US embassy cable - 04BRUSSELS3207

C O N F I D E N T I A L BRUSSELS 003207 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/28/2014 
TAGS: PTER, KT, NP, EUN, USEU BRUSSELS 
SUBJECT: MAOIST VIOLENCE IN NEPAL: NO EU CLEARINGHOUSE 
ACTION YET 
 
REF: STATE 159970 
 
Classified By: Political Officer Maren Smith for reasons 1.4 (b/d). 
 
1. (C) We met on July 28 with Mario Ferrucci, deputy head of 
the India, Nepal, and Bhutan unit in the Commission's 
External Relations directorate, to discuss reftel points.  He 
said that UK pressure for designating the Maoists as a 
terrorist organization was "a constant" in EU discussions, 
most recently at the July 22 COREPER meeting.  According to 
Ferrucci -- who admitted that the Commission has no role in 
the designation decision but is closely following the debate 
-- the EU's position has not changed due to the "legitimate 
possibility" that the peace process could take off.  It would 
not help, he said, to add the Maoists to the list of 
terrorist groups at this point.  Ferrucci also questioned 
whether a freeze on Maoist assets in Europe -- which he 
claimed were minimal -- would really have much of an effect 
on the group's activities. 
 
2. (C) Ferrucci confirmed that the Dutch Presidency was 
drafting a strong statement intended to send a parallel 
message, warning the Nepalese government to make progress on 
development, good governance, and human rights reforms while 
also threatening the Maoists with being added to the list of 
terrorist groups if they did not support peace talks.  The EU 
has agreed to review progress and reconsider designation "by 
the end of the year," according to Ferrucci. 
 
3. (C) We also discussed points on July 27 with British and 
Dutch contacts, who -- like Ferrucci -- noted that some 
member states were concerned that freezing assets now would 
hurt the peace process.  The Council will revisit the issue 
in September.  According to British diplomat Anna Clunes, the 
Germans have also argued that the Maoists do not meet the EU 
criteria for designation because no competent (judicial) 
authority has started an investigation or legal proceeding. 
She suggested that it might be useful for the U.S. and the UK 
to jointly lobby the Germans on this particular question in 
September.