our voice and vote in the
IFI’s to promote human rights. In the case of Paraguay, the demarche
produced a promise on the part of that government to respond favorably
to the IAHRC request to visit
Paraguay. The formal invitation, however, has not yet been offered.
Other instances in which general demarches were made include Malawi and
the Philippines. Other demarches are in process for Indonesia, Guatemala
and Romania.
These actions have given substance to the Administration’s human rights
policy in the IFIs and thereby
improved the chances for the success of our legislative strategy.
However, continuing evidence on this policy is clearly necessary if the
legislative strategy is ultimately to be successful.
5. Security Assistance
As noted, the Arms Export Control Board is now in operation with D/HA participation and initial efforts to
define policy guidelines are underway. In relation to our effort and in
conjunction with the PRM, a summary
statement will be available June 7. In addition, D/HA, in fulfilling its legislative
requirements, has continued to advise on arms transfers to countries
with human rights problems. The reports now being prepared for each
country also will discuss ways in which security assistance programs can
be modified in order to help implement our human rights policy.
6. Cooperation with the Congress
H has been actively engaged in security assistance, State Department
authorization, IFI activities, and economic assistance legislation. In
addition H has worked closely with other bureaus and the White House in
pressing for the consideration of the Genocide treaty. The Deputy
Secretary opened the Senate ratification hearings on the [Page 156] treaty.16 This has been part of the developing strategy
for ratification for the United Nations covenants and conventions and
the OAS Convention on Human Rights,
which the President signed this week.17
While the balance sheet is still in our favor and a cooperative and
friendly attitude has dominated the process, there is growing
questioning among some sectors of the Congress with regard to the vigor
of our human rights policy. This was most apparent in the IFI
legislation in the House but has recurred on several security assistance
matters. Closer coordination by D/HA
and H with the more outspoken advocates on the Hill should take place.
There remains a basic receptivity to our policy if a greater number of
specific actions can be cited, even privately, to these Congressmen and
Senators.
D/HA has been meeting with the human
rights organizations in Washington on an individual basis and
participated as well in NGO
activities.
7. Multilateral Diplomacy
a. The United Nations
In response to the Deputy Secretary’s previous memorandum and in keeping
with the PRM, IO is working actively on “an agenda for U.S. action on
Human Rights at the United Nations” and has engaged in efforts to seek
the appointment of a UN Human Rights
Commissioner and to strengthen the UNHRC.
b. The Organization of American States (OAS)
Preparations are well underway for efforts to strengthen the
Inter-American Human Rights Commission at the upcoming General Assembly
including efforts to obtain budgetary increases, increasing the number
of visits, more adequate debate and broader educational programs. ARA also is preparing papers in other ways
to strengthen OAS human rights
activities.
[Page 157]
8. Improving U.S. Performance and Defense of
American Rights
The visa policy review has not yet been completed, although a decision is
currently pending by the President on this issue and on possible
legislative amendment. This matter also will be treated as part of the
PRM exercise.
9. Public Diplomacy
Both as part of the PRM exercise and in
response to tasking memorandums within the Department, USIA, CU,
and PA are exploring ways to improve
public awareness and understanding of our human rights policy.18 The first town meeting in Los Angeles emphasized
the human rights policy and upcoming town meetings will advance that
effort.19
