VZCZCXYZ0816
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHC #1247 0610300
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 010255Z MAR 08
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK IMMEDIATE 0000
INFO RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA IMMEDIATE 0000

UNCLAS STATE 021247 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL KPKO MARR AMGT SC GA
SUBJECT: MARCH 4 - APRIL 10 SUBSTANTIVE SESSION OF SPECIAL 
COMMITTEE ON PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS (C-34) 
 
¶1. (U)  The annual substantive session of the General 
Assembly's Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations 
(C-34) will be held March 4 to April 10.  We have reviewed 
the Secretary-General's report on implementation of the 
recommendations of the 2007 session (A/62/627). 
Canada chairs the working group, and will produce the 
first draft of the 2008 C-34 report.  USUN should discuss 
with the Canadian UN Mission the issues laid out in 
paragraphs 3 to 11, as our input to the draft report.  We 
expect that you will also discuss these issues with the 
other members of the Peacekeeping Quadrilateral Group (UK 
and Australia), plus other UN missions and DPKO/DFS as you 
believe will be helpful in garnering support for USG 
views.  Points for inclusion in the U.S. opening statement 
are in paragraph 2, and you may draw on these as well for 
your discussions with other missions and the UN.  USUN 
should also use this cable as basis for discussions during 
the C-34 session; updated and additional guidance will be 
provided as necessary. 
 
¶2. (U) Begin points for opening statement: 
 
-- There has been substantial progress on a wide range of 
issues over the past year. 
 
-- In particular, we note that the restructuring of DPKO 
and creation of DFS is underway, with progress being made 
in recruiting for new positions.  We commend the close 
coordination between the two departments.  We believe the 
innovations, improved coordination both within UN 
headquarters and between headquarters and field missions, 
and the best, most efficient use of resources will help 
the UN respond to the unprecedented and increasing demand 
for peacekeeping capabilities. We welcome the creation of 
integrated operational teams.   We would appreciate an 
update from DPKO/DFS on progress in recruitment and 
restructuring since the Secretary-General's report was 
issued in December. 
 
--Attention has been paid throughout this process to 
weaving together the critical work being done by military, 
police and civilian components, to ensure that efforts by 
various components are mutually reinforcing.  The U.S. 
believes that, despite all the challenges that continue to 
face us, we should be proud of the thoughtful approach 
that we, and the dedicated people of the UN, are taking to 
address those challenges. 
 
-- The US believes in an integrated approach to countries 
emerging from conflict.  The foundation must be laid from 
the beginning for strong institutions and continuing 
stability, which will be sustainable after peacekeepers 
leave.  There must always be a strategy for transition to 
longer-term solutions, including work by bilateral and 
multilateral development agencies.  We note with 
appreciation the work of the Peacebuilding Commission with 
regard to Sierra Leone and Burundi, and note the ongoing 
need for similar engagements elsewhere. 
 
-- We share the concern of the Secretariat and UN 
personnel stationed in often difficult situations around 
the world that the UN have adequate, well-coordinated 
security procedures.  The U.S. looks forward to hearing 
specific details on proposals for coordinating security 
mechanisms for military, police and civilian staff. 
 
-- The U.S. notes with appreciation the steps already 
taken to enhance and reorganize the Office of Military 
Affairs.  We also welcome the substantial progress made in 
building the Standing Police Capacity. 
 
-- We will be interested in hearing more about the steps 
the two departments are taking to improve core management 
functions -- information management, public affairs, 
contractual arrangements with personnel, and training. 
These form the solid base for successful operations. 
 
-- In various fora, including sub-groups of this 
committee, over the past year we have made substantial 
progress in addressing the continuing serious problem of 
sexual exploitation and abuse of vulnerable persons by UN 
personnel.  We commend the steps DPKO has taken to 
institutionalize training, monitoring and reporting 
procedures, and the work OIOS is doing to investigate 
allegations.  We understand that OIOS has moved its field 
investigators to regional hubs.  We are concerned that 
this move may hamper OIOS' ability to gather evidence, 
particularly in cases of alleged rape, in a timely 
fashion. Finally, the U.S. calls on all countries 
contributing personnel to UN missions to insist on the 
highest standards of conduct and to discipline those who 
commit offenses. 
 
End points. 
 
