VZCZCXRO8593
PP RUEHBZ RUEHDU RUEHGI RUEHJO RUEHMA RUEHMR RUEHPA RUEHRN RUEHTRO
DE RUEHNR #1273/01 1760921
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 250921Z JUN 09
FM AMEMBASSY NAIROBI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9968
INFO RUEHZO/AFRICAN UNION COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING PRIORITY 0490
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN PRIORITY 0360
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS PRIORITY 2143
RUEHCP/AMEMBASSY COPENHAGEN PRIORITY 0216
RUEHHE/AMEMBASSY HELSINKI PRIORITY 0066
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 3246
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID PRIORITY 0136
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY 0326
RUEHNY/AMEMBASSY OSLO PRIORITY 1330
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS PRIORITY 3118
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME PRIORITY 5495
RUEHSM/AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM PRIORITY 0543
RUEHTC/AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE PRIORITY 1076
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO PRIORITY 0770
RUZEFAA/HQ USAFRICOM STUTTGART GE PRIORITY
RHMFIUU/CJTF HOA  PRIORITY
RUZEFAA/CDR USAFRICOM STUTTGART GE PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC//ISA AFRICA PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 NAIROBI 001273 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
EMBASSY ADDIS ABABA: PLEASE PASS TO USAU 
DEPARTMENT FOR AF/RSA 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: MARR MASS PREL XA CA UK AS
SUBJECT: INTERNATIONALIZING CAPACITY BUILDING FOR EAST 
AFRICA'S AU STANDBY FORCE 
 
REF: A. NAIROBI 994 
     ¶B. NAIROBI 43 
 
------- 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) On June 23, the British High Commissioner convened a 
meeting with Canada, Australia, and the United States to 
garner support for their efforts to internationalize Kenya's 
peacekeeping training centers.  The British see this step as 
necessary to maintain the momentum to turn the East African 
Standby Brigade (EASBRIG) into a viable standby force.  While 
the assembled group supported the strengthening of East 
Africa's regional security capacity, others' ability to 
contribute and opinions on how to get there from here were 
diverse.  We reiterated that the lack of a Presidential 
Determination limits how we can engage with EASBRIG.  We also 
advised that because we deal on a bilateral basis with 
Kenya's training centers, their internationalization would 
require a re-assessment of how (or whether) we can continue 
to provide funding and manpower to support them. 
 
¶2. (SBU) The assembled group agreed to consider a joint 
demarche to the Government of Kenya to follow through on 
their alleged commitment to internationalize the peacekeeping 
training centers and the importance of promoting a regional 
approach to building security capacity.  There was also 
general agreement that the donor community should consider 
using the next Friends of EASBRIG meeting, tentatively 
scheduled for July 14 in Addis Ababa, and the EASBRIG Chiefs 
of Defense Staff and Ministers' Summit, tentatively planned 
for August in Addis Ababa, as opportunities to talk more 
about the way forward.  End Summary. 
 
¶3. (U) This cable contains an action request. See para 12. 
 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
UK Investment in East African Security Capacity 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶4. (SBU)  On June 23, British High Commissioner Robert 
Macaire convened a meeting that included the Chiefs of 
Mission and Defense Advisors of Canada, Australia, and the UK 
as well as PolOff and Deputy KUSLO.  Also present was COL 
Andy Mason, the UK's liaison officer to the EASBRIG 
Coordination Mechanism (EASBRICOM). 
 
¶5. (SBU) Macaire said that the British government is anxious 
to ensure its investment in developing a regional training 
platform for East African security forces through the 
International Peace Support Training Center (IPSTC) and the 
Humanitarian Peace Support School (HPSS - formerly known as 
the International Mine Action Training Center (IMATC)), both 
located on the outskirts of Nairobi, are not in vain.  To 
keep these organizations viable, he argued, their management 
must be internationalized in the form of a donor-led board of 
directors.  The Kenyan military is operationally in charge of 
both organizations and as a result they do not function as 
true regional organizations, Macaire said.  Also, the 
European Union would like to support the development of East 
Africa's regional security capacity, and the establishment of 
an international board of directors for a merged IPSTC-HPSS 
training facility would allow EU member states to donate 
funding more easily.  The ultimate goal of these 
institutions, Macaire continued, is to create a viable 
standby force in the form of EASBRIG, the only organization 
that has the African Union (AU) mandate for maintaining peace 
 
NAIROBI 00001273  002 OF 003 
 
 
and security in the region. (Note: The UK Ministry of Defense 
through the British Peace Support Team has indeed made a 
significant investment in establishing and developing all 
three of these institutions with a good degree of success to 
date, and their guiding hand is still very much visible.  End 
Note.) 
 
