VZCZCXRO0208
PP RUEHAG RUEHDT RUEHPB RUEHROV
DE RUEHC #6304/01 3051422
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 311410Z OCT 08
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
ASEAN REGIONAL FORUM COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHIN/AIT TAIPEI PRIORITY 3217
INFO RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHMFISS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 STATE 116304 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/15/23 
TAGS: PREL FR EU XB NK CH
SUBJECT: U.S. AND EU DISCUSS DEVELOPMENTS IN EAST ASIA 
 
REF: USEU 0356 
 
(U) CLASSIFIED BY EAP PDAS GLYN T. DAVIES.  REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D). 
 
¶1. (C) SUMMARY: U.S. and EU officials held their biannual discussions 
on East Asia (termed COASI, or Consultations on Asia) in Washington 
on October 3.  In addition to a general review of developments in the 
region, this session included an exchange of views on the future of 
India, China, and ASEAN in the evolving global architecture and next 
steps for cooperation with Central Asia.  Under new Japanese PM Aso, 
Japan's foreign policy and the current trajectory of the U.S.-Japan 
alliance are likely to remain broadly consistent with past trends. 
According to the EU, the new Taiwan administration is "step-by-step" 
in dealing with China to gain more formalized representation in 
international organizations.  Pending assurances from the DPRK on 
distribution and monitoring, the EU remains interested in better 
coordinating food aid in the DPRK with the United States and other 
donors and exchanging information on the NGOs operating in the DPRK. 
The United States and EU concurred on the lack of progress in Burma 
and the UN's current role, but disagreed on alternative policy 
measures such as sanctions.  EU representatives saw increased 
sanctions as ineffective in Burma's case.  U.S. and EU officials also 
discussed developments elsewhere in Southeast Asia such as Indonesia, 
the Philippines, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, and the future 
trajectory of ASEAN.  END SUMMARY. 
 
----------------------------------------- 
STRATEGIC ISSUES: INDIA, CHINA, AND ASEAN 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (C) REGIONAL ISSUES: EU officials opened the working lunch (joint 
with EAP and SCA officials) by asking how the United States organized 
its South and Central Asia policy and how Afghanistan fit into U.S. 
policy towards Central Asia.  SCA PDAS Donald Camp acknowledged that, 
after establishing the SCA Bureau, some officials in Central Asia 
initially had seemed disappointed to be subsumed into the bureau that 
covers South Asia.  Both U.S. and EU officials discussed the next 
steps for economic cooperation with Central Asia, with an expected 
upcoming regional conference on food and energy security convened by 
the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in November 2008.  EU 
officials sought U.S. views of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization 
(SCO) and potential U.S. observership. 
 
¶3. (C) Moving to Southeast Asian regional organizations, EU 
Commission Director James Moran noted that Association of Southeast 
Asian Nations (ASEAN) officials had visited the EU many times to 
better understand two critical achievements of the EU: reducing 
historic animosities and opening a common market.  ASEAN's new 
charter was far from creating an EU-style common market, but 
intra-ASEAN trade had now reached a critical mass -- roughly 
one-third of trade of member countries is among ASEAN nations (the 
same level of European countries in the 1970s).  There might now be 
real opportunities for economic integration. 
 
¶4. (C) INDIA AND GLOBAL ARCHITECTURE: In discussing the great powers 
of Asia - India, China, Japan - an EU official lamented that most 
European leaders thought only in economic, not geostrategic, terms. 
French Director for Asia Francois Descoueyte wondered whether India 
would follow China's path of integration into the global system and 
onto the world stage.  More broadly, EU officials proffered that an 
emerging global system would have six major groups - a "P-6" 
involving the EU, United States, China, India, Japan, and Russia. G 
etting to that future global architecture, all agreed, would be 
extremely difficult. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
JAPANESE POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS, TAIWAN and CHINA 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
 
¶5. (C) JAPAN: Descoueyte opined that, under new Japanese PM Aso, 
Japan's foreign policy would be somewhat similar, but perhaps more 
pro-active and right-wing.  How Aso balanced the Japanese political 
elites and the will of the public would remain essential for his 
success.  Descoueyte also queried U.S. officials on whether the 
U.S.-Japan alliance might change under Aso. 
 
