VZCZCXRO6159
RR RUEHHM RUEHLN RUEHMA RUEHPB RUEHPOD
DE RUEHNE #0195/01 0181300
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 181300Z JAN 08
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0082
INFO RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA 1610
RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 2295
RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 1404
RUEHKP/AMCONSUL KARACHI 8437
RUEHLH/AMCONSUL LAHORE 4276
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHDC
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC
RUCPDC/NOAA WASHDC
RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 000195 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR OES/PCI, OES/EGC, AND SCA/INS 
DEPT OF ENERGY FOR TCUTLER, CGILLESPIE, MGINZBERG 
USDOC FOR A/S BOHIGIAN 
NSC FOR DAN PRICE 
CEQ FOR JAMES CONNAUGHTON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV ENRG ECON TSPL TRGY KSCA KGHG IN
SUBJECT:  DRS. WATSON AND DIXON ENGAGE GOI IN PREPARATION FOR SECOND 
MAJOR ECONOMIES MEETING 
 
NEW DELHI 00000195  001.2 OF 003 
 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY:  Drs. Harlan Watson and Robert Dixon met with 
representatives of the Government of India (GOI) to discuss 
preparations for the upcoming Second Major Economies Meeting (MEM2) 
scheduled for January 30-31 in Honolulu, Hawaii.  The GOI was 
represented by officials from the Ministry of External Affairs 
(MEA), Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), the Ministry of 
Power's Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE), as well as the GOI's 
senior advisors to the Prime Minister on climate change.  The 
meeting resulted in a frank and friendly exchange of ideas and 
suggestions for MEM2 ranging from the organization of the meeting to 
the issues that need to be addressed with the GOI focused primarily 
on technology transfer.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  In an extensive two and a half hour lunch meeting on January 16, 
Drs. Watson and Dixon sought out India's suggestions for all aspects 
of MEM2 in a successful effort to address concerns and demonstrate 
the USG's desire to make the MEM process inclusive.  They met with 
GOI representatives including: 
 
-- Meena Gupta, Secretary, MoEF; 
-- Manjeev Puri, Joint Secretary, United Nations Economic & Social 
Affairs, MEA; 
-- J.M. Mauskar, Additional Secretary, MoEF; 
-- Dr. Prodipto Ghosh, Distinguished Fellow, The Energy and 
Resources Institute (TERI) and special advisor to the Prime Minister 
on Climate Change; 
-- Ambassador Chandrashekher Dasgupta, Distinguished Fellow, TERI, 
and special advisor to the Prime Minister on Climate Change; 
-- Ajay Mathur, Director General, BEE; and 
-- Indra Mani Pandey, Deputy Director Americas, MEA 
 
Manjeev Puri confirmed India's participation in MEM2 and stated that 
in addition to himself, the delegation would consist of Dr. R. 
Chidambaram, Principal Scientific Advisor to the Prime Minister and 
Leader's Representative, as well as Ambassador Dasgupta, Dr. Ghosh, 
and J.M. Mauskar. 
 
SHAPING MEM2:  GOI SUGGESTIONS AND CONCERNS 
 
¶3.  TRANSPARENCY:  Ambassador Dasgupta indicated India would very 
much like to see an enhanced degree of public transparency with 
opening and closing sessions open to the press in which each country 
could make its own statements. Dr. Dixon informed him the USG shares 
the GOI's interest in transparency and openness and that while the 
intent of closed-door sessions is to create an atmosphere of 
intimacy and closeness without noise competition from the press, the 
possibility of allowing press in an adjacent listening room has been 
explored and remains open.  Ambassador Dasgupta asked if all the 
sessions would be open to the press via the listening room and 
expressed surprise when informed that was also a possibility. 
 
