VZCZCXYZ0001
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHC #1971 0872312
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 272306Z MAR 08
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK IMMEDIATE 0000
INFO RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEHGO/AMEMBASSY RANGOON IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA IMMEDIATE 0000

UNCLAS STATE 031971 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM PREL
SUBJECT: GUIDANCE: UN DEMOCRACY FUND ADVISORY BOARD 
MEETING 
 
REF: A. NORIN-OSTERMEIER EMAIL WEDNESDAY MARCH 19 2008 
 
        5:04 PM 
     ¶B. STATE 030490 
     ¶C. OSTERMEIER-NORIN EMAIL WEDNESDAY MARCH 26 2008 
     ¶D. JOVIN-NORIN EMAIL THURSDAY MARCH 6 2008 4:15 PM 
 
 ¶1. (U) This is an action request with guidance for USUN to 
participate in the March 28 UN Democracy Fund (UNDEF) 
Advisory Board meeting. Please see para 4 for action 
requested. 
 
¶2. (SBU) Per reftel A, the March 28 Advisory Board meeting 
will include a discussion of: a) the second funding round 
process generally, b) the suggested 86 programs UNDEF 
proposes to fund ("the short list"), c) the appointment of a 
new UNDEF Advisory Board Chair, and d) the inclusion (or not) 
of the Community of Democracies (CD) and the International 
Conference on New and Restored Democracies (ICNRD) in the 
"Friends of UNDEF" group. 
 
¶3. (SBU) The Department continues to have high expectations 
for the UN Democracy Fund under Roland Rich's leadership. 
While the Department is very pleased with UNDEF's efforts to 
increase the percentage of grants allocated to civil society, 
it is disappointed that at least one conference (in Benin) 
has made UNDEF's short list, and that the Advisory Board was 
given a narrow window to give advice on and comment on the 
short list. The Department urges that UNDEF reconsider its 
strategy of funding no more than one program per country as 
this will make it more difficult for the Fund to assist those 
countries that are most in need. Per reftel B, the Department 
wishes for UNDEF to defer the decision on a new Advisory 
Board Chair until Advisory Board members have had adequate 
time to consult with one another. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Action Request: Given previous reporting (ref A), 
Department expects the meeting to be a debate and discussion 
about the appropriate role of the Advisory Board in UNDEF's 
work and to focus on this year's funding round and the 
decision of the Advisory Board Chair.  USUN is requested to 
convey U.S. perspective, as appropriate, during the various 
portions of the meeting as noted in paragraphs 5 through 8. 
Should the discussion focus on particular programs, previous 
guidance on U.S. key priorities for funding stands 
(particularly with respect to the BBC program in Burma about 
which India appears to have concerns and the desirability of 
the funding the ActionAid program in Burma).  As feasible, 
Mission is requested to consult informally with other Board 
Members to seek their agreement before these issues come up 
for discussion. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) The Second Funding Round Process 
 
-- UNDEF's Advisory Board should help set the Fund's 
strategic direction and generally approve the methods by 
which programs are selected for funding.  The Board should 
also monitor the Fund's work and ensure that it is meeting 
its stated goals. The Advisory Board should not be involved 
in the day-to-day management of the Fund, nor should it 
expect to review every application that comes to UNDEF for 
funding (Note: there were approximately 1800 grant 
applications in this second round.  End Note).  However, the 
Board should have the opportunity to comment on the projects 
proposed, and should not be expected simply to rubber-stamp 
decisions taken by UNDEF staff or by the Secretary General. 
 
-- The Department generally believes that UNDEF's hiring of 
democracy "experts" to make an initial review of all 1800 
projects is a sound tactic but it is generally concerned that 
Advisory Board members were not informed of the identities of 
those experts, and that the full criteria used during this 
process were not made available in final to the Advisory 
Board until March 19. The Department would appreciate 
clarification on whether or not UNDEF plans to make the full 
criteria for evaluation public. (Note: The criteria provided 
on March 19 had a date stamp of October 20th, 2007, well 
before the ending of the call for proposals, yet the 
Department has not been able to find this information online. 
 End Note.) 
 
