VZCZCXRO8628
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHGV #0279/01 0930956
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 030956Z APR 09
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8242
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2996
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 GENEVA 000279 
 
SIPDIS 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR IO/EDA and EEB/OMA 
USUN for JLAWRENCE and CNORMAN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EFIN ECON EINV UNGA ECOSOC
SUBJECT: Financial Crisis - considerations for April UNGA 
negotiations 
 
REFS:  A) GENEVA 220 B) GENEVA 262 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED; NOT FOR INTERNET 
 
¶1.  (SBU) SUMMARY: The report of the UNGA President's Commission of 
Experts on Reforms of the Monetary and Financial System (Stiglitz 
report) will contribute to a negotiated outcome document in the hope 
of giving the UN a greater role in financial affairs.  A greater 
UNGA role would not necessarily serve USG interests.  The US may be 
able to avert that result, as well as improve the UN response to the 
financial crisis, by proposing productive actions for the UN 
Secretariat and UN agencies, actions such as those listed in 
paragraphs 11-13.  END SUMMARY. 
 
----------------------------------- 
Lessons from the Fair Globalization 
Negotiations 2004 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (U) The UN is preparing for April negotiations on an outcome 
document which may include a response to the report of the UNGA 
President-led Commission of Experts on Reforms of the Monetary and 
Financial System (the Stiglitz Commission).  Mission officer's 
personal experiences negotiating another UNGA resolution (responding 
to the ILO Director General Somavia-led Commission on the Social 
Dimension of Globalization, which in 2004 produced the report "A 
fair Globalization: Creating opportunities for all"), may provide 
some relevant lessons.  Stiglitz was a member of the Somavia-led 
Commission, and Somavia is now an ex-officio member of the Stiglitz 
Commission. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) The final 2004 UNGA resolution on the Fair Globalization 
report took considerable time to discuss.  Just arriving at 
consensus to "take note" of the report required weeks of contentious 
negotiations, because delegations who had government officials on 
the Somavia-led Commission wanted the report endorsed.  The Finnish 
President was a Co-Chair of the Somavia-Commission, and the Finnish 
delegate rallied EU support to insist on endorsing, or at least 
welcoming, the report.  The G-77 also demanded endorsement of the 
report.  Informally, several EU delegates admitted that some of the 
positions in the report were not fully consistent with their 
government's policies and priorities, but they backed the Finnish 
effort nonetheless.  The final compromise was to take note of the 
report and also express appreciation for the specific efforts of the 
co-chairs and the Commission as a group. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Stiglitz, Somavia and the UNGA President appear to have 
learned from the Fair Globalization process and have raised the 
stakes by making the UNGA process, responding to the "Stiglitz 
report," time-limited and leading to a high-level meeting.  Member 
states negotiating the modalities for the June High Level meeting 
have also defused the argument that "the Stiglitz report was not 
mandated by member states and so has no status," by calling upon the 
Secretary General to prepare a report for the high level meeting. 
We can expect the Secretary General to delegate drafting of his 
report to the Department of Economic and Social Affairs' (DESA) and 
the UN Commission on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), both of which 
have served as Secretariats for the Stiglitz Commission.  Therefore 
we can expect the Secretary General's report to draw heavily on the 
Stiglitz report. Given the pressures and expectations of substance 
from a high-level meeting and the Department of Economic and Social 
Affairs' (DESA) contribution to drafting the initial negotiating 
document for the UNGA President, that draft likely will be full of 
substance.  It will be very difficult for the outcome document to 
just take note of the Secretary General's report. 
 
-------- 
Strategy 
-------- 
 
¶5. (U) Since the outcome document will be substantive, it can be an 
opportunity to put forward our own ideas on how to use the UN system 
to respond to the global financial crisis.  Focusing the 
international community on practical responses by the UN could lead 
to positive actions and would divert attention from any bad ideas in 
the draft outcome document. 
 