¶6. (C) EAP PDAS Glyn Davies and EAP DAS Alex Arvizu noted "all eyes 
are now on Aso."  While Aso sought longevity in his Prime 
Ministership, the turbulent Japanese political system might not allow 
for a long tenure.  "Small things" could introduce serious political 
controversy into the system, and many in the Japanese public did not 
trust some of the political elites.  The United States was in the 
midst of a major realignment of forces in Japan and in the region and 
would continue to work closely with the GOJ on that effort.  DAS 
Arvizu noted that since Japan would likely continue to have weak 
 
STATE 00116304  002 OF 003 
 
 
governments in the near term, we could not expect major new 
diplomatic initiatives from Tokyo.  He suggested that the United 
States and EU focus on small, practical regional issues when dealing 
with the Japanese.  Participants observed that if Japan were to 
obtain a permanent Security Council seat, Tokyo might be surprised by 
how tough some of the decisions would be, especially in authorizing 
the use of force. 
 
¶7. (C) TAIWAN: Descoueyte noted that the new Taiwan administration 
was "step-by-step" trying to gain more formalized representation in 
international organizations.  Moran felt that perhaps Taiwan could 
find some level of representation in the WHO.  Some in the 
international community, and certainly China, worried that Taiwan 
might abuse its new international space and "make an issue" out of 
its limited role once it was defined.  EAP Acting DAS John Norris 
noted that unless China showed more flexibility on the issue of 
international space, there would likely be no movement by others in 
the international community.  Norris also took the opportunity to 
preview for the EU the pending announcement of U.S. arms sales to 
Taiwan to occur later that day. 
 
¶8. (C) S/P staff James Green spoke to the need for EU help in urging 
China to coordinate its foreign assistance more in places like 
Africa.  Descoueyte felt trilateral cooperation between donors could 
provide an opening for greater coordination and transparency. 
 
---------------- 
KOREAN PENINSULA 
---------------- 
 
¶9. (C) Descoueyte relayed known French details about the health of 
Kim Jong-il.  The EU remained interested in better coordinating food 
aid in the DPRK with the United States and other donors and 
exchanging information on the NGOs operating in the DPRK.  Descoueyte 
stated that the North Korean people are devastated and hurting.  He 
wondered why the international community made "so much noise" about 
Burma, but less so about the DPRK.  Moran noted that this year's 
harvest in the DPRK is rumored to be less plentiful than in years 
past.  The EU needed assurances from the DPRK regarding the 
distribution and monitoring of food aid before EU commitments of aid. 
 
¶10. (C) In response to Descoueyte's relay of the Chinese view that 
the Six-Party Talks process is "up to Washington," Davies responded 
that we must continue to gain movement from the DPRK on key issues. 
The United States had shown flexibility throughout the process. 
EAP/K Director Kurt Tong noted that the World Food Program and U.S. 
NGOs, supported by the United States, had negotiated over the past 
year a monitoring program to facilitate U.S. food aid of 500,000 tons 
over 10 months.  The EU was welcome to operate under the agreement. 
The United States would likely reexamine its food aid commitments in 
the spring of 2009, following the results of the 2008 harvest.  Tong 
also updated the EU on U.S. and ROK legislative processes in 
approving the U.S.-ROK Free Trade Agreement. 
 
------------------------ 
BURMA AND SOUTHEAST ASIA 
------------------------ 
 
¶11. (C) BURMA: The United States and EU concurred on the lack of 
progress in Burma, but diffed on the utility of policy measures such 
as sanctions.  In discussing the role of the UN, both parties held 
that UN special representative Ibrahim Gambari's activities did not 
seem to produce significant results in pressing for political 
dialogue and political prisoner releases. 
 
¶12. (C) Internally, EU member-states did not agree on the utility of 
sanctions or their effectiveness.  Descoueyte claimed that sanctions 
in the past had not borne any fruit and Moran mentioned it could even 
hurt business interests.  Czech Director for Asia and the Pacific 
Jiri Sitler argued that sanctions held a symbolic meaning.  Despite 
this, the EU did not have a position on an alternative approach to 
increasing sanctions.  Still, Moran wondered how a foreign 
assistance-oriented approach focusing on Millenium Development Goals 
would unfold in the future.  Descoueyte was not convinced of the 
merits of the non-paper proposed by UK for a new diplomatic approach, 
including what he characterized as the UK's overly high expectation 
for free and fair elections by 2010.  The EU would discuss Burma 
topics with Asian countries during the Asia-Europe Summit at the end 
of October in China. 
 
