Tim W Hayes  11/06/2007 02:13:27 PM  From  DB/Inbox:  Tim W Hayes

Cable 
Text:                                                                      
                                                                           
      
UNCLAS    SENSITIVE     SECSTATE 152799

SIPDIS
CX:
    ACTION: ECON
    INFO:   FCS POL DCM AMB CONS PA RAO FAS MGT PMA

DISSEMINATION: ECON /1
CHARGE: PROG

VZCZCAYO181
OO RUEHAK
DE RUEHC #2799/01 3092247
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O P 052230Z NOV 07
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA IMMEDIATE 1916
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA IMMEDIATE 6157
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA IMMEDIATE 9448
RUEHCP/AMEMBASSY COPENHAGEN IMMEDIATE 7544
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO IMMEDIATE 8653
RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA IMMEDIATE 8399
RUEHSG/AMEMBASSY SANTIAGO IMMEDIATE 7482
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL IMMEDIATE 5298
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO IMMEDIATE 1376
RUEHWR/AMEMBASSY WARSAW IMMEDIATE 9260
RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON IMMEDIATE 4525
INFO RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN PRIORITY 0481
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 3056
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS PRIORITY 5529

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 STATE 152799 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
USOECD - CHARLES RANDOLPH 
PAUL REID 
CURTIS STONE 
USOAS FOR BOB MANZANARES 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AU BR CA CI EAID ET JA KDEM KS MX NL NZ PL PO
PREL, TU, UK, OAS, DA, OECD 
SUBJECT: STEERING GROUP NON-PAPER FOR THE PARTNERSHIP FOR 
DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE (PDG) 
 
REF: A. STATE 106990 
     ¶B. STATE 108794 
     ¶C. STATE 115400 
 
¶1. (SBU) This is an action request; please see para 5. 
 
¶2. (SBU) Background: The Partnership for Democratic 
Governance was successfully rolled out at a well-attended 
high level event co-hosted by OECD and UNDP in New York on 
October 1, 2007.  The Department appreciates Posts' support 
and efforts which made the launch of the PDG a great success. 
 The current founding members of the PDG are: Australia, 
Brazil, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New 
Zealand, Poland, Turkey, the U.S., OECD, UNDP, OAS and the 
Inter-American Development Bank.  The U.S. and other founding 
members must now turn our attention to effectively 
implementing this new multilateral initiative at OECD. 
Founding members will meet in Paris on November 12 to have an 
informal discussion on PDG implementation and to prepare for 
the first meeting of the PDG,s Steering Group tentatively 
scheduled for January 28-29, 2008.  The UK and possibly 
France will participate in these discussions as observers but 
have not yet joined the PDG. Paris, London and Berlin are 
slugged for information only. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Action Request: Drawing on REFTELs and key PDG 
material at www.oecd.org/pdg, Department requests action 
posts to convey points contained in paras 4 and 5 and deliver 
the non-paper in para 6 on outstanding governance issues of 
the PDG to host governments.  Embassy should ask for initial 
comments on the draft non-paper by COB November 15 and inform 
host government that the U.S. hopes to discuss issues in the 
non-paper with delegations at the November 12 meeting in 
Paris.  We view this as a working document and welcome 
comments and input from other partners as we move forward. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Pilot Assessments: Department requests that Posts 
inform other partners that the U.S. has begun to seek input 
and assessments from our own embassies and USAID missions on 
potential PDG pilot programs in Africa, Asia and Latin 
America.  Given the relatively short initial period for the 
PDG Advisory Unit of three years, we think it is important to 
feed as much information to the new unit as possible and 
inform its decisions about dialogue and exploration with 
target countries.  We expect UNDP to begin similar 
assessments and welcome their participation in the 
development of templates and procedures for selection of 
target countries; however, posts should encourage other 
partner countries to join us in gathering and feeding 
information to the new unit as soon as they are able to in 
parallel with UNDP,s development of its own assessment 
framework. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Country Co-Chair: OECD Secretary General Gurria will 
chair the first Steering Group meeting of the PDG but the PDG 
terms of reference require that a co-chair be selected at the 
first Steering Group meeting.  The U.S. feels strongly that 
the other co-chair of the Steering Group should be a partner 
government serving perhaps on an annual rotating basis.  We 
believe that Chile would make an ideal first country co-chair 
for the Steering Group and posts should communicate this view 
to host governments and seek their opinions on this issue. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Begin non-paper: 
 
Non-Paper: PDG Governance Issues 
 
This non-paper addresses two important issues that members of 
the PDG will need to decide in the coming months: 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AU BR CA CI EAID ET JA KDEM KS MX NL NZ PL PO
PREL, TU, UK, OAS, DA, OECD 
SUBJECT: STEERING GROUP NON-PAPER FOR THE PARTNERSHIP FOR 
DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE (PD 
(1) Standards for admitting new members into the Partnership, 
as outlined in the attached OECD note; and 
 
(2) Principles that should guide the process for selecting 
countries for PDG-sponsored assistance. 
Membership Standards: In accordance with the attached OECD 
note, all countries wishing to join the Partnership must 
subscribe to the PDG's Declaration of Principles and 
Objectives.  The issue is whether this is both a necessary 
and sufficient condition for membership, or whether 
additional standards should be applied in considering the 
accession of new members prior to and after the January 
Steering Group members. 
 
