DEMARCHE REQUEST: INDIA'S ROLE IN THE COMMUNITY

UNCLAS STATE 062767 SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KDEM PGOV PREL PHUM UNGA IN ZI SF PO CA SUBJECT: DEMARCHE REQUEST: INDIA'S ROLE IN THE COMMUNITY OF DEMOCRACIES ¶1. (U) This is an action request. Please see paragraph 3. SUMMARY -------------- ¶2. (SBU) India has a longstanding position at the UN against the use of country-specific language in resolutions and it seems they are extending that position to statements issued by the Community of Democracies (CD). India has been particularly unhelpful on efforts to issue a statement on the situation in Zimbabwe; an appropriate high-level approach may be helpful in obtaining India's support, which would be very useful in drawing along a begrudging but compliant South Africa. To urge further action on Zimbabwe, we have taken the following actions: the U.S. delegation to the CD has asked India for an explanation of its position and included the issue in President Bush's brief for his meeting with PM Singh on the sidelines of the G-8. Thus far the Indian delegation maintains its unhelpful stance, objecting to the statement without explanation. Additionally, India's recent decision to remove its Foreign Secretary's endorsement for the CD's Diplomat's Handbook, a successful initiative that has been in the works for well over one year and has been widely praised by CD members, calls into question the GOI's commitment to the efforts and principles of the Community. After the strong support India had thus far displayed for the Handbook and the recent reversal, it may be possible that the Indian delegation in Washington did not adequately report on the project throughout the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) in earlier stages. An explanation of India's decision on Zimbabwe, its recent reversal on the handbook, and its intent for future cooperation on CD projects would be useful. OBJECTIVES -------------- ¶3. (U) Post is requested to pursue the following objectives: -- Ascertain India's reasons for not supporting the statement on Zimbabwe. Though we understand that India opposes the statement, we have not heard any particular reasons either publicly or privately. Other CD members have shared with us their confusion about India's position on this matter. No other country has objected in writing as the Portuguese procedure required: Others like Mongolia, the Czech Republic, and El Salvador are publicly supportive while South Korea and Morocco are privately supportive. We would find India's constructive comments helpful in advancing the ability of the CD to play an effective role in supporting democratic elections in Zimbabwe. -- Urge India's support for a Community of Democracies Statement on the election crisis in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe is undergoing an urgent crisis over its elections. As democracies, we ought to urge Zimbabwe to end the violence and establish a level playing field for the runoff election. This situation goes to the core of what CD is about -- the promotion and protection of democratic institutions and processes. Even South Africa, which did not like the proposed statement, said it would not block the CG from issuing it. Zimbabwe's actions June 5, when police forces detained British and U.S. diplomats at the outskirts of Harare, and characterized their elections observations in the north as "criminal," is indicative of the true attitude of the Mugabe regime toward democracy. -- Remind India of our shared commitments under the CD to protect democracies under threat. The CD is a forum distinct from the UN, and one designed specifically to bring democracies together to assist one another - and to offer examples of good governance. Cooperation on CD issues has been discussed at several Summits with President Bush and PM Singh and the high level Global Issues Forum. India's opposition to the CD statement is not in the spirit of our commitments in Warsaw or our countries' bilateral talks. -- Query India as to its reasons for the sudden withdrawal of Foreign Secretary Menon's endorsement for the Diplomat's Handbook, which it had previously supported during the GOI's strong leadership of the Working Group for Democratic Governance and Civil Society in the run up to the Bamako Ministerial last year. REPORTING DEADLINE -------------- ¶4. (U) Embassy is requested to report results of efforts by cable to DRL/MLGA Laura Jordan, G Joaquin Ferrao, and SCA/INA Madeeha Ashraf before June 16. BACKGROUND -------------- ¶5. (SBU) At the May 5 meeting of the Convening Group (CG), we circulated a draft statement on the situation in Zimbabwe and urged the CG to issue it on behalf of the Community of Democracies. The U.S. delegation argued Zimbabwe is