DEMARCHES DELIVERED: UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL,

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 006931 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/06/2015 TAGS: PREL EAID ECIN PHUM KDEM KUNR IN AF UNGA GOI SUBJECT: DEMARCHES DELIVERED: UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL, DEVELOPMENT ISSUES AND OUTCOME DOCUMENT REF: A. STATE 160880 ¶B. STATE 163224 ¶C. NEW DELHI 6148 ¶D. BETTS-PYATT EMAIL Classified By: A/DCM Geoff Pyatt for Reasons 1.4 (B, D) ¶1. (U) This is an Action Request. Please see para 8. ¶2. (C) Summary: A/DCM and Poloff called on new MEA Joint Secretary (UN Political) Sanjiv Arora on September 6 and SIPDIS delivered Refs A and B demarches, underlining the importance in the new US-India relationship for India to be seen working constructively with the US in multilateral fora. Arora outlined India's UN reform priorities of peacebuilding, management reform, Democracy Fund, and, of course, a permanent UNSC seat. Other MEA interlocutors gave mixed signals on September 8 about India's willingness to be helpful on Human Rights Council (HRC) dialogue in New York. Post is ready to engage further but requests detailed points on HRC discussions and India's role. End Summary. Concern about Development Issues -------------- ¶3. (C) Arora listened attentively to A/DCM's message, but cautioned that reported US concerns about the draft Outcome Document could be a "damper" on developing countries' "high expectations." He expressed concern that there was little time to make "nitty-gritty" changes to the Outcome Document before the Summit. However, he agreed that US positions were well-known, and assured us that New Delhi does not subscribe to the mistaken belief that the US is trying to make last-minute changes without prior consultation. GOI Priorities -------------- ¶4. (C) Arora highlighted India's positions on the Peacebuilding Commission, management reform, and the UN Democracy Fund as common interests with the US, and stated that India would bring ideas to New York on how the UN should implement the UN Democracy Fund, drawing from its long experience in providing assistance to developing countries (like Afghanistan). The GOI has already sent a USD 10 million contribution to its New York Mission for donation to the UN, Arora said, adding that the Democracy Fund is a good example of a visible US-India collaborative effort. ¶5. (C) Arora repeated New Delhi's belief that India's "impeccable" credentials merit a permanent UNSC seat, which would help update the UN system to reflect the modern world. Commenting that, since either the G-4 proposal or the US's criteria for UNSC expansion would favor India, Arora stated India's success in securing a permanent seat was only a question of deciding which route to follow, and that the GOI expected more articulation of support from friends in the US. Human Rights Council: Mixed Signals -------------- ¶6. (C) Poloff followed up with MEA Deputy Secretary (UN Economic and Social) Gopal Baglay on India's position on the Human Rights Council, recalling J/S Manjeev Puri's earlier statement (Ref C) hinting at Indian agreement for US proposals, and repeating our hope that India would be an ally instead of an obstacle in replacing the broken Commission on Human Rights (CHR). Baglay said that while India has still not formed a position on the format of a new HRC, its guiding principle was to "depoliticize" the UN human rights mechanisms, New Delhi's shorthand for opposition to country-specific actions and resolutions. The HRC discussion was too hurried, Baglay added, suggesting that CHR replacement proposals should be taken up in the UNGA after the High-level Event. Poloff pushed back, pointing out that advocating delay would mean siding with perpetual human rights violators who benefit from the current ineffective CHR and have no desire to improve it. ¶7. (C) A/DCM and A/PolCouns double-tracked this HRC message on September 8 with J/S (Americas) S Jaishankar and new Director (Americas) Sanjay Bhattacharyya, respectively. Bhattacharyya pointed out that India's positions on human rights resolutions were well-known, but, echoing Puri's August 8 hints of support, cautioned, "Don't read too much into what the tea leaves are saying." Bhattacharyya implied that the specialized MEA UN divisions were leading the discussion on UN reform in the bureaucracy, but indicated that the debate is not yet over and the Americas division was aware of the implications of India's actions. UNES's Baglay also admitted that India's NY Mission was acting with a fairly free hand in negotiations, as New Delhi was unable to devote much attention to the HRC debates. Jaishankar noted that India's views were heavily shaped by MEA's multilateralists, and suggested further discussion between U/S Burns and Foreign Secretary Saran. Comment and Action Request -------------- ¶8. (C) New Delhi is an enthusiastic supporter of several USG reform priorities, including democracy promotion, peace support operations, and management reform. Reported obstructionism from India's New York Mission (Ref D) and conflicting signals from New Delhi on the HRC may indicate ongoing disagreement within MEA over how much to play the role of a new emerging power Security Council contender instead of falling back on India's dubious traditional NAM solidarity. ACTION REQUEST: We are prepared to press the GOI further on HRC, but would appreciate specific points on what the US wants and what India is resisting in New York. We could also use more information on the September 14 UN Democracy Fund launch in NY hosted by POTUS and PM Singh. ¶9. (U) Visit New Delhi's Classified Website: (http//www.state.sgov/p/sa/newdelhi) MULFORD