BILATERAL DISCUSSIONS WITH INDIA PR ON DEMOCRACY

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000671 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/24/2018 TAGS: PREL PGOV AF AA SUBJECT: BILATERAL DISCUSSIONS WITH INDIA PR ON DEMOCRACY CAUCUS, UN BUDGET, AFGHANISTAN AND SC REFORM Classified By: AMBASSADOR ZALMAY KHALILZAD, FOR REASONS 1.4 B/D ¶1. (C) Summary: Ambassador Khalilzad met with Indian PermRep Sen on July 24. They discussed possible initial members in the UN democracy caucus and shared concern regarding UN budget practices. India offered to do more on Afghanistan if needed, and pointedly asked when the U.S. would be as open in support of an Indian permanent seat in the Security Council as it is with Japan. Discussion on Burma is at reftel. End summary. UN DEMOCRACY CAUCUS ¶2. (C) Ambassadors Khalilzad and Sen began with the UN Democracy Caucus, and agreed that they should finalize the list of countries that would work on a common agenda of support for human rights, democracy, and women,s rights. The Indian Mission had developed a non-paper that outlines the composition, structure, and agenda for this group. As initially proposed by India, the group would initially include the U.S., India, Australia, Japan, Qatar, Mozambique, Poland, South Korea, Mali, Chile, Portugal, UK, Brazil, Mexico, Tanzania, and Senegal. The Ambassador said the U.S. agreed with the list of proposed countries but suggested that Qatar not be included in the group because it is not a member of the Community of Democracies (CD). The Ambassador also proposed that India consider additional countries, including Canada and Lithuania and other Community of Democracies Convening Group members such as the Czech Republic, Mongolia, Cape Verde, and Morocco. For regional balance, the Ambassador asked Sen to consider including another Latin American country, El Salvador, which is also a member of the CD Convening Group. Ambassador Sen responded that due to concerns regarding the upcoming elections in El Salvador, he was not sure whether El Salvador should be included in the group. He indicated that he would take El Salvador under consideration and get back to us. Excluding El Salvador, the group would be comprised of the U.S., Canada, 4 African countries (Cape Verde, Mali, Morocco, and Mozambique),4 East Asia and Pacific countries (Australia, India, Japan, and the Philippines),4 European countries (Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, and the UK),and 3 Latin American countries (Brazil, Chile, and Mexico). The U.S. and India agreed to convene an initial meeting of the group in late August. Sen noted that the invitation should be from either the U.S. or India. Ambassador Khalilzad said that he would consider whether the U.S. should send out the initial invitation and would get back to Ambassador Sen on this issue. Both ambassadors agreed that initially, the group should try not to be too ambitious but instead take on more targeted manageable issues. UN BUDGET ¶3. (C) Ambassador Khalilzad expressed serious concern about the piecemeal budgeting process undertaken by the Secretary General during the last biennium budget process for 2008-2009. The budgeting process is disjointed and with many players involved it becomes difficult to discern the Secretary General,s priorities. The UN budget for 2008-2009 amounts to 4.2 billion. Because of potential "add-ons" by member states, another 1.1 billion could be added to the total budget before the end of 2008. These "add-ons" could add as much as 25 per cent over the original cost of the biennium budget. Ambassador Sen stated that he did not believe the add-ons coupled with the current budgeting practice would be sustainable. He offered to work with the U.S. on this issue. AFGHANISTAN ¶4. (C) The Ambassador stressed U.S. support for SRSG Kai Eide and UNAMA, including Eide,s expansion plans. Sen said India strongly supports the UN,s efforts in Afghanistan, and views Afghanistan as an "existential priority." He added that India is prepared to do more in Afghanistan, including "big projects." Sen urged the U.S. and/or Afghanistan to approach India with requests; India would look at any requests with great seriousness and openness. SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM ¶5. (C) Sen brought up Security Council reform and asked when the U.S. would be as openly supportive of India as it is with Japan for a permanent seat in the Security Council. Sen criticized Italy and Pakistan for their insistence only on consultations rather than negotiations on Security Council reform. This was not acceptable; India supported a balance of consultations and negotiations. The Ambassador said the U.S. supports intergovernmental negotiations, with all options on the table. But the U.S. believed that there is a need for a framework agreement. Both this agreement and the intergovenmental negotiations needed to take place in the open-ended working group. He added that Security Council reform must be in the context of broad reform of the UN. Khalilzad