SA/LW NEGOTIATIONS ON MARKING AND TRACING: FRANCE

C O N F I D E N T I A L PARIS 003844

SIPDIS

STATE FOR PM/WRA PICO AND EUR/WE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/01/2015
TAGS: MARR PREL PARM FR
SUBJECT: SA/LW NEGOTIATIONS ON MARKING AND TRACING: FRANCE
LOOKING FOR SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME

REF: A) STATE 99866 B) 5/31 RECINOS/PICO E-MAIL

Classified By: Acting Political Counselor Paul Mailhot, Reason 1.4 B/D


1. (C) Summary: France plans to work with its EU partners on
Small arms and light weapons (SA/LW) negotiations, but in an
effort to reach consensus, is prepared to take a more
pragmatic bilateral approach. The French end game is to
obtain an agreement on dealing with the illicit trade in
SA/LW, as opposed to no agreement, therefore France is
prepared to accept an Instrument that emphasizes cooperation
and is politically versus legally binding. MFA experts are
concerned that some national delegations will have a
difficult time reaching an agreement as they have included
among their delegates NGO members, who will have an
ideological agenda. In terms of implementation, France
believes that regional issues should also be factored in and
consideration should be given to assisting poor countries to
comply with an agreement. France is agnostic on record
keeping, but strongly favors NATO standards for the marking
of military SA/LW arms and ammunition. France looks forward
to working with the U.S. on an end game strategy. End
Summary.


2. (C) Ms. Marion Paradas, a DAS-equivalent director for
strategic affairs, and Jean-Francois Guillaume, action
officer for SA/LW, explained to us on June 1st that France's
starting strategy for the upcoming negotiations on marking
and tracing of SA/LW will be to back fully the EU position in
support of a legally binding document. Responding to our May
31st demarche (ref A),they indicated that France shares U.S.
concerns and, at the end of the day, is prepared to back a
politically versus legally binding Instrument. Our aim is to
obtain an agreement on the basis of cooperation, they added.
Guillaume and Paradas cautioned that other participants (no
specific country mentioned) could be expected to be less
flexible given that they have included NGOs among their
delegates. NGOs, Guillaume stated, have an agenda and are
more intent on making a point than reaching an agreement.


3. (C) In terms of tracking arms transfers via the marking
and tracing of ammunition and the SA/LW themselves, Guillaume
questioned whether we were looking at civilian and military
weapons separately. France does not see civilian arms as a
global problem, hence, the French focus is on military arms,
which are a source of destabilization in Africa, a region of
major concern to France. He explained that every country has
its own standards and rules on the registration and tracking
of civilian arms. France also agrees that the UN Firearms
Protocol already has provisions for marking, tracing, and
record-keeping, and therefore there is no need to replicate
the Protocol at the upcoming negotiations. Guillaume added
that the MFA was aware of U.S. domestic pressures (lobbies)
against registration. In terms of military ammunition and
arms, Guillaume and Paradas expressed surprise that the U.S.
has not backed the use of NATO standards. France strongly
supports the inclusion of SA/LW military ammunition in an
agreement. Paradas and Guillaume said they were unclear with
respect to the U.S. position on seized, confiscated, or
collected SA/LW, but observed that France favors the
destruction of such weapons. They understood that it might
seem more economical to redistribute such arms and ammunition
to appropriate governmental recipients, but given the fragile
nature of many governments in impoverished developing
countries, it would be more appropriate to just destroy
seized SA/LW arms and ammunition. Additionally, the French
voiced support for assisting developing countries with the
destruction of SA/LW and more generally on helping them to
implement an agreed Instrument.


4. (C) Paradas and Guillaume joked that France has and will
continue to maintain extensive archives dating to the French
revolution and beyond. France was therefore agnostic on the
30 versus 10 year proposals for record-keeping and could
support the shorter timeframe, as necessary. Returning to
the discussion of end game options, Paradas and Guillaume
observed that they could not speak for other EU member
states, but that the French approach is to support the
overall initiative next week and to seek a consensus
document, which hopefully can allow for regional differences
in implementation. As they noted earlier, France's focus is
on the problems posed by SA/LW in Africa.


WOLFF