Dear Brett,

On 08/03/2016 06:16 PM, Schaefer, Brett wrote:
> Niels,
> 
> You seem to be taking this personally. Why?
> 

You seem to mistake me being rigorous for taking things personal.

> We had several meetings in Morocco where went through each of the 11
> recommendations and people voiced their concerns and we tried to
> reconcile a position. On some it was easy, others not so much. I
> don't recall if you attended or not.
>

I attended them, and there it was also discussed that the discussion on
human rights should happen on the list, as well as the justification of
the councillors, and not just in the PC meeting. This did not happen.

Best,

Niels




> Best,
> 
> Brett
> 
> 
> 
> Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International
> Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis
> Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage
> Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 
> 202-608-6097 heritage.org
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Niels ten Oever
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016
> 11:47 AM To: Schaefer, Brett; [log in to unmask] Subject:
> Re: +1's and support
> 
> On 08/03/2016 05:29 PM, Schaefer, Brett wrote:
> 
>> I disagree. The NCSG had various views on a number of issues in
>> the transition proposal. I actually though that the councilors did
>> a credible job of representing the diversity of views in the NCSG
>> by dividing their votes.
>> 
> 
> Hi Brett,
> 
> I probably have missed the discussion on human rights (and how it
> relates to North Korea) on the NCSG-list, could you point me to it?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Niels
> 

-- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9