IRISH RESPONSE TO SA/LW MARKING AND TRACING

UNCLAS DUBLIN 000077

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PARM
SUBJECT: IRISH RESPONSE TO SA/LW MARKING AND TRACING
DEMARCHE

REF: STATE 9788


1. On January 21, Post delivered reftel talking points to
Adrian McDaid, Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Counselor
for Disarmament and Non-proliferation and Ireland's
representative at the January 24-February 4 UN Small Arms and
Light Weapons (SA/LW) negotiation session. McDaid said that
the Irish view was consistent with the EU position that the
proposed international instrument on the marking and tracing
of SA/LW should be legally (versus politically) binding. He
noted that the EU position reflected the majority view of
participating countries in the first UN negotiating session
on the proposed instrument in June 2004. This majority view
was based on the belief that the instrument would be more
effective if it had legal force. McDaid disagreed with
reftel talking point that the draft instrument was
commensurate with a legally binding agreement, noting that
Ambassador Thalman's text had not prejudged the issue. He
added that both the EU and Ireland believed that to debate at
the outset of next week's negotiation whether the instrument
should be politically or legally binding would consume too
much time. The better option, McDaid suggested, would be to
focus first on the substance of the draft instrument, with a
view to producing a second draft by the end of the first week
of the negotiations. The EU troika, he observed, planned to
meet with U.S. representatives at that time, and Ambassador
Thalman also planned to set aside a half-day to discuss the
nature of the instrument.


2. Ireland likewise supported the EU position that the
proposed instrument should cover ammunition, noted McDaid.
He said that there had been a fairly strong level of support
for this position among the EU Member States during the June
2004 negotiating session. He added that most African
countries also subscribed to this position, which was based
on the view that the instrument was the best international
tool on offer to address ammunition as a segment of the SA/LW
issue. McDaid pointed out that Germany had taken the lead
among the EU Member States to approach skeptical countries
like the United States on the merits of including ammunition
in the instrument.
BENTON