U.S.- EUROPEAN UNION - RUSSIA TRILATERAL

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 07 BRUSSELS 002667 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR INL/FO, S/CT, L/LEI, INL/PC, INL/AAE, EUR/ERA; JUSTICE FOR CRIMINAL DIVISION, OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS HOMELAND SECURITY FOR OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PTER KCRM PREL SNAR EU RU UN SUBJECT: U.S.- EUROPEAN UNION - RUSSIA TRILATERAL HIGH-LEVEL WORKING GROUP MEETING IN BRUSSELS REF: A. MCANULTY-VERVILLE/KELLER/PROPP E-MAIL OF JULY 31 ¶B. LOONELA-MCANULTY E-MAIL OF JULY 24 ¶C. LOONELA-MCANULTY E-MAIL OF JULY 12 ¶D. MCANULTY-PROPP/CLINE E-MAIL OF JULY 6 ¶E. BUSS-MCANULTY/CONWAY E-MAIL OF JULY 4 ¶F. OLSON-MCANULTY E-MAIL OF JUNE 21 ¶G. KELLER-MCANULTY E-MAIL MESSAGE OF JUNE 21 ¶H. ANGHA/MATANO-MCANULTY E-MAIL OF JUNE 20 -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (U) A meeting of the United States - European Union (EU) - Russia Trilateral High Level Working Group on terrorism convened June 22 in fulfillment of a commitment made at the U.S.- EU - Russia Trilateral Ministerial Meeting in Berlin on April 4. Participants expressed support for the work of the Ad Hoc Committee on the United Nations (UN) Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) in New York in developing a definition of terrorism, while acknowledging that parties had not yet agreed on the scope of the Convention itself. Participants also agreed that the proposed work of the Trilateral High Level Working Group duplicated work already covered satisfactorily by other multilateral fora and agreed, therefore, that no future meetings of this group would be necessary. After coordination with both the U.S. and Russia, EU officials disseminated the texts of "agreed final minutes" from the meeting on July 24. In this telegram, we include a summary of the discussions at the meeting as well as the verbatim text of the official "minutes" prepared and agreed upon subsequent to the meeting. END SUMMARY. -------------- TRILATERAL HIGH LEVEL WORKING GROUP -------------- ¶2. (U) In fulfillment of a commitment made at the April 4 Trilateral Ministerial Meeting in Berlin, representatives of the U.S., EU, and Russia met June 22 in Brussels as a "Trilateral High Level Working Group" to discuss terrorism issues. European Commission Director General for Justice, Freedom, and Security Jonathan Faull welcomed participants to the meeting and expressed a desire to avoid duplicating activities of other multilateral fora. He noted that the UN had actively discussed the definition of terrorism in the Sixth Committee as part of efforts to negotiate the UN CCIT. He understood that negotiators from the EU, U.S., and Russia, among others, had provisionally agreed on the definition of terrorism in article two of the proposed convention, but that differences remained over the scope of the convention. He proposed that the group report to their justice and interior Ministers that they agreed on this common definition of terrorism and reaffirmed their commitment towards prompt conclusion of negotiations for the CCIT. 3, (U) Russian Presidential Directorate Deputy Head for Promotion of Constitutional Rights Sergey Gerasimov agreed with Faull's remarks, asserting that discussions at the UN had continued for over ten years. He suggested that Russia, the EU, and the U.S. follow up with concrete actions. U.S. Mission International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) Counselor agreed with Faull's goal of avoiding duplication of work in other fora. He suggested modifying Faull's proposal slightly to express support for the work of the CCIT negotiations in developing the definition of terrorism and working towards agreement on the scope. German Interior Ministry Counter-Terrorism Director Gerhard Schindler expressed support for the CCIT's work and suggested that participants consider counter-terrorism activities that would be required after adoption of the Convention. He listed some practical issues to consider, including the length of time terrorists should be held after arrest, types of evidence to be provided at trials, whether such evidence should conform with international or national law, and whether an obligation existed for countries to share information on terrorist activities. Portuguese Permanent BRUSSELS 00002667 002 OF 007 Representation Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Counselor Maria Constanca agreed with the Commission's proposal, while Gerasimov seconded Germany's suggestion to look at practical follow-on measures. Faull indicated that the Commission would prepare and circulate a "minute" for