UNSC REFORM: CHINA NOT READY FOR P-5 MINISTERIAL

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000325 SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR USUN/W AND IO/UNP; NSC FOR POWER E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/27/2019 TAGS: PREL KUNR UNGA UNSC CH FR UK RS IT SUBJECT: UNSC REFORM: CHINA NOT READY FOR P-5 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ON SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM Classified By: Ambassador Alex D. Wolff for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) UK Deputy Perm Rep Pierce hosted a P-5 meeting to discuss whether a statement could be released following the planned P-5 Foreign Ministers' discussion in London on Security Council expansion. She asked if other P-5 members could agree with the idea of issuing a statement on the subject and whether the UK text was a basis for such a statement. Chinese Deputy Perm Rep Liu said China would be pleased to participate in the London meeting (at the Deputy Foreign Minister-level) but was opposed to a P-5 statement on the subject. When pressed, Liu stated that China believes it is too early for such a statement and it would set the P-5 up as a target for attack, which is not a risk at present, by other groups during intergovernmental negotiations in New York. He urged his P-5 counterparts to wait and use a statement at a later date when it could serve as an appropriate stimulus. Now was not such a time. Nevertheless, Liu said China is willing to exchange views on the subject in the P-5 and believes it is important to reach a common understanding about what permanent members are willing to support. ¶2. (C) French Deputy Perm Rep Lacroix said that France would welcome a P-5 statement and wondered if having a meeting and not issuing a statement might open the P-5 to criticism. Nonetheless, in view of the Chinese position, Lacroix thought it did not make sense to discuss the text. Russian Deputy Perm Rep Dolgov said Russia welcomes the meeting in London and, if there is agreement within the P-5 on a statement, Russia would be willing to engage with comments for such a statement. He said that he had no instructions to push for a statement but it had to have the support of the entire P-5. Ambassador Wolff said that the U.S. could support a text that is agreed by all of the P-5 and that we could also engage with comments on a text. He shared that the Italians have heard of the P-5 meeting in London and were concerned that any P-5 statement, given the P-5's unique role, might unduly tilt the intergovernmental negotiating process before it plays out. (Comment: Italian Perm Rep Terzi called Ambassador Wolff before the meeting and expressed deep concern about a P-5 statement. He said that Italy would be demarching P-5 members in capitals. Terzi subsequently sent a letter to Ambassador Rice, which he said was at the instruction of his minister. See para 4. End comment.) ¶3. (C) Pierce asked Liu to advise Beijing that the other four members of the P-5 could support a P-5 statement and ask if Beijing is prepared to reconsider and engage on a "short and bland" statement of P-5 intention. Russian DPR Dolgov told Ambassador Wolff after the meeting that he thought the Chinese might come on board for a brief, nonsubstantive statement at the Foreign Ministers' meeting itself. ¶4. (SBU) Begin text of letter from Italian Perm Rep Terzi to Ambassador Rice: Excellency, Dear Susan, I have this morning received urgent instructions from my Minister, the Hon. Franco Frattini, to convey through You (sic) to the US Government our deep concern about an initiative, which has been proposed for a P5 Ministerial statement on the reform of the Security Council. It is our understanding that a UK draft is currently discussed (sic) among the P5 Missions in New York, implying that the negotiations underway in the informal plenary session of the General Assembly should aim at an "interim" or "intermediate" solution for the SC reform. My Government is concerned by the unforeseeable direction that a statement of this kind could impress on the overall negotiating process. The discussion on the three main elements, among the five recognized by all as the crucial matters for the negotiation, has generated an intense flow of proposals which need to be further tested and compared among the different parties which have shown specific interest in the discussion. As shown by the Ministerial meeting in Rome which took place at the initiative of Minister Frattini last February, and by the subsequent positions expressed in the General Assembly, Italy, as many other Member States, has advanced specific and innovative proposals aimed at facilitating a compromise solution. A formal statement by the P5 which may take side, or instrumentally considered to do so, for positions which need to be thoroughly examined and discussed, could expose the whole process to the serious risk of being tilted toward an unforeseeable direction. The recognized authority of the P5 will be of fundamental help throughout the process, by encouraging the negotiators to pursue the established schedule in a spirit of moderation, full transparency and common purpose towards a solution which can garner the widest possible political acceptance by member States, rather than supporting and promoting a prematurely specified outcome for the Security Council reform. I would like to express my deep appreciation for Your (sic) personal attention in this matter. With my best regards, Yours very truly, Giulio Terzi End text. Wolff