RICE MEETS WITH INDIAN MINISTER OF STATE FOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000946 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/16/2019 TAGS: PARM PHUM UNSC IN SUBJECT: RICE MEETS WITH INDIAN MINISTER OF STATE FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS THAROOR Classified By: Ambassador Rice for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) Summary: During a meeting with Ambassador Rice on October 16, Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor raised India's hope that the U.S. would continue working with India on the convention on counterterrorism. The two also discussed the Goldstone Report, Security Council reform and India's stance on the NPT. Tharoor noted that India is currently recalibrating its approach on many issues and hoped the U.S. would recognize India's more nuanced perspective at the UN. Both restated the value of the U.S.-India partnership bilaterally and at the UN, and agreed on the need to find more areas for cooperation. End Summary. ¶2. (C) Minister of State for External Affairs Tharoor met with Ambassador Rice on October 16 and said he hoped the U.S. and India would continue to work together on the draft convention on counterterrorism. Tharoor acknowledged some holdouts, which would require additional work, including Egypt and Pakistan, noting that he asked Secretary-General Ban to use his "moral authority" to work on the Egyptians. Ambassador Rice assured Tharoor that the U.S is keen to work together on the convention, but underscored the importance of finding additional areas for cooperation, including the Goldstone Report. ¶3. (C) Regarding the Goldstone Report, Tharoor commented that India gave a statement in Geneva on October 15 and an explanation of vote on October 16 "not completely consistent" with its vote, which alluded to problems in the report. However, in the end India voted with the NAM. Tharoor commented that leaning too heavily on the PA not to pursue the Goldstone Report would ultimately hurt Palestinian President Abbas, but said India would do a "post-mortem" in New Delhi. Rice commented that the issue would likely move to New York for consideration in the Security Council and the General Assembly and suggested with good humor that "maybe India would get it right the second time around." ¶4. (C) Tharoor said he hoped the United States had taken a "long, hard look" at its stance on Security Council reform. He remarked that those who "can't sit at the high table, will disrespect it," and sought the U.S. perspective on how to fix this. Rice reiterated U.S. policy on UNSC reform, stressing that any permanent member state aspirant must show a strong record of contributing to the maintenance of international peace and security consistent with the UN Charter. Rice said India's strengths are its democracy, as well as its role in the region and its enormous contribution to peace and security. She emphasized that the U.S. did not support extending veto privileges and must ensure that expansion does not negatively effect the Council's efficiency or effectiveness. ¶5. (C) Rice said that India's stance on the NPT and CTBT causes Russia and China "heartburn." Tharoor replied that India dislikes the NPT because it enforces a system of haves and have nots. "India's nuclear capacity is indigenous," he said, "we won't export it and don't like others who do; our nonproliferation record is good." On CTBT, Tharoor commented that India is not the only holdout, and would not be the last holdout. Rice stressed that the Obama administration has made nonproliferation and ratification of CTBT a clear priority. Responding to Rice's question on next steps, Tharoor suggested that rules be drawn up that are de-linked from the "coincidental cut-off date of 1968." (Note: the NPT was opened for signature on July 1, 1968. End note.) Tharoor said that India could find ways to accommodate the overall approach, but would not unilaterally disarm "for reasons that are well known." ¶6. (C) Speaking more generally about the atmosphere at the UN, Rice commented that some logjams were easing and there seemed to be a better mood, using increased cooperation and engagement in the First Committee as an example. Rice noted that some fault lines persist, such as human rights and protection of civilians, especially in cases like Burma, Zimbabwe and Sudan. Rice urged India, as a leading democracy, to lend support in these areas. Tharoor responded that the Government of India is "readjusting and recalibrating its approach to many issues, adding that he hoped the U.S. would find India's perspective more nuanced. Rice