JAPANESE QUESTIONS REGARDING THE GLOBAL INITIATIVE

UNCLAS TOKYO 005558 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KNNP MCAP PINR PINS PTER SUBJECT: JAPANESE QUESTIONS REGARDING THE GLOBAL INITIATIVE TO COMBAT NUCLEAR TERRORISM KEY DOCUMENTS, PREPARATION FOR INITIAL MEETING IN OCTOBER REF: SECSTATE 155988 ¶1. This is an action message. See para 5. ¶2. SUMMARY: Russian Embassy Political Officer Sergey I. Kuznetsov and U.S. Embassy Science and Technical Affairs Officer Ayanna Hobbs met with Japanese counterparts at MOFA on 25 September. Using the three briefing documents (reftel) officers explained the points, and using a timeline, highlighted the important dates, including the date change of the initial meeting. Japan raised numerous questions regarding the Initiative. END SUMMARY. -------------- MOFA's Comments -------------- ¶3. Japan welcomed the Initiative and stated its continued support in the fight against terrorism. They added that the same people working on the Initiative are also responsible for ratifying the Nuclear Terrorism Convention. Therefore Japan may not be able to provide a response by 29 September. MOFA plans to have interagency discussions on GI starting 26 September. Japan reiterated that if it is unable to provide comments by 29 September, it does not mean Japan does not support the initiative. ¶4. MOFA's International Nuclear Energy Cooperation Division Principal Deputy Director Zentaro Naganuma conveyed a message that Japan is currently undertaking legal checks and measures to ratify the Nuclear Terrorism Convention. Japanese Embassy officials in the U.S. and Russia will be in contact with their counterparts for further discussion. Japan welcomes cooperation from the U.S. and Russia on this matter. -------------- MOFA's Questions -------------- ¶5. In general, Japan's questions centered around the Explanatory Notes to Statement of Principles and the Terms of Reference for Implementation and Assessment. Their main concerns were on member participation, financial obligations and procedures for carrying out training exercises and/or workshops. ¶A. What kind of representation is expected from other initial partner nations? What will be the level of participation from each partner nation? (NOTE: For example, other government entities, specialists, scientists/technicians, law enforcement) ¶B. Will inclusion/membership be limited to IAEA countries or will the offer be open to others? ¶C. What distinction will be made between initial partner nations and those countries which join after the Statement of Principles has been endorsed? ¶D. What are the reactions or responses to this Initiative from other countries? (NOTE: China was specifically mentioned). ¶E. As Morocco is hosting the event, will Morocco become a partner nation or only act an observer at the initial meeting? If Morocco does becomes a partner, Japan needs a statement to issue to the press, which explains the criteria or requirements for becoming a partner nation and a justification for Morocco's inclusion. ¶F. Under the second document entitled Explanatory Notes to Statement of Principles referring to the subsection titled, Activities, what is the difference between regular host Global Initiative workshops and host Global Initiative workshops, if any? In objectives 3, 4, 7, 8 regular is mentioned. In objectives 1, 2, 5, 6 it is not. ¶G. Under the second document entitled Explanatory Notes to Statement of Principles, referring to the subsection titled, Authorities, what is the meaning of meets or exceeds legal requirements? Japan is unclear of the meaning because the Nuclear Terrorism Convention has not been ratified. ¶H. Will the training exercises mentioned in the Explanatory Notes to Statement of Principles be similar to other international cooperative training, such as PSI? Who will fund the exercises? Will there be a joint or special fund? If so, what are the plans for fund creation? Will there be any expected financial obligations from the initial partner nations? ¶I. Under the third document entitled Terms of Reference for Implementation and Assessment referring to the subsection titled Responsibilities of Initiative Participants, statement number 3, what is meant by ensure adequate provision of resources? Japan understands that contributions are voluntary. However do resources mean financial resources? If so, how much will each member be assessed? If resources are not financial obligations, provide concrete information on the kind of resources expected and/or anticipated. ¶J. Will the Terms of Reference for Implementation and Assessment become a legally-binding document? ¶K. Please advise on briefing format for the 31 October presentation given by expert-level I+G*le)2Qon physical protection or its international role in combating terrorism? Should Japan's announcement include any financial commitments? If so, what amount? -------------- Participants -------------- ¶6. Japanese participants included three members from MOFA's International Nuclear Energy Cooperation Division: Principal Deputy Director Zentaro Naganuma Deputy Director Takayuki Kitagawa Officer Toshio Kaneko ¶7. Other participants included: Russian Embassy Political Officer Sergey I. Kuznetsov American Embassy Science and Technical Affairs Officer Ayanna Hobbs SCHIEFFER