¶6. (SBU) UNDEF's "Short List" 
 
-- The Department is generally very pleased at the clear 
emphasis UNDEF is giving to the work of civil society 
organizations.  The Department is pleased at UNDEF's 
reassurance that fully 100% of its suggested programs are to 
be implemented by civil society and that in the 23 instances 
where UN agencies are involved in the programs, it is only to 
move funds to local non-governmental organizations.  The 
Department would appreciate clarification on whether or not 
UN agencies will also provide a measure of oversight to local 
NGOs.  (Note: We recognize the need to use existing 
infrastructure to assist in getting funding to NGOs as 
quickly as possible, but want to be cautious that the 
additional relationship with a UN agency does not create 
additional obligations for the implementing NGO and/or the 
appearance or substance of a supervisory role for the UN 
agency over the NGO or the project. End Note.) UNDEF should 
be commended on this substantial increase in the percentage 
of grantees that are civil society organizations. 
 
-- The Department is very pleased that strong programs in key 
priority countries were approved (Russia, Venezuela, Burma, 
Nicaragua and Pakistan).  However, the Department is 
disappointed to see that the sole purpose of one project - in 
Benin - is to hold a conference.  The U.S. continues to 
maintain that UNDEF's purpose is not to hold yet more 
conferences.  The Department would prefer that this program 
be removed from the short list and regrets that the vigorous 
and sustained U.S. efforts toward this end have thus far been 
unsuccessful.  We do note the reduction in the amount of 
support for this from $1,000,000 to $350,000.  Mission should 
use its best judgment about whether continued efforts to 
block or further reduce funding for the Benin conference 
would have any likelihood of success and whether such efforts 
would be counterproductive to the other objectives set forth 
in this message. 
 
-- The Department is disappointed that the Fund's short list 
does not include programs that support the initiatives of the 
Community of Democracies (CD) or initiatives in support of 
the Inter-American Democratic Charter (IADC); both are USG 
priorities and align with UNDEF's goals.  We are aware that 
several NGOs submitted programs related to the CD and the 
IADC for consideration but apparently were eliminated during 
the experts' review of the programs. Th Department would 
appreciate a broader consultation on the criteria used during 
the experts' review so that we can better understand how 
strong proposals on important topics such as the Community of 
Democracies can succeed in the future. 
 
-- As noted in reftel C, Department can support India's 
proposal to delay a final decision on UNDEF's "short list" 
providing India agrees to support at least one (and 
preferably both) of the two Burma projects currently under 
consideration (the proposals are from the BBC World Trust and 
Action Aid); to be helpful to our position on the Advisory 
Board Chair; and not to use the delay to advocate for any 
patently unacceptable programs (such as further conferences 
or reinstatement of proposals that the U.S. strongly 
opposed). 
 
¶7. (SBU) Advisory Board Chair 
 
-- Per reftel B, Department requests that the decision on 
Advisory Board chair be postponed until after the Advisory 
Board has had an adequate chance to review all candidates. 
 
¶8. (SBU) CD and ICNRD in "Friends of UNDEF" 
 
-- Department believes that the "Friends of UNDEF" group 
should be limited to past Advisory Board members and to 
donors whose contributions do not meet the threshold required 
for Advisory Board membership.  It is important for UNDEF to 
cultivate a relationship with all donors, not only those on 
the Advisory Board.  By establishing a consultative group for 
this group alone - with the purpose of providing information 
about UNDEF's work - contributions to UNDEF at any level will 
be seen to have privileges not accorded to all member states. 
 
-- Department encourages UNDEF to consult with the Community 
of Democracies on an ad hoc basis.  (Note: Department 
strongly opposes the idea of ICNRD joining any advisory group 
for UNDEF.  It is an organization with no membership 
criteria, and the Chair of ICNRD in the future could easily 
be Cuba or Iran or any other country.  It does not represent 
any sort of commitment by its members to the mandate or 
ideals that underpin the UNDEF and would not have anything 
positive to add to the functioning of UNDEF or its Advisory 
Board.  End Note.) 
RICE