Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08BRUSSELS640
2008-04-25 15:48:00
CONFIDENTIAL
USEU Brussels
Cable title:  

EC ON INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT CONFERENCE ON

Tags:  PREL PGOV AF EU EAID ECON EFIN EUN KDEM 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO8298
OO RUEHAG RUEHROV
DE RUEHBS #0640/01 1161548
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 251548Z APR 08
FM USEU BRUSSELS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA PRIORITY
RUEHAH/AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT PRIORITY
RUEHTA/AMEMBASSY ASTANA PRIORITY
RUEHTH/AMEMBASSY ATHENS PRIORITY
RUEHBD/AMEMBASSY BANDAR SERI BEGAWAN PRIORITY
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING PRIORITY
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN PRIORITY
RUEHSW/AMEMBASSY BERN PRIORITY
RUEHEK/AMEMBASSY BISHKEK PRIORITY
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS PRIORITY
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA PRIORITY
RUEHCP/AMEMBASSY COPENHAGEN PRIORITY
RUEHDL/AMEMBASSY DUBLIN PRIORITY
RUEHDBU/AMEMBASSY DUSHANBE PRIORITY
RUEHHE/AMEMBASSY HELSINKI PRIORITY
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD PRIORITY
RUEHBUL/AMEMBASSY KABUL PRIORITY
RUEHLI/AMEMBASSY LISBON PRIORITY
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID PRIORITY
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI PRIORITY
RUEHNY/AMEMBASSY OSLO PRIORITY
RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA PRIORITY
RUEHPG/AMEMBASSY PRAGUE PRIORITY
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME PRIORITY
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL PRIORITY
RUEHSM/AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM PRIORITY
RUEHTL/AMEMBASSY TALLINN PRIORITY
RUEHNT/AMEMBASSY TASHKENT PRIORITY
RUEHTC/AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE PRIORITY
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO PRIORITY
RUEHVI/AMEMBASSY VIENNA PRIORITY
RUEHWR/AMEMBASSY WARSAW PRIORITY
RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON PRIORITY
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 000640 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

SCA/A FOR LAUREN FRESE, EUR/ERA FOR NATHANIEL DEAN, USAID
FOR WARD

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/24/2018
TAGS: PREL PGOV AF EU EAID ECON EFIN EUN KDEM
SUBJECT: EC ON INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT CONFERENCE ON
AFGHANISTAN

REF: STATE 32155

Classified By: PolMinCouns Laurence Wohlers for reasons 1.4 (b,d)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 000640

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

SCA/A FOR LAUREN FRESE, EUR/ERA FOR NATHANIEL DEAN, USAID
FOR WARD

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/24/2018
TAGS: PREL PGOV AF EU EAID ECON EFIN EUN KDEM
SUBJECT: EC ON INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT CONFERENCE ON
AFGHANISTAN

REF: STATE 32155

Classified By: PolMinCouns Laurence Wohlers for reasons 1.4 (b,d)


1. (C) Summary: The European Commission would like to
coordinate with the United States in the lead-up to the June
12 International Support Conference on Afghanistan.
Commission contacts agree (and have made this point to the
French government) that the total pledge must surpass the
$10.5 billion achieved in the 2006 London Conference in order
for the meeting to be portrayed as a success, although
contacts are concerned that surpassing that figure might
prove difficult. Commission contacts tell USEU that the
inclusion of all assistance pledged since the London
conference is useful in that it allows the Commission to
present a significant and "respectable" pledge at the Paris
conference, totaling close to one billion U.S. dollars. The
Commission view is that the conference should not be a pure
"pledging" event and that the Afghans should bring their own
commitments to the conference. Commission contacts also
expressed concern that journalists will see through any
attempt to couch money already committed as "new pledges".
Both Commission and Council Secretariat contacts expect
Commissioner Benita Ferrero Waldner as well as EU High
Representative Javier Solana to attend the Paris Support
Conference. End Summary.


2. (C) In a meeting with USEU, Commission Head of Unit for
Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Maldives
Helen Campbell and Afghanistan Development Aid desk officer
Paul Turner suggested that the United States, the Commission,
and France coordinate positions in advance of the Paris
conference through telephone conferences. Campbell noted
that such telcons were extremely useful in the lead-up to the
London conference on Afghanistan in 2006, when they included

Washington, the Commission, and Tokyo. She added that it
would be useful to hold such telcons weekly, beginning the
week of May 5. Campbell noted the EC would be happy to
approach Paris on this idea if we agreed, and suggested that
perhaps Washington could approach Paris in parallel. In
particular, the EC would like to coordinate with the United
States on a "common line" regarding actions we would like the
Government of Afghanistan to take. Campbell noted actions
related to the Ministry of Interior, corruption, and senior
appointments as possibile areas to target, but expressed
openness to other ideas from Washington.


BRUSSELS 00000640 002 OF 003



3. (C) The Commission would also like to discuss with the
United States possible "success stories" and "challenges"
that we could jointly point to at the conference (a model
they said Paris wanted international donors to employ).
Campbell and Turner suggested one idea of highlighting the
ANA as a success story and discussing how to use the ANA as a
model for the international community's efforts with the
police. They added that they were very interested in doing
something jointly with Washington (and maybe other donors as
well) on elections. They said the EC would likely focus on
health as one success story. From an EC standpoint,
education is another area of relative success where the
United States has played an important role. Conversely,
"challenges" from an EC perspective innclude border issues,
revenue generation, and policing. Campbell added that
successes should be viewed and presented as Afghan successes,
not simply attributed to donor interventions.


4. (C) Campbell told us that the idea of including as pledges
all money committed since the 2006 London conference would be
useful for the Commission because it would mean they could
count their four-year 610 million EUR pledge, as well as 33
million EUR in humanitarian assistance committed last year.
Altogether, Campbell said, the total EC pledge amount could
reach about one billion U.S. dollars at the current exchange
rate. At the same time, Campbell and Turner stressed that
they and a number of member states were concerned that the
"adding up of every penny" not take over the focus of the
Paris conference. They said that when the new UNSR for
Afghanistan Kai Eide briefed the EU Political and Security
Committee ambassadors, he stressed that he wanted to see
greater pledging effectiveness and coordination. He also
noted that he wanted President Karzai to come to Paris with
commitments of his own. According to Campbell and some of
USEU's member state contacts, the majority of the EU seems to
agree strongly with this approach. They also want to see Kai
Eide have a strong role at the conference, noting his "quiet
Norwegian style" can be very effective with Europeans.


5. (C) Comment: While the EC understands the importance of
funding commitments in the lead-up to Paris, there is also a
clear sense that the core issues are only partially about
money. From their standpoint, aid effectiveness and the
responsibility of the Afghans are also vital concerns. In
their view, the London conference placed too much emphasis on
pledges and "ribbon cutting." In contrast, Paris should be
centered on more substantive concerns. Going into the

BRUSSELS 00000640 003 OF 003


conference, the EC also sees a need for consensus on issues
and approaches among all the major donors. Member state
permanent representation contacts in Brussels note with
optimism the very fact that the EU itself intends to go into
the Paris conference with a "common approach". Building on
this, EC counterparts noted to us that they can emphasize
areas of agreement between the EU and the US in their own
ongoing dialogue with member states, further helping to
advance a "larger" common approach. End Comment.
MURRAY
.