US embassy cable - 03RANGOON43

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 RANGOON 000043 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP, DRL AND IO 
USCINCPAC FOR FPA 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/08/2013 
TAGS: EAID, PHUM, BM, UNDP, Human Rights, NGO 
SUBJECT: UNDP'S PROGRAM IN BURMA - LINKING BASIC HUMAN 
NEEDS AND BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS 
 
Classified By: COM Carmen Martinez.  Reason: 1.5 (d), 
 
1. (C) Summary: UNDP will be seeking a more flexible mandate 
for its operations in Burma at the January 21 meeting in New 
York.  The USG should support that request, but should also 
demand that UNDP and other UN agencies play a more active 
role in regard to human rights monitoring and protection on a 
day-to-day basis in Burma.  End Summary. 
 
2. (U) UNDP has scheduled a meeting in New York on January 21 
to review UNDP's program in Burma.  The centerpiece of that 
meeting will be an independent evaluation done in May and 
June, 2002 on UNDP's programs here.  That assessment 
basically concluded that UNDP's projects in Burma are being 
carried out in accordance with the instructions of the 
Governing Council and the Executive Board.  The report also 
concluded that UNDP's projects are having a significant 
positive impact on the intended beneficiaries.  According to 
the report, UNDP's projects addressed all the critical areas 
mandated by the Executive Board, with a strong emphasis on 
the poorest segments of Burma's rural population.  Moreover, 
most of the projects exceeded their goals and targets and all 
were delivered within budget. Among the most notable 
accomplishments were the establishment of "self care" 
facilities in 3700 villages involving over 370,000 women; the 
development of water and sanitation programs in 2400 
villages; the establishment of micro-credit schemes in 11 
townships; the creation of over 1000 community self-reliance 
groups covering more than three-quarters of the target 
households; and improvements in food production with the 
result that 80 percent of the villages within UNDP's program 
area are now self-sufficient in food 
 
3. (U) For all this success, however, the assessment also 
notes that UNDP's programs now reach only a small percentage 
(about 4 percent) of Burma's rural population.  The impact of 
projects has also been undermined by the macro-economic 
policy environment within which they are implemented.  In 
addition, little has been done to deal with the devastating 
impact that economic shocks and natural disasters can have on 
vulnerable rural populations. Finally, but most seriously, 
the sustainability of all of all of UNDP's projects is 
questionable.  Most are now being implemented through ad hoc 
structures with few, if any links, to national institutions, 
such as the national health and education services.  As a 
result, there is a real question as to how many will survive, 
if and when UNDP funding is cut off.  The assessment traces 
several of these problems -- particularly the problems 
regarding sustainability -- to UNDP's current mandate, which 
directs UNDP to allocate its resources in Burma only "to 
programs which meet humanitarian and basic human needs 
through projects which have a sustainable impact at the grass 
roots level in the areas of primary health care, the 
environment, HIV/AIDS, education and food security" and 
recommends that UNDP expand that mandate to bring it in line 
with that of other UN agencies in Burma. 
 
4. (C) We basically agree with the assessment.  For all its 
good work, UNDP's program in Burma has basically become a 
high-cost, low-impact program that is not adequately serving 
the needs of either donors or its intended recipients.  If 
UNDP continues as it has to date, it will only ensure that 
its programs reach only a fraction of the rural population 
with activities whose impact and sustainability will both be 
strictly limited.  To act efficiently and effectively on 
behalf of Burma's poor, UNDP needs to be able to work on a 
larger scale with local government officials and national 
institutions, including representatives of social and 
economic service ministries, such as the Ministries of 
Health, Education and Agriculture.  Such latitude to work 
with the GOB's economic and social service ministries will 
not contribute to the repressive powers of the regime, but 
will ensure that the social and economic programs that UNDP 
is seeking to establish in Burma will have the institutional 
underpinnings to ensure their durability.  It will also bring 
UNDP's mandate in line with the mandates of other UN 
agencies, like UNICEF (one of Aung San Suu Kyi's favorite 
organizations), which already works closely and productively 
with Burma's Health and Education Ministries.  That 
collaboration has not compromised UNICEF's programs in any 
sense, but has allowed it to support programs of major 
importance, such as the eradication of polio, which can only 
be done on a nationwide basis.  Similar flexibility in regard 
to the implementation of UNDP's program would allow similar 
results in regard to both the scope and impact of UNDP's 
rural development programs. 
 
5. (C) That flexibility, however, should be combined with 
additional responsibilities.  If UNDP is to be granted more 
flexibility to develop more effective and more valuable 
programs, then the USG should also demand that it play a more 
effective and forthright role in providing for not only basic 
human needs, but also basic human rights in Burma.  Right 
now, of all the UN agencies in Burma, only the ILO and UNHCR 
have joined with ICRC in consistently bringing human rights 
violations to the attention of the GOB.  While several others 
(notably UNICEF and UNDP) have established relatively 
widespread programs in Burma (e.g. for UNDP, in Burma's Dry 
Zone, the Irrawaddy Delta, Shan State and remote border areas 
of Chin, Kachin and Rakhine States), none have yet been 
willing to play an effective monitoring, protection and 
advocacy role on human rights issues.  In some cases, this 
has led to severe criticism of UNDP's programs by groups -- 
such as Aung San Suu Kyi's National league for Democracy -- 
which have accused to the UN of turning a blind eye to the 
regime's abuses. This neglect of human rights issues by the 
UN agencies has also left day-to-day reporting on human 
rights issues in the hands of politically motivated groups, 
often based in Thailand, of varying credibility.  The net 
result has been a situation which benefits no one, least of 
all the UN agencies. 
 
6. (C) In recent months, the GOB has shown an increased 
willingness to allow human rights monitoring in sensitive 
areas throughout Burma by the ILO, the ICRC and UNHCR.  The 
UN, and particularly UNDP, which provides leadership for all 
UN agencies here, should take advantage of this new 
flexibility to lay down markers regarding its overriding 
interest in protecting the basic human rights of Burma's 
rural poor.  We have discussed this with UNDP's outgoing 
resident coordinator and he believes, as we do, that such 
human rights monitoring and advocacy work is necessary, and 
can be done effectively by UNDP and the other UN agencies, 
given adequate support and direction from the Governing 
Council and the Executive Board. 
 
7. (C) In short, we are convinced that UNDP needs a more 
flexible mandate in order to do their job properly in Burma. 
They should be able to discuss macro-economic issues of key 
importance to rural populations with the relevant 
authorities.  They should also be able to work with the 
Burmese social and economic ministries in exactly the fashion 
that other UN agencies already do.  However, we are equally 
convinced that there is scope and need for greater action in 
regard to the protection of human rights in all the areas 
where the UN is active in Burma.  From that perspective, we 
recommend that the US delegate to the upcoming UNDP meeting 
discuss with UN staff and other Executive Board members the 
possibility of coupling any plans to increase the flexibility 
of UNDP's mandate in Burma with an expanded mandate in regard 
to human rights monitoring and protection activities among 
Burma's rural population.  The UN, as a body, has already 
recognized its responsibility for human rights in Burma by 
the appointment of a Special Rapporteur.  However, it needs 
to develop the capacity to carry out those responsibilities 
at a grass roots level on a day-to-day basis. Making the 
protection of human rights an integral part of UNDP's mandate 
in Burma will help meet that need. 
Martinez