¶3. (SBU) "Consent":  As USUN will recall, the U.S. stood 
alone in the 2007 session in arguing against language in 
the "Guiding Principles" section of the 2007 C-34 report 
stating that consent of the parties is necessary for 
deployment of a UN peacekeeping mission.  While a number 
of delegations agreed with the U.S. position, that the 
Security Council has authority under the UN charter to 
enforce the measures it deems necessary to maintain 
international peace and security, they were not prepared 
to hold up consensus on the C-34 report.  The recently 
issued "Capstone Doctrine," a field manual on UN 
peacekeeping developed by DPKO in consultation with Member 
States, contains ambiguous language distinguishing between 
"peacekeeping" and "peace enforcement," which could be 
read as implying that UN peacekeeping missions do not have 
authority to enforce their mandates, even with a Chapter 
VII mandate.  However, this language could also be read 
simply as a description of what has happened in practice 
over the past decade: that enforcement has been carried 
out by ad hoc coalitions of Member States or by regional 
organizations, with Security Council authorization, not by 
UN peacekeeping missions.  Although the Capstone Doctrine 
is an internal DPKO document, not an official UN document, 
it will be widely cited and used as a reference in 
Security Council and General Assembly discussions of UN 
peacekeeping for years to come.  Therefore, USUN should 
seek clarification from DPKO on its understanding of this 
point.  Since that DPKO may prefer that the C-34 not 
discuss the Capstone Doctrine (lest some members try to 
reopen the document for discussion), USUN should also ask 
DPKO and the Canadian UN Mission whether there are plans 
to refer to the Doctrine in the draft C-34 report. USUN 
should also underline for the Canadian UN mission, in 
particular, our hope that we can work together to prevent 
this issue from reemerging in the 2008 C-34 report, either 
by introduction of new problematic language in the report 
itself or by a blanket endorsement of the Capstone 
Doctrine.  If such language is proposed, USUN should seek 
further guidance. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Resource/staffing issues:  The Secretary-General's 
report notes the continued growth in UN peacekeeping and 
the GA's decision in 2007 to approve many, but not all, of 
the additional positions requested for headquarters support 
of peacekeeping missions, and draws the conclusion that 
additional resources (personnel, financial contributions 
and specialized peacekeeping capacities) are still needed. 
The USG anticipates that any suggestions for additional 
assessed resources will be subject to rigorous scrutiny by 
the budget committees.  That said, we welcome the progress 
that has been made in filling the positions approved as 
part of the DPKO/DFS restructuring, as well as steps 
already taken to ensure smooth coordination between the two 
departments (e.g. an integrated team approach, co-location 
of the U/SYGs and key staff of the two departments, a 
revised information management system). We will be 
interested in hearing more about recruitment, improved 
information, records and communication systems, as well as 
what key performance indicators and evaluation mechanisms 
DPKO/DFS are developing.  We note that the report 
specifically calls for additional resources for the DPKO 
Public Affairs Unit; the USG would like more information on 
why the UN's central public affairs office would not be 
able to provide additional support if needed.  As 
described, the composition of the integrated operational 
teams (four for Africa, one each for Europe/Latin America 
and Asia/Middle East, with specialist support) is a 
reasonable approach.  The report suggests that additional 
resources will be needed for "thematic" and specialized 
staff; the USG would prefer to see how the new system is 
operating in practice before opening any discussion of 
adding new positions, particularly since the GA just 
approved the current number of slots.  We will be 
interested in the development and performance of the ad hoc 
capacity in the Office of Operations for training and 
guidance of political and specialist officers.  The report 
also raises, again,  the proposed cadre of 2,500 career 
civilian experts; in 2007 the ACABQ did not support this 
proposal, in light of other recommendations for reforming 
contractual arrangements for civilian staff.  The USG sees 
no reason to revisit the cadre proposal before the results 
of revising contracting procedures are available. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Security:  The report notes that DPKO and DFS 
will seek the C-34's support for creation of a full-time 
security focal point in DPKO to ensure that guidance and 
risk management for UN civilian, police and military 
personnel are coordinated and consistent.  The USG looks 
forward to hearing the specifics of the proposal.  USUN 
should seek such specifics from DPKO as soon as possible, 
including costs and staffing; on the face of it, this 
appears to be a sensible suggestion. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Military planning/oversight:  The improvements to 
and augmentation of the Office of Military Affairs are a 
welcome step.  The report notes a need for military 
personnel with a range of key specialties.  In principle 
the USG supports enhancement of OMA's capacity.  However, 
since many of these positions would be funded through 
assessed contributions, rather than by secondment (to 
allow candidates from the range of troop-contributing 
countries to be considered), the USG would expect any 
specific proposals to be vetted by the budget committees. 
We believe that the reorganized military/crisis cell is a 
useful approach to the need to provide rapid, expert 
advice in developing situations.  We look forward to 
DPKO's recommendations on modalities for planning for new 
or changing operations. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Enhanced rapid deployment capacity (ERDC): DPKO 
will brief the C-34 on the response from Member States to 
the call for ERDC support for UNIFIL, UNMIS, UNOCI, UNMIL 
and MONUC.  We understand that the response overall has 
been minimal, and we anticipate that DPKO will advise the 
C-34 that it will not be able to proceed with developing 
ERDC.  The USG is not in a position at this time to 
contribute in any significant way to ERDC, beyond our 
already substantial contribution to the assessed costs of 
peacekeeping. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Rule of law/security institutions:  We welcome 
the creation of an integrated office dealing with the 
range of rule of law/security issues (including police, 
justice, demining, demobilization, and security sector 
reform)  The USG recognizes that the demand for responses 
to the complex security issues involved in the 
peacekeeping/peacebuilding nexus continues to grow.  This 
is being addressed in part by international efforts (such 
as COESPU). We underline that the integrated approach to 
peacekeeping operations adopted in recent years calls for 
laying the foundation for continuing efforts to build 
institutions, but that there must always be a strategy for 
transition to longer-term solutions, including work by 
bilateral and multilateral development agencies.  We look 
forward to specific discussions of requirements in this 
sector.  The USG welcomes the progress on development and 
use of the Standing Police Capacity, and supports the 
relocation of the group to the UN Logistics Base in 
Brindisi; this should help speed new or changed 
requirements for policing in UN missions. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Partnerships:  As the report notes, UNAMID and 
MINURCAT are new approaches to joint operations with 
regional organizations; we are encouraged by the 
creativity being shown in finding innovative ways to 
address unusual situations.  At the same time, we are 
monitoring carefully how these creative arrangements can 
best preserve clear chains of command and mission 
effectiveness. We found the discussion of the difficulties 
of coordinating the UN's administrative and financial 
frameworks with those of potential external partners -- 
IFIs, NGOs, regional organizations -- to be 
thought-provoking.  We believe this would be an 
interesting area for more detailed discussion, and we 
welcome the establishment of the DPKO's new partnership 
capacity. 
 