¶13. (C) EAP/MLS Director Steve Blake gave a brief overview of U.S. 
views on the situation in Burma.  PDAS Davies maintained that 
sanctions work when a clear target is defined; they send a clear 
message, and they prevent Burma from pursuing nefarious deals. Aung 
San Suu Kyi's demand for continued sanctions made a case for their 
utility as well. 
 
¶14. (C) SOUTHEAST ASIA: On Thailand, Moran said the new prime 
minister seemed credible although the People's Alliance for Democracy 
 
STATE 00116304  003 OF 003 
 
 
(PAD) still "made some noise" regarding his appointment.  Descoueyte 
said Thailand would stabilize as long as the current king, now 81 
years old, stayed in power and retained unanimous support from the 
public and the army.  On Vietnam, Moran said that remnants of the old 
regime, including human rights issues, made it difficult for foreign 
countries to engage Vietnam economically.  Descoueyte congratulated 
the United States on recently providing funds to the Khmer Rouge 
Trials in Cambodia.  Speaking to the situation in Aceh, Moran said it 
might be difficult to hold elections peacefully without an 
international monitoring team.  However, it might be inappropriate 
for the EU to participate in an election monitoring team due to the 
EU's high degree of involvement in the peace process.  Moran 
speculated on the possibility that the Aceh Peace Agreement might go 
"belly up" if elections went poorly. 
 
¶15. (C) PDAS Davies pointed out the important role of Thailand's 
military as key for the country to accept any fundamental political 
shifts.  On peace efforts in the southern Philippines, EAP/MTS 
Director Kamala Lakhdir attributed the recent breakdown of the peace 
agreement in Kuala Lumpur to the failure of parliamentarians, local 
leaders, and President Arroyo.  The decision about whether to accept 
an agreement now resides with the Philippine Supreme Court.  On 
upcoming elections in Indonesia, Lakhdhir acknowledged Indonesia's 
record of holding elections successfully in the recent past.  The 
United States would take that record into account when considering 
whether to provide U.S. assistance for the elections. 
 
¶16. (C) REGIONAL ARCHITECTURE AND ASEAN: Moran maintained that 
discussions on regional frameworks made sense so long as there was 
seriousness on the part of ASEAN member countries, and that 
substantial matters would continue to be dealt with on a bilateral 
basis.  PDAS Davies spoke favorably of ASEAN Secretary-General Surin 
Pitsuwan and the improving cooperation between ASEAN and the United 
States.  EAP/RSP Director Blair Hall mentioned that Indonesia and 
Thailand, the last two countries that had not ratified the ASEAN 
Charter, would soon overcome legislative delays in ratification. 
This would pave the way for the Charter's passage at the December 
ASEAN Summit.  The United States hoped to cooperate closely with 
ASEAN, but in the background, on the design of its Human Rights Body. 
 Hall also mentioned there was a general sense that the ASEAN 
Regional Forum (ARF) should move beyond traditional security issues 
and focus more on concrete transnational security issues including 
disaster relief, maritime security and nonproliferation. 
 
¶17. PARTICIPANTS 
 
United States: 
Glyn Davies, EAP PDAS 
Alex Arvizu, EAP DAS 
Scot Marciel, EAP DAS 
John Norris, EAP DAS, Acting 
Blair Hall, EAP/RSP Director 
Kamala Lakhdir, EAP/MTS Director 
Steve Blake, EAP/MLS Director 
Kurt Tong, EAP/K Director 
David Shear, EAP/CM Director 
James Green, S/P Staff 
Donald Camp, SCA PDAS 
Evan Feigenbaum, SCA DAS 
George Krol, SCA DAS 
Jack Spillsbury, SCA/RA Director 
 
European Union Troika: 
-- French Presidency: 
Francois Descouetye, Director for Asia and Oceania 
Jean-Noel Ladois, European Cooperation Bureau 
Etienne de Gonneville, French Embassy 
 
--EU Commission: 
James Moran, Director DG Relex Asia 
Denis Chaibi, Desk Officer for India 
Laszlo Deak, Political Counselor, EC Delegation in Washington 
 
-- EU Council Secretariat: 
Francesco Presutti, Asia Task Force, Acting Head of Unit 
Tim Eestermans, Counselor for Afghanistan, Pakistan, Horizontal Issues 
 
-- Incoming Czech Presidency 
Jiri Sitler, Director for Asia and Pacific 
RICE