US embassy cable - 04COLOMBO668

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 000668 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR SA, SA/INS, IO, IO/T 
 
E.O. 12958:    DECL:  04-20-14 
TAGS: SNAR, AORC, PREL, CE, IO 
SUBJECT:  Colombo Plan:  How do we deal with arrears? 
 
Refs:  (A) SA/INS-Colombo 04/07/04 class email 
-      (B) Colombo-IO/T 03/25/04 class email 
-      (C) Colombo 301, and previous 
 
(U) Classified by Ambassador Jeffrey J. Lunstead. 
Reasons 1.5 (b,d). 
 
1.  (U) This is an Action Request -- Please see 
Para six. 
 
2.  (C) Poloff attended the bimonthly meeting of the 
Colombo Plan Council on April 7.  On the margins of the 
meeting, poloff spoke to Colombo Plan Secretary General 
K. Kanjanapipatkul and reiterated the USG position that 
we would not be able to support the proposed amendment 
to the Colombo Plan constitution that would restrict 
training opportunities for members in arrears (per Ref 
A).  In explaining the USG's position, Poloff noted -- 
again per Ref A -- that the U.S. held in high regard the 
Colombo Plan's efforts in the area of drug awareness and 
demand reduction, and would not want countries to be 
prohibited from participating in such beneficial 
programs. 
 
3.  (C) In response, the Secretary General requested 
that the USG consider the following two suggestions on 
how to handle the matter: 
 
-- Would the U.S. consider a statement for the record 
citing its opposition to the amendment as an "official 
view," but not obstructing the consensus of the other 25 
member countries to support the amendment? 
 
or: 
 
-- Would the U.S. consider officially offering an 
alternative to the proposed training sanctions 
amendment?  The Secretary General felt such an effort by 
the U.S. would be welcomed by other member countries. 
Lack of a viable alternative would effectively terminate 
the discussion and leave Council members wondering how 
next to address the issue of countries in arrears. 
 
4.  (C) COMMENT:  As currently designed, the proposed 
amendment restricts a member country's access to 
training opportunities if it is four or more years in 
arrears of its annual dues (see Ref C).  Participation 
in training would be restricted until a partial payment 
of arrears was made.  As reviewed in Refs, Mission 
believes that member states have given careful 
consideration to the issue and developed a 
straightforward method for addressing the problem of 
arrears.  (Restricting training opportunities appears to 
be the sole way for the organization to impact countries 
not paying their share of the annual dues.)  Other forms 
of sanctions were discussed in the Council and deemed 
not effective, including those related to the suspension 
of voting rights.  In fact, all decisions are taken by 
consensus, and there are no provisions in the 
constitution for formal voting.  Hence a suspension in 
voting rights, as suggested by the Department, would 
have no practical effect, since there are no votes. 
 
5.  (C) COMMENT (Continued):  The Secretary General's 
first suggestion that the USG officially voice non- 
support yet not prohibit the majority view to implement 
the amendment seems to be a possible way out of the 
quandary.  With our official view on record, the U.S. 
would remain capable of monitoring the consequences of 
the amendment and have standing within the Council 
should an issue arise concerning its implementation. 
 
6.  (C) COMMENT (Continued):  At present, the United 
States is the only Council member voicing opposition to 
the proposed amendment.  Even states such as Indonesia, 
which would be subject to the new sanctions because it 
is currently in arrears, are in support of the proposed 
amendment.  It is also distinctly in the US interest to 
motivate countries to pay their dues.  The US 
contributes money for counter-narcotics programs under 
the Drug Advisory Program, administered by the 
Secretariat.  Member dues are the Secretariat's only 
 
SIPDIS 
source of income.  The Secretariat tells us that non- 
payment of dues will soon damage their ability to 
function effectively.  END COMMENT. 
 
7.  (C) ACTION REQUEST:  We understand the concern that 
a financial restriction could set an unwelcome precedent 
for other international organizations.  The proposed 
course of action would at least partially deal with this 
problem.  The US could express its opposition to such 
measures in principle, but state it would not oppose 
consensus.  Mission requests that the Department review 
this matter further.  If such a stance is not supported 
by the Department, Mission then further requests that 
the Department consider proposing an alternative means 
for sanctioning member states who are four or more years 
in arrears on their annual dues.  The next opportunity 
for the U.S. to finalize its position is at the next 
Council meeting, scheduled for July 7, 2004.  (Note: 
The Colombo plan is holding is biennial Consultative 
Committee Meeting in Tehran from June 14-16, 2004.  Due 
to the fact that the meeting is in Tehran, the USG will 
not be in attendance.)  END ACTION REQUEST. 
 
8.  (U) Minimize considered. 
 
LUNSTEAD