VZCZCXRO7006
RR RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHBW RUEHDA RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA
RUEHLN RUEHLZ RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHTC #0362 1151455
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 241455Z APR 08
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1389
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEHAT/AMCONSUL AMSTERDAM 3955
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASH DC
UNCLAS THE HAGUE 000362
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
STATE FOR EEB/IFD/ODF (CHARBAUGH), EUR/WE (TSMITH)
TREASURY FOR DO/IA/IDP
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAID PREL TU NL
SUBJECT: DUTCH ON TURKEY'S CHANGE OF STATUS AT THE EBRD
REF: STATE 41999
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED; PLEASE HANDLE ACCORDINGLY.
1. (SBU) Freek Keppels, Head of International Economy and
Financial Institutions, Ministry of Finance (MOF), told
Econoff April 24 that the GONL takes a "positive attitude"
towards Turkey becoming a country of operation at EBRD but
agrees with USG that a decision should not be made hastily.
Keppels, along with Gerben Planting, Deputy Head of
International Financial Institutions Section, Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, and Karen Rot, Senior Policy Advisor,
Foreign Financial Relations Directorate, MOF, added that the
GONL is amenable to expanding the EBRD's mandate going
forward. They explained, however, that the Dutch attached
three caveats to any such expansion: first, the EBRD should
"stick to what it is good at;" second, an expanded EBRD
mission must avoid duplication with other multilateral
financial institutions; and third, any changes to the EBRD's
mandate should enjoy a "wide consensus" and avoid alienating
shareholders.
2. (SBU) Regarding the USG proposal for an accelerated
strategic review, Keppels said that a discussion of EBRD's
fundamentals "appeals to us." Rot predicted this would be a
"tough discussion," especially coming on the heels of a
contentious debate over the EBRD's dividend distribution and
in advance of a scheduled 2009 capital adequacy review.
Keppels and Planting said that before reaching a final
position on the USG proposal, the GONL would need to gain a
firm grasp on the following three questions:
-- How broad should the strategic review be and how would it
relate to the 2009 review of the EBRD's capital adequacy?
-- What does the USG envision as the strategic review's
outcome?
-- Is it feasible to conclude a strategic review within a
six-month timeframe?
Gallagher