US embassy cable - 05NEWDELHI2606

S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 002606 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/05/2015 
TAGS: PHUM, PREL, PTER, IN, PK, Human Rights 
SUBJECT: ICRC FRUSTRATED WITH INDIAN GOVERNMENT 
 
 
Classified By: DCM Robert O. Blake, Jr. for Reasons 1.4 (B, D) 
 
1.  (S) Summary: In a April 1 confidential briefing on GOI 
detention centers in Kashmir, ICRC Deputy Head of Delegation 
described to D/Polcouns torture methods and relatively stable 
trend lines of prisoner abuses by Indian security forces, 
based on data derived from 1491 interviews with detainees 
during 2002-2004.  The continued ill-treatment of detainees, 
despite longstanding ICRC-GOI dialogue, have led the ICRC to 
conclude that the New Delhi condones torture.  The MEA/MHA 
recently protested ICRC presence and activities in J&K, and 
keeps the organization in legal limbo, but allows their 
operations to continue.  Security forces in J&K are open to 
ICRC seminars in international humanitarian law (IHL).  ICRC 
stressed that it was not asking for USG action, but may seek 
to mobilize support in the future, if its relations with the 
GOI do not improve.  Separately, the media reported that COAS 
LTG JJ Singh put human rights issues at the center of an 
April 4 conference of army commanders.  End Summary. 
 
2.  (S) On April 1, ICRC Deputy Head of Delegation Maarten 
Merkelbach (strictly protect) gave us a confidential briefing 
on the ICRC Kashmir program, the first such detailed and 
organized presentation Embassy has received in a number of 
years.  The last two Heads of Delegation have limited the 
information they have exchanged with us to general comments 
on the human rights situation in Kashmir and the Northeast 
"in order to respect their confidentiality agreement with the 
GOI," with which relations have been strained.  Merkelbach 
intimated that the reason he was departing from this practice 
was ICRC annoyance with the GOI, and his view that the USG 
would be an ally in ICRC attempts to regularize its status in 
India.  The UK, Holland, and France would receive the same 
briefing, he stated. 
 
Interaction 
----------- 
 
3.  (S) ICRC has been active in India for 23 years, but 
signed its first and only MOU in 1995, Merkelbach said. 
Since the last ministerial in 1998, contacts have been at 
periodic Roundtables with the MEA and MHA, led on the Indian 
side by a Joint Secretary (A/S equivalent).  The atmosphere 
at these meetings has usually been testy, with GOI 
interlocutors singling out some ICRC activities as "not part 
of the MOU," and occasionally claiming that data presented 
are "not specific enough" (even going to far as to call some 
of them "lies").  At recent Roundtables, ICRC has provided 
thick books to the GOI, which has over time raised fewer 
questions about the data and focused more on activities that 
were not carefully delineated in the MOU.  Between these 
meetings, ICRC contact is kept to the Deputy Secretary level 
(the second lowest in protocol terms).  Thus far, ICRC staff 
had not had problems with visas, he stated.  (Note: The MOU 
was facilitated by the Embassy in the early 1990s and 
resulted from extensive interaction between the Mission Front 
Office and the MHA, including then-Secretary and current 
Kashmir Interlocutor NN Vohra.  End Note) 
 
4.  (S) According to Merkelbach, a MEA Note Verbale from 
January 30 stated that the GOI values its relations with the 
ICRC, and also its instruction in international humanitarian 
law (IHL) to security forces.  However, he said the MEA also 
protested the ICRC's presence in Srinagar, asking it to "wind 
up" its operations, advising that its "public activities must 
stop" (believed to be a reference to a seminar ICRC staff 
held at Kashmir University on IHL in 2004), and warning 
against "unauthorized contacts with separatist elements" 
(which ICRC acknowledges have taken place, including with 
Hurriyat hardliner SAS Geelani).  (Comment: This GOI request 
to "wind up" operations in Srinagar seems more like a warning 
to keep to the letter of the MOU than a real threat to close 
down there.  End Comment) 
 
Detention Center Visits 
----------------------- 
 
5.  (S) ICRC staff made 177 visits to detention centers in 
J&K and elsewhere (primarily the Northeast) between 
2002-2004, meeting with 1491 detainees, 1296 of which were 
private interviews.   Merkelbach considered this group a 
representative sample of detainees in Kashmir, but stressed 
that they had not been allowed access to all detainees.  In 
852 cases, detainees reported what ICRC refers to as "IT" 
(ill-treatment): 171 persons were beaten, the remaining 681 
subjected to one or more of six forms of torture: 
electricity (498 cases), suspension from ceiling (381), 
"roller" (a round metal object put on the thighs of sitting 
person, which prison personnel then sit on, crushing muscles 
-- 294); stretching (legs split 180 degrees -- 181), water 
(various forms -- 234), or sexual (302).  Numbers add up to 
more than 681, as many detainees were subjected to more than 
one form of IT.  ICRC stressed that all the branches of the 
security forces used these forms of IT and torture. 
 
