US embassy cable - 05PARIS298

UNCLAS PARIS 000298 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR S/GAC PPEARSON, OES/IHA; HHS FOR WSTEIGER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KHIV, EAID, TBIO, FR 
SUBJECT: BROADENING GLOBAL FUND ELIGIBILITY - FRENCH CHANGE 
HEART 
 
REF: SECSTATE 6462 
 
1.  (SBU)  On January 12, EST Counselor contacted Dr. 
Frederic Goyet, responsible for the Division of Health and 
Social Development, Bureau of Development and Technical 
Cooperation, MFA, to inform him of the U.S. plan to seek a 
change in the guidelines for the Global Fund to permit a 
wider range of applications from upper-middle income (UMI) 
countries.  EST Counselor expressed U.S. appreciation for the 
stance taken by Ambassador Guigaz at the June Fund Board 
Meeting.  In the spirit of the Dublin Conference Guigaz had 
supported a broadening of the guidelines.  Additionally, EST 
Counselor urged the French to "maintain that position" in 
light of the upcoming telephone conference meeting of the 
Portfolio Management and Procurement Committee (PMPC). 
 
2.  (SBU)  In response, Goyet agreed with EST Counselor that 
the "Global Fund was always supposed to be global."  In 
addition, he said there was definitely a need for additional 
assistance in addressing pandemics in a number of the UMI 
countries.  However, he added that the question of opening 
the eligibility criteria for UMI countries raised "not only 
theoretical questions, but also problems of prioritization 
and availability of funds."  He asked to consider the issue 
further with Ambassador Guigaz.  EST Counselor provided him 
with the non paper contained in para 16 reftel. 
 
3.  (SBU)  On January 14, Goyet replied that after having 
discussed the issue with Ambassador Guigaz that at this time 
the French side considered it not desirable to modify the 
criteria for eligibility of the UMI countries.  France, like 
the U.S., he said, is very concerned about the evolution of 
AIDs and tuberculosis pandemics, even Malaria, in the UMI 
countries of Latin America and Eastern Europe.  But, the 
current level of resources in the Fund requires that a choice 
be made "of prioritization and focus on the poorest 
countries."  As far as France was concerned, he continued, 
the success of the upcoming replenishment mechanism would be 
a precondition for flexibility in the eligibility criteria of 
the Fund. EST Counselor asked what had occasioned this change 
of policy.  Goyet restated that while France is concerned 
about the UMI countries, everything rests on the success of 
the reconstitution of Fund resources in 2005. 
Leach