UN REFORM: U/S BURNS PRESSES KEY G-77 AMBASSADORS

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000996

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/15/2011
TAGS: PREL KUNR AORC UN
SUBJECT: UN REFORM: U/S BURNS PRESSES KEY G-77 AMBASSADORS


Classified By: Ambassador Alex Wolff, Deputy Permanent Representative,
for reasons 1.4 b,d.


1. (C) Summary. On May 9, U/S Burns pressed the UN reform
agenda with four senior G-77 Ambassadors, three in particular
(Egypt, Pakistan and South Africa) who play a disruptive role
on a number of U.S. priority reform issues. The meeting took
place a day after the G-77 successfully forced a resolution
through the General Assembly that would significantly delay
the Secretariat's efforts to implement the reform proposals
put forward by the Secretary-General. U/S Burns told the
four that the U.S. sought an improved UN machinery, more
accountable to member states and more able to deal with the
major challenges of the 21st Century. The G-77 Ambassadors
were focused on the June expiration of the spending cap, and
encouraged agreement on a "realistic" set of objectives that
would lead to the lifting of the cap. They also complained
that the Secretariat was increasingly biased against
developing countries and was working with the wealthy member
states to fundamentally change the nature of the
organization. End Summary.


2. (U) Under Secretary for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns
met with four key G-77 Permanent Representatives over lunch
on Tuesday May 9. Hosted by USUN Deputy PR Alex Wolff, the
lunch was attended by South African PR Dumisani Kumalo (G-77
Chair),Pakistani PR Munir Akram (co-chair of the GA's
management reform working group),Egyptian PR Maged
Abdelaziz, and Yemeni PR Abdullah Alsaidi (OIC Chair).


3. (U) U/S Burns told that group that the U.S. sought to
create a UN "stronger tomorrow than it is today" in order to
better deal with the problems facing the world. There is a
great deal of scrutiny in the U.S., however, on how the UN
uses member state contributions. Management reform would
remain at the top of our agenda. The U.S. seeks to improve
the effectiveness of the Secretariat, which "is not serving
any of our countries very well at this point." The U.S. will
work to close the divisions with the G-77 and other member
states, said U/S Burns, but only if we see tangible evidence
that the G-77 will meet us halfway.

The Secretariat is against us!
--------------


4. (U) The G-77 Ambassadors unanimously stated their support
for the process of reform. Kumalo claimed that it was
developing states, in fact, who sought stronger
anti-corruption and anti-fraud mechanisms within the UN
system. "If money is stolen from a UN program, it's the
people of Darfur who suffer." Kumalo added that there was an
urgent need to move on the reform agenda. "We agree on
principles, but are getting lost in the methodology of
getting to these problems."


5. (U) The G-77 was forced, he said, to vote against the
SYG's management reform proposals (as they did on May 8)
because the Secretariat was insensitive to their needs. The
SYG's report was written by consultants and would have "gone
down well in the private sector," but it was badly received
by member states.


6. (U) Akram agreed: "In this house at the moment, there is a
very bad atmosphere between the North and the South with the
U.S. at the center of it -- not alone, but at the center."
He said that developing countries did not feel that they were
getting their priorities addressed (such as progress on the
development follow-up to the Summit Outcome Document and the
ECOSOC reform resolution). Instead, the reform agenda was
being dictated by "the U.S. and our other Northern friends."
Talk of "empowering" the SYG means taking power away from the
smaller states in the General Assembly, he added.


7. (U) Delegations agreed to the imposition of the spending
cap, said Egypt's Abdelaziz, in order to put pressure on the
Secretariat to reform itself. But now Western countries and

SIPDIS
the Secretariat have formed a "coalition against the
developing countries" and are using the June deadline to
squeeze maximum concessions out of the G-77. G-77 states, he
said, believe the U.S. wants to turn the UN into an
organization in which an individual state's institutional
power is based on the size of its financial contribution.
This approach, threatens the one mechanism by which small and
developing states have an effective voice. Abdelaziz also
complained that there were too many Western officials in
senior Secretariat positions.


8. (U) Alsaidi said, in reference to the SYG's report on
mandate review, that the "Secretariat is taking sides."
Akram said the latest report on a counter-terrorism strategy

was another example of the SYG going "too far" in the wrong
direction. "We see the Secretariat as biased."

The Spending Cap as the Sword of Damocles
--------------


9. (SBU) Akram emphasized the importance of reaching an
understanding between the G-77 and the U.S./EU/Japan on
"realistic expectations" of what can be achieved by the end
of June in order to lift the spending cap on the
Secretariat's operations. "We need to get over the

SIPDIS
suspicions surrounding the spending cap," he said. "People
see it as a threat." Abdelaziz predicted that if delegations
did not reach an agreement on a means to lift the spending
cap there would be a vote that would be disastrous for the
organization. "We have the numbers and you have the money,"
he said.


10. (U) Kumalo complained that the U.S. has not been clear
enough in explaining its objectives for UN reform, and many
member states are frustrated by what are perceived as
constantly shifting goalposts. He claimed that whenever the
GA acts on reform, including on ethics reform, whistle-blower
protection and financial disclosure, the U.S. quickly forgets
about the successes and moves on to focus on new reform
objectives. This pattern had only deepened the mistrust of
the overall U.S. goal. Instead, Kumalo encouraged the U.S.
to state clearly what it is required to lift the spending
cap. He admitted that many delegations would use such a
statement to help coalesce opposition to the U.S. position,
but he said, "They're going to oppose you anyway."

Mandate Review
--------------


11. (U) Yemen's Alsaidi, Pakistan's Akram and Egypt's
Abdelaziz each specifically mentioned the fear that the
mandate review process was "aimed" at the Palestinian
mandates. Amb Wolff responded that the U.S. believed
strongly that the Palestinian mandates were one-sided,
corrosive, and did next to nothing to benefit the Palestinian
people. The U.S. position was well known on these mandates,
he added, but it would be a mistake to assume that they
represent the total of our reform objectives.

"Get off the psychiatrist's couch"
--------------


12. (U) Abdelaziz and Alsaidi also called for the U.S. to
find a peaceful solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. U/S
Burns responded by noting that it was not the U.S. that
precipitated this crisis. Iran has violated its commitments
to the international community and has now failed to live up
to multiple IAEA resolutions and a statement of the Security
Council. The pressure, he said, should not be on the U.S.,
but on Iran. "People, particularly those in the region, need
to tell the Iranians that they need to come to their senses."


13. (SBU) Addressing the growing North/South divide on UN
matters, U/S Burns suggested (to much laughter) that member
states need to "get off the psychiatrist's couch." Simply
changing the rhetoric will not solve the mistrust and
suspicion between states. Instead, what was needed was a
practical, pragmatic, action-oriented approach to solve
issues "one-by-one." Trust and confidence would come from
success, he said. The U.S. will be flexible, but it has to
be a two-way street.


14. (U) Under Secretary Burns has reviewed this cable.
BOLTON