VZCZCXYZ0024
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHC #6557 0991857
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 081851Z APR 08
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO AMEMBASSY ADDIS ABABA 0000

UNCLAS STATE 036557 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AMGT ET
SUBJECT: ETHIOPIA FY 2010 MISSION STRATEGIC PLAN FEEDBACK 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  An April 4, 2008 inter-agency review of 
post,s 2010 Mission Performance Plan (MSP) complimented 
post,s excellent, comprehensive assessment of USG relations 
with Ethiopia.  The Chief of Mission statement clearly and 
thoroughly outlines USG priorities, appropriately according 
prominence to the strategic relationship in a region that 
faces many security and development challenges.  The Foreign 
Assistance narrative accurately details our significant 
assistance programs, although additional information in some 
areas would help to clarify post's additional assistance 
requests.  The MSP review participants noted post,s program 
activities had substantially outpaced the administrative 
resources devoted to supporting them.  They supported post,s 
suggested flexibility in using funds to address democracy and 
governance objectives.  End summary. 
 
-------------------------- 
Chief of Mission Statement 
-------------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) The Chief of Mission (COM) statement outlines 
clearly the important strategic relationship the USG has with 
the Ethiopian government and people, with a focus on our 
national security interests of counterterrorism and regional 
stability.  There was some interest in elevating the 
democracy objectives to make them the Mission's highest 
priority, but post explained that building Ethiopia's 
capacity to promote peace and security was the most vital USG 
interest.  The COM paper's detailed democracy goals were 
clear, although participants asked post to clarify whether 
obstacles to their realization were largely financial or 
rather related to diplomatic or political constraints.  There 
were no objections to the ranking of the other goal papers. 
 
----------------------------- 
Foreign Assistance Priorities 
----------------------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) The Foreign Assistance Priorities narrative details 
USG assistance objectives in Ethiopia, with appropriate 
financing levels to reach them.  Several minor corrections to 
the text are needed, however.  As noted in the review, the 
narrative needs revisions on page 5, second paragraph, to 
spell out that proper management of the new Presidential 
Malaria Initiative and the Education Initiative will require 
more positions rather than more funding.  Also, since the 
Mission,s assistance request is $10 million above the 
Control request, language needs to be inserted in the 
narrative (and in the relevant goal paper(s)) on how post 
proposes to spend this additional funding. 
 
¶4. (U) The follow recommendations are tied to the draft 
MSP,s goal papers. 
 
------------ 
Goal Paper 1 
------------ 
 
¶5. (SBU) The review concurred with post that regional 
security concerns will remain paramount in 2010, and that the 
USG will have more leverage with the GOE in promoting 
regional security than it is likely to have with the GOE over 
internal political developments.  For this reason, regional 
stability remained as Post's principal priority.  The review 
also concurred that post does not require additional 
resources to manage the Eritrea/Ethiopia border conflict or 
any effort to normalize relations between the two countries. 
Such efforts are likely to be undertaken, if at all, by the 
United Nations and/or in capitals. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Participants made the follow comments: 
 
-- RM noted the current MSP draft appears to conflate the 
GOE,s counter-insurgency campaign in the Ogaden against the 
ONLF with its counter-terrorism actions against Islamic 
extremists, and should be revised to make a clear distinction 
between the two activities, since the USG collaborates 
closely with the GOE on the latter and not the former. 
 
-- S/CT recommended noting that terrorist groups, including 
Al-Shabaab, at times operate in parts of Ethiopia,s Ogaden 
region. 
 
-- PRM indicated the draft would benefit by mentioning that 
Ethiopia might face significant refugee flows from the region 
in 2010, given ongoing conflicts in neighboring countries, 
especially in Sudan and in Somalia. 
 
-- S/CT said the MSP should reference the East Africa 
Regional Security Initiative (EARSI), and the fact that 
significant funding (more than $10 million) is likely to be 
channeled to EARSI 
programs in 2010. 
 
-- All participants agreed that public diplomacy ought to be 
given more emphasis, and that performance indicator #2 
appeared to be somewhat vague in its target. 
 
------------ 
Goal Paper 2 
------------ 
 
¶7.  (U) Goal paper 2 focuses on helping in Ethiopia's 
progress toward a stable multi-party democracy.  DRL agreed 
that post should have flexibilty to use funds originally 
allocated to promote human rights for democracy and 
governance goals instead.  Both performance indicators #1 and 
#2 are supposed to be indexed by a MCA performance figure, 
yet no number was given in the MSP draft.  This will require 
revision. 
 
------------ 
Goal Paper 3 
------------ 
 
¶8.  (U) Goal paper 3, assisting a growing market-oriented 
economy, requires no significant changes.  However RM 
recommended an explanation be given as to why the FY 2007 
Result figure for the second performance indicator greatly 
exceeded the FY 2007 Target. 
 
------------ 
Goal Paper 4 
------------ 
 
¶9. (U) Goal paper 4 is about investing in people for a 
healthy, educated population.  RM recommended that 
Performance Indicator 2 be amended to show both the number of 
students enrolled in schools through USG funding and the 
number of schools involved. 
 
------------ 
Goal Paper 5 
------------ 
 
¶15. (U) On Goal Paper 5, building a management platform that 
supports growing Mission needs, participants understood that 
post's administrative staff had almost quadrupled its 
workload in the last ten years, without growing in size. 
They agreed that the growing management burden justified 
post's request for a new GSO position.  Mission was urged to 
indicate the ICASS ratio benchmark, which would highlight the 
need for another GSO.  As for the requested additional ISO 
position, it was suggested that post take a close look at 
whether this position was still necessary, given that an 
additional IM position was already in the process of being 
established.  If post still felt the ISO were needed, the 
Bureau would concur with its remaining in the MSP at this 
point.  Post was cautioned that obtaining either of these new 
positions would be extremely difficult. 
 
--------------------------------------- 
Submission of Final Copy of FY 2010 MSP 
--------------------------------------- 
 
¶16. (U) A copy of the reworked MSP must be re-submitted to 
Washington via RM/SPP's MSP application NLT May 12 for a 
final, revised version of the document to be posted to the 
MSP website. 
RICE