Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05NEWDELHI388
2005-01-14 10:30:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy New Delhi
Cable title:
SAARC SUMMIT: WHAT'S THE HOLD UP?
how-toThis record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 000388
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/13/2015
TAGS: PREL ETRD BG PK IN SAARC
SUBJECT: SAARC SUMMIT: WHAT'S THE HOLD UP?
REF: A. NEW DELHI 303
B. 04 NEW DELHI 7426
Classified By: PolCouns Geoff Pyatt. Reason 1.4 (B,D)
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 000388
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/13/2015
TAGS: PREL ETRD BG PK IN SAARC
SUBJECT: SAARC SUMMIT: WHAT'S THE HOLD UP?
REF: A. NEW DELHI 303
B. 04 NEW DELHI 7426
Classified By: PolCouns Geoff Pyatt. Reason 1.4 (B,D)
1. (C) Summary: The GOI has not yet agreed to the proposed February 7-9 dates for the SAARC Summit, and media reports indicate New Delhi has suggested February 6-7 instead. The MEA remains tightlipped about the reasons for delay, but some New Delhi foreign policy watchers speculate that the SAARC indecision is connected to the major upcoming elections in the states of Bihar and Jharkhand, or the unsuccessful talks with Pakistan on the Baglihar Dam. India is likely ultimately to agree to a Summit in February. Further postponement of the Summit would put off progress on SAFTA negotiations, as well as a first-time meeting between PM Singh and Bangladeshi PM Khaleda Zia. End Summary.
2. (C) MEA Deputy Secretary (SAARC) Oscar Kerketta told Poloff on January 12 that there was still ""some haggling"" going on over the proposed dates. While Kerketta said that the ""majority"" had accepted February 7-9, not all member states were on board (but declined to specify which countries had not yet agreed). A well informed journalist reported that as of January 13, India was the only member who had not accepted the Summit, but predicted a decision within a few days. The media reported on January 14 that India has suggested February 6-7 to Islamabad, which currently holds the SAARC chairmanship until Dhaka takes over at the Summit.
Elections No Excuse
--------------
3. (C) Some commentators have attributed New Delhi's resistance to the February dates to upcoming elections in the battleground states of Bihar and Jharkhand, noting that February 7-9 falls between the first two phases, February 3 and 15. ""Hindustan Times"" Deputy Editor Pramit Pal Chaudhary, however, dismissed this notion, remarking on January 13 that ""nothing big is on the stake for the Congress party"" in these states. Raj Chengappa of ""India Today"" came to the same conclusion, as did the ""Business Standard's"" Aditi Phadnis, who said ""Sonia Gandhi, not PM Manmohan Singh, would be required for campaign and other poll exercises,"" and that ""assembly elections were not a potent reason for postponing the Summit.""
It Wouldn't Be the First Time
--------------
4. (C) Although the Dhaka Summit will mark SAARC's twentieth anniversary, it will only be the thirteenth summit, as seven summits have been nixed because of neighborly animosity.
While this meeting does not appear to be in any imminent danger of being called off, observers in India suspect bilateral friction may be at the root of New Delhi's slow response to Dhaka's proposal. Debunking the explanation that New Delhi wishes to avoid high-level travel during the state elections, political commentator Zafar Agha suggested that poor atmospherics between India and Pakistan following Islamabad's threat of World Bank arbitration to resolve the Baglihar Dam dispute (Ref A),have prompted New Delhi's reluctance to confirm the Summit, which normally includes bilateral meetings on the sidelines.
5. (C) MEA officials have given other reasons for India's hesitation. MEA Director (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives)
TS Sandhu said it would not be appropriate for the PM and
SIPDIS Foreign Minister to be seen on non-tsunami related travel while parts of the country are still recovering from the disaster. Kerketta of the SAARC desk ascribed the delay to ongoing discussion among the members as to which documents are to be signed, but he mentioned four agreements (Customs Mutual Assistance Agreement, SAARC Arbitration Rules, Multilateral Double Taxation Treaty, Promotion and Protection of Investment Agreement) that the MEA expects to be finalized in Dhaka.
The Problems With Postponing
--------------
6. (C) ORF Senior Fellow Jayshree Sengupta, who takes an admittedly pessimistic view of the organization (""SAARC does not have a bright future""),recently told Poloff that if India were to put off the Summit it would delay action on South Asia Free Trade Area (SAFTA) negotiations and also postpone release of the Poverty Commission Report. Sengupta described the report as useful in highlighting that all the SAARC countries suffer from the same problems. MEA Joint Secretary (SAARC) V. Ashok had outlined an ambitious schedule
SIPDIS for SAARC implementation in a November 22 conversation with PolCouns (Ref B). While he did not think the Dhaka Summit would include any significant announcements on SAFTA itself, he noted that the four agreements would be important to facilitate trade and investment in the region.
Comment: Baglihar Theory Holds No Water
--------------
7. (C) Despite the chatter among some commentators, we do not buy the theory that the GOI is using SAARC as a tool to show its displeasure with Islamabad. This judgment is reinforced by the MEA's January 13 confirmation that Foreign Minister Natwar Singh will travel to Pakistan (shortly after the Summit) on February 15. If India were as upset with Islamabad as some suggest (and we have seen little evidence of this),holding Natwar's visit hostage would be more effective with Islamabad than quibbling over SAARC. Postponing the Summit considerably would also put off the PM's first meeting with Bangladeshi PM Khaleda Zia, which provides an opportunity to make inroads into New Delhi's recent difficulties with Dhaka. On balance, we still expect the GOI to agree to a Summit (and the PM's first trip to any of India's neighbors) in February.
