Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05THEHAGUE2126
2005-08-03 05:52:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy The Hague
Cable title:
NETHERLANDS/UZBEKISTAN: MORE ON DENIED DUTCH
how-toThis record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 002126
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/03/2005
TAGS: MARR MOPS PGOV PINS PREL PTER UZ NL
SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS/UZBEKISTAN: MORE ON DENIED DUTCH
OVERFLIGHT
REF: TASHKENT 2077
Classified By: Political Counselor Andrew Schofer, Reasons 1.4 (b,d)
(C) Polmiloff followed up on August 2 with Joop Nijssen,
Deputy Head of Operations at the Dutch MFA, regarding the
July 29 flight clearance denial by the GOU of a Dutch
military plane transiting from Afghanistan (reftel). Nijssen
acknowledged that the denial was regrettable and most likely
politically motivated, as suggested reftel. He noted,
however, that while the purpose of the Dutch overflight was
"military in nature", the plane itself had been contracted
commercially. As such, Nijssen said the GOU was technically
"within its rights" to deny the overflight as the request for
flight clearance fell short of the required 30-day advanced
notice for commercial flights. He confirmed that only a
10-day advanced notice is required for military planes.
Nijssen suggested that, given this technicality, the Dutch
did not have a strong case for a protest and therefore did
not plan to make an issue out of the denial.
SOBEL
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/03/2005
TAGS: MARR MOPS PGOV PINS PREL PTER UZ NL
SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS/UZBEKISTAN: MORE ON DENIED DUTCH
OVERFLIGHT
REF: TASHKENT 2077
Classified By: Political Counselor Andrew Schofer, Reasons 1.4 (b,d)
(C) Polmiloff followed up on August 2 with Joop Nijssen,
Deputy Head of Operations at the Dutch MFA, regarding the
July 29 flight clearance denial by the GOU of a Dutch
military plane transiting from Afghanistan (reftel). Nijssen
acknowledged that the denial was regrettable and most likely
politically motivated, as suggested reftel. He noted,
however, that while the purpose of the Dutch overflight was
"military in nature", the plane itself had been contracted
commercially. As such, Nijssen said the GOU was technically
"within its rights" to deny the overflight as the request for
flight clearance fell short of the required 30-day advanced
notice for commercial flights. He confirmed that only a
10-day advanced notice is required for military planes.
Nijssen suggested that, given this technicality, the Dutch
did not have a strong case for a protest and therefore did
not plan to make an issue out of the denial.
SOBEL