EU OFFICIALS DISCUSS BURMA WITH PDAS DAVIES

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 000361

SIPDIS

NOFORN
SIPDIS

FOR EAP/MLS, EUR/ERA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/10/2018
TAGS: PREL PHUM ETTC EUN BM
SUBJECT: EU OFFICIALS DISCUSS BURMA WITH PDAS DAVIES

REF: USEU BRUSSELS 356

Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Larry Wohlers for reasons 1
.4 (b) and (d).


1. (C) Summary. In an exchange with a group of Political and
Security Committee (PSC) Ambassadors and member state
representatives on the margins of U.S.-EU expert level
discussions on Asia (reftel),EAP PDAS Glyn Davies discussed
the U.S. position on Burma and encouraged further UN action
and additional sanctions on the regime. EU participants
highlighted their concerns about the human rights situation
and questioned the efficacy of other actors in the region.
Some identified a sense of "drift" on the issue within the
EU, but expressed desire for a political discussion to help
re-focus the debate. While there is support among some
member states for further sanctions, others will want to
ensure that any new measures are appropriately targeted and
that the discussion also considers incentives for positive
change. End Summary.


2. (C) In a meeting with PSC representatives from Austria,
France, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the UK,
PDAS Davies outlined the U.S. assessment of the situation in
Burma, saying that the regime has no interest in taking the
reform process forward. In addition to supporting UN Special
Representative Gambari, it is important to impress upon UN
Secretary General Ban Ki Moon that there are standards that

SIPDIS
the regime must meet, and if they are not met, then he should
say so. He added that the other avenue to pursue against the
regime is sanctions. The U.S. believes that it is possible
to enact sanctions that will not harm individual Burmese or
inhibit money flows to NGOs. In addition, sanctions may put
indirect pressure on the Chinese to encourage discussions in
Burma between the regime and the opposition.

EU Questions Situation on the Ground and in the Region


3. (C) In response to PDAS Davies, the EU representatives
raised questions about the draft constitution, referendum,
and possible points of leverage and future courses of action
in the region. Irish PSC Ambassador Cross said that Ireland
has a strong interest in the human rights situation in Burma
and described the draft constitution promulgated by the
regime as "completely unacceptable." She wondered if the
regime had become impervious to outside influence from any
corner, including China. Italian Mission Counselor Baruco
asked about the regime's announced referendum, and Swedish
Deputy PSC representative Hartzell observed that the West was
acting as "bad cop," and asked about the respective stances
of Burma's neighbors. He also asked whether we could work
with its roadmap. French Deputy PSC representative Chabert
raised the role of India.


4. (C) PDAS Davies said that we view the referendum as
fundamentally flawed as Aung San Suu Kyi and other
stakeholders had not been involved. He warned that if the
international community accepts the referendum as legitimate,
then that will be pocketed by the regime. If Gambari's
efforts fail, then perhaps we need to return the issue of
Burma to the UN Security Council for a possible sanctions
discussion. PDAS Davies further noted that it has become
increasingly difficult for the Chinese (in their support of
the regime) to publicly argue against the UN's founding
documents. ASEAN was not a robust enough institution to
pressure one of its own members. Nevertheless, its September
2007 UN statement on Burma had been relatively strong, and we
had noticed some modest domestic non-governmental interest in
various South East Asian countries in support of democracy in
Burma. PDAS Davies dismissed prospects for working with the
roadmap and argued that we should go after the relatively few
people at the top of the regime. He noted that the Indians
have proven the most recalcitrant on Burma. This is likely a
legacy of their NAM non-interference policy, as well as their
growing economic interests and their competition with China
over Burmese business.

Potential Next Steps in the EU


5. (SBU) UK Acting PSC Representative Lapsley said that some

BRUSSELS 00000361 002 OF 002


in the EU would like to have a political discussion of Burma,
and Cross said it was possible one might take place at the
April GAERC. Lapsley added that it would be valuable to have
a U.S.-EU discussion before that meeting in order to examine
what steps might work. Unfortunately, there has been a
feeling of "drift" within EU councils on the issue, said
Irish representative Cross. Hartzell noted that while the EU
has not taken any actions on Burma recently, its inclusion on
the GAERC agenda in February did demonstrate that the EU was
still seized with the matter.


6. (C) Turning to the issue of sanctions, Cross said that
Ireland supported going further, with Lapsley adding that the
British also supported further measures if there was no
substantive progress from Gambari's efforts. He noted that
the sanctions on Burmese timber and gems, which had been
approved by EU FMs in October, were now ready. (Note: These
sanctions will enter into force on March 10.) Lapsley
thought that the EU debate would be about whether sanctions
will have an effect on the right people in Burma, and
Hartzell asked about the prospect for also offering
incentives to the Burmese regime.


7. (C) PDAS Davies responded by saying that the U.S. saw
sanctions as an art rather than as a science, and that we had
built in safety valves to protect Burmese people. He added
that the U.S. has evidence that the regime has said that U.S.
sanctions are hurting and he encouraged the EU to consider
targeting the three banks that the regime uses for foreign
exchange. He agreed to take back the question about
incentives.


8. (C/NF) Comment: The EU will renegotiate their common
position on Burma ahead of April's GAERC meeting, and in
separate, subsequent conversations with member state and EU
contacts, USEU's interlocutors have predicted a debate
between those inclined to give the regime the benefit of the
doubt due to the proposed constitutional referendum and
future elections and those who want to maintain a more
restrictive policy. On a related front, the EU also remains
divided on the case for further sanctions, with some,
including Council officials, arguing that any discussion of
sanctions should also consider possible incentives to promote
change. The occasion of the political discussion
accompanying the common position renewal is a key opportunity
to provide specific information to the EU on the efficacy of
sanctions and international pressure as well as an analysis
of the political situation and points of leverage in the
region. It remains important to continue to reassure
skeptical EU members that restrictive measures can be part of
a wider strategy for encouraging democracy and progress in
Burma.


9. (U) PDAS Davies has cleared this cable.

MURRAY
.