Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09NEWDELHI674
2009-04-06 14:46:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy New Delhi
Cable title:
INDIAN RESPONSE TO NORTH KOREAN TAEPO-DONG 2
how-toVZCZCXRO0525 OO RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHDBU RUEHLH RUEHPW DE RUEHNE #0674 0961446 ZNY CCCCC ZZH O 061446Z APR 09 FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6048 INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 7529 RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 6168 RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 3260 RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 1493 RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 6221 RHMFISS/HQ USNORTHCOM CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN AFS CO RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC RUEIDN/DNI WASHINGTON DC RHMFISS/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
C O N F I D E N T I A L NEW DELHI 000674
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/06/2019
TAGS: PREL PARM KNNP KN IN
SUBJECT: INDIAN RESPONSE TO NORTH KOREAN TAEPO-DONG 2
LAUNCH: CONCERN, BUT NOT CLEAR CUT CONDEMNATION
REF: STATE 33031
Classified By: PolCouns Ted Osius for Reasons 1.4 (B, D)
C O N F I D E N T I A L NEW DELHI 000674
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/06/2019
TAGS: PREL PARM KNNP KN IN
SUBJECT: INDIAN RESPONSE TO NORTH KOREAN TAEPO-DONG 2
LAUNCH: CONCERN, BUT NOT CLEAR CUT CONDEMNATION
REF: STATE 33031
Classified By: PolCouns Ted Osius for Reasons 1.4 (B, D)
1. (C) During his introductory April 6 meetings at the
Foreign Ministry, Charge Burleigh delivered reftel points to
Indian Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and Joint
Secretary Gaitri Kumar (Americas),providing both officials
with copies of the White House statement. The Charge urged
the GoI to issue a more definitive condemnation of the
missile launch, which he characterized as a violation of UN
Security Council resolutions. Menon stated that India wants
to understand what impact the launch will have on Six-Party
Talks. Charge offered to seek answers to any factual
questions the GOI wishes to pose.
2. (U) Post notes that the Indian media has given significant
coverage of the missile launch, noting the dilemma for Indian
policymakers. On the one hand, Indian officials readily
condemn North Korea's proliferation record -- and
particularly its links to Pakistan. As Foreign Ministry
Mukherjee was quoted as saying, India is "totally in
agreement that those who were signatories to the NPT must
fulfill their obligations." However, India has consistently
maintained that because it never signed the NPT, it is not
bound to its "discriminatory" requirements. Noting the
DPRK's withdrawal from the NPT, India has refused to take a
clear stand on North Korea's responsibilities. India's own
experience with UNSC Resolution 1172, which called on Delhi
and Islamabad to cease development of ballistic missile
capabilities for delivering nuclear weapons in the wake of
the 1998 nuclear tests, has led it to reject such resolutions
for being prescriptive and an infringement on sovereignty --
not unlike Pyongyang's current claims. The left-leaning
Hindu newspaper described UNSCR 1172 as an "over-reach" of
the Security Council.
3. (U) Reflecting the balancing act Delhi is trying to carry
out, the External Affairs Ministry's official spokesperson on
April 6, in response to a question, stated "While it is for
the Security Council to come to a conclusion on the nature of
the event and its relationship to its earlier resolutions, we
hope that responses by all concerned will be restrained and
proportionate."
BURLEIGH
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/06/2019
TAGS: PREL PARM KNNP KN IN
SUBJECT: INDIAN RESPONSE TO NORTH KOREAN TAEPO-DONG 2
LAUNCH: CONCERN, BUT NOT CLEAR CUT CONDEMNATION
REF: STATE 33031
Classified By: PolCouns Ted Osius for Reasons 1.4 (B, D)
1. (C) During his introductory April 6 meetings at the
Foreign Ministry, Charge Burleigh delivered reftel points to
Indian Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and Joint
Secretary Gaitri Kumar (Americas),providing both officials
with copies of the White House statement. The Charge urged
the GoI to issue a more definitive condemnation of the
missile launch, which he characterized as a violation of UN
Security Council resolutions. Menon stated that India wants
to understand what impact the launch will have on Six-Party
Talks. Charge offered to seek answers to any factual
questions the GOI wishes to pose.
2. (U) Post notes that the Indian media has given significant
coverage of the missile launch, noting the dilemma for Indian
policymakers. On the one hand, Indian officials readily
condemn North Korea's proliferation record -- and
particularly its links to Pakistan. As Foreign Ministry
Mukherjee was quoted as saying, India is "totally in
agreement that those who were signatories to the NPT must
fulfill their obligations." However, India has consistently
maintained that because it never signed the NPT, it is not
bound to its "discriminatory" requirements. Noting the
DPRK's withdrawal from the NPT, India has refused to take a
clear stand on North Korea's responsibilities. India's own
experience with UNSC Resolution 1172, which called on Delhi
and Islamabad to cease development of ballistic missile
capabilities for delivering nuclear weapons in the wake of
the 1998 nuclear tests, has led it to reject such resolutions
for being prescriptive and an infringement on sovereignty --
not unlike Pyongyang's current claims. The left-leaning
Hindu newspaper described UNSCR 1172 as an "over-reach" of
the Security Council.
3. (U) Reflecting the balancing act Delhi is trying to carry
out, the External Affairs Ministry's official spokesperson on
April 6, in response to a question, stated "While it is for
the Security Council to come to a conclusion on the nature of
the event and its relationship to its earlier resolutions, we
hope that responses by all concerned will be restrained and
proportionate."
BURLEIGH