From the outset, the U.S. has understood the PDG to be a 
group of like-minded democracies.  The U.S. therefore 
believes that the democratic character of countries applying 
for membership should be an important factor in admissions 
policy.  At the same time, we recognize the inherent and 
practical difficulties of reaching agreement among all 
partners on an objective and credible set of democracy 
indicators and applying them consistently -- and in a 
compulsory manner -- to specific cases. 
 
In consequence, it is the U.S. view that each member of the 
PDG should formulate some set of standards for evaluating 
applications for membership and, at its discretion, exercise 
its right to veto countries that do not meet these standards. 
 The U.S. believes the following democracy guidelines would 
be useful in evaluating membership requests to protect the 
'like-minded' nature of the Partnership.  The U.S. also 
believes that a coordinated set of guidelines among partners 
would minimize disagreements and the necessity of any 
partners to break consensus.  We believe that all PDG members 
should base their membership decisions on similar standards. 
 
-- A "free ranking" from Freedom House 
 
-- A score of 50 percent or higher in the World Bank's Voice 
and Accountability Index 
 
-- Practical experience in establishing legitimate, 
effective, and accountable democratic institutions that would 
help the PDG to achieve its objectives. 
 
Eligibility Standards for Assistance: The United States has 
also conceived the principal, if not exclusive, aim of the 
PDG to be helping emerging democracies to improve their 
governance capacity and service delivery to their citizens. 
We recognize, of course, that the definition of emerging 
democracies should be sufficiently flexible to reflect the 
reality that democratic transitions are often protracted and 
incomplete, and that some fragile and post-conflict states 
need assistance in strengthening governing institutions, even 
if they are not yet exemplars of democratic practices, to 
successfully get on a democratic path. 
 
Although there is agreement that governments of any country 
on the OECD DAC list of Official Development Assistance 
recipients can contact the PDG for advice or assistance, 
whether to approve such requests will require a 
recommendation from the Advisory Unit and a separate decision 
by the Steering Group under the rules of consensus.  As with 
the case of membership, the United States does not seek 
formal agreement among PDG members on democratic guidelines 
for the assistance selection process.   However, the U.S. 
will observe the following guidelines in making these 
decisions within the Steering Group and again believes that 
close coordination in partners' decision-making will be 
important for the success of the PDG.  We, therefore, 
encourage other PDG Partners to adopt similar guidelines. 
 
-- Countries seeking assistance from the PDG must be willing 
to accept stringent provisions for assuring accountability, 
auditing, monitoring, transparency and open citizen feedback 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AU BR CA CI EAID ET JA KDEM KS MX NL NZ PL PO
PREL, TU, UK, OAS, DA, OECD 
SUBJECT: STEERING GROUP NON-PAPER FOR THE PARTNERSHIP FOR 
DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE (PD 
in the implementation of the PDG-sponsored projects, based on 
best practices developed by the Advisory Unit. 
 
-- Applications for assistance should take into account a 
candidate's performance on Freedom House scores based on 
civil and political liberties and the World Bank's indicators 
of voice and accountability, government effectiveness, rule 
of law, and control of corruption. 
 
-- There should be a strong presumption of denial, with 
exceptions made on a case-by-case basis, for requests for PDG 
services from any country that received a Freedom House 
ranking of "not free" and a score of under 50 percent in the 
World Bank's Voice and Accountability Index. 
 
Conclusion: The United States believes that the approaches 
laid out above strike the right balance between two competing 
desiderata: preserving the flexibility of the Partnership to 
make politically sensitive decisions taking into account the 
special circumstances of individual cases, and maintaining 
the democratic character and purposes of the Partnership's 
membership and operations.  In the spirit of partnership, the 
United States would welcome the views of our PDG partners on 
the guidelines set out above -- or others that might be 
usefully applied to our decision-making process in the PDG -- 
and hope we will be able to achieve consensus on a way 
forward. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Points of Contact: Comments on the non-paper should 
be provided directly via e-mail to EEB/EPPD Nancy 
Smith-Nissley (Smith-NissleyN(at)state.gov) and EEB/ODF 
Christine Harbaugh (HarbaughCM(at)state.gov) copying S/P 
members Dick Sokolsky (SokolskyRD@state.gov) and Jean Geran 
(GeranJM(at)state.gov). 
RICE