U/S DOBRIANSKY DISCUSSES DEMOCRACY PROMOTION IN

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 11 NEW DELHI 000759

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/02/2016
TAGS: PREL PGOV KDEM UNSC PHUM PTER AF HU JP IZ IN
SUBJECT: U/S DOBRIANSKY DISCUSSES DEMOCRACY PROMOTION IN
THE GLOBAL ISSUES FORUM

REF: A. NEW DELHI 0512


B. 05 NEW DELHI 8682

NEW DELHI 00000759 001.2 OF 011


Classified By: Ambassador David Mulford for Reasons 1.4 (B, D)


1. (C) As part of the February 1 Global Issues Forum, U/S
Dobriansky met with Foreign Secretary Saran to discuss
initiatives to promote democracy and human rights with India,
including presidential deliverables, the UN Deeocracy Fund
and UN Human Rights Commission reform. U/S Dobriansky opened
the discussion by commenting that India and the US have
deepened bilateral relations since the last Global Issues
Forum, and the fourth round of discussions provides an
opportunity to further solidify ties ahead of President
Bush's upcoming visit. Responding to the US proposal to
create an Indian democracy institute similar to the National
Endowment for Democracy (NED),the GOI proposed to establish
an institution that could serve as the implementation arm of
the UN Democracy Fund. Saran also raised alternative ways
for India to get more involved with the Community of
Democracies, and was open to cooperating with the
International Center for Democratic Transitions (ICDT) and
expanding the Virtual Democracy Center. For the time being,
the GOI will only lead training programs for Iraqis in India,
and does not yet have an answer on the joint US-India-Japan
21st Century Leadership Alliance in Afghanistan. While
agreeing to collaborate bilaterally in Kyrgyzstan on
practical projects, FS Saran expressed reluctance on working
to implement OSCE election recommendations since India is not
an OSCE member. India has come closer to some US positions
on the Human Rights Council, but there are still several
areas of disagreement. U/S Dobriansky's visit provided an
opportunity for greater clarification of India's ideas for
the President's visit, but we still need to push the
democracy related deliverables to have a clearly operational
element.

Indian UN Democracy Fund Institution
--------------


2. (C) U/S Dobriansky and Indian Foreign Secretary Saran
began the Fourth Global Issues Forum on February 1 by
discussing initiatives to promote democracy. Saran commented
that the GOI's founding participation in the UN Democracy
Fund (UNDF) makes that a natural conduit for India to share
its expertise in this area. Noting that India has completed
its commitment to donate USD ten million, Saran said that
India is gratified that 29 countries have contributed to the
success of the fund with a total of USD 42 million. He
recommended that India and the US move quickly to
operationalize the fund and take on democracy promotion
activities. Once the fund is operational, India hopes to
contribute in the key areas of institution and capacity
building, awareness creation, and leadership development. He
looked forward to the first Advisory Board meeting in
February, suggested that the US and India collaborate on the

NEW DELHI 00000759 002.2 OF 011


agenda, and passed along a GOI paper on Indian contributions
under the UN Development Fund (text in paragraph 22).


3. (C) While cool on the idea of an Indian NED-like
institute (Ref A),FS Saran presented a proposal to create an
institution in India to serve as the implementation arm of
the UN Democracy Fund. This institute could be funded by the
UNDF and based in India with the goal of promoting democracy
all over the world. Saran made substantive suggestions on
the focus areas of an institute and how India could lend
expertise in a variety of areas including: training and
exchange programs on democratic governance, electoral
administration, accountability, treatment of women and
minorities, political party administration, local governance,
promotion of secularism and pluralism, diversity management
and the creation of transparent institutions. Emphasizing
that this institution would be hosted "under the UN Democracy
Fund framework," Saran noted that the UN umbrella would boost
the acceptability of such an idea domestically. In a
follow-up conversation with PolCouns, MEA Additional
Secretary K.C. Singh emphasized that this institution should

SIPDIS
not be part of the UN office in India -- but would need the
UN umbrella to be politically feasible.


