OMAN OPPOSES G-4 RESOLUTION, STUDIES OTHER REFORMS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 MUSCAT 001190 SIPDIS STATE FOR IO, IO/PSC (LMALENAS),AND NEA/ARPI E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/27/2015 TAGS: PREL PGOV SUBJECT: OMAN OPPOSES G-4 RESOLUTION, STUDIES OTHER REFORMS REF: A. SECSTATE 137602 AND PREVIOUS ¶B. MUSCAT 1149 ¶C. SECSTATE 114051 ¶D. SECSTATE 130530 Classified By: Ambassador Richard L. Baltimore III. Reason: 1.4 (b, d) -------------- Summary -------------- ¶1. (C) The MFA's International Organizations Department Chief confirmed on July 27 that Oman will either oppose or abstain in any vote on the G-4 Resolution for UN Security Council expansion. Ambassador Talib al-Raisi added that Oman has actively urged the resident G-4 ambassadors not to put the motion forward for a vote, despite Oman's support for their individual candidacies. Ambassador Talib indicated that Oman is still reviewing other UN reform initiatives, but suggested possible support for the USG position on a new Peacebuilding Commission, while the Human Rights Commission proposal remains more controversial. End summary. -------------- To Abstain or Oppose G-4 Resolution -------------- ¶2. (C) The Embassy delivered ref A demarche on July 27 to MFA Chief of International Organizations Department Ambassador Talib bin Miran al-Raisi. Amb. Talib reported that the Ministry was initially divided on the G-4 Resolution, with their mission in New York advocating in favor of it as the "most realistic" option, while Amb. Talib and his department opposed it as unlikely to gain two-thirds support in the General Assembly. As the resolution became more controversial internationally, Minister Yusuf bin Alawi sided with the IO Department's argument. Amb. Talib convoked the German, Indian, and Japanese ambassadors (Brazil does not have a local embassy) and said in diplomatic terms that, while Oman supported their candidacies to the UNSC, the Sultanate "advised" them that this was not an auspicious time to bring their resolution to a vote; if they did, Oman might be forced "to take a different position." The G-3 pushed back, though the Japanese Ambassador in a separate meeting with MFA Under Secretary Sayyid Badr seemed to agree with the Omani assessment. ¶3. (C) Ambassador Talib confirmed that, if a vote on the G-4 Resolution were brought forward, Oman would either abstain or vote against. Oman advocates a more gradual, step-by-step process for UNSC expansion. Amb. Talib also indicated that UNSYG Annan seemed to be putting particular urgency on UNSC reform in the hopes of accomplishing it before the end of his tenure, which Oman views as being a rash and artificial deadline. The IO chief was not aware of whether there was an Arab League consensus on the G-4 proposal, guessing that the AL might be waiting for indications of how the African Union might decide. He nevertheless indicated that Oman would stick to its current position regardless. -------------- --- Peacebuilding Commission, Human Rights Committee -------------- --- ¶4. (C) Having previously provided the Ministry with USG views on a proposed Peacebuilding Commission and creation of a new Human Rights Council (refs C and D),we amplified our points with Amb. Talib and solicited the Sultanate's views. He indicated that his department had drafted a comprehensive report on UN reform that was briefed to the Minister and Under Secretary. The briefing paper was commissioned because of the confusing jumble created by the UNSYG's "In Larger Freedom" report and "reports on that report" that, he said, often had contradictory points. Ambassador Talib was reluctant to get into detail on how the Omani briefing paper came out on the reform proposals, not being able to recall the salient points. He undertook to have one of his deputies brief the embassy in the near future. ¶5. (C) Ambassador Talib had a more favorable initial reaction to the Peacebuilding Commission points, saying he recalled that Oman took a very similar view to the U.S. demarche. The Human Rights Commission was more controversial, pointing out that many third world nations had qualms about it. We reiterated the need to have a credible and effective body with higher membership standards and more targeted scope. The IO Chief fully agreed that the CHR was of little use in its present guise and that it seemed to attract the worst human rights abusers among its membership. ¶6. (U) The Embassy will report any follow-up responses from the Ministry on these issues. BALTIMORE