SECURITY ENVIRONMENT PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRE (SEPQ)

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 VILNIUS 001013

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

DEPARTMENT FOR DS/IP/ITA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ASEC LH PTER
SUBJECT: SECURITY ENVIRONMENT PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRE (SEPQ)
FOR LITHUANIA - FALL, 2005

REF: SECSTATE 162859

ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS PROVIDED IN REFTEL ARE AS FOLLOWS:


1. DEMONSTRATIONS


A. ARE THERE ANY ETHNIC OR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES IN COUNTRY
CAPABLE OF CARRYING OUT SIGNIFICANT ANTI-AMERICAN
DEMONSTRATIONS? No


B. HAVE THERE BEEN ANTI-AMERICAN DEMONSTRATIONS IN THE
COUNTRY WITHIN THE LAST 12 MONTHS? No


C. HAVE DEMONSTRATIONS TAKEN PLACE NEAR OR IN FRONT OF U.S.
DIPLOMATIC FACILITIES? No


D. WHAT IS THE AVERAGE SIZE OF AN ANTI-AMERICAN
DEMONSTRATION? N/A


E. ARE ANTI-AMERICAN DEMONSTRATIONS USUALLY TRIGGERED BY
U.S. FOREIGN POLICY INITIATIVES, MILITARY ACTIONS, OR BY
DOMESTIC ISSUES? N/A


F. ARE DEMONSTRATIONS GENERALLY VIOLENT OR PEACEFUL? N/A


G. IF VIOLENT, HAVE ANY DEMONSTRATIONS RESULTED IN DAMAGE
TO USG PROPERTY OR INJURIES TO USG EMPLOYEES? N/A


H. IF VIOLENT, HAVE ANY DEMONSTRATORS EVER PENETRATED OUR
PERIMETER SECURITY LINE? N/A


I. HAVE THERE BEEN ANTI-GOVERNMENT DEMONSTRATIONS IN THE
COUNTRY WITHIN THE LAST 12 MONTHS? Yes


J. HAVE DEMONSTRATIONS TAKEN PLACE NEAR OR IN FRONT OF U.S.
DIPLOMATIC FACILITIES? No


K. WHAT IS THE AVERAGE SIZE OF AN ANTI-GOVERNMENT
DEMONSTRATION? 20-50 people


L. ARE DEMONSTRATIONS GENERALLY VIOLENT OR PEACEFUL? Peaceful


M. IF VIOLENT, HAVE ANY DEMONSTRATIONS RESULTED IN DAMAGE
TO USG PROPERTY? N/A



2. (SBU) MACRO CONFLICT CONDITIONS


A. IS THE HOST COUNTRY ENGAGED IN AN INTERSTATE OR
INTRASTATE CONFLICT? (THIS MAY INCLUDE BATTLES BETWEEN
ORGANIZED AND VIOLENT DRUG CARTELS) No


B. IF AN INTRASTATE CONFLICT, IS IT AN INSURGENCY LIMITED
TO A SPECIFIC REGION OR IS IT A COUNTRYWIDE CIVIL WAR? N/A


C. IF LIMITED TO A SPECIFIC REGION, ARE ANY U.S. DIPLOMATIC
FACILITIES LOCATED IN THIS REGION? N/A


D. HAVE ANY OF THE FACTIONS INVOLVED IN INTRASTATE
CONFLICTS SIGNALED OR DEMONSTRATED AN ANTI-AMERICAN
ORIENTATION? N/A


3. (SBU) HOST COUNTRY CAPABILITIES


A. ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES PROFESSIONAL AND WELL-
TRAINED? Yes


B. HAVE THEY BEEN TRAINED BY U.S. AGENCIES? IF SO, PLEASE
ELABORATE ON EFFECTIVENESS OF TRAINING. The USG has provided
several training programs for host nation law enforcement.
The response from Lithuanian personnel and USG trainers has
been extremely positive.


C. ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES CONFRONTED WITH SERIOUS,
WIDESPREAD CORRUPTION INSIDE THEIR AGENCIES? No


D. ARE THE INTELLIGENCE SERVICES PROFESSIONAL AND CAPABLE
OF DETERRING TERRORIST ACTIONS? Yes


E. HAVE THE INTELLIGENCE SERVICES BEEN COOPERATIVE WITH
U.S. EMBASSY REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION AND SUPPORT? Yes


F. ASSUMING THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT TERRORIST THREATS
IN RECENT YEARS, HAVE HOST COUNTRY SECURITY SERVICES BEEN
ABLE TO SCORE ANY MAJOR ANTI-TERRORISM SUCCESSES? N/A


