Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06USUNNEWYORK1410
2006-07-25 20:45:00
UNCLASSIFIED
USUN New York
Cable title:  

1540: P-5 EXPERTS NEAR AGREEMENT ON DRAFT

Tags:  PREL PTER AORC KNNP UNSC PGOV 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0033
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #1410 2062045
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 252045Z JUL 06
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 9675
UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001410 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

FOR IO/UNP:EBROWN AND ISN/CPI:EWILCOX

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL PTER AORC KNNP UNSC PGOV
SUBJECT: 1540: P-5 EXPERTS NEAR AGREEMENT ON DRAFT
COMMITTEE PROGRAM OF WORK

REF: A. WUCHTE/HOTZ EMAIL--7/3/06


B. STATE 114027

C. WILCOX/BROWN/WUCHTE EMAIL--7/24/06

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001410

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

FOR IO/UNP:EBROWN AND ISN/CPI:EWILCOX

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL PTER AORC KNNP UNSC PGOV
SUBJECT: 1540: P-5 EXPERTS NEAR AGREEMENT ON DRAFT
COMMITTEE PROGRAM OF WORK

REF: A. WUCHTE/HOTZ EMAIL--7/3/06


B. STATE 114027

C. WILCOX/BROWN/WUCHTE EMAIL--7/24/06


1. Begin summary: P-5 experts met informally July 24 to
discuss a UK draft of the 12-month program of work for the
Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution
1540 (2004) (ref A). USUN stressed the U.S. desire for the
Committee to agree upon a work program soon and urged the
experts to accept a work program addressing the three
priority areas and proposals set forth in reftel. USUN also
requested the addition of new language to provide the
Committee flexibility to act upon new ideas and respond to
new developments in the course of its work. P-5 experts
agreed generally to the UK draft as written, but China and
Russia objected to inserting language tasking the Committee
to develop standards for measuring states' compliance with
resolution 1540 (2001). UKUN has circulated a slightly
revised version of the text to Committee Chairman and Slovak
PermRep Peter Burian (ref C),labeling it as a UK text
developed in consultation with P-5 experts. The 1540
Committee meets to discuss the program of work on Thursday,
July 27. The Chairman has sought Ambassador Bolton's support
in ensuring that the Committee reaches agreement then. End
summary.


2. At a meeting July 24 to discuss the UK-drafted program of
work for the 1540 Committee, China and Russia presented a few
objections to the draft. Note: The UK had prepared the text
following a June 13 meeting at which P-5 experts shared views
on the Committee's program of work. At the June meeting, the
Russian and Chinese delegation specifically objected to the
U.S. proposal for the Committee to establish regional- and
state-specific assistance priorities for stemming
proliferation activity, saying the Committee should not
differentiate among states but should work to help all states
implement the resolution. End note.


3. Russia said it could have accepted the early draft
program, which the Committee experts had prepared, and said
time constraints prevented it from gathering views from all
relevant parts of the Russian government on the UK draft. It
then joined China in opposing language tasking the Committee
to work to develop and refine standards for measuring states'
compliance with resolution 1540, in preparation for its
report to the Council. While USUN argued that the Committee
needs to develop such standards, consistent with the
requirements of para 6 of resolution 1673 (2005),China said
the Committee does not have a mandate to develop such
standards. China also opposed identifying specific areas of
resolution 1540, such as proliferation financing and means of
delivery, for which the Committee should undertake further
analysis. France proposed replacing references to compliance
and proliferation financing with language noting provisions
of resolution 1540 and 1673 that address those issues.
(Comment: France's proposal preserves the substance of the
original formulation but avoids using language that are
redlines for the Chinese and the Russian delegations. End
comment.) Russia also questioned the need for the Committee
to promote full understanding of the terms of the resolution,
including "Means of Delivery," "Non State Actor" and "Related
Materials," arguing (correctly) that the resolution already
defines those terms.


4. USUN will continue to present the points set forth in
reftel at the Committee's July 27 meeting and encourage the
Committee to include them in its program of work. Per
reftel, USUN will not block consensus if continuing to insist
upon these additional proposals would lead to deadlock. For
example, because the Chinese and Russian delegations already
have opposed specific language to allow the Committee to set
regional- and state-specific priorities for technical
assistance, USUN will not insist on adding new language to
the program of work. Similarly, because other P-5 members
are not prepared to insert specific proposals in reftel
concerning the development of an assessment template for
tracking the submission of implementation plans along with
assistance requests and the establishment of an expert pool,
USUN will not block consensus if these ideas are not
addressed specifically in the program of work.
BOLTON