DEMARCHE REQUEST: G-4 FRAMEWORK RESOLUTION ON UN

UNCLAS OTTAWA 002097 SIPDIS SENSITIVE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL CA UNSC SUBJECT: DEMARCHE REQUEST: G-4 FRAMEWORK RESOLUTION ON UN REFORM REF: SECSTATE 126870 ¶1. (SBU) Summary: The GOC supports us in opposing the G-4 proposal. Canada instead supports a model of Security Council reform which would provide for no new permanent seats but instead create a new category of eight four-year renewable seats and one new two-year non-permanent (and non-renewable) seat, divided among the major regional players. End Summary ¶2. (SBU) Ambassador delivered reftel demarche to Foreign Affairs Canada Assistant Deputy Minister for Global Issues David Malone. Malone was familiar with our brief, and said that where there is a difference in the U.S. and Canadian positions, it is in the details. He said he understands that the U.S. is open to the possibility of new Security Council seats, albeit not the six suggested by the G-4. Canada does not want to see any new permanent seats on the Security Council at all. It can live with the current permanent members but believes that adding additional permanent seats would limit accountability by spreading the Security Council too thin. In addition, the GOC believes that the members we would add today may not be the ones we would want to see on the council 60 years from now, just as the five original members made sense at the time but would not be the choice today. ¶3. (SBU) Malone said that the Japanese Ambassador had been in to see him that morning to press Japan's case for a seat. The GOC has tried to politely inform Japan and others who are lobbying that Canada has taken a different approach to Security Council reform and so cannot support their membership, but have assured them that it is nothing personal. Canada would like to maintain its position without harming bilateral relations, in contrast to China, which he described as having a "nearly dangerous expression of no expansion." ¶4. (SBU) Whatever our differences, Malone said, the U.S. and Canada are united in their concern about too large an expansion. For a country that takes UN reform seriously, Malone said, Canada worries that problemsolvers will take their business elsewhere if the UN, either because of a large dysfunctional Security Council, or because the larger reform agenda was derailed by Security Council discussions, becomes ineffective. ¶5. (SBU) Comment: The GOC position on Security Council reform is summarized as follows in FAC documents: "We support Model B, which provides no new permanent seats but creates a new category of eight four-year renewable-term seats and one new two-year non-permanent (and non-renewable) seat, divided among the major regional areas. The longer term (four years) of the members of the new tier provides for continuity and depth of experience with issues before the Council. The possible re-election for members in this tier reinforces the benefits noted above, and the requirements for peer-vetting and support will encourage potential Security Council members to keep their credentials as good international citizens in order. We also look forward to recommendations that go well beyond the Security Council. For example, the need to set out measures to facilitate an integrated response to the diverse range of security challenges we face from the proliferation of terrorism to improving UN coordination on development, health, and environment. End Comment Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa WILKINS