Foreign Relations of the United States, 1981–1988, Volume XXIV, North Africa

110. Telegram From the Embassy in Algeria to the Department of State¹

4046.

Algiers, November 15, 1981, 1620Z

SUBJECT

• After Cancun: Algerian Views.

1. (C) Entire text.

2. Summary and comment.
In discussion of post-Cancun steps, Algerian MFA official said GOA continues to envision UN as central forum to coordinate disparate technical discussions on global growth and development.² He stressed that GOA has no interest in histrionics in global negotiations and that its intention is to engage in business-like negotiations on specific economic issues. He said next step is up to USG—to accept or reject concept of global negotiations and to propose an agenda.

3. In Embassy’s opinion, there is no question that Algeria attaches great importance to a coordinated international approach to critical economic issues, particularly money and finance, raw materials, energy, and food and agriculture. An unwillingness by the U.S. to consult on separate issues under a UN umbrella would certainly be regarded as an effort to avoid or undermine discussions on those issues. Although current Algerian objective of an omnibus agreement encompassing the results of a series of sectoral negotiations is grandiose in the extreme, it provides insight into what GOA believes GN’s should accomplish. End summary and comment.

4. In 75-minute discussion on Nov. 11, Econ Off reviewed points in reftel with Mohamed Benhocine,³ Director Economic and Financial Affairs, MFA. Benhocine served in GOA’s Mission in New York for six years, and participated in Cancun preparatory meeting in Mexico City.⁴ EconOff was meeting with Benhocine for first time, and assessed him as able, careful, and thoughtful with a good sense of humor.

5. Benhocine said GOA considers Cancun to have been a success in that it clearly was a step down the road toward global negotiations. He noted that “everyone now seems to spell global negotiations with capital letters.”

6. EconOff said USG, too, considers Cancun to have been a successful meeting, but that it is still too early to talk of launching GN’s. He reviewed four “understandings” in President’s Cancun address⁵ and said USG is in process of conducting series of informal discussions at end of which we will determine whether it will be possible for us to engage in a new preparatory process.

7. Benhocine said GOA has not yet arrived at a satisfactory French rendering of USG use of “understandings”, and asked what word USG is using in its French translations. EconOff said ICA text of speech uses “point d’accord”.

8. Benhocine said that, in general, GOA, could proceed on basis of four “understandings.” He added, however, that GOA and most G–77 governments wish to discuss in an open forum the future roles and objectives of the specialized agencies, “of which we are all members” and to discuss those roles and objectives in relation to broad detailed negotiations in the fields of energy, money and finance, agriculture, trade, etc., i.e., global negotiations. Benhocine stressed that for GOA and G–77 “global negotiations” has two meanings:

1) “Universal” in the sense of covering all the main fields of economic growth and development, and;

2) All-inclusive in terms of participation by all interested governments. He said GOA continues to believe GN’s should be held in UN context but stressed that voting procedures would have to be set aside in favor of a negotiating process. He said it would be pointless to try to use UN voting machinery in which the majority could adopt a formula which the minority would ignore, and added that GN’s could be successful only if all governments could arrive at negotiated agreements on new roles and strategies which they found it in their interest to support.

9. EconOff said it would be very difficult for the USG to participate in GN’s in the UN context on basis existing resolutions and that our emphasis now is on new and as yet unnamed preparatory process as the next step after the informal discussions now underway. Benhocine said he understood clearly USG reluctance regarding GN’s in UN, but said it would also be difficult, and probably counter-productive psychologically, to “throw away two year’s work” by UN members. He said GOA and G–77 have stressed UN as forum for GN’s because they see the need for a central body to coordinate what must of necessity be a series of disparate detailed talks on major issues. He said that in absence of central coordinating body, series of sectoral negotiations on trade, energy, etc. would not take into account the relationships between sectors and between the IMF, IBRD, etc., and would inevitably fail to find the answers the world badly needs. He said GOA continues to envision GN process in UN context as follows: with parliamentary voting machinery set aside, participants would negotiate agenda for talks and broad objectives to be sought; 2) technical negotiations would then be held, including negotiations on specialized agencies; 3) results of technical talks would be referred back to central forum for tailoring if needed and eventual inclusion in coordinated package agreement on all issues. He said GOA has no desire to create new organizations or machinery. On the contrary, GOA hope is that, with parliamentary machinery set aside, existing UN machinery can be used as a forum for negotiation.

10. With regard to follow-up steps, Benhocine said GOA considers next move is up to USG; that is, U.S. should make known its views regarding the concept of GN’s, and should propose an agenda. He said that for practical purposes the “new preparatory process” cited in the President’s message is already underway and that the sense of urgency shown by all leaders at Cancun had raised “great expectations” that GN’s would be launched soon. EconOff said that our usage of “preparatory process” is different: that it would follow, if at all the informal talks now being conducted and would involve discussions of agenda and procedures for eventual negotiations.

11. In summing up, Benhocine stressed that GOA, both as a government and as chairman of G–77, has no interest in engaging in divisive debate or in trying to conclude a shallow, contentious “global” agreement that would be without meaning. He said GOA wishes to engage in serious negotiations on concrete growth and development issues and subjects, including the specialized agencies, with the prior understanding that changes will be made and new strategies adopted only if and when the participants—particularly the major Western powers—agree that such changes should be made.

Newlin

1. Source: Department of State, Central Foreign Policy File, Electronic Telegrams, D810388–0828. Confidential; Priority. Sent for information to Geneva, Rabat, Tunis, and USUN.
2. See footnote 9, Document 105. During the Cancun Summit, attendees from 22 nations explored ways to alleviate world hunger, strengthen investment in the developing world, and increase trade between the developed and developing nations.
3. No record of this conversation was found.
4. The preparatory meeting took place August 1–2. No record of the meeting has been found.
5. The text of Reagan’s October 22 address is printed in Public Papers: Reagan, 1981, Book II, pp. 980–982. Excerpts from the address are also printed in Foreign Relations, 1981–1988, vol. I, Foundations of Foreign Policy, Document 68.