GOI Points to Improvements 
-------------------------- 
 
6.  (S) Merkelbach reported that during recent ICRC 
interactions with the GOI, officials have maintained that the 
human rights situation in Kashmir is "much better than it was 
in the 1990s," a view he also agreed with.  Security forces 
no longer roused entire villages in the middle of the night 
and detained inhabitants indiscriminately, as they had as 
recently as the late 1990s.  There is "more openness from 
medical doctors and the police," who have conceded that 95 
percent of the information on particular cases is accurate. 
Ten years ago, there were some 300 detention centers; now 
there are "a lot fewer," he stated. 
 
General Observations 
-------------------- 
 
7.  (S) While acknowledging these improvements, Merkelbach 
made a number of additional observations based on ICRC 
experience in Kashmir that indicate persistent problems: 
 
-- There is a regular and widespread use of IT and torture by 
the security forces during interrogation; 
-- This always takes place in the presence of officers; 
-- ICRC has raised these issues with the GOI for more than 10 
years; 
-- Because practice continues, ICRC is forced to conclude 
that GOI condones torture; 
-- Dialogue on prison conditions is OK, dialogue on treatment 
of detainees is not; 
-- Security forces were rougher on detainees in the past; 
-- Detainees were rarely militants (they are routinely 
killed), but persons connected to or believed to have 
information about the insurgency; 
-- ICRC has never obtained access to the "Cargo Building," 
the most notorious detention center in Srinagar; and 
-- Current practices continue because "security forces need 
promotions," while for militants, "the insurgency has become 
a business." 
 
Trend Lines Constant 
-------------------- 
 
8.  (S) Merkelbach showed us two graphs depicting data 
obtained from interviews conducted during the past two years, 
with lines and bars tracing the various kinds of 
ill-treatment.  All the lines were zig-zag in nature, but 
within bands and largely horizontal.  There were no clear 
trend lines, up or down.  The lines at the end of 2004 were 
in an order of magnitude roughly comparable to 2002.  He did 
not attribute the spikes up or down to particular policies in 
place at particular times, but called them "ad hoc changes." 
 
 
Next Steps 
---------- 
 
9.  (S) The ICRC official indicated that his organization 
would seek another Roundtable with the MEA and MHA between 
April and June.  The ICRC New Delhi office also wants its 
President to visit India, to raise these and other issues in 
a meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.  Merkelbach 
considered this "very important," although stressed that it 
was not agreed.  After 23 years of activities in country, the 
ICRC also wants to regularize its status by concluding a 
formal agreement with the GOI like that enjoyed by UN 
agencies.  Most importantly, ICRC seeks a "purposive, rather 
than restrictive" interpretation of its existing MOU and and 
end to IT and torture. 
 
Bright Spot 
----------- 
 
10.  (S) Merkelbach said the one bright spot in ICRC 
activities was with the security forces.  Staff have 
conducted more than 300 sessions with SF on IHL in Kashmir 
and elsewhere, which have touched an estimated 20,000 junior 
grade officers in one way or another.  Discussions are 
underway for further sessions with officers at the 
headquarters of the Southern Command in Pune (Maharashtra) 
and Northern Command in Udhampur (J&K). 
 
COAS: Velvet Glove, Iron Fist 
----------------------------- 
 
11.  (C) In a separate but related development, the media 
reported that COAS LTG JJ Singh made military discipline 
issues the centerpoint of a conference for army commanders 
April 5, following reports that Defense Minister Mukherjee 
was disturbed by continued reports of human rights violations 
by the security forces.  Addressing the conference, Mukherkee 
observed that "we must realize that while dealing with 
insurgents, we are operating within our own territory and 
allegations of human rights violations will not only sully 
the image of the army, but also reduce our effectiveness in 
tackling militancy."  As part of his "velvet glove, iron 
fist" approach, Singh has repeatedly stipulated that his 
officers should use "minimum force" and avoid "collateral 
damage" in their units in order to reverse declining 
standards in discipline. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
12.  (S) The fact that ICRC reversed its practice of the last 
several years to provide this briefing to us reflects its 
frustration with the MEA and MHA, although we note that their 
experience with security forces in J&K is clearly better than 
in the past, pragmatic and bordering on the positive.  The 
data showing stable trend lines of ill-treatment and torture 
in detention centers are very disturbing, because the 
practice continues unabated.  It does not appear that the GOI 
is planning anything precipitous, but the ICRC is clearly 
upping the ante with the GOI, which it charges with "not 
playing ball."  ICRC considers the status quo "unacceptable," 
and wants substantive dialogue with the GOI.  Their approach 
to us may be a prelude to a more assertive stance vis-a-vis 
New Delhi, which could be helpful in goading the Home 
Ministry and MOD to taking firmer action, but also risks 
backfiring if the GOI starts to back out of a long-negotiated 
working relationship which has produced valuable results over 
the past decade. 
MULFORD