85. Memorandum From the United States Representative to the United Nations (Kirkpatrick) to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Clark)1
SUBJECT
- Update on Global Negotiations and Relations with Developing Countries
The issue of Global Negotiations has been “urgently” considered at the United Nations since the Cancun Summit. However, the outlook for Global Negotiations is not good due to obstructions from hardline OPEC members (Algeria, Iraq, Libya, Kuwait).
Last December the U.S. introduced a text for a Global Negotiations resolution which was widely regarded as a positive step in fulfilling the President’s commitments undertaken at the Cancun Summit. Many developing nations were prepared to accept the U.S. text as presented, and with minor modifications most developing countries would have accepted it. However, as the prospects for Global Negotiations improved, the OPEC hardliners doubled their efforts to derail the process. It is clear that under current circumstances, OPEC hardliners are less prepared [Page 233] than ever to discuss energy in a U.N. forum. They see such a discussion as one in which they would be isolated against oil importing nations both developed and developing. To prevent such a situation from developing, OPEC has hardened its position by insisting that Global Negotiations discuss issues which lie within the competence of the international financial institutions (IMF, World Bank, etc.). This is intended to force the OECD in general, and the U.S. in particular, either to reject Global Negotiations and thus take the blame for the failure to launch the conference, or to create a conference in which there would be unacceptable linkages between energy and financial issues. In New York, of the Versailles Summit participants, Japan has been the closest to our position. Germany and the U.K. have been passive on our side. France and Canada have been the most anxious to seek accommodation with the developing countries. (Although not a Summit participant, Belgium has been the most supportive of our views.) Our objective continues to be not to take the blame for the failure to move forward on Global Negotiations, and we are now in a much better position to attain this objective than a year ago.
Nevertheless, given the current impasse on Global Negotiations in New York, we should expect to be under pressure from France and perhaps others at Versailles to be more “forthcoming” on North/South issues. In response to such pressures, we should not propose an alternative conference to Global Negotiations, but, instead should be prepared to react sympathetically to proposals by others, especially if they are presented on a sector-by-sector basis. We should, however, take care not to accept responsibility for a “successful” outcome of the Summit.
- Source: Reagan Library, Douglas McMinn Files, Subject Files, Global Negotiations; NLR–369–3–27–18–1. Confidential. An unknown hand initialed for Kirkpatrick.↩