US embassy cable - 05NEWDELHI6931

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 006931 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/06/2015 
TAGS: PREL, EAID, ECIN, PHUM, KDEM, KUNR, IN, AF, UNGA, GOI 
SUBJECT: DEMARCHES DELIVERED: UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL, 
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES AND OUTCOME DOCUMENT 
 
REF: A. STATE 160880 
     B. STATE 163224 
     C. NEW DELHI 6148 
     D. BETTS-PYATT EMAIL 
 
Classified By: A/DCM Geoff Pyatt for Reasons 1.4 (B, D) 
 
1.  (U) This is an Action Request.  Please see para 8. 
 
2.  (C) Summary: A/DCM and Poloff called on new MEA Joint 
Secretary (UN Political) Sanjiv Arora on September 6 and 
 
SIPDIS 
delivered Refs A and B demarches, underlining the importance 
in the new US-India relationship for India to be seen working 
constructively with the US in multilateral fora.  Arora 
outlined India's UN reform priorities of peacebuilding, 
management reform, Democracy Fund, and, of course, a 
permanent UNSC seat.  Other MEA interlocutors gave mixed 
signals on September 8 about India's willingness to be 
helpful on Human Rights Council (HRC) dialogue in New York. 
Post is ready to engage further but requests detailed points 
on HRC discussions and India's role.  End Summary. 
 
Concern about Development Issues 
-------------------------------- 
 
3.  (C) Arora listened attentively to A/DCM's message, but 
cautioned that reported US concerns about the draft Outcome 
Document could be a "damper" on developing countries' "high 
expectations."  He expressed concern that there was little 
time to make "nitty-gritty" changes to the Outcome Document 
before the Summit.  However, he agreed that US positions were 
well-known, and assured us that New Delhi does not subscribe 
to the mistaken belief that the US is trying to make 
last-minute changes without prior consultation. 
 
GOI Priorities 
-------------- 
 
4.  (C) Arora highlighted India's positions on the 
Peacebuilding Commission, management reform, and the UN 
Democracy Fund as common interests with the US, and stated 
that India would bring ideas to New York on how the UN should 
implement the UN Democracy Fund, drawing from its long 
experience in providing assistance to developing countries 
(like Afghanistan).  The GOI has already sent a USD 10 
million contribution to its New York Mission for donation to 
the UN, Arora said, adding that the Democracy Fund is a good 
example of a visible US-India collaborative effort. 
 
5.  (C) Arora repeated New Delhi's belief that India's 
"impeccable" credentials merit a permanent UNSC seat, which 
would help update the UN system to reflect the modern world. 
Commenting that, since either the G-4 proposal or the US's 
criteria for UNSC expansion would favor India, Arora stated 
India's success in securing a permanent seat was only a 
question of deciding which route to follow, and that the GOI 
expected more articulation of support from friends in the US. 
 
Human Rights Council: Mixed Signals 
----------------------------------- 
 
6.  (C) Poloff followed up with MEA Deputy Secretary (UN 
Economic and Social) Gopal Baglay on India's position on the 
Human Rights Council, recalling J/S Manjeev Puri's earlier 
statement (Ref C) hinting at Indian agreement for US 
proposals, and repeating our hope that India would be an ally 
instead of an obstacle in replacing the broken Commission on 
Human Rights (CHR).  Baglay said that while India has still 
not formed a position on the format of a new HRC, its guiding 
principle was to "depoliticize" the UN human rights 
mechanisms, New Delhi's shorthand for opposition to 
country-specific actions and resolutions.  The HRC discussion 
was too hurried, Baglay added, suggesting that CHR 
replacement proposals should be taken up in the UNGA after 
the High-level Event.  Poloff pushed back, pointing out that 
advocating delay would mean siding with perpetual human 
rights violators who benefit from the current ineffective CHR 
and have no desire to improve it. 
 
7.  (C) A/DCM and A/PolCouns double-tracked this HRC message 
on September 8 with J/S (Americas) S Jaishankar and new 
Director (Americas) Sanjay Bhattacharyya, respectively. 
Bhattacharyya pointed out that India's positions on human 
rights resolutions were well-known, but, echoing Puri's 
August 8 hints of support, cautioned, "Don't read too much 
into what the tea leaves are saying."   Bhattacharyya implied 
that the specialized MEA UN divisions were leading the 
discussion on UN reform in the bureaucracy, but indicated 
that the debate is not yet over and the Americas division was 
aware of the implications of India's actions.  UNES's Baglay 
also admitted that India's NY Mission was acting with a 
fairly free hand in negotiations, as New Delhi was unable to 
devote much attention to the HRC debates.  Jaishankar noted 
that India's views were heavily shaped by MEA's 
multilateralists, and suggested further discussion between 
U/S Burns and Foreign Secretary Saran. 
 
Comment and Action Request 
-------------------------- 
 
8.  (C) New Delhi is an enthusiastic supporter of several USG 
reform priorities, including democracy promotion, peace 
support operations, and management reform.  Reported 
obstructionism from India's New York Mission (Ref D) and 
conflicting signals from New Delhi on the HRC may indicate 
ongoing disagreement within MEA over how much to play the 
role of a new emerging power Security Council contender 
instead of falling back on India's dubious traditional NAM 
solidarity.  ACTION REQUEST: We are prepared to press the GOI 
further on HRC, but would appreciate specific points on what 
the US wants and what India is resisting in New York.  We 
could also use more information on the September 14 UN 
Democracy Fund launch in NY hosted by POTUS and PM Singh. 
 
9.  (U) Visit New Delhi's Classified Website: 
(http//www.state.sgov/p/sa/newdelhi) 
MULFORD