Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07BERLIN1134
2007-06-06 13:42:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Berlin
Cable title:
CFE: GERMANY REACTS POSITIVELY TO U.S. THINKING ON
how-toVZCZCXYZ0007 OO RUEHWEB DE RUEHRL #1134 1571342 ZNY CCCCC ZZH O 061342Z JUN 07 FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 8474 RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC IMMEDIATE INFO RUCNCFE/CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE COLLECTIVE RHMFISS/COMSOCEUR VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY RHMFISS/CDRUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE PRIORITY RHMFISS/HQ USAFE RAMSTEIN AB GE PRIORITY RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY RUEHRL/USDAO BERLIN GE PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 001134
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/06/2017
TAGS: KCFE NATO PARM PREL GE
SUBJECT: CFE: GERMANY REACTS POSITIVELY TO U.S. THINKING ON
ELEMENTS FOR A FINAL DOCUMENT
REF: A. STATE 77371
B. BERLIN 1107
Classified By: ACTING DCM JOHN BAUMAN. REASONS: 1.4 (B) AND (D).
C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 001134
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/06/2017
TAGS: KCFE NATO PARM PREL GE
SUBJECT: CFE: GERMANY REACTS POSITIVELY TO U.S. THINKING ON
ELEMENTS FOR A FINAL DOCUMENT
REF: A. STATE 77371
B. BERLIN 1107
Classified By: ACTING DCM JOHN BAUMAN. REASONS: 1.4 (B) AND (D).
1. (C) We delivered ref A points on U.S. thinking on
elements for a final document for the June 12-15 CFE
Extraordinary Conference to Amb. Friedrich Groening, MFA
Director for Disarmament and Arms Control, June 5 and then
followed-up with him June 6 to get his reactions right before
he left for Brussels to attend the Quad pre-coordination
meeting.
Praises U.S. nonpaper for positive approach
--------------
2. (C) Groening praised the U.S. nonpaper for taking a
positive approach and focusing on how the Allies can engage
the Russians and meet their concerns. He thought some of its
elements (i.e., equipment reduction commitments,
reaffirmation from the Baltic countries and Slovenia that
they plan to join the A/CFE when possible, etc.) should be
incorporated into the final conference document.
Agrees on no re-negotiation of A/CFE
--------------
3. (C) Groening said he shared the U.S. view that the
apparent Russian attempt to eliminate or re-negotiate the
flank regime was "cause for concern." While he thought the
Allies should be open to discuss Russian views regarding the
flank regime, Groening agreed that there could no be question
about re-negotiating or changing the A/CFE at this stage.
Any proposed changes to the flank regime could only be
entertained once the A/CFE had been ratified and brought into
force.
Wants to avoid a NATO vs. Russia stance
--------------
4. (C) Groening raised some concerns about the emphasis in
the U.S. nonpaper on a strong, unified Allied message to the
Russians. While not denying the necessity of a common NATO
position on the key issues, he thought it was important not
to give the Russians the impression of the Allies "acting as
a NATO block," with each Ally just repeating what the
previous one had said. He thought this could create a
confrontational atmosphere in Vienna and would not facilitate
dialogue with the Russians.
5. (C) Groening also thought it would not be helpful to just
repeat the standard NATO line that the Allies would ratify
A/CFE once the Istanbul Commitments had been met. Since the
Russians do not accept the linkage between A/CFE ratification
and the Istanbul commitments, simply repeating this demand
over and over could be counterproductive. It would be better
to be forward looking, as proposed in the U.S. nonpaper.
6. (C) Finally, Groening questioned whether it would be a
good idea to issue a statement at the conference reaffirming
NATO's adherence to the language of the NATO-Russia Founding
Act. He was concerned that this would reinforce an
impression of NATO versus Russia in Vienna.
TIMKEN JR
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/06/2017
TAGS: KCFE NATO PARM PREL GE
SUBJECT: CFE: GERMANY REACTS POSITIVELY TO U.S. THINKING ON
ELEMENTS FOR A FINAL DOCUMENT
REF: A. STATE 77371
B. BERLIN 1107
Classified By: ACTING DCM JOHN BAUMAN. REASONS: 1.4 (B) AND (D).
1. (C) We delivered ref A points on U.S. thinking on
elements for a final document for the June 12-15 CFE
Extraordinary Conference to Amb. Friedrich Groening, MFA
Director for Disarmament and Arms Control, June 5 and then
followed-up with him June 6 to get his reactions right before
he left for Brussels to attend the Quad pre-coordination
meeting.
Praises U.S. nonpaper for positive approach
--------------
2. (C) Groening praised the U.S. nonpaper for taking a
positive approach and focusing on how the Allies can engage
the Russians and meet their concerns. He thought some of its
elements (i.e., equipment reduction commitments,
reaffirmation from the Baltic countries and Slovenia that
they plan to join the A/CFE when possible, etc.) should be
incorporated into the final conference document.
Agrees on no re-negotiation of A/CFE
--------------
3. (C) Groening said he shared the U.S. view that the
apparent Russian attempt to eliminate or re-negotiate the
flank regime was "cause for concern." While he thought the
Allies should be open to discuss Russian views regarding the
flank regime, Groening agreed that there could no be question
about re-negotiating or changing the A/CFE at this stage.
Any proposed changes to the flank regime could only be
entertained once the A/CFE had been ratified and brought into
force.
Wants to avoid a NATO vs. Russia stance
--------------
4. (C) Groening raised some concerns about the emphasis in
the U.S. nonpaper on a strong, unified Allied message to the
Russians. While not denying the necessity of a common NATO
position on the key issues, he thought it was important not
to give the Russians the impression of the Allies "acting as
a NATO block," with each Ally just repeating what the
previous one had said. He thought this could create a
confrontational atmosphere in Vienna and would not facilitate
dialogue with the Russians.
5. (C) Groening also thought it would not be helpful to just
repeat the standard NATO line that the Allies would ratify
A/CFE once the Istanbul Commitments had been met. Since the
Russians do not accept the linkage between A/CFE ratification
and the Istanbul commitments, simply repeating this demand
over and over could be counterproductive. It would be better
to be forward looking, as proposed in the U.S. nonpaper.
6. (C) Finally, Groening questioned whether it would be a
good idea to issue a statement at the conference reaffirming
NATO's adherence to the language of the NATO-Russia Founding
Act. He was concerned that this would reinforce an
impression of NATO versus Russia in Vienna.
TIMKEN JR