INDIAN OFFICIALS PRESS PDAS WARLICK ON UN REFORM,

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 NEW DELHI 002918

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/19/2012
TAGS: PREL PGOV KUNR IN
SUBJECT: INDIAN OFFICIALS PRESS PDAS WARLICK ON UN REFORM,
UNSC PERM SEAT

Classified By: DCM Geoffrey Pyatt for Reasons 1.4 (B, D)


1. (C) Summary. In side meetings around the U.S.-India
Peacekeeping Joint Working Group, Indian officials:

-- pressed PDAS Warlick to support India's bid for a
permanent UN Security Council;
-- briefed on India's efforts within the G4 and the wider UN
membership for the perm seat;
-- agreed on the need for closer consultations with the U.S.
on UN reform; and
-- claimed today's India deserved a larger share of important
UN positions.

PDAS Warlick:

-- sought India's advice for ways to move UN reform forward;
-- encouraged India to play a leadership role in the UN,
particularly in building bridges between the G77, the
Non-Aligned Movement and the general membership;
-- suggested ways to improve coordination between our
missions in New York, such as building on the relationship
between our Deputy Permanent Representatives;
-- expressed U.S. concerns over the framework concept for
UNSC expansion; and
-- reiterated U.S. commitment to a mechanism to reform the
Human Rights Council. End Summary.


-------------- An Agreement On The Need For Closer Consultations On
UN Reform --------------


2. (C) Joint Secretary (UN Political) Sanjiv Arora asked to
meet with PDAS Warlick for 30 minutes prior to beginning to
U.S.-India Peacekeeping Working Group. At the outset of the
private meeting, Arora said he wished to discuss the UN
reform process, and PDAS Warlick provided his view that while
reform had stalled several months back, the atmosphere in New
York had improved and it was now a more opportune time to get
the process back on track. The U.S. and India share many of
the same goals on UN reform, Warlick said, and are uniquely
positioned to effect reform. He suggested that the U.S. and
India focus on what can be achieved in the current
environment. Arora agreed that, following high expectations
for reform when the first push was made in 2005, efforts had
stalled. The Peace Building Commission was a good sign that
reform may be moving again, he said. Arora agreed the U.S.
and India had common interests and urged closer contact and
more frequent consultations on UN reform, adding that he had
heard from India's Mission in New York that the desire to
engage more closely was mutual. Arora defended India's
loyalty to the G77 and Non-Aligned Movement, saying India was
trying to play a moderating role within the groups, looking
at issues in their totality, while building bridges with the
larger UN membership. Arora cited the C34 special committee
on peacekeeping operations as an example of India playing a
positive role in bringing a compromise formulation to an
impasse situation. PDAS Warlick urged India to play the
bridging role Arora had described, and said that the U.S.
would be responsive to good ideas on how to advance UN reform.

-------------- Arora, K.C. Singh Push For A Permanent Indian Security
Council Seat --------------


3. (C) India -- and several other members states, according
to Arora -- were expecting to see UNSC reform meaningfully
discussed at the upcoming UN General Assembly. However, it
appeared to Arora as though such discussions had stalled.
India is eagerly awaiting the facilitators' report on the
issue, which he expected would be ready by the end of July

NEW DELHI 00002918 002 OF 004


and would be the impetus for "serious" negotiations. India
is seeking expansion of both permanent and non-permanent
seats on the Security Council. Given the new friendship
between India and the U.S., Arora said there is a strong
public expectation in India that the U.S. will support of
India's bid for a permanent seat. Arora advised that in
order to move the UN reform issue forward, the U.S., as the
global leader, should send a signal that it is open to
engaging with the wider membership. He argued the U.S. could
offer a clearer and stronger formulation on the need for
reform. He said he also hoped the U.S. would offer stronger
support for India's permanent seat candidacy. India remains
engaged with its G4 partners at "senior levels," Arora
explained, but remains flexible toward considering other
ideas. India is also consulting "across the board" with
African countries. PDAS Warlick replied that the U.S. has
reached no conclusions yet on how UNSC reform might take
place, and is listening to proposals. He asked Arora if
India is inclined to support one of the interim proposals, to
which Arora replied India is "not comfortable" with interim
solutions, adding that he believed the concept was not
gaining currency among wider member states. Arora worried
that should the facilitators' report propose interim
solutions to the permanent Council issue, it could cause
African Union countries to break from consensus.