4. (C) U/S Dobriansky thanked the GOI for its support for
the UNDF, and expressed her hope that some type of Indian
center for democracy could be a major outcome of Bush's
upcoming visit. In light of the enormous Indian
accomplishments in democracy, U/S Dobriansky suggested that
India consider building an independent institution that would
develop links to the UNDF in addition to democratic
institutions such as the Community of Democracies and
Hungary's International Center for Democratic Transitions.
She acknowledged that the GOI knows what works best for
India, but asked whether building the institution under the
UNDF framework might limit India's contributions. By giving
the proposed institution a UN lead rather than an Indian
lead, she worried that India's contribution might be
overshadowed by the UN, and it could deny much deserved
Indian recognition for taking a leadership position in
democracy promotion.


5. (C) FS Saran responded that the GOI believes that the
UNDF provides the best framework for building an Indian
institution for democracy. Although India has in-country
democracy institutions such as the Institution for
Parliamentary Studies and the Election Commission, "local
problems" prevented the GOI from finding an endowment, NGO or
foundation from which to base a new promotional institution.
Rather than building a new institution, India would prefer to
use UNDF resources to build a coordinating office from which
to base democracy promotion activities. This idea would also
provide a solution to quickly operationalize the fund, Saran
noted. He also suggested that putting a UN label on the
office would make it "easier for other countries to access
the assistance." U/S Dobriansky agreed to get back to the

NEW DELHI 00000759 003.2 OF 011


GOI on this new concept.

GOI interested in CD through the UNDF
--------------


6. (C) In response to a US proposal for India to hold a
Community of Democracies (CD) conference or roundtable in
Asia, Saran asked whether the UNDF could be the vehicle to
carry out any CD recommendations. Since India has put so
much effort into the UNDF, Saran stressed that the GOI would
like to carry out its capacity building activities through
this mechanism.


7. (C) Given India's interest in capacity building with the
UN, U/S Dobriansky pressed the GOI to think about a Community
of Democracies regional training initiative. She raised the
recent example of East Timor, where the US helped lead a
multi-national mission with the UNDP to strengthen and
consolidate democratic institutions. She welcomed India's
assistance in this type of joint initiative within Asia. U/S
Dobriansky also referred to another regional model known as
the Democratic Choice initiative. Ukraine has launched a
Democratic Choice initiative along with Lithuania, Georgia
and Romania and other regional countries to bring together in
one forum members of government, Parliamentarians and NGOs to
discuss regional democracy issues.


8. (C) Saran suggested that rather than convening an Asian
Community of Democracies conference without any invitation
from an Asian country, India might be able to include Asian
countries in a workshop or seminar on a topic like federalism
or diversity. Due to "sensitivities in the region," he
predicted that such an Indian sponsored event would be
"easier to manage" than an Asian conference.

Indian ICDT expert in Budapest
--------------


9. (C) U/S Dobriansky recalled her discussion with MEA Joint
Secretary (Americas) S. Jaishankar about Hungary's

SIPDIS
International Center for Democratic Transition, and passed on
a Hungarian invitation for an Indian expert in residence at
the center. She noted that we had been told by officials at
the center that the Hungarian Foreign Minister had sent a
letter to the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, and such
an invitation was extended. The USG is supportive of this
initiative and plans to inform the Center that the American
Ambassador to Hungary will be part of the center's Government
Advisory Board. Saran reported that the MEA had not received
this letter, but would be happy to work with this institution
when invited.

Expanding Virtual Democracy Centers
--------------


10. (C) U/S Dobriansky raised the idea of expanding the

NEW DELHI 00000759 004.2 OF 011


Virtual Democracy Center websites that both countries created
around the time of the US-India hosted launch of the UN
Democracy Fund to make them more operationally useful. Saran
responded that India was proud of its web site, which offered
comprehensive and practical aid," and was happy to extend the
scope of these websites. MEA Joint Secretary (Americas) S.
Jaishankar added that it might be helpful to have a US expert
look through and offer concrete advice on "how to spread the
message" and derive more use from the existing site.
Jaishankar volunteered to be the point of contact for this
project, and suggested that other UNDF donors could set up
Virtual Democracy Centers so that the sites could all
mutually reinforce each other.

