AVIATION FEE IMPASSE FORCES EMBASSY TO CANCEL

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 001251

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

FOR PM/ISO

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL MARR KMGT OTRA EAIR IN
SUBJECT: AVIATION FEE IMPASSE FORCES EMBASSY TO CANCEL
SUPPORT FLIGHT, SEEK INTERIM SOLUTION

REF: A. NEW DELHI 813

B. 2007 STATE 105799

C. NEW DELHI 473


1. (U) This is an action request; please see paragraphs 6 and

7.


2. (SBU) Post appreciates the Department's guidance to date
(ref A and previous) on the issue of aviation-related fees
for official U.S. Government aircraft and understands that an
interagency process is currently underway to provide further
guidance on a global policy. However, the issue has taken on
increased urgency from an operational standpoint, resulting
in the forced cancellation of an Embassy support flight June

14. Failure to find a interim solution that guarantees
reliable access by U.S. Government aircraft threatens further
disruption to Embassy operations and damage to important
relationships leading into several high-level visits
beginning the week of June 22.

Embassy Support Flight Cancellation
- - -


3. (SBU) The Embassy received an email June 9 from Delhi
International Airport Limited (DIAL),the private entity
running commercial operations at Indira Gandhi International
airport (IGI),indicating that it would no longer extend
credit for fees levied on U.S. Government state aircraft.
The message indicated that absent the settlement of
outstanding dues, the U.S. Air Force could only operate from
IGI Airport "on (a) cash and carry basis with immediate
effect." This put at risk an Embassy support flight due to
arrive June 14. Following repeated inquiries to Ministry of
External Affairs (MEA) Joint Secretary for the Americas
Gaitri Kumar and her staff June 9-12, Kumar agreed on June 12
to ask DIAL to extend credit for the June 14 flight.
Reinforcing this conclusion, one member of Kumar's staff
assured POLoff June 12 that the flight would not be impeded,
but said he could not provide a written guarantee. DIAL
separately confirmed to ECONoff June 12 that it would
continue to permit flights to land if instructed to do so by
MEA, as had been the ad hoc arrangement for some time.


4. (SBU) Nevertheless, on June 13 DIAL said it would extend
credit for the June 14 flight, but asked the Defense Attache
to provide a letter stating that the Embassy would accept
responsibility for all landing fees for that particular
flight. The Defense Attache replied that he was not
authorized to provide such a letter. Kumar then told the
A/DCM the afternoon of June 13 that the only DIAL official
authorized to reinstate credit for the flight was not
available on a Saturday, adding that in any case MEA viewed
the issue between the Embassy and DIAL as a private
commercial matter and that MEA was not obliged to intervene.
(Comment: It is not clear whether Kumar's characterization of
the issue as a commercial matter was pursuant to a deliberate
new MEA policy or was merely a deflection from her inability
to fix the problem. End Comment.) Absent effective MEA
intervention with DIAL or the authorization to pay any fees,
the Embassy recommended the cancellation of the June 14
support flight on June 13 at approximately 6 pm.


5. (SBU) The Airports Authority of India and
privately-operated Indian airports claim that the U.S.
Government owes approximately $171,378 in unpaid fees. Of
this total, Embassy New Delhi DAO calculates that DIAL is
owed only $64,606 in legitimate fees, or an average of about
$1,219 per flight. The Embassy expects the arrival of a USG
aircraft carrying high-level visitors the week of June 22,
with further visits planned for July.

Action Request and Proposed Interim Solutions
- - -


6. (SBU) ACTION REQUEST: Taking into consideration the
uncertainty of the current ad hoc arrangements as illustrated
by the June 14 flight cancellation and the volume of
important U.S. Government business that depends on reliable

NEW DELHI 00001251 002 OF 002


access by USG state aircraft, the Embassy no longer feels
that the status quo is sustainable. Post requests that the
Department and Interagency revisit this issue with renewed
urgency to explore reliable interim arrangements prior to
high-level visits due later this month and next month. Post
recommends the following way forward (parts originally
proposed ref A) to ensure USG flights are not disrupted in
the short term while a more comprehensive solution is sought:


A. Post requests permission to pay -- before high-level
visits expected the week of June 22 -- outstanding bills
which in our view are payable under ref B's guidance for
landing and commercial side parking fees for DIAL and other
commercial entities in India as necessary to facilitate USG
business (Mumbai International Airport Ltd, New Bangalore
Airport, New Hyderabad Airport, and Cochin Airport). An MEA
contact repeated June 12 his off-the-record suggestion that
payment of the past dues to DIAL would be a signal of our
intention to resolve the longer-term issue and prevent
further action by the GOI or any other commercial provider
throughout India.


B. Post recommends a team of policy and legal experts from
Washington request to meet with Indian authorities on billing
of aviation fees at the earliest opportunity to address the
differences under ref B policy. From the GOI perspective,
concrete progress on a process to resolve the larger issue
could help to sustain the viability of an interim solution.


C. Post continues to oppose the new Indian policy (ref C)
that only exempts USG flights from payment if "invited."
However, Post increasingly views seeking invitations as less
onerous than the unpredictable disruption of important USG
business, and requests Department authorization to seek
invitations for VIP visitors in limited circumstances.
(Note: MEA has made clear that it now has a formal policy
for the first time and intends to apply it scrupulously; MEA
does not therefore regard previous visits that may or may not
have received formal invitations prior to the establishment
of its current policy as precedent-setting. Furthermore, the
GOI rarely extends formal invitations except to Heads of
State and, occassionally, to the Secretary of State. For
instance, former Secretary Rice did not receive a formal
invitation -- for MEA's purposes -- for her two visits in the
fall of 2008. End Note.)


D. DIAL's "cash and carry" option suggests that it would
accept payment for individual flights, leaving the
outstanding fees to be addressed separately. This would seem
to permit an approach proposed in interim guidance Post
received March 19 that the Embassy could pay for the
individual flight, mark the bill "paid under protest," and
send it back to Washington (per instructions in the foreign
clearance guide). Under this arrangement, Post would be
responsible for payment of DIAL fees before takeoff. Post
recognizes that this is a last resort, but requests guidance
on whether this is a genuine option in exceptional cases.


7. (SBU) If none of these options is feasible, Post
recommends that the Department consider canceling a
high-level visit to illustrate that the GOI -- and the MEA in
particular -- will pay a price for its failure to extend the
courtesy of reliable access for visits of mutual benefit
pending final resolution of our differences on this issue.
END ACTION REQUEST.


BURLEIGH