undergoing a clear crisis over its elections, and that free and fair elections are at the core of what CD is about. The heart of the CD lies in the Warsaw commitments -- to promote and defend democracy, especially in situations such as Zimbabwe. It would be detrimental to its mission if the CD remained silent. As democracies, the CD member states ought to urge Zimbabwe to end the violence and establish a level playing field for the runoff election, particularly by allowing international monitors. At a special Convening Group meeting May 23 to further discuss the possible CD statement on the situation in Zimbabwe, our delegation offered an updated version for consideration, expressed openness to changes in the document that could make the declaration more meaningful and current, and asked that delegations express their thoughts on the matter quickly to enable us to identify a way forward. ¶6. (SBU) India privately reached out to Portugal shortly after the draft statement was first proposed to ascertain the level of support for the text; when Portugal noted South Africa's reservations due to Mbeki's role as the SADC mediator, India then expressed reservations for unstated reasons. Since the May 23 meeting, India issued its opposition to the statement in writing and asked that the statement not be issued, but did not provide its reasons for opposing the statement. India has been mostly opposed to country-specific actions in multilateral fora, preferring instead thematic approaches to human rights problems. (Note: India played the key obstructionist role last fall, when the CD tried - and failed - to issue a statement condemning the Government of Burma's crackdown on peaceful democracy activists and Buddhist monks. However in 2003 the CD did manage to issue a statement on Burma. At the Human Rights Council's March 2008 Session, India attempted to water down the resolution on Burma. End Note.) ¶7. (SBU) South Africa's position is that the current proposed statement would interfere with the delicate efforts of President Mbeki to help find a peaceful resolution to the election crisis. Privately, South Africa says it is concerned about having tough language in the declaration because it believes it would undermine its role as a mediator. We have been publicly supportive of SADC's mediation role and of South African President Mbeki as the designated SADC facilitator, but privately we have encouraged him to take a more active role. Mbeki deserves credit for helping improve the conduct of the elections, but his efforts have not prevented post-election manipulation of the results or the descent into runoff-related violence. Mbeki has been subjected to harsh domestic criticism on Zimbabwe and the Zimbabwean opposition has "fired" him as facilitator, which puts his ability to continue in this role in question. We think the Convening Group should issue the statement on Zimbabwe, since for us it is a more neutral way to increase public pressure on Mbeki and South Africa to take a more assertive position, and since the statement supports SADC's leading role in addressing the Zimbabwe crisis. ¶8. (SBU) Separately, India requested May 29 in a private meeting with NGO Council for a Community of Democracies (CCD) the removal of its Foreign Secretary's endorsement in the frontispiece to the Diplomat's Handbook for Democracy Development Support. The specific reasons given were three: One case study was entitled Burma/Myanmar. CCD was told India no longer recognizes the old name Burma. One case study was entitled "Belarus: Europe's Last Dictator?" Apparently, India regards that reference as an insult to the sovereignty of Belarus. Taiwan was mentioned (CCD said it is mentioned twice, once in the Resource list under Taiwan Foundation for Democracy) in the Handbook. India's position is that there is no such country. CCD notes their understanding that even if they had made modifications to the handbook the FS's decision was not reversible. This came as the Diplomat's Handbook launched May 30 in final form on www.diplomatshandbook.org and went to print the same day. India was the chair of the working group out of which the Diplomat's Handbook emerged in the run-up to the Bamako Ministerial; Canadian retired diplomat Jeremy Kinsman led the effort with the help of CCD and Princeton University to develop, publish and promote the book. FSI recently announced its intent to purchase 400 copies of the book to use in training of U.S. diplomats. CCD notified us that they were able to remove FS Menon's remarks from the book before it went to print. POINT OF CONTACT -------------- ¶9. (U) Please contact DRL/MLGA Laura Jordan at (202) 647-3088 or via e-mail for any necessary further background information or argumentation to meet our objectives. RICE