Iraq Democracy Cooperation Only in India
--------------


11. (C) Saran commented that India was "happy to look at"
country-specific democracy activities when any country
requests Indian assistance, but the GOI would take a "case by
case approach" to the proposed initiatives. Since India has
already agreed to assist with democratic institution building
in Iraq, Saran clarified that there is "no hesitation" with
US proposals to support training of the civil service or
assistance with the constitution as long as the work can be
carried out in India. He reiterated GOI concerns over the
security situation arising out of the "traumatic" experience
with Indian hostages in Iraq, which make the GOI reluctant to
expose Indian personnel to these security risks. Saran
offered the expertise of the Indian Bureau of Parliamentary
Studies to arrange training for Iraqi civil servants, along
with an existing offer to train petroleum workers and civil
aviation experts at India's dedicated academies. Commenting
that India was already offering democracy training in other
developing countries on a bilateral basis, he listed Bhutan
as an example of a country that has requested Indian
assistance in drafting a constitution and building
independent election institutions and a judicial system.


12. (C) U/S Dobriansky welcomed Indian involvement, and
pressed for assistance in Iraq. She noted that FS Saran had
agreed to consider a hybrid training course with the first
half of the training in India and the second half in a secure
location such as the Green Zone in Iraq (Ref A). Saran
replied that Indian uneasiness about sending personnel to
Iraq is too high to consider the hybrid proposal at this
time. He concluded that the GOI would continue to monitor
the security situation there, and as soon as the security
improves, India could reconsider sending trainers to Iraq.
In the meantime, the GOI offer to train in India awaits a
reply.

US-India Engagement in Afghanistan
--------------


13. (C) Saran reviewed India's substantial cooperation in

NEW DELHI 00000759 005.2 OF 011


Afghanistan and suggested using the UNDF to create a
structured program for joint capacity building there. The
GOI is already assisting with human resources work through
the Institute for Public Administration's customized training
capsules for civil servants and diplomats in India. New
Delhi has committed to building the Afghan Parliament, and PM
Singh laid the foundation stone during his latest visit to
Kabul. In addition, India has agreed to fund 500 university
slots and 500 technical scholarships in areas such as
information technology, agriculture and entrepreneurial
development.


14. (C) Thanking India for its initiative and meaningful
programs, U/S Dobriansky observed that it also sends a strong
message of US-India joint commitment in Afghanistan. She
asked for feedback on the US proposal for the joint
US-India-Japanese 21st Century Leadership Alliance to train
Afghan leaders and civil servants in public administration
through short and long term workshops and programs (Ref A).
She noted that the initiative would require approximately USD
five million, of which Japan and the US would give USD 2
million each, and proposed that India could contribute USD
one million. U/S Dobriansky asked whether there was any
further progress since MEA told U/S Burns during January 20
meetings in India that the GOI was discussing this proposal
with its Embassy in Kabul. Saran replied that India is still
examining this proposal to see how it would fit in with its
current training programs and whether it might be attached to
India's established program for training civil servants.

GOI Open to Bilateral Cooperation in Kyrgyzstan
-------------- --


15. (C) U/S Dobriansky raised a US proposal for Indian
technical or financial assistance in implementing the OSCE
electoral recommendations made after the July presidential
election in Kyrgyzstan. She suggested that India could also
assist in a US program to provide small grants to NGOs
supporting democracy, advocacy and electoral reform in
Kyrgyzstan. FS Saran responded that "practically, India is
happy to provide assistance," but there is sensitivity to
getting involved in an OSCE project. Since India is not a
member of the organization, he commented that it would be
"awkward" to be carrying out OSCE recommendations. However,
the GOI is open to finding a way to contribute bilaterally in
Central Asia.

