INL DAS VERVILLE AND BREAKING THE DEADLOCK ON A NEW

UNCLAS UNVIE VIENNA 000467

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PGOV KCRM KCOR UN AU
SUBJECT: INL DAS VERVILLE AND BREAKING THE DEADLOCK ON A NEW
ANTICORRUPTION REVIEW MECHANISM

REF: UNVIE VIENNA 000429

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


1. In a whirlwind Vienna tour, INL DAS Elizabeth Verville hosted
several meetings with key delegations in an effort to break the
deadlock on creating a new anti-corruption review mechanism (reftel)
for the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC). In meetings with
Ambassadors from the key obstructionist countries - China, Russia,
Pakistan and Egypt- DAS Verville stressed the urgency of adopting
terms of reference for the new mechanism during the November 9-13
3rd meeting of the UNCAC Conference of the States Parties (COSP) in
Doha, Qatar. After exploring why these countries refuse to join the
vast majority of States Parties which desire a strong and
transparent mechanism that would include country visits, publication
of reports, involvement of civil society and the use of all
available information during the course of reviews, DAS Verville
held a meeting with key "like-minded" governments - Sweden, France,
Austria, Peru, Mexico, Argentina, and Canada - to coordinate a
strategy for moving forward in unison and trying to bring the few
reluctant countries into the fold as the negotiations enter their
final stages. END SUMMARY

--------------
BREAKING THE DEADLOCK
--------------


2. On September 28-29, while in Vienna to chair formal meetings
related to the UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime
(septel) INL DAS Elizabeth Verville organized a series of meetings
to attempt to break the deadlock in current negotiations to create a
new mechanism to review implementation of UNCAC. The meetings helped
solidify a U.S.-created bloc of "like-minded" countries that are
trying to identify common negotiating positions. The meetings also
sent a clear message to four key reluctant countries - Egypt,
Pakistan, Russia and China - that failure is not an option when the
negotiations culminate at the November 9-13 3rd UNCAC COSP in Doha.

--------------
PRODDING RELUCTANT COUNTRIES
--------------


3. DAS Verville first met with Russian Ambassador Alexander
Zmeyevskiy and highlighted the recent G-20 statement calling for an
"inclusive, transparent and effective" UNCAC review mechanism. She
emphasized the importance of coming to agreement in Doha to the
credibility of the UNCAC and our international anticorruption
efforts. The Russian Ambassador remarked that Russia shared the
U.S. goal of finalizing terms of reference in Doha for a new peer
review mechanism, but was concerned about the role of NGO's in the
work of the mechanism. Russia was particularly concerned with the
possibility that some countries might appoint representatives of
NGO's to represent them on the expert team to review other
countries. To preclude having NGO representatives review Russia,
Moscow was requesting that UNODC maintain a list of experts for each
country that would participate in reviews. Ambassador Zmeyevskiy
also shared Russian concerns about country visits, which, like NGO
participation, he felt were not commonly found in other treaty
review mechanisms. DAS Verville stressed that States Parties had
long ago committed to developing a constructive mechanism that will
be useful and not seek to embarrass countries. Zmeyevskiy and DAS
Verville agreed to meet at the working level to try to resolve
differences. (COMMENT: The ability of countries to appoint NGOs to
the review teams is particularly important to EU countries. END
COMMENT)


4. In her meeting with Egyptian Ambassador Ehab Fawzy and Counsellor
Ayman Elgammal, DAS Verville explored Egypt's review mechanism
concerns. Elgammal emphasized that his delegation sought to limit
the participation of NGO's in what they consider an
intergovernmental peer review mechanism. While Egypt also wants to
limit the type of information that would be considered during any
review (only information provided by the country under review),
Elgammal noted that one potential compromise would be to omit in the
terms of reference any discussion on sources of information that
could be used during the course of reviews. He also reiterated
Egypt's insistence that the core activities of the mechanism be
funded via the UN Regular Budget, with possible exceptions for
technical assistance and country visit activity. DAS Verville noted
that while their meeting was not a negotiating session, she
appreciated the frank outline of Egypt's position and hoped the
dialogue could continue in advance of Doha. She further highlighted
the importance of establishing an inclusive, transparent and
effective review mechanism, which included all sources of
information, rather than limiting the process to information
provided by governments. On the issue of funding, DAS Verville

stressed a practical approach, noting that an increase in the UN
Regular Budget would not be possible in the short term, given that
UNODC's Regular Budget request for the biennium 2010-2011 had
already been submitted to New York. She also noted that many States
Parties would come forward with voluntary contributions if the end
mechanism adopted proved to be inclusive, transparent, and
effective.


