Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06ABUDHABI2567
2006-06-21 12:17:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Cable title:  

NATO DELEGATION REPORTS ON STATUS OF DISCUSSIONS

Tags:  MARR PREL IZ AE NATO GE 
pdf how-to read a cable
This 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 SECTION 01 OF 02 ABU DHABI 002567 

SIPDIS

FOR NEA/ARP, EUR/RPM;
PM - HILLEN, LOFTUS
OSD FOR ASD RODMAN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/20/2016
TAGS: MARR PREL IZ AE NATO GE
SUBJECT: NATO DELEGATION REPORTS ON STATUS OF DISCUSSIONS
WITH UAE ON ICI

REF: 05 ABU DHABI 1376

Classified By: DCM Martin Quinn, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ABU DHABI 002567

SIPDIS

FOR NEA/ARP, EUR/RPM;
PM - HILLEN, LOFTUS
OSD FOR ASD RODMAN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/20/2016
TAGS: MARR PREL IZ AE NATO GE
SUBJECT: NATO DELEGATION REPORTS ON STATUS OF DISCUSSIONS
WITH UAE ON ICI

REF: 05 ABU DHABI 1376

Classified By: DCM Martin Quinn, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).


1. (C) Summary. On June 12, a Turkish admiral heading NATO
delegation visiting the UAE briefed diplomats of NATO
countries on progress in ICI discussions with the UAEG. UAE
interlocutors were described as well-prepped and "very
forward-leaning and positive," but are also perceived as
having "misperceptions and incorrect knowledge" about NATO's
overall goals. Delegation conveyed UAE MFA concerns about
Iranian "poor management" of nuclear facilities as well as
its apparent preference for bilateral rather than collective
military relationships. NATO delegation also relayed UAEG's
familiar position that the islands dispute with Iran would
not be resolved by force. End Summary.


2. (C) Rear Admiral Deniz Kutluk (Turkish Navy),Assistant
Director of International Military Staff, Cooperation and
Regional Security Head of NATO delegation, briefed
Ambassadors, Defense Attaches, and other diplomats of NATO
countries at the German Embassy on June 12 concerning
progress on Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI) discussions
with the UAEG. Admiral Kutluk described his Emirati
interlocutors (MG Ali Al-Kaabi, BG Al Salah) as "very
forward-leaning and positive," noting that they came forward
with new ideas, expressing interest in the menu of NATO
programs and in force standardization. He said that the UAE,
like NATO, recognizes the primary security threats as
terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. He further
described the Emiratis as having come well-prepped for their
meetings, asking relevant and specific questions.


3. (C) In this regard Kutluk says they discussed intel
exchange and info sharing within a framework security
agreement. Genevieve Labelle (Canadian Member of NATO Office
of Security) noted that there was no military contact at the
UAE Embassy in Brussels, a situation the UAEG may seek to
remedy as it seeks to comprehend the complexity of NATO's
organizational structure.


4. (C) However, the conclusion of the NATO delegation is that
the UAE may eventually be ready to cooperate even beyond the
limits of the program, but for the time being has "some
misperceptions and incorrect knowledge" of NATO's overall
goals and intentions in the Middle East region as well as how
it operates as a coalition of sovereign states. Kutluk noted
a discrepancy between the ability of NATO and that of the GCC
in terms of "fast reactive" capability.


5. (C) With regard to Iran and its nuclear ambitions, Kutluk
said the UAEG expressed primary concern about the "poor
management" of Iranian nuclear power generators and the
likelihood of nuclear fallout following accidents. The UAEG
made it clear that the Abu Musa and Tunb islands dispute with
Iran will not be resolved by force.


6. (C) Kutluk said that the MFA U/S Abdullah Rashid al-Nuaimi
described to him the effects of regional
turbulence on UAE's development, indicating that it had not
been easy for a 35-year-old nation to cope with security
challenges. According to Kutluk, al-Nuaimi posed questions
about the relative advantages of a collective (NATO) versus a
bilateral (US-UAE, US-UK) military relationship.


7. (C) During discussion period, UK military attach opined
that owing to the tribal habit and structure of the UAE it
would take 50-60 years to develop a credible military
capacity, noting fundamental mistrust of anything other than
a bilateral relationship and inherent difficulty grasping the
NATO concept. He noted that the UAE had approached the UK
about deploying an additional 600 UAE soldiers to Helman in
Afghanistan and also the U.S. about deploying as many as

1000.


8. (C) The Turkish military representative confirmed that
despite earlier indications to the contrary, the UAE did not
send observers to the Anatolian Sun exercise in Turkey. The
consensus was that the UAE, while selecting nineteen (19)
activities from the menu of NATO possibilities, would
probably prefer a quieter, less high profile form of
cooperation for the immediate future.


9. (C) Admiral Kutluk also expressed interest in hearing
ideas on how Saudi Arabia and Oman would likely respond to
ICI. The admiral indicated that he personally had no future
plans to return to the UAE in order to continue ICI
discussions on behalf of NATO.
SISON