India Budges on UN Human Rights Council
--------------


16. (C) FS Saran opened discussions on reform of the Human
Rights Council by commenting that the GOI believes that
comprehensive UN reform should also involve changes to the
Security Council, and was therefore concerned about the lack
of progress in this direction. India fears that other reform
will be piecemeal, but he emphasized that New Delhi is

NEW DELHI 00000759 006.2 OF 011


engaged in these reform discussions and will not stand in the
way. As a democratic country with strong institutions of
justice, India has an interest in promoting human rights,
Saran noted. He underlined that India has "made a major
effort to be flexible and move towards US positions" on the
Human Rights Council (Ref B). He relayed that the GOI has
agreed to "raise the bar for membership" by accepting a
two-thirds requirement and to support 38 members on the
council if other countries are in consensus with this number.
Saran agreed with the US position of a one year gap before
reelection to the Human Rights Council and the need for a
declaration of human rights norms. He observed that the GOI
does want an overall cap on the frequency of sessions for
budgetary reasons, but will agree to emergency sessions with
vote of one-third of all members. India is also willing to
accept a universal periodic review of any country's human
rights record, but wants the new HRC to be reviewed after
five years.

But Some Disagreements Remain
--------------


17. (C) However, the GOI maintains several of its positions
on the HRC's punitive role, country specific resolutions, and
linkages to the Security Council. The GOI believes that the
Human Rights Council needs to balance the punitive and
promotional measures, and Saran asked the US to look at
additional ways to promote a culture that respects human
rights, as this is more effective than "finger pointing."
Because of India's "reservations on HRC criticisms and
country specific resolutions, India is not in favor of any
linkage between the Security Council and the Human Rights
Council. Instead, the GOI would like the HRC and any other
links to other subsidiaries of the UN to be accountable to
the UN General Assembly. India believes that council
membership should be open to any country which agrees to
state its commitment to human rights, and membership should
not require a regional endorsement provision (he alluded to
likely Pakistani and Chinese objections to India's role).
Due to India's ideological opposition to country specific
resolutions, Saran indicated that the GOI would only support
these resolutions if required to pass with a two-thirds
majority.


18. (C) U/S Dobriansky noted that India and the US have
moved forward together over the last few months, and hoped
that we will continue to move closer as we try to push
through UN reform during a tight window of opportunity.
Commenting that democracies should oppose membership for
those countries who seek membership on the Human Rights
Council in order to avoid scrutiny by the international
community, she urged agreement on disqualification for any
country currently under sanctions for human rights violations
or terrorism concerns. These countries would only undermine
the council, U/S Dobriansky observed, so the window of
opportunity to join will be crucial. Since most

NEW DELHI 00000759 007.2 OF 011


country-specific resolutions pass with only a simple
majority, she worried that requiring a two-thirds majority
vote would eliminate any chance of passing these resolutions,
which are a crucial mechanism for the international community
to respond to violations.


19. (C) In a private pull aside, U/S Dobriansky pressed for
closer cooperation in New York to achieve our shared
objectives for reform of the UN Human Rights Commission.
Saran reported that new instructions had been sent to the
Indian PR in New York, and added that "on several of the
issues we're pretty close." "Our whole approach," he added,
"will be very forthcoming and constructive." "We need to
carry others along," Saran noted, but India will help. U/S
Dobriansky noted that India carries real weight on democracy
issues, and hoped that the GOI would take a leadership
position in New York. Saran again committed to being "as
flexible as possible." "We feel strongly about the principle
of universality," he noted, but even here India is prepared
to "raise the bar" for membership.

Management Reform
--------------


20. (C) On management reform, Saran noted concern that the
creation of a new oversight mechanism would create a
bureaucracy that is too top heavy. Instead, the GOI prefers
to look at ways to strengthen the UN General Assembly to
fulfill this oversight role. In response to the proposal to
create a Chief Operations Officer to keep a check on UN
administration, he pointed out that this was the purpose of
appointing a Deputy Secretary General in 1998. He suggested
reviewing the effectiveness of this position before creating
a new one.

