TSHISEKEDI GAMBIT WITH THE VISITING UNSC

C O N F I D E N T I A L KINSHASA 001855

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/08/2015
TAGS: PGOV PREL KDEM KPKO CG UNSC
SUBJECT: TSHISEKEDI GAMBIT WITH THE VISITING UNSC

Classified By: Ambassador Roger Meece. Reasons 1.4 (b/d).


1. (C) A few days prior to the arrival in Kinshasa of the
U.N. Security Council (UNSC)on November 5 , two key officials
of Etienne Tshisekedi,s opposition UDPS party approached
French Ambassador Georges Serres to request a meeting with
the UNSC. (Note: The French PermRep was the UNSC's lead for
the visit. End note). According to Serres in a subsequent
briefing to members of the International Committee To
Accompany the Transition (CIAT),the two indicated that the
party was modifying its stance opposing the election process
and was looking for a way to participate. They reported that
party leader Tshisekedi was prepared to enter into a
discussion without preconditions and passed along a draft
document to be given to the UNSC. Subsequent reading of the
document indicated that indeed there were preconditions, for
example calling for a dialogue to fix a "realistic election
calendar," asserting that the voter registration process and
election planning to-date were invalid, and stating that the
Transition government "1 4" formula (President plus four Vice
Presidents) as established by the 2003 Sun City Accord needed
to be replaced by a "classic schema." Serres reportedly told
the UDPS reps that he could likely arrange a meeting with at
least the delegation leader, the French PermRep, but it
appeared the paper needed to be modified. The two indicated
that it was still being revised.


2. (U) Tshisekedi did meet with French PermRep de la Sabliere
at the French Ambassador,s residence on Saturday evening,
November 5, following the UNSC,s arrival in Kinshasa. The
Algerian UN PermRep also participated in the meeting, as did
the British Ambassador. Tshisekedi handed over the UDPS
position paper, reportedly slightly modified from the earlier
draft. Tshisekedi's supporters had earlier staged a protest
rally on the road from the airport, greeting the arriving
UNSC with slogans. The Japanese Ambassador reported that his
car was rocked a bit, but the demonstration was peaceful.


3. (C) The British and French Ambassadors told us that
Tshisekedi and the UDPS members accompanying him at the

SIPDIS
Saturday meeting delivered a mixed message to the UNSC. On
the one hand, there was expressed UDPS willingness to become
involved in the election process. On the other hand, the
UDPS members condemned the current process as invalid. The
core idea of the UDPS initiative seemed to be to convene a
broadly-based conference of political and other leaders to
define a path forward. The conference as proposed, however,
could potentially wreck the current election calendar and
process, which was possibly the intent. The response from
the PermReps was reportedly in essence that the UNSC would
welcome UPDS full participation in elections, but the basic
parameters of the process, including the December 18
constitutional referendum and general elections in the first
half of 2006 had to be respected.


4. (C) Comment: Key members of the UDPS seem to recognize
that the position taken by party leader Tshisekedi would lead
them to a political dead end. These more moderate members of
the party are trying to find a way out, but it does not
appear that they have yet succeeded. Tshisekedi,s
willingness to go the French Ambassador,s residence is a
notable concession; Tshisekedi normally will not leave his
Kinshasa residence and office. It appears, however, he is
still trying to redefine a future process on his own terms.
Tshisekedi,s traditional position has been essentially that

SIPDIS
he must occupy a leadership position, as President or Prime
Minister. The latter post does not exist in the Transition
government structure; hence the UDPS draft paper,s reference
to the need for a replacement "traditional schema." The
"unconditional talks" advanced by the two moderates did not
square with either the paper or various remarks reportedly
made in the Saturday meeting. It seems clear there are still
differences within the UDPS party as to what the party should
do. Having failed to stop the transition, the party,s goal
on June 30 of this year, UDPS leaders appear to be struggling
to define a new position. We, along with other CIAT members,
will continue to urge dialogue, but the options available to
the UDPS become more limited as time passes, with no
breakthrough possibilities yet visible. End comment.


MEECE