¶6. (SBU) In parsing out our response to the UNGA President's draft, 
a first cut may be to separate actions that might help resolve the 
financial crisis from those that might help alleviate the economic 
downturn.  The first set of ideas might be acknowledged, and 
referred for action to the Bretton Woods Institutions (BWIs), to the 
G-20, to member states, or to whoever is appropriate, with an 
invitation to consider them.  The second set of actions could then 
 
GENEVA 00000279  002 OF 004 
 
 
be reviewed and separated in terms of whose mandate they fall under 
and so distributed.  The key in doing this would be that the UNGA 
"invites" others to consider the ideas, and thus avoids creating any 
appearance of the UNGA having jurisdiction where it does not. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) Mandates:  No developed country would want to have 
financial issues and ODA decided in a forum like the UNGA where the 
principle of one country, one vote, takes precedence over economic 
weight.  In second committee and UNCTAD, the US with support from 
the EU and JUSCANZ (like-minded non-EU countries) has been vigilant 
to avoid treading on the mandates of the BWIs.   The Secretary 
General's report and UNGA President's draft negotiating document 
will likely intend to put financial and economic issues solidly in 
the UNGA fold, along the lines proposed by the Stiglitz report. 
Paul Oquist, Senior Advisor from the UNGA President's office, 
previewed this position at the Stiglitz briefing in Geneva on March 
12 (ref A), where Oquist said that the final solutions to the global 
financial crisis need to come to the UN for approval as a matter of 
legality; that the G7 and G8 have no basis in international law; and 
that international solutions affect everyone, so everyone should 
have a voice in them for them to be legitimate.  Oquist concluded 
that trillions are being spent to reinstate credibility in the 
global financial system, but we must have equality and justice where 
everyone feels their interests are represented.  Oquist explained 
further that UN leadership in responding to the financial crisis is 
the logical next step following the initial breakthrough in the 
Monterrey consensus, which gave DESA the Secretariat follow-up role 
on Financing for Development and provided an agenda for an annual 
spring UNGA-ECOSOC/BWI meeting (Monterrey Consensus paragraphs 
68-73). 
 
¶8. (SBU) It could be useful for USDEL to have a clear 
pre-negotiating consensus with like-minded countries that this UNGA 
negotiation will not address mandates of the BWIs or further expand 
UNGA's role in finance.  There may be a strong dynamic in favor of 
leaving it to the USG to play hardball and take the hit for 
protecting developed countries' interests.  Unless there is lots of 
advance preparation with the EU, encouragement of Japan to speak, 
and coordination with JUSCANZ, the US risks being isolated and 
portrayed as not only responsible for the global financial crisis 
but being the obstacle to its resolution. 
 
¶9.  (SBU) To avoid the US being isolated, USDEL may wish to 
consider: 
 
-- Getting like-minded countries to agree on redlines for this 
negotiation; 
-- Getting commitments from other countries to speak out, so from 
the onset any G-77 efforts to divide like-minded countries by 
isolating the US come to naught. 
-- Laying down redlines with the facilitators for the negotiations 
of the outcome document, in the hopes that any chairman's compromise 
proposals will take into consideration US redlines.  (Those 
facilitators are the Permanent Representatives to the UN in New York 
of Netherlands and of St. Vincent.) 
 
¶10. (SBU)  Assuming it is impossible to just take note of the 
Secretary General's report, USDEL may wish to have a back-up 
position whereby we agree to some kind of open-ended working group 
or dialogue in the appropriate forum to consider elements of the 
report in detail.  USDEL can make the short time-frame for 
negotiations work in our favor by using the time to negotiate 
practical ideas for how the UN should respond to the crisis and 
relegating the ideas from the report to dialogue and discussion in 
appropriate forums (since there is insufficient time for capitals to 
really reflect on those ideas before the June high-level meeting). 
 
---------------------------------- 
Practical Actions by the UN 
Responding to the financial crisis 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶11.  (U) The global financial crisis has caused Member States' to 
reconsider the levels of their contributions to the United Nations 
due to budget constraints they are facing in their respective 
governments.  Given overall budget constraints, the US could use 
this discussion as an opportunity to continue to press the UN 
Secretariat and UN agencies to prioritize and focus their work in 
order to more effectively use available resources.  The US could 
promote the following principles/actions: 
 
a. Recognize that collection of better statistics and use of more 
transparent, effective impact measurement tools (such as collection 
and analysis of gender-disaggregated data by member states and the 
 
GENEVA 00000279  003 OF 004 
 
 
UN) are essential if we are to effectively tailor and target 
assistance programs and UN efforts. 
 
