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