US-India Collaboration on CCIT
--------------


21. (C) Saran also stressed the importance of working
together on the Convention on Terrorism (CCIT). Noting a
potential US-India disagreement on the recent compromise
language with the Organization of Islamic Conference, he
requested greater collaboration to come to a consensus before
meetings resume in late February in New York.

GOI UN Democracy Fund Paper
--------------


22. (SBU) The following text is the GOI paper on specific
ideas for Indian contributions to the UN Democracy Fund:

India, with its billion plus population, is the world's
largest democracy. As a developing country with a diverse and
heterogeneous polity, India is in the unique position of not
only understanding the problems that a developing country
taking its first steps towards democracy may face, but also

NEW DELHI 00000759 008.2 OF 011


suggesting a whole range of approaches and solutions based on
its own experience. This distinctive expertise could be
utilized to great advantage by the UN Democracy Fund (UNDEF)
in assisting new and restored democracies to draw up
programmes tailored to their specific requirements. India
could be of particular help in capacity building in this
context.

India has been deeply committed to the idea and establishment
of the Democratic Fund from the very beginning. It was one of
the first countries to support the initiative. On 15 June
2005, India had, along with 25 other countries, cosponsored a
letter addressed to the UN Secretary General, requesting
early operationalization of the Fund, preferably before the
forthcoming High Level Event in September.

During the PM's State visit to the United States in July this
year, both the countries, while welcoming the establishment
of the UNDEF, affirmed their intention to contribute US$ 10
million each to the Fund during the course of the current
year. On 14 September 2005, PM addressed an event organised
on the margins of The High Level Plenary Meeting of the UN
General Assembly to launch the UN Democracy Fund. The
contributions from Member countries have been made to a
voluntary Trust Fund set up under the UN rules and
regulations. India has contributed USD 10 million to the fund
and along with US, shares the first position among
contributors.

India's possible contribution towards the proposed activities
of the UNDEF

India could meaningfully contribute in achieving the Fund's
objectives in several ways, as illustrated in the paragraphs
below.

Institution Building

India, as the world's largest functioning democracy, which is
also familiar with the constraints and special needs of a
developing economy, is in the unique position of being able
to offer a comprehensive package of assistance in the field
of institution-building to countries seeking such support. To
enumerate just a few examples -

-- Our Central Election Commission (CEC) has already signed
an MOU with the UN, on the basis of which it deputes
officials to observe elections and receives officials from
other democracies to share the Indian experience. The CEC's
contribution of expertise in the field of holding elections
in other countries could be explored;
-- Material support for elections in the form of voting
paper, ink and electronic voting machines could be
considered.
-- A panel of experts to contribute ideas towards
constitution drafting could be set up and their services made

NEW DELHI 00000759 009.2 OF 011


available on request.
-- The working of statutory bodies that underpin our
democratic polity could provide insights for the building and
restructuring of similar institutions in other countries in
transition. Relevant bodies can be broadly categorized into
three groups: watchdogs of democracy and democratic
governance; bodies and institutions providing economic
governance; and institutions selecting, training and
developing the personnel required for executing the decisions
and policies of the government. The first category includes
the Judiciary, the National Human Rights Commission, the
Central Vigilance Commission, the Minorities Commission, the
National Commission for Women, and the Scheduled Caste &
Scheduled Tribes Commissions. The Reserve Bank of India and
the Finance Commission would fall under the second category,
while the Union Public Service Commission and the various
institutions for the training and development of civil and
military services could provide guidance and assistance to
new democracies in human resource development.

It may also be emphasized that post-conflict reconstruction
and rehabilitation would be an overlapping area that would
impact on the overall process of institution-building in an
emergent democracy and, in some cases (e.g. Afghanistan and
Iraq),may need to be addressed before any other areas can be
focused on. In Afghanistan, for example, India is one of the
principal donors in the areas of reconstruction, food
assistance, road construction and power generation projects,
among other things. India will also construct the Afghan
Parliament building - a symbol of friendship and cooperation
between the two nations. We could likewise offer support to
other countries in a similar situation.