5. DAS Verville met on September 29 with Chinese Ambassador Hu
Xiaodi, Counsellor Chen Peijie and two organized crime experts
visiting from Bejing, and once again called their attention to the
pledge of the G-20 to develop an inclusive, transparent and
effective mechanism. Given the well established and accepted role
of civil society in the UNCAC and our anticorruption efforts, DAS
Verville stressed to the Chinese Ambassador, it would make a
"mockery" of the UNCAC and our review efforts if we did not find a
useful way to integrate civil society into our review work.
Ambassador Xiaodi admitted that he was relatively new in Vienna, but
knew that countries had been negotiating for some time on the new
review mechanism. He claimed that China is also committed to
developing a useful mechanism, but wanted a mechanism where
governments could feel comfortable in discussing their
implementation of UNCAC. DAS Verville pointed to the UNCAC Pilot
Review Program, involving 29 countries, which contained various
characteristics that China opposed, such as country visits and
publication of final reports, as an example that States Parties had
nothing to fear from a transparent review process. Counsellor Chen
replied that the pilot program was voluntary, and countries needed
to be more careful about how to design a mandatory review mechanism
that would involve all States Parties. DAS Verville urged China to
join the large number of countries that want a transparent and
useful mechanism adopted at Doha.


6. In her meeting with Pakistan Ambassador Khurshid Anwar and Third
Secretary Usman Jadoon, DAS Verville stressed the need for a
transparent mechanism, which is a key concept behind the fight
against corruption. Ambassador Khurshid wondered if state parties
had time to overcome our differences before Doha; DAS Verville
opined that it was possible if we shared a "joint vision" for a
transparent mechanism. Ambassador Khurshid said that transparency
is a "good thing," but it was also critical to bring "reluctant"
countries into the fold. He noted his work with a Central Asian
regional mechanism while posted in Tehran, and said that they had
been able to design something useful that had, at the same time,
ensured all countries were comfortable with the organization. He
further noted the suspicions of NGO's, which are not always
objective, and felt that we should not give NGO's a disproportionate
role in the review process. DAS Verville urged Pakistan to look for
compromises on the disputed issues in order to maintain the
credibility of any new review mechanism. She noted that just that
morning she had read an article detailing Pakistan's corruption
problems. Detrimental information that could affect Pakistan's
standing is already out there, DAV Verville stressed. This review
mechanism offers Pakistan a chance for some help.

--------------
RALLYING "LIKE-MINDED" COUNTRIES
--------------


7. On September 29, DAS Verville hosted a lunch with key
"like-minded" countries: Sweden, Argentina, Canada, France, Peru,
Mexico, and Austria. All agreed that, given the complexities of the
issues, it was crucial to enter Doha with some type of agreement
among like-minded and reluctant countries. The like-minded group
pledged to develop potential credible compromises on the six major
disputed issues (composition of review teams, sources of
information, country visits, publication of reports, role of the
Implementation Review Group, and financing) and to also identify
redlines on each issue. Many attendees thanked DAS Verville for
sending a message to the local ambassadors of the "reluctant"
countries, as well as for U.S. plans to reach out to these same
governments in Washington and in capitals. All agreed that it would
be important to approach reluctant countries at the highest levels
in capitals, and to possibly coordinate our in-country demarches.

--------------
STRATEGIZING WITH UNODC CHIEF COSTA
--------------


8. On September 29, DAS Verville and Ambassador Glyn Davies met with
UNODC Executive Director Costa to demonstrate U.S. commitment to
developing an UNCAC review mechanism. In this regard, DAS Verville
outlined U.S. outreach efforts with reluctant countries, including
meetings with Vienna-based ambassadors, planned demarches via
capitals and outreach in Washington. She also noted the work of the
like-minded group to develop a possible compromise package. Costa
welcomed these efforts and noted that the UN Secretary General was
contemplating whether he might also write to all governments in

order to stress the importance of adopting a review mechanism in
Doha. Costa also raised the specter of potentially calling for a
vote - something which has yet to be done in the context of
Vienna-based anti-crime work - and suggested this might be necessary
in order to reach agreement on a review mechanism. DAS Verville
emphasized her reluctance to use this option and to consider it only
as a last resort, noting that the goal should be to create a
mechanism that had buy-in from all States Parties.


9. On the margins of the meeting, DAS Verville urged Costa to fill
the vacant D-2 position as Director for the Division of Treaty
Affairs. If the position remains vacant for one year (until March
2010),New York has the option of withdrawing it. Costa said that
the position was frozen. He noted that he "has his pulse" on
whether New York would withdraw the position and indicated he would
take action to prevent this from occurring.


--------------
COMMENTS
--------------


10. We are heartened by the close cooperation exhibited by a large
group of like-minded countries, and the progress in developing joint
compromises and strategies. DAS Verville apparently was the first
senior diplomat to approach China, Russia, Egypt and Pakistan at the
ambassadorial level in Vienna on the topic of the mechanism; she was
able to send a strong message about the urgent need to reach
agreement in Doha. However, we remain concerned that, with little
time until Doha, reluctant countries continue to advocate for a
review mechanism that lacks critical elements of transparency (no
site visits, limits on information that can be used during reviews,
and elimination of any role for civil society) and feel that the
like-minded countries areare not addressing their concerns. Six
informal negotiation sessions have been scheduled in Vienna prior to
November, and we will continue to work closely with the like-minded
countries to develop viable compromises that do not adversely affect
the integrity or transparency of any new review mechanism. At the
same time, we will reach out in capitals and in Washington to China,
Russia, Egypt and Pakistan, and will coordinate with Sweden (EU
chair) and other like-minded countries during the course of our
outreach, as well as working with the interagency, to take advantage
of other high-level opportunities to make the point that it is in
all state parties' interest to have a strong and transparent review
mechanism. END COMMENTS

DAVIES