presentation to Ministers affirming that participants had no problem with the definition of "terrorism" itself but only with the scope of the definition as discussed at the CCIT negotiations in New York. ¶4. (U) Faull also proposed that participants indicate that the trilateral High Level Working Group should not duplicate work done satisfactorily within the UN, Group of Eight (G-8), or other multilateral fora. Mission INL Counselor agreed with this approach, adding that he would need to refer the draft "minutes" to officials in Washington for comment and approval. Noting that the issue may be one of semantics, he expressed doubt that trilateral Working Group participants could state that they "fully agreed" with the definition of terrorism, while differences remained over the scope of the convention. Accordingly, he proposed expressing support for the work of the CCIT negotiators, but cautioned against "second-guessing" that group's decisions or work. ¶5. (U) Faull suggested looking as well at potential gaps that may exist in discussing terrorism at multilateral fora. He noted that a great deal of work was underway within the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), UN, and G-8 on terrorism issues. Referring to a paper that the Russian side had just circulated at the start of the Working Group meeting, he noted he could not identify any "burning" issues not already discussed elsewhere. He remained open to suggestions from others on issues for which the Working Group could "add value" to multilateral discussions. Schindler agreed, noting that other multilateral fora already discussed all significant terrorism issues. He suggested that future EU presidencies might wish to consider discussion of use of the Internet by terrorists and of radicalization and recruitment. Speaking for the Portuguese Presidency, Constanca remarked that Russia and the U.S. already productively discussed terrorism issues with the EU in various fora, including during "Troika", counter-terrorism, counter-drug, and "road map" meetings. She saw no need to duplicate such efforts. For his part, Geramisov argued for continued Working Group meetings, which, he said, could become the "locomotive" for the work of Russia, the EU, and the US on internal security matters and would help Ministers prepare for their in-depth discussions of such issues. ¶6. (U) Faull noted that the Commission remained the "humble servant" of the EU Member States and that the Presidency of the Council would have to decide on behalf of the EU whether to convene future meetings of the Working Group. Synthesizing the discussion, he proposed that a second "minute" indicate that participants agreed that other international fora already addressed terrorism issues in a satisfactory way and that they could not justify future meetings of this Trilateral High Level Working Group under such circumstances. Gerasimov averred that a report would be necessary for the Ministers and that the group had met as agreed at the Ministerial meeting in Berlin. He acknowledged that another meeting of the High Level Working Group would not be necessary before the next trilateral Ministerial Meeting. Nonetheless, he encouraged establishment of an "experts group," in lieu of a high level working group, to identify practical issues for discussion by the Ministers. Speaking on behalf of the Slovenia Presidency (which will begin in January 2008),Slovenia Permanent Representation official Jana Kulevska said she shared the Portuguese position, noting that her Government was considering the idea of convening a trilateral Ministerial Meeting, for which preparations could occur during "ad hoc" sessions. Schindler suggested that the G-8 Counter-Terrorism Practitioners Group might be an appropriate forum for discussing Russia's proposals. ¶7. (U) Faull summed up the discussions by noting that the BRUSSELS 00002667 003 OF 007 Slovenian Presidency would consider convening a trilateral Ministerial Meeting, for which the Ministers, of course, would receive adequate preparation. The EU, he noted, was already working within the G-8 and at separate bilateral discussions with the U.S. and Russia on use of the Internet by terrorists and on radicalization and recruitment. Discussions of these important issues would continue at the experts level, but he saw no need for creating a new forum. He promised to prepare minutes to circulate to others. Gerasimov expressed appreciation for the meeting, noting unanimity on the first point regarding the definition of terrorism. He said he would not insist on establishing an additional group that would duplicate work done at other fora. -------------- AGREED