Capacity Building

While it is important to evolve a system whereby people can
exercise their right to participate in the governance of
their country by choosing their representatives through the
process of regular, free and fair elections, it is also
essential to foster grass-root democracy that pervades all
sections of society, so that democratic institutions become
self-sustaining and self-perpetuating. India's experiences
could serve as a base on which to model capacity building
initiatives in a fledgling democracy. Some specific areas are
mentioned below.

-- Evolution of institutions such as India's Panchayati Raj
system would be useful in democracies in transition, so that
even the basic units of society participate fully in the
democratic process and thus help sustain it at the national
level. Women and youth would need to be drawn into the
process, through grass-root empowerment. For this purpose,
suitable provisions would need to be made in the constitution
when it is being written, coupled with changes in
legislation, to grant more empowerment. This is where the
expertise of Indian institutions such as the Bureau of

NEW DELHI 00000759 010.2 OF 011


Parliamentary Studies & Training (BPST) could come in handy:
it could undertake programmes on drafting of legislation for
foreign parliamentary officials in the overall context of
training/internship facilities extended to them. For example,
as part of India's contribution to the UNDP project on
"Support to the Establishment of the Afghan Legislature
(SEAL) to build capacities", 30 Afghan Parliamentary
officials have undergone training at the BPST.
-- Exposure to our intra-party elections and innovative
developments in management and administration of party cadres
could be organized for office holders of political parties in
other countries. The objective would be to promote internal
democracy within political parties.
-- It is essential that the law enforcement personnel in a
democracy clearly understand that while no one is above the
law, and that they would be required to carry out their
responsibilities within the parameters of the rule of law and
in conformity with human rights. India could offer training
courses for enforcement personnel from aspiring democracies
at the National Police Academy.
-- Community development is fundamental to the structured
growth of the weaker sections of society and, therefore, to
the strengthening of democratic traditions. India is already
actively exploring the possibility of initiating a pilot
project on community development to wean away Afghan farmers
from poppy cultivation. We could support similar projects in
other countries under post-war reconstruction and
democratization.
-- India, with its strong and well-rooted civil services
traditions, could offer training facilities for civil
servants at various centers such as the Indian Institute of
Public Administration (IIPA),the Administrative Staff
College of India (ASCI),and the Foreign Service Institute
(FSI). India's assistance in capacity building could also
focus on the distinctive advantages of defense forces working
in harmony and coordination with, and under the control of
the civilian leadership and administration.
-- Keeping in mind the increasingly important role being
played by civil society in the consolidation of democracy,
India is in a position to offer wide-spectrum interaction to
new democracies to help them create and nurture an effective
and focused network of NGOs, think tanks and other interest
groups.

Awareness Creation

Citizens living in a democracy must be aware of their rights
and obligations to be able to maintain constant vigilance so
as to ensure that democratic traditions are not threatened or
subverted. India could contribute substantially on this
front.

-- With its robust traditions of the freedom of the media and
a highly articulate press, as well as the audio-visual media,
both at the national and regional levels, India could support
other countries in building capacities in this area.

NEW DELHI 00000759 011.2 OF 011


Institutions like the Indian Institute of Mass Communications
can play a meaningful role in this direction.
-- We could help in the creation of an NGO network dedicated
to the promotion of ethnic, religious and linguistic harmony
in countries that may, until recently, have been torn by
internal conflicts.
-- It is important to create awareness among children and
young people to help them become effective and interactive
citizens. India could play a part in the preparation and
dissemination of educational material for civic studies in
schools and, where possible, offer exchange programmes for
students so as to provide first-hand experience through
direct interaction.

Leadership Development

To ensure that democracy takes strong roots, it is essential
to develop leadership qualities at the local as well as
national levels. India could offer exchanges/study tours for
young political leaders. There could also be a special focus
on women as community and national leaders.


23. (U) U/S Dobriansky cleared this cable.


24. (U) Visit New Delhi's Classified Website:
(http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/sa/newdelhi/)
MULFORD