MULFORD
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/13/2015
TAGS: PREL ETRD BG PK IN SAARC
SUBJECT: SAARC SUMMIT: WHAT'S THE HOLD UP?
REF: A. NEW DELHI 303
B. 04 NEW DELHI 7426
Classified By: PolCouns Geoff Pyatt. Reason 1.4 (B,D)
1. (C) Summary: The GOI has not yet agreed to the proposed February 7-9 dates for the SAARC Summit, and media reports indicate New Delhi has suggested February 6-7 instead. The MEA remains tightlipped about the reasons for delay, but some New Delhi foreign policy watchers speculate that the SAARC indecision is connected to the major upcoming elections in the states of Bihar and Jharkhand, or the unsuccessful talks with Pakistan on the Baglihar Dam. India is likely ultimately to agree to a Summit in February. Further postponement of the Summit would put off progress on SAFTA negotiations, as well as a first-time meeting between PM Singh and Bangladeshi PM Khaleda Zia. End Summary.
2. (C) MEA Deputy Secretary (SAARC) Oscar Kerketta told Poloff on January 12 that there was still ""some haggling"" going on over the proposed dates. While Kerketta said that the ""majority"" had accepted February 7-9, not all member states were on board (but declined to specify which countries had not yet agreed). A well informed journalist reported that as of January 13, India was the only member who had not accepted the Summit, but predicted a decision within a few days. The media reported on January 14 that India has suggested February 6-7 to Islamabad, which currently holds the SAARC chairmanship until Dhaka takes over at the Summit.
Elections No Excuse
--------------
3. (C) Some commentators have attributed New Delhi's resistance to the February dates to upcoming elections in the battleground states of Bihar and Jharkhand, noting that February 7-9 falls between the first two phases, February 3 and 15. ""Hindustan Times"" Deputy Editor Pramit Pal Chaudhary, however, dismissed this notion, remarking on January 13 that ""nothing big is on the stake for the Congress party"" in these states. Raj Chengappa of ""India Today"" came to the same conclusion, as did the ""Business Standard's"" Aditi Phadnis, who said ""Sonia Gandhi, not PM Manmohan Singh, would be required for campaign and other poll exercises,"" and that ""assembly elections were not a potent reason for postponing the Summit.""
It Wouldn't Be the First Time
--------------
4. (C) Although the Dhaka Summit will mark SAARC's twentieth anniversary, it will only be the thirteenth summit, as seven summits have been nixed because of neighborly animosity.
While this meeting does not appear to be in any imminent danger of being called off, observers in India suspect bilateral friction may be at the root of New Delhi's slow response to Dhaka's proposal. Debunking the explanation that New Delhi wishes to avoid high-level travel during the state elections, political commentator Zafar Agha suggested that poor atmospherics between India and Pakistan following Islamabad's threat of World Bank arbitration to resolve the Baglihar Dam dispute (Ref A),have prompted New Delhi's reluctance to confirm the Summit, which normally includes bilateral meetings on the sidelines.
5. (C) MEA officials have given other reasons for India's hesitation. MEA Director (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives)
TS Sandhu said it would not be appropriate for the PM and
SIPDIS Foreign Minister to be seen on non-tsunami related travel while parts of the country are still recovering from the disaster. Kerketta of the SAARC desk ascribed the delay to ongoing discussion among the members as to which documents are to be signed, but he mentioned four agreements (Customs Mutual Assistance Agreement, SAARC Arbitration Rules, Multilateral Double Taxation Treaty, Promotion and Protection of Investment Agreement) that the MEA expects to be finalized in Dhaka.
The Problems With Postponing
--------------
6. (C) ORF Senior Fellow Jayshree Sengupta, who takes an admittedly pessimistic view of the organization (""SAARC does not have a bright future""),recently told Poloff that if India were to put off the Summit it would delay action on South Asia Free Trade Area (SAFTA) negotiations and also postpone release of the Poverty Commission Report. Sengupta described the report as useful in highlighting that all the SAARC countries suffer from the same problems. MEA Joint Secretary (SAARC) V. Ashok had outlined an ambitious schedule
SIPDIS for SAARC implementation in a November 22 conversation with PolCouns (Ref B). While he did not think the Dhaka Summit would include any significant announcements on SAFTA itself, he noted that the four agreements would be important to facilitate trade and investment in the region.
Comment: Baglihar Theory Holds No Water
--------------
7. (C) Despite the chatter among some commentators, we do not buy the theory that the GOI is using SAARC as a tool to show its displeasure with Islamabad. This judgment is reinforced by the MEA's January 13 confirmation that Foreign Minister Natwar Singh will travel to Pakistan (shortly after the Summit) on February 15. If India were as upset with Islamabad as some suggest (and we have seen little evidence of this),holding Natwar's visit hostage would be more effective with Islamabad than quibbling over SAARC. Postponing the Summit considerably would also put off the PM's first meeting with Bangladeshi PM Khaleda Zia, which provides an opportunity to make inroads into New Delhi's recent difficulties with Dhaka. On balance, we still expect the GOI to agree to a Summit (and the PM's first trip to any of India's neighbors) in February.
MULFORD