US embassy cable - 05BRUSSELS2730

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 002730 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NOFORN 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/18/2015 
TAGS: PREL, MOPS, SU, EUN, USEU BRUSSELS 
SUBJECT: EC CONSIDERS FUNDING OPTIONS FOR AMIS 
 
Classified By: PRMOFF MARC J. MEZNAR.  REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D). 
 
1. (C) Summary.  Although the European Commission (EC) has 
reservations about expanding the African Union Mission in 
Sudan (AMIS IIe) beyond 7000 peacekeepers, it nonetheless is 
considering a third funding tranche from its Africa Peace 
Facility (APF).  Even if the EC uses most of the APF balance, 
funding would only extend AMIS IIe through April 2006.  The 
EC hopes that other donors, like the U.S., will also provide 
additional significant contributions in order to extend the 
expanded operation for at least a year beyond October 2005. 
While the Commission's main objective in contributing to AMIS 
is strengthening the AU's future capacity, the European 
Council's focus is on reducing violence in Darfur and in 
raising the profile of the EU internationally.  End Summary. 
 
------------------------ 
AMIS II Expansion (AMIS IIe) 
------------------------ 
 
2. (U) The original sum allocated from the APF to support the 
Darfur mission was 80 million euros.  Two tranches have so 
far been released by the EC to the AU, each of 23.1 million 
euros, leaving a balance of 33.8 million euros.  (Note.  The 
EC releases the tranches when the AU shows good budget 
figures of having spent 70% of the previous tranche so as to 
maintain the AU's cash flow.  End Note.) 
 
3. (U) The EC calculates that its current funding lines are 
sufficient to cover requirements up to October 20, 2005, as 
AU expenditures on allowances have been less due to delays in 
deploying additional personnel. 
 
4. (C) While fully supporting an expanded AMIS of up to 7000 
peacekeepers, the EC is lukewarm towards a larger operation. 
First, the EC is concerned that the AU does not have the 
institutional capacity to manage a large expansion.  The 
operation risks becoming an AU mission in name only, with the 
overall control being in the hands of outsiders (i.e., the 
EU, U.S. and NATO).  According to DG DEV policy officer for 
the APF, Ranieri Sabatucci, this would defeat the fundamental 
purpose of the APF, which was established with development 
funds to strengthen the AU,s institutional capacity.  The 
medium-term goal of the 250 million euro APF funding line is 
to raise the profile of the AU; the long-term goal is to 
develop a genuine African-owned and operated mechanism for 
peace enforcement throughout the continent. 
 
5. (C) Second, unless other donors step forward with 
significant contributions for AMIS IIe, the EC's funding 
simply does not exist for sustaining a larger operation. 
Sabatucci pointed out that even if the EC uses the rest of 
the APF on Darfur (more than doubling its contribution), 
funding will run out by April 2006 because AMIS IIe will cost 
about 17 million euros per month to operate.  Commission 
officials like Ranieri suggest that since the U.S. is most 
enthusiastic for expanding the number beyond 7000, it would 
seem logical the U.S. to provide the funding for the expanded 
AMIS mission.  Before allocating and dispersing APF funds, 
the EC needs assurances from the AU that there is financial 
support for the entire proposed budget (preferably for a full 
year of operations).  The EC will not do partial funding in 
hopes that other monies can be found later. 
 
6. (C) One EC option for funding a third tranche is to reduce 
the number of elements in the AMIS budget (i.e., budget 
lines) which the EC funds.  By narrowing the scope of its 
funds, the EC can guarantee that the part of the operation it 
commits to can be carried out for a full year (instead of 
ending in April 2006).  It would be up to the AU to propose 
which budget lines would be cut. 
 
------------------------ 
Council versus Commission 
------------------------ 
 
7. (C) Two factors weigh in favor of a third EC tranche for 
AMIS.  The AU reportedly supports this, as does the EU 
Council.  The Council, while paying lip service to the EC,s 
overall objective of strengthening AU institutions and 
capacity through the APF, is far more interested in the 
short-term goal of reducing violence in Darfur.  This is one 
reason the Council has been more aggressive in urging the EC 
to condition its funding on the AU accepting technical and 
logistical support.  The EC agreed with this conditionality 
in order to ensure operational success of the mission, thus 
strengthening the AU politically. 
 
8. (C/NF) However, the friction between the EC and Council 
remains over Darfur.  The EC does not fully share the 
Council's political objective of raising the EU's profile by 
intervening in Darfur.  Sabatucci (protect) explained that 
for this reason the EC resisted the Council's attempt to 
block NATO involvement in Darfur.  Reportedly, the Council 
asked the EC to use its funding prerogative to dissuade the 
AU from requesting NATO assistance, but the EC declined to 
intervene. 
 
9. (C) According to EuropeAid's APF technical expert Peter 
Stamps, the PSC will have to take up the question of a third 
tranche to support AMIS IIe no later than this week or risk 
interrupting the cash flow to the AU.  His personal opinion 
is "we've all tacked our colors to the mast" in support of 
the AU so it would be politically impossible to back off now. 
 Therefore, he anticipates PSC agreement to a 3rd cooperation 
agreement to establish funding for AMIS IIe after October 20, 
2005.  Reportedly, the EC would consider using the balance of 
the APF -- apart from 15 million euros for a possible AU 
mission in Somalia -- for this third tranche allocation. 
------------------------ 
Comment 
------------------------ 
 
10. (C) The competing interests in Darfur - both intra-EU and 
transatlantic - are not mutually exclusive.  Increased 
involvement by the various players, together with their 
assets and funds, can help achieve multiple objectives, 
including:  strengthening the AU as an institution, reducing 
violence in Darfur, raising the international profile of the 
EU, expanding NATO's role in Africa and improving peace 
enforcement capabilities.  The EC is poised to commit 
additional funds for AMIS.  Significant contributions by 
other donors could clinch the decision and help sustain an 
expanded operation.  Meanwhile, the EC also continues to 
study the possibility of replenishing the APF as it 
approaches the end of its seven-year budget cycle. 
 
MINIMIZE CONSIDERED 
 
McKinley 
.