¶6. (SBU) Macaire asked the Canadians, Australians, and 
Americans together to get a sense of their willingness to (a) 
jointly demarche the Kenyans on the need to follow through on 
their alleged commitment to internationalize the management 
of the training institutions, and (b) provide additional 
support to keep the training institutions sustainable, 
particularly in the form of trainers posted to HPSS's new 
Tactical Peace Support Operations School.  (Note: While 
Macaire said that the British Government is not planning to 
pull their security assistance away from Kenya in the same 
way they have in parts of West Africa, he emphasized that 
they could not maintain their current level of military 
support. End Note.) 
------------------- 
Diplomats' Reaction 
------------------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) The Canadians and Australians discussed their 
current and potential future support to capacity building. 
In both cases, support is limited and still on a year-to-year 
basis.  Neither mission appeared to have strong opinions on 
the internationalization issue, although Australian High 
Commissioner Lisa Filipetto did express the need to work 
through the AU and asked whether it would be possible to fund 
IPSTC through the AU, perhaps through a memorandum of 
understanding. 
 
¶8. (SBU) We reiterated our EASBRIG policy: the United States 
is happy to provide bilateral support to Kenya's training 
centers in the form of funding and liaison officers.  We also 
support bilateral assistance to EASBRIG member countries that 
can be used to support EASBRIG's ultimate goals; however, the 
lack of a Presidential Determination ties our hands in 
providing direct support to EASBRIG, and any 
internationalization of Kenya's training centers may 
constrain our ability to support them as well. 
 
------------- 
The Way Ahead 
------------- 
 
¶9. (SBU) Comment: It is Post's understanding that the 
Department is not ready to move forward with a request for a 
Presidential Determination on EASBRIG because the 
organization is not formally recognized by the member states' 
parliaments and is, therefore, not yet robust enough to be 
recognized as an international organization.  In Post's view, 
EASBRIG has some serious sustainability and commitment 
problems, as described in ref B.  Potential U.S. funding 
implications aside, the goal to internationalize IPSTC's 
management would almost certainly make the institutions 
easier to donate to for the rest of the international 
community should they decide to do so.  However, it could 
also decrease member states' incentive to take real ownership 
of their own regional security capacity, which is one of the 
major factors holding EASBRIG back. 
 
¶10. (SBU) Comment, cont.: We also have our doubts, frankly, 
about the level of sophistication that the UK is trying to 
infuse in its training regimen (e.g., combined military, 
police and civilian planning and operations); these goals are 
 
NAIROBI 00001273  003 OF 003 
 
 
too ambitious to become a reality any time soon, especially 
given the current skill levels of member states' security 
forces.  How can EASBRIG member states take ownership of a 
template they will never be able to maintain without outside 
assistance?  Western countries have certainly not mastered 
the art of such combined operations.  On the other hand, it 
is EASBRIG (not the East African Community) that has the AU's 
mandate for peace and security in East Africa.  How, then, to 
move forward? 
 
¶11. (SBU) Comment, cont.: In our view, it is worth 
considering beginning a more strategic dialogue, perhaps at 
both the member state and AU level, about the Presidential 
Determination issue with an eye toward encouraging greater 
ownership by EASBRIG member countries.  The British believe 
that helping member states finalize the draft Harmonized 
Policy Framework will be a step in the right direction.  We 
at Post think this may be of assistance, but it will be more 
important to listen to what the EASBRIG member states 
themselves are prepared to commit to vice projecting our 
plans onto them.  The next Friends of EASBRIG meeting, 
tentatively scheduled to take place in Addis Ababa on July 
14, will allow the Friends to discuss these issues among 
ourselves.  An ideal place for commencing this larger 
dialogue with the AU and EASBRIG member states is at the 
EASBRIG Chiefs of Defense Staff and Ministers' Summit, 
tentatively planned for August in Addis Ababa.  Although 
non-EASBRIG members (i.e., Friends of EASBRIG) have not 
regularly attended such summits, we believe that including 
the "Friends" either in the summit or in the margins of the 
summit would initiate a constructive and direct dialogue 
between AU/EASBRIG members and donor partners/governments. 
End Comment. 
 
¶12. (SBU) Action Request: The UK is hosting a meeting on July 
3 to explain in more detail the IPSTC board proposal, and is 
inviting UNDP, Germany, Kenya, and the United States among 
others.  Post requests that the Department review existing 
policy on U.S. support to IPSTC and HPSS to identify any 
potential difficulties with future funding streams and/or 
manning should these institutions fall under the management 
of an international board of directors.  Post also requests 
that the Department outline more fully the steps needed for 
EASBRIG to gain recognition as an international organization 
under a Presidential Determination and consider turning this 
into a larger outreach strategy.  Finally, we expect the 
British to circulate draft talking points for a joint 
demarche to the Kenyans soon.  We will forward these to the 
Department for approval on receipt.  End Action Request. 
RANNEBERGER