VZCZCXYZ0007
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #1005 3082210
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 032210Z NOV 08
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5246
INFO RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 3414

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001005 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KDEM PHUM
SUBJECT: UN DEMOCRACY CAUCUS 
 
REF: A. USUN 671 
     ¶B. USUN 736 
     ¶C. STATE 97313 
 
¶1.  Action requested: please see paragraph 6. 
 
¶2.  The Permanent Representatives of 14 UN Member States met 
over lunch Oct. 27 at the Mission of India "to discuss issues 
of mutual interest relating to Democracy," as Indian 
Ambassador Nirupam Sen wrote in his invitation.  Although not 
calling themselves the UN Democracy Caucus, the guests all 
represented countries participating in the Community of 
Democracies: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, India, Japan, 
Lithuania, Mexico, Mozambique, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, 
UK, and the United States.  CD participants Cape Verde, Mali 
and Morocco were also invited but did not attend.  The 
meeting was an initiative of Ambassadors Khalilzad and Sen, 
stemming from bilateral talks they have held since May about 
reviving the UN Democracy Caucus (ref A). 
 
¶3.  Ambassador Sen proposed five issues (previously agreed 
with Ambassador Khalilzad) on which the group could focus: a 
possible Third Committee resolution entitled "Education for 
Democracy" drafted by the Council for a Community of 
Democracies; an event to share best practices on democracy 
and good governance as a follow-up to the CD's Bamako 
ministerial meeting; support for a strong and independent 
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in 
discussions of the OHCHR's work program currently underway in 
the Third Committee; a possible Third Committee resolution on 
"Women and political participation," last adopted in 2003; 
and support for a draft Swiss-Guatemalan General Assembly 
plenary resolution on the report of the Commission on Legal 
Empowerment of the Poor (ref B). 
 
¶4.  The group generally reacted positively to the idea of 
reviving the Democracy Caucus, and to the thematic proposals 
presented.  Canada called the idea attractive.  The 
Philippines said democracy is about more than free and fair 
elections, and democratic governance must take into account 
economic development issues as well.  Mexico was somewhat 
ambivalent, however, questioning the impact on democracy of 
crises such as those involving the world's financial, food, 
and energy markets.  India cautioned the group should not 
attempt to take on issues it cannot handle.  Chilean 
Ambassador Munoz said he was personally enthused about the 
idea of reviving the Caucus, but it needed to be pragmatic 
and could not realistically attempt to do anything regarding 
the financial crisis; our time is limited, he said, and we 
have to pick things we are all willing to work on. 
Australian Ambassador Hill said the group should focus on 
issues where it could add value, such as generating new 
contributions for the UN Democracy Fund.  Japan said the idea 
of reviving the Caucus was compatible with Japan's own "human 
security" initiative.  Mozambican Ambassador Chidumo agreed 
the group should start by focusing on small, specific issues; 
in time it could try to be more ambitious; he also urged more 
African participation.  The UK, saying democracy is under 
pressure in Russia, suggested a possible resolution on 
democratic standards, and Mexico proposed an organ or 
pressure group to monitor human rights and democracy; but 
Portugal said the Caucus should focus on existing 
institutions.  Poland said the focus should be on 
democratizing non-democracies, but India cautioned the Caucus 
should start small. 
 
¶5.  The group agreed to meet again in November, at the 
invitation of Australian Ambassador Robert Hill, and to try 
to come up with an agreed list of projects or issues in 
priority order on which a revived Democracy Caucus could 
focus its attention. 
 
¶6.  Action request: please provide guidance on the issues 
discussed above and any others the Department believes the 
Democracy Caucus could usefully and realistically undertake. 
In our view, the Caucus should start with a modest agenda. 
Few CD members, even the small group described here, have the 
time or inclination to embark on major new initiatives and 
most are subject to the competing demands of regional groups 
and interest groups such as the G77, the NAM, and the OIC. 
In our view the Democracy Caucus could become "an added 
mechanism for like-minded democratic nations to cooperate in 
areas such as human rights, good governance, and the rule of 
law," as envisioned in the Department's latest cable on U.S. 
priorities for the CD (ref C); but it will take time and 
careful nurturing. 
Khalilzad