¶10. (SBU) Integrated Mission Planning and Implementation: 
The report contains a thoughtful discussion of how the 
integrated approach is working in practice -- to a large 
extent ad hoc, and carried out more in the field than at 
headquarters.  We look forward to working with the new, 
developing headquarters capacity. 
 
¶11. (SBU) Sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) and other 
misconduct:  There has been substantial progress in 
addressing this issue over the past year.  Given the steps 
the UN has taken to require training and to establish 
reporting mechanisms, USUN should focus in particular on 
the need for troop-contributing countries to discipline 
their own personnel.  The General Assembly approved a 
model memorandum of understanding (MOU) as a basis for 
discussion between the UN and potential troop contributors 
on standards of conduct and procedures for addressing 
allegations.  The report notes that DPKO intends, subject 
to review by the UN's Office of Legal Affairs, to use the 
model MOU in discussions with troop contributors on 
amending current agreements .  The U.S. will consider any 
such proposals on a case-by-case basis, and cannot comment 
in advance on specifics.  We understand that OIOS has 
moved its field investigators in Africa to regional UN 
hubs.  OIOS determined that, because these officers were 
not involved in programs to deter SEA misconduct, it would 
be more cost effective to station them at central 
locations so they could be rapidly deployed; OIOS does not 
currently have sufficient investigators to assign to every 
mission.  However, two senior US officials, during their 
recent travels to two UN missions, separately heard 
complaints from senior UN officials questioning OIOS' plan 
to remove these embedded investigators.  The U.S. is 
concerned that removing OIOS investigators from field 
missions could hamper OIOS' ability to investigate 
allegations of SEA in a timely manner, particularly in 
allegations of rape, where evidence needs to be gathered 
and secured within a very narrow timeframe. In December 
the General Assembly adopted the "UN Comprehensive 
Strategy on Assistance and Support to Victims of Sexual 
Exploitation and Abuse by UN Staff and Related Personnel" 
(the victims' assistance strategy). As reported ref B, the 
strategy identified three categories of persons who would 
be provided immediate and mid-term assistance - 
complainants, victims (complainants whose claims have been 
established), and children born as a result of SEA.  The 
General Assembly underlined and the strategy states 
specifically that its implementation will not diminish or 
replace individual responsibility for acts of SEA, which 
rests with the perpetrators.  We look forward to reviewing 
the report being prepared on welfare and recreation, and 
will give serious consideration to proposals for 
reasonable provisions in mission budgets for enhancing 
troop welfare.  The U.S. looks forward to the 
Secretary-General's report on offenses committed by UN 
 
SIPDIS 
officials and experts on mission (professional civilian 
staff, which probably includes UN police officers), 
including what actions governments have taken to address 
this conduct.  As we argued in the Sixth Committee in 
2007, the U.S. is not prepared to support the proposal for 
an international convention in the absence of any evidence 
about the scope of the problem and what measures are 
already in place to address it. 
RICE