4. (C) In response to Warlick's inquiry as to how committed
India is to the G4 process, Arora said there have been ups
and downs with the G4; however, no other proposal which has
been put on the table has matched the G4 plan. The G4
continues to seek expansion in both categories, Arora
reported, but is flexible on the numbers. Turning
specifically to the number of African seats he saw on an
expanded Security Council, Arora said India has always
strongly supported Africa's aspirations to play a larger role
on the Council, and India wants expansion to address the
issue of adequate representation both regionally and among
developing countries, but will not provide a specific number.
In terms of support from other permanent UNSC members, Arora
said that France has expressed willingness to co-sponsor any
resolution put forth by the G4, and referred to President
Putin's trip to New Delhi in January where Putin publicly
reiterated Russia's support for India's candidacy. China has
said it is committed to the reform process and to supporting
developing countries, he said, although he expected China
will always maintain reservations about India. When asked
about perceptions that Europe would be over-represented
should Germany be given a permanent seat, Arora said that New
Delhi hasn't taken a position on Europe's
(over)representation, but suggested that a framework be
developed to determine credentials for permanent seat
membership. PDAS Warlick expressed concern that a framework
method could lead to unpredictability and could polarize
members who felt they had credentials as good as those who
were selected from a blank framework.


5. (C) PDAS Warlick met later in the day with Additional
Secretary (International Organizations) K.C. Singh. Relating

SIPDIS
that the U.S. is now open to work positively on UN Reform
efforts to expand the UNSC, Warlick asked for Singh's
impression on progress. Singh acknowledged the evolution in
the U.S. position, which he had heard about from the
Japanese. He reported that Africa has adopted an extreme
position, with internal conflicts between Ghana, Nigeria and
South Africa stalling the process. Referring to the
facilitators' report on expansion, Singh speculated that it
would have had the support of almost 99 countries. He noted
concerns about the nature of proposed new categories of
membership, such as those involving semi-permanent members in
five- or ten-year stints. According to Singh, Japan had two

NEW DELHI 00002918 003 OF 004


requirements: any proposal should earn the support of
two-thirds of the members and not be rejected by the P5.
Singh did not think that China would use its veto against the
will of two-thirds of the UN. Warlick expressed relief that
the G4 would not attempt to bypass the P5. Singh stated that
India and Japan would reject any effort to make the
non-permanent seats renewable, which he felt would compel a
state to vote with a mind towards pursuing re-election.


6. (C) Recalling the history of the G4, Singh described the
original proposal of six new permanent members (two from
Asia, two Africa, one Latin America and one Europe) and four
non-permanent seats. However, worries about the potential
for an African stalemate over the two countries compelled the
G4 to revise the proposal, Singh continued. Now the proposal
has been recast to be two seats for the developed world,
which is not specific about any one continent, one for
Africa, one for Asia and one for Latin America, with
two-to-four non-permanent seats added. Singh added that the
new proposal included a mechanism by which a two-thirds
membership vote could remove a country from the UNSC during
its tenure, adding that Russia and China are uncomfortable
with this.


7. (C) Noting that Under Secretary Burns has engaged with
the Brazilians about the G4 process on an ad hoc basis,
Warlick wondered how the U.S. should relate to the G-4.
Singh clarified that India was not looking for a U.S. public
endorsement, which could put some countries off. Instead, he
advised that the U.S. could support the framework, as opposed
to individual countries. As he put it, a few phone calls
from Secretary Rice to key counterparts would have much more
impact than public declarations. MEA Joint Secretary Sanjiv
Arora, also present, interjected that U.S. endorsement of
India would play extremely well domestically, and Singh
clarified that he was talking about how U.S. support would
affect UN electoral politics.