b. Improve the UN regular budget presentation by showing expenditure 
by activity.  Providing greater transparency on expenditures by 
thematic activity would complement ongoing efforts to implement 
results-based budgeting.  More detailed reporting would allow Member 
States to direct resources to the precise activities that are having 
the most impact.  Implementation of results-based management and 
international public sector accounting standards in the UN 
Secretariat, should also draw on the best of what's used by the UN 
agencies and be compatible with UN agencies' systems. 
c. Increase its use of shared services, including possible carbon 
neutral technologies, i.e. video-conferencing. 
 
d. Call on the UN (DESA, LLDC/SIDS, NEPAD, and UNCTAD) and the 
regional economic commissions to discuss with their governing or 
advisory boards the use of the 91 new positions allocated to them by 
the fifth committee under the UN development pillar in December 
2008, and to report back to the UNGA on proposed best use of those 
positions.  The 50 positions in the regional economic commissions 
were established effective January 1 and the 41 posts for DESA, 
LLDC/SIDS, NEPAD and UNCTAD will be established effective July 1, 
¶2009.  For whichever positions are not yet filled, we could call on 
the SG to ensure those positions are deployed towards helping 
developing countries to maintain living standards and employment and 
to continue work towards achievement of the MDGs. 
 
e. Build on UN "delivering as one" experiences to implement what 
works well across all agencies and countries, so that we can most 
effectively use scarce resources.   In this regard, we might look at 
management of the Iraq Trust fund and website, which are transparent 
and structured to encourage demand-driven inter-agency coordinated 
UN projects. 
 
¶12. (U) The USG could ask each US expert that follows a UN agency or 
Economic Commission to come up with a few ideas for specific actions 
and proposals. For example for UNCTAD, we could: 
 
a. Consider supporting the UK-initiated proposal to have UNCTAD 
monitor trends in direct foreign investment in response to the 
global financial crisis. (ref B) 
 
b. Pick up on the UNCTAD gender experts meeting's recommendation 
that UNCTAD apply gender analysis to trade data and alert member 
states on a timely basis of sectors and countries where men and 
women are affected differently by the global financial crisis, so 
that member states can develop gender-aware policy responses. 
However, DESA may have more capacity to do gender analysis than 
UNCTAD, since DESA's gender office will receive five new positions 
under the development pillar, while UNCTAD has not yet established a 
gender office. 
 
c. Call for an acceleration of efforts to consolidate requests for 
trade and development related technical assistance from member 
states, and offers of assistance, into an accessible, transparent 
database (perhaps along the lines of Reliefweb).  Look at the 
Enhanced Integrated Framework for LDCs in this regard. 
 
d. Consider providing voluntary funds to help developing countries 
that have requested UNCTAD's entrepreneurial training program 
(EMPRETEC) to establish that program, since that program 
specifically supports employment creation.  Consider providing 
voluntary funds as catalysts to expand the ASYCUDA customs software 
program to all countries that have requested it, since that program 
is proven to reduce corruption and to increase recorded government 
revenues from customs. 
 
¶13.  (U) The international Trade Center (ITC) also has proven 
programs aimed at poverty reduction through exports and tourism.  We 
should consider making voluntary contributions to those programs 
since they directly support achievement of the Millennium 
Development Goals and employment creation. 
 
------- 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶14. (SBU)  This is the time, first, to use what exists to the best 
possible benefit of supporting living conditions and economic growth 
in developing countries; and then second, once we have done all we 
can to help people continue to earn livelihoods, to look 
thoughtfully at proposals for structural changes to the 
international financial architecture.  USG should use the 
 
GENEVA 00000279  004 OF 004 
 
 
opportunity created by the Stiglitz report to make the UN system 
fight fires, and not get side-tracked by a bigger debate on 
financial architecture that can happen more thoughtfully (and 
ideally elsewhere) after the existing financial system is again 
functioning more normally.  By engaging all parts of the UN system 
to work effectively within their existing mandates, in support of 
developing countries, the US would show its desire to work with the 
global community and to make the UN system, within its existing 
mandates, effectively respond to the global financial crisis.  The 
US could consider reinforcing this approach and statements against 
protectionism, by targeting more of its voluntary contributions 
towards programs that facilitate trade and generate employment in 
developing countries. END COMMENT. 
 
STORELLA #