MINUTES -------------- ¶8. (U) In early July, the Commission circulated draft minutes. On July 24, after receiving comments from both the U.S. and Russian sides, the Commission provided the final agreed minutes from the meeting. The verbatim text of these minutes, including two annexes, (forwarded earlier to Washington via electronic-mail -- Ref A) follows: (Begin Text of Final Agreed Minutes) Trilateral High Level Working Group Between the EU, US and Russia 22 June 2007 in Brussels - Summary minutes of the meeting -- l. Definition of terrorism All parties agreed to the general framework: Discussions in UN at the Sixth Committee and at the Ad Hoc Committee on the UN Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) have been going on since 1996. Article 2 of the Coordinator's text, containing the definition of terrorism (offence provisions),has been provisionally agreed already for several years and the EU, Russia and the US have agreed to it among other UN Member States. The problems at the UN with the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism are by now not on the definition of terrorism, but rather on the scope of the Convention itself. Since the CCIT negotiations are handled by Permanent Missions in New York with support from capitals, all three sides agreed that it would be counter productive to reopen previously- settled issues. The CCIT should continue to be dealt with by the Permanent Missions in New York in the framework of the UN 6th Committee. It was suggested to draw the attention of the Permanent Representations in New York to the possible measures of implementation once the Convention is adopted. All three parties reconfirmed their shared commitment to supporting the discussions at the UN. They have a common desire to conclude the Comprehensive Convention swiftly, and they decided to continue work on convincing other states of the utility of such a Convention. -- 2. Possible topics for further discussion The starting point for the discussion was that the high level working group should not duplicate work that is already done satisfactorily elsewhere -- at UN, G8 or bilateral meetings. All parties agreed on this basic premise. All subjects, i.e. counter terrorism, drugs, border security that have come up in discussion are part of EU's efficient existing dialogue with US and Russia be it bilaterally or in multilateral forums, e.g. G8, UN, FATF, Paris Pact. All sides reiterated their full commitment to strengthening the dialogue between the three strategic partners, but without BRUSSELS 00002667 004 OF 007 duplicating existing cooperation frameworks. Internet, Radicalization and Recruitment and a list of other topics circulated by Russia (attached) were mentioned as worthy discussion items, but those are all already addressed also at ministerial level in existing formats. Therefore the added value of the high level working group seemed very limited to the parties and there is no need for further meetings of the high level working group in trilateral format. A possible future Ministerial meeting could be prepared ad hoc by officials drawing on discussions in the other forums so that Ministers can have fruitful discussions. Slovenia informed partners of their considerations to call a Ministerial meeting during their Presidency in the first half of 2008. Officials from EU, US and Russia will continue to see each other and discuss all related topics at various configurations during the upcoming Presidency. Annexes: List of participants List of Russian proposals - Trilateral High Level Working Group between the EU, US and Russia 22 June 10.00 Berlaymont building, Jean Monnet room List of Participants Germany Gerhard Schindler, Director for Counter-Terrorism, Ministry of Interior Andrea Schumacher, Head of Division for Counter-Terrorism: International co-operation, Ministry of Interior Martina Wenske, Permanent Representation Ivo Thiemrodt Wolf Plesmann, Permanent Representation Portugal Maria Constanca de Sousa, Permanent Representation Mario Fernandes, Presidency Coordinator, Ministry of Justice Paulo Cunha Alves, Permanent Representation Slovenia Jana Kulevska, Permanent Representation European Commission Jonathan Faull, Director General DG JLS Heike Buss, Acing Head of Unit for External Relations, DG JLS Vivian Loonela, Unit for External Relations, DG JLS Caroline Hagar, Unit for coordination of anti-drugs policy, DG JLS Efthymios Costopoulos, Unit for Security Policy, DG RELEX Nora Rolle, Unit for US and Canada, DG Relex Council Secretariat Ivan Bizjak, Director General JHA Gilles De Kerchove, Director Ivica Stehlikova, Office of the CT Coordinator Marek Grela, Director