8. (C) With travel planned for New York June 21 to discuss
the G4 proposal, Singh observed that Africa has proven
difficult to corral. Because of President Lula,s support
from Afro-Brazilians, Brazil has backed off. But several
states, such as Botswana and Benin, have openly criticized
the process, and Singh believed that enough African nations
would vote for the framework concept. Singh suspected that
Germany also feared for its membership because of the
submersion of European identity as the EU expands, and the
perceived over-representation of European countries on the
UNSC already. The framework concept, said Singh, would not
name any countries. Warlick counseled that a one-step
process of voting for the framework and charter might make
more sense; after admitting to some confusion about the
mechanics, Singh agreed. He observed that many of the U.S.
suggestions about reform have "filtered back" to the G4
proposal.

-------------- Singh, Puri: India Deserves Bigger Role In UN
Decision-Making --------------


9. (C) Singh told Warlick India was frustrated with its lack
of representation in the decision-making process. Despite
Indian efforts to increase its presence in the UN, Singh
lamented that, "we have no say in decision-making, no say in
composition." India has suggested candidates for positions,
but has been told by the Secretary General's office that
India filled its quota with an Indian on the SYG,s staff
(Chief of Staff Vijay Nambiar) and another sent abroad (Atul
Khare, Special Representative of the SG for East Timor). "We
need some reflection of the role we are playing in the
field," he urged. Warlick described how the U.S. also

NEW DELHI 00002918 004 OF 004


believes it is under-represented in the UN, and regularly
suggests qualified candidates. Singh asserted that India
will start playing "hardball," and threaten to withdraw its
troops from peacekeeping missions if the Secretary General
continues to refuse Indian candidates. Warlick attempted to
dissuade Singh from this strategy, but Singh countered,
"That's the only leverage we have."


10. (C) In a separate meeting, Joint Secretary (United
Nations Economic and Social) Manjeev Singh Puri, after
lobbying for an Indian permanent seat on the UNSC, also urged
that India be given more leadership opportunities at the UN.
"If you want change, you need to put us on the inner track,"
Puri replied. He also highlighted that the GOI agrees with
USG desires for transparency and accountability in UN
financial matters, but underlined India's view that "UN
reform must be major, not just tinkering--especially
regarding UNSC decision-making and membership." Turning to
UN peacekeeping operations, Puri said the GOI was concerned
with the chain of command structures and hoped that any
changes would not leave boots on the ground exposed.

-------------- Bypass Sen For Closer Cooperation In New York? --------------


11. (C) Warlick raised with K.C. Singh the issue of
continuing tensions between the U.S. and India in New York,
and said he hoped to find a way to reflect the broad common
ground shared by both countries. Singh agreed about the
necessity of building better coordination in New York,
admitted that PermRep Sen had been the source of much of
India's problems, and offered to meet with the U.S. Permanent
Representative or Acting PermRep on June 22 in New York. He
suggested that the U.S. and Indian UN missions establish a
"number two" dialogue led on the Indian side by Deputy
Permanent Representative Ajay Malhotra.

-------------- Human Rights Council: --------------


12. (C) In response to Singh's inquiry on the Human Rights
Council (HRC),Warlick assured Singh that the U.S. remained
committed to an effective human rights mechanism in the UN
system. "We still recognize the need for an HRC that works,"
he reiterated. Singh welcomed Warlick,s assurance, noting
that the U.S. and India have more in common. Warlick
clarified that the U.S. supports periodic reviews as a way of
singling out gross human rights violators. Singh pointed out
that the process makes it easier for India to work with the
U.S. in the HRC. Puri, discussing the USG decision to
abstain from participating in the HRC and work through the
Third Committee, reported the GOI wants the USG involved and
engaged in the HRC, as "only the US can bring credibility and
sensibility to the Council." PDAS Warlick said he
appreciated GOI sentiments, but the current HRC's
single-minded pursuit of Israel made it impossible for the
U.S. to participate.


13. (U) This cable has been cleared by PDAS Warlick.
MULFORD