G. HAS HOST COUNTRY BEEN RESPONSIVE (RE: TIMELINESS AND
ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES) TO EMBASSY REQUESTS FOR PROTECTIVE
SECURITY? Yes

H. HOW DOES THE EMBASSY ASSESS THE OVERALL SECURITY AT
MAJOR AIRPORTS IN THE COUNTRY? (EXCELLENT; VERY GOOD,
GOOD/AVERAGE; POOR) GOOD

I. HOW EFFECTIVE ARE CUSTOMS AND IMMIGRATION CONTROLS
AGENCIES? (EFFECTIVE; AVERAGE; INEFFECTIVE) Effective


J. HOW EFFECTIVE ARE BORDER PATROL FORCES? (EFFECTIVE;
AVERAGE; INEFFECTIVE) Effective

--------------
INDIGENOUS TERRORISM
--------------

4. (SBU) ANTI-AMERICAN TERRORIST GROUPS


A. ARE THERE INDIGENOUS, ANTI-AMERICAN TERRORIST GROUPS IN
COUNTRY? No.


B. IF YES, HOW MANY? PLEASE NAME GROUPS. N/A


C. HAVE GROUPS CARRIED OUT ANTI-AMERICAN ATTACKS
WITHIN THE LAST 12 MONTHS? N/A


D. WERE ANY OF THESE LETHAL ATTACKS? N/A


E. HAVE GROUPS ATTACKED U.S. DIPLOMATIC TARGETS? N/A


F. HAVE GROUPS ATTACKED U.S. BUSINESS, U.S. MILITARY,
OR U.S. RELATED TARGETS? N/A


G. HAVE GROUPS LIMITED THEIR ATTACKS TO SPECIFIC REGIONS OR
DO THEY OPERATE COUNTRY-WIDE? N/A


H. IF ATTACKS ARE LIMITED TO REGIONS, ARE THERE ANY
U.S. DIPLOMATIC FACILITIES LOCATED IN THESE REGIONS? N/A


5. (SBU) OTHER INDIGENOUS TERRORIST GROUPS


A. ARE THERE OTHER INDIGENOUS TERRORIST GROUPS (NOT
ANTI-AMERICAN)IN COUNTRY? No.


B. IF YES, HOW MANY? PLEASE NAME GROUPS. N/A


C. HAVE GROUPS CARRIED OUT ATTACKS IN THE CAPITAL OR IN
AREAS WHERE U.S. DIPLOMATIC FACILITIES ARE LOCATED? N/A


D. WERE ATTACKS LETHAL AND/OR INDISCRIMINATE? N/A


E. HAVE THERE BEEN ANY AMERICANS KILLED OR INJURED IN
THESE ATTACKS? N/A

--------------
TRANSNATIONAL TERRORISM
--------------


6. (SBU) TRANSNATIONAL TERRORIST INDICATORS


A. ARE THERE ANY FOREIGN TERRORIST GROUPS THAT HAVE A
PRESENCE IN COUNTRY? PROVIDE NAMES. No.


B. HOW DOES POST ASSESS THIS PRESENCE? IS IT AN
OPERATIONAL CELL? FINANCIAL CELL? SUPPORT CELL?
PROPAGANDA CELL? N/A


C. IS THE HOST GOVERNMENT SYMPATHETIC TO THESE GROUPS? N/A


D. ARE THERE SUSPECT NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
(NGOS) IN THE COUNTRY THAT HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH ANY
OF THESE GROUPS? N/A


E. ARE THERE ANY ETHNIC OR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES IN
COUNTRY THAT ARE SYMPATHETIC TO THESE GROUPS? N/A


F. HOW DOES POST ASSESS THE LEVEL, INTENT, AND SCOPE OF
HOSTILE INTELLIGENCE SERVICES (IRAN, IRAQ, SYRIA,
SERBIA, SUDAN, ET. AL.) IN COUNTRY RELATIVE TO
POTENTIAL ANTI-AMERICAN TERRORIST ACTS? The threat level is
low.


G. HOW DOES POST ASSESS THE AVAILABILITY OF WEAPONS AND
EXPLOSIVES IN COUNTRY OR FROM NEARBY COUNTRIES FOR
HOSTILE TERRORIST ELEMENTS? The availability of weapons can
be considered high. Although gun control laws within
Lithuania are relatively stringent,weapons and explosives are
readily available in nearby Belarus and Russia (Kaliningrad).
This problem is exacerbated by the fact that there are still
many weapons caches throughout Lithuania, which were created
by Lithuanian nationalists shortly after the collapse of the
Soviet Union.

KELLY