JCIC-XXVII: (U) UKRAINIAN GRIEVANCES WITH CTR AND

S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 GENEVA 002749 SIPDIS DEPT FOR T, VCI, ISN, EUR AND S/NIS DOE FOR NA-24 JCS FOR J5/DDINMA AND J5/IN SECDEF FOR OSD/ISP AND OSD/ACP NAVY FOR CNO-N5GP AND DIRSSP DTRA FOR OSA AND DIRECTOR NSC FOR LUTI DIA FOR RAR-3 E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/10/2015 TAGS: PARM KACT US RS UP BO KZ START JCIC INF SUBJECT: JCIC-XXVII: (U) UKRAINIAN GRIEVANCES WITH CTR AND INTEREST IN FOLLOW-ON TO START REF: A. GENEVA 2712 (JCIC-XXVII-038) ¶B. GENEVA 2719 (JCIC-XXVII-039) Classified By: Jerry A. Taylor, U.S. Representative to the Joint Compliance and Inspection Commission (JCIC). Reasons: 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (U) This is JCIC-XXVII-046. ¶2. (U) Meeting Date: November 8, 2005 Time: 4:00 - 5:00 P.M. Place: U.S. Mission, Geneva -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶3. (S) Ukraine took the opportunity, during a bilateral meeting at the U.S. Mission on November 8, 2005, to complain about its perceived lack of support from the United States Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program. The U.S. Delegation pointed out that this subject was not within the framework of the JCIC, but that it would forward the Ukrainian concerns to the appropriate authorities in Washington. ¶4. (S) Ukraine also asked whether or not the U.S. had considered a follow-on to the START Treaty. The U.S. Delegation said that the U.S. had begun consideration of such a process at high levels, but had not yet completed it and, therefore, had no comment. Shevtsov said that Ukraine would be a willing participant in a follow-on to the START Treaty if the U.S. could provide Ukraine monetary incentives to help it eliminate the remnants of nuclear weapons systems. -------------- UKRAINIAN GRIEVANCES -------------- ¶5. (S) At a bilateral working group meeting at the U.S. Mission on November 8, 2005, the Ukrainian Delegation briefed the U.S. Delegation regarding the situation "on the ground" at Pavlograd. They strongly defended the water wash-out method as the best means of eliminating SS-24 solid rocket motors (SRMs) while, at the same time, "recycling" the solid propellant into commercial explosive material for use in Ukraine's mining industry. They expressed their "discomfort" with a perceived lack of funding from the U.S. Government. Specifically, the Ukrainian Delegation claimed that the U.S. was not fully implementing its obligations under the CTR Program. They expressed their belief that people at the U.S. "CTR Organization" were balking at getting funding deemed necessary for solid propellant elimination. In particular, they perceived a lack of funding for safe storage of SRMs at the Pavlograd site. Dotsenko asserted that while he believed that the U.S. Government had invested over $25 million on the water wash-out facility, Ukraine believed that the amount spent was considerably less, at around $2.5 million. As for Pavlograd, they claimed that U.S. funding had dried up from $2 million per year to less than $300,000 per year. ¶6. (S) Buttrick responded that, while this issue was not strictly within the framework of the JCIC, he would certainly forward the Ukrainian concerns to the appropriate people in Washington. Further, Mullins explained the high level at which CTR policy was made within the U.S. Government, as well as the high degree of professionalism that goes along with executing this policy. Mullins also encouraged the Ukrainian Delegation to consider eliminating SRMs by explosive detonation, similar to the C-4 elimination procedure he witnessed earlier this year in Utah. However, Shevtsov remained faithful to Ukraine's water wash-out method -- no matter what the cost -- because it provided "economic return" in the form of industrial explosives used in mining. Shevtsov also stated that Ukraine would not be able to finish its START eliminations in the time frame of the Treaty without international monetary support. In this regard, he mentioned possible Japanese financing, but said that Japan had conditioned its assistance on U.S. sponsorship, even if it were symbolic. Lastly, Shevtsov linked the CTR funding issue to Ukraine's Pavlograd issues discussed earlier in JCIC-XXVII (REFS A and B). The U.S. Delegation repeated that it would take Ukraine's message back to Washington. -------------- UKRAINE ASKS ABOUT START FOLLOW-ON -------------- ¶7. (S) Shevtsov asked whether the U.S. had plans to extend the START Treaty. The U.S. Delegation said that the U.S. had begun to consider the question at high levels, but had not yet completed its review and, therefore, had no comment. Buttrick turned the question around to the Ukrainians, and Shevtsov responded that Ukraine would be a willing participant in a follow-on to the START Treaty if the United States would provide Ukraine monetary incentives to help it eliminate remnants of nuclear weapons systems. According to Shevtsov, those remnants included large quantities of heptyl at eight sites, 17,000 tons of cruise missile fuel, and radiological and nuclear material. ¶8. (U) Documents exchanged. None. ¶9. (U) Participants: U.S. Mr. Mullins Mr. Buttrick Mr. Hay Mr. Singer Mr. Smith Mr. Hopkins (Int) Ukraine Dr. Shevtsov Col Taran Mr. Dotsenko Mr. Fedotov ¶10. (U) Taylor sends. Cassel