CNIES UPDATE: ECUADOR DISMISSES STOCK TEXT

C O N F I D E N T I A L QUITO 000666 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/22/2015 TAGS: SNAR MOPS MASS PREL EC EARI SUBJECT: CNIES UPDATE: ECUADOR DISMISSES STOCK TEXT REF: A. QUITO 491 ¶B. QUITO 444 ¶C. QUITO 257 ¶D. 04 QUITO 3032 Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Arnold Chacon, Reasons 1.4 (b),(d) ¶1. (C) SUMMARY: Attempting to dissipate confusion and spur movement on CNIES negotiations, Embassy officers called on Ecuadorian Air Force (FAE) leaders March 22 and worked through the USG boilerplate line-by-line. The FAE remains convinced, however, that current agreement language does not reflect Ecuadorian realities. They offered to draft counter-text focusing more on provision of CNIES data and prohibitions on its use, and less on aerial interceptions, lethal or non-lethal. Fearing negotiations otherwise dead, we recommend hearing the FAE out. END SUMMARY. ¶2. (C) The Embassy's Pol-Mil Officer and USAF Mission Chief visited FAE HQ March 22 for a meeting with Brigadier General and Chief of Air Operations Jorge Moreno. Their intent was two-fold; to explain that Washington was averse to the FAE's proposed CNIES text changes, and to identify which sections were causing confusion and consternation among FAE leaders. Interrupting, Moreno claimed Ecuador considered the CNIES system useful, in that it showed high-level leadership -- both military and civilian -- how narcotraffickers increasingly used eastern Ecuadorian airspace. He hoped the FAE could continue to receive the signal. CNIES aerial tracks did not arrive in real-time, however, but rather some 15 minutes after-the-fact. Moreno therefore argued the data was of no use in aerial interdiction. ¶3. (C) The FAE general loved the idea of ramping up an Airbridge Denial-like program in Ecuador. He would need a massive infusion of USG cash to do so, of course, to provide for A-37 refurbishment, new radar installations, and communications upgrades. He was cognizant that U.S. aerial interception aid was not forthcoming, instead using his discourse to introduce his fundamental problem with the proposed CNIES accord. If, he asked, our intention was to govern use of CNIES data, why did the agreement feature but one or two paragraphs on CNIES, but three pages on interdiction provisions? Ecuador's moribund aircraft fleet precluded Peru-like lethal interceptions, he added. ¶4. (C) Moreno's CNIES accord would be one-fourth the length of ours. A salutary paragraph, a definition of the CNIES systems and its capabilities, a provision or two governing how Ecuador could and could not utilize the aerial tracks, and a closing -- no more. He offered up his staff to draft the counter-text, and asked for detail on the U.S. legislation governing (and potentially penalizing) interceptions conducted with "USG assistance." ¶5. (C) Emboffs countered by claiming that a half-dozen Latin American nations already had inked the agreement, as-is. If the CNIES data did not assist in shoot-downs, and if the FAE's fleet was so decrepit as to make interceptions impossible, why protest the current language? They emphasized that Washington was unlikely to accept wholesale changes to the U.S.-proposed text. Seeing the Ecuadorians dug in, however, Emboffs floated another idea: a change to the GoE's dipnote response, more closely hewing to Ecuadorian "realities." Positively, they secured Moreno's buy-in to what we believe our key goal in the negotiations: Ecuador agreeing it would not conduct lethal and/or ICAO non-compliant interceptions utilizing CNIES data or other USG-provided assistance. ¶6. (C) Concluding, Emboffs asserted they could buy Ecuador no more CNIES time. If an agreement could not be reached shortly, the USG would flip the system switch. Moreno again offered his staff's full cooperation in finding mutually acceptable agreement text. ¶7. (C) COMMENT: We aimed to clear confusion with our visit to Moreno; we believe we succeeded. Unfortunately, we have reached a substantive impasse with our FAE interlocutors that looks unbreakable without USG flexibility on text. We therefore recommend giving the FAE counter-proposal a serious look, especially if it satisfies our basic CNIES liability concerns. If it does not, however, we won't protest a system shutdown. END COMMENT. CHACON