¶4.  STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE UNFCCC PROCESS:  There was broad 
consensus from the GOI that the discussion at MEM2 should follow the 
Bali Action Plan.  Specifically, Dasgupta indicated the wording of 
all agenda items should reflect as closely as possible the language 
of the Bali Action Plan.  He also stated that discussion of national 
plans to combat climate change should reflect the differentiation 
between developed and developing countries in accordance with Bali 
and that a major topic of discussion should be how the MEM can 
contribute to the UNFCCC process.  Dr. Dixon informed the group the 
MEM is designed to feed into the UNFCCC process and that it is not 
in competition, but complimentary.  He noted MEM member countries 
have many common interests including energy security, growing their 
respective economies, and protecting the environment and that the 
USG would like to see India and all member countries take a 
consensus approach to moving forward with the MEM.  Dr. Watson 
concurred and noted the UNFCCC needed to be strengthened and that 
the MEM process could and should be used to do so. 
 
¶5.  MANAGING THE DISCUSSION:  The GOI expressed concern regarding 
how the discussion would be managed and was informed that the USG 
was striving for an intimate, business-casual environment designed 
to stimulate a free-flowing dialog in which the best ideas would be 
allowed to bubble to the top.  This was met with great enthusiasm by 
Manjeev Puri who stated he was very happy with the idea of 
encouraging the free flow of ideas.  He cautioned however that MEM2 
was not a brainstorming session but rather more in the nature of 
 
NEW DELHI 00000195  002.2 OF 003 
 
 
inter-governmental negotiations.  He expressed a strong preference 
for a large table discussion in order to put forth ideas that are 
representative of a nation's government as a whole.  In addition, 
Dasgupta expressed a desire to have a Chairman's Summary and 
sufficient time to reach agreements on it's contents. 
 
¶6.  SPEAKERS:  Puri also indicated dissatisfaction with having 
speakers at MEM2 that had spoken at the first MEM in Washington.  He 
stated all participants were already familiar with the issues and he 
saw little value in listening to the same information.  Dr. Dixon 
informed him that there was still time before MEM2 to invite other 
speakers if the GOI so desired.  The GOI representatives did not 
offer any suggestions. 
 
¶7. MAJOR ECONOMIES, NOT MAJOR EMITTERS:  Ambassador Dasgupta 
insisted that all parties must stick to accepted nomenclature and 
avoid any reference to the term "major emitters."  This was a 
critical issue for the GOI and both Dasgupta and Puri firmly stated 
they wanted the USG to sensitize all parties as it would lead to 
"unnecessary controversy" if it did not.  Puri noted this was not 
the first time the GOI had raised the issue but that the USG had 
used the term after both Bali and MEM1.  He stated that if the USG 
was looking for long-term cooperative action from India, it must be 
sensitive to this issue. 
 
¶8.  TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND RESOURCES:  The issues of cooperative 
technology development and clean technology transfer emerged as the 
greatest concerns of the GOI for MEM2.  Ajay Mathur, Dr. Ghosh, 
Puri, and Dasgupta all raised it and all stressed they wanted to see 
strong movement on the issue during MEM2.  Puri noted the 
availability of resources to combat climate change will be critical 
and that the United States is "obviously the natural leader."  He 
stated MEM2 should focus on what can be done in hard, practical 
terms.  Dasgupta went further and inquired whether technology 
transfer couldn't be handled bilaterally in order to speed the 
process. Dr. Dixon responded by noting President Bush has put the 
clean technology fund in the budget and that the Department of 
Treasury was working the issue.  This elicited a stream of questions 
on the size of the fund, it's uses, whether it would be dispersed 
via grants or another mechanism, and whether it could be used for 
collaborative research and development.  Dr. Dixon responded stating 
the fund was still a work in progress but that it was focused on the 
diffusion of clean technology. 
 
¶9.  NO TALK OF TARIFFS:  Ambassador Dasgupta took issue with the 
idea of including a discussion of tariff and non-tariff barriers to 
the transfer of clean technology.  He stated it was a WTO issue and 
that it shouldn't be on the agenda.  Dr. Dixon agreed that while 
tariffs are in fact a WTO issue, it was put on the agenda in order 
to facilitate discussion of how to remove barriers to the transfer 
of environmental products and clean technology which will be a 
critical tool in combating climate change.  While Dasgupta agreed 
technology transfer was vitally important, a discussion of tariffs 
at MEM2 would be too difficult and that it was not the proper venue. 
 
 
¶10.  SECTORAL APPROACH:  Dr. Dixon raised the concept of addressing 
climate change issues via a sectoral approach with focus on 
individual sectors such as the steel industry or the cement 
industry.  He noted a growing enthusiasm for the concept and stated 
it seemed a natural way to organize a national climate plan. 
Dasgupta stated the GOI sees the sectoral approach as useful in 
creating harmonized standards but did not go further.  Puri pointed 
out that none of the sectors are autonomous and that all come back 
to the need for clean technology transfer which needs to be deployed 
as quickly as possible.  Although unwilling to talk about tariffs, 
Puri was quick to point out Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) 
issues should not slow down or hinder clean technology transfer. 
 
¶11.  FORESTRY AND LAND USE PLANNING:  Puri raised the issue and 
stated he would like to see conservation of forests and combating 
deforestation managed in tandem.  Dr. Ghosh inquired as to the USG 
position on positive incentives to combat deforestation.  Dr. Watson 
noted problems with how land use was treated in the Kyoto Protocol 
and stated there was a sense that forests should be looked at in a 
much broader context but that when it came to positive incentives, 
the discussion always comes down to money and the opportunity costs 
 
NEW DELHI 00000195  003.2 OF 003 
 
 
associated with deforestation.  Puri stated that if the United 
States can't provide positive incentives nobody else can.  Dr. 
Watson stated limited positive incentives may be available but that 
it was not politically sustainable in the long-term. 
 
¶12.  CONCRETE OUTCOMES AND LEADER'S REPS:  The GOI representatives 
were unanimous in their desire to see solid, practical outcomes from 
the MEM process.  Puri stated the GOI would like to focus on how, 
what, and where it can contribute and that he didn't want to come 
back from Honolulu and inform his colleagues that he had "just 
attended a meeting."  Dr. Dixon stated the USG shared the same 
feeling and wanted to focus on worthwhile outcomes and products.  He 
went on to explain that the MEM process was geared to do just that 
and was distinct from other processes in that the Leaders 
Representatives speak for the head of state and are empowered to 
enter into a different realm of discourse as well as make decisions 
on real constructs that can solve problems.  He noted the USG was 
sending its senior representatives to MEM2 in the form of CEQ 
Chairman James Connaughton and Deputy National Security Advisor for 
International Economic Affairs Dan Price, both of whom personally 
represented President Bush, and encouraged the GOI to send similarly 
empowered senior leaders as well.  Despite his insistence on 
obtaining concrete outcomes, Manjeev Puri made it clear the GOI's 
leader representative was only the leader of the delegation. 
 
¶13.  LONG-TERM GLOBAL GOAL:  Ambassador Dasgupta said the 
development of a long-term global goal for reduction of green house 
gases (GHGs) in accordance with national needs is critical and 
should be addressed at MEM2.  However, he stated it was premature to 
arrive at a figure and that all parties need to look at 
stabilization of GHG levels in the context of better scientific 
understanding as well as costs.  He suggested focusing on the 
process of developing a long term global goal as opposed to the goal 
itself.  Puri noted the GOI was interested in USG views of a 
long-term global goal and stated the GOI view was well known and was 
not going to change. 
 
¶14.  COMMENT:  The GOI will continue to support the MEM process in 
the hopes of obtaining clean technology at low or no-cost. 
Considering Puri's statement regarding the leader's rep being only 
the representative of the delegation, it would not appear the GOI is 
ready to enter into any type of commitment at MEM2.  However, any 
doubts the GOI had regarding the MEM Process and the USG commitment 
to it were eliminated by the conviction displayed by Drs. Dixon and 
Watson who were very open to suggestions on all aspects of the MEM 
and made it clear the USG wanted the process to be inclusive.  The 
representatives of the GOI were impressed by their willingness to 
listen.  This resulted in a robust discussion that will go a long 
way to securing GOI buy-in at MEM2.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶15.  This cable has been cleared by Harlan Watson and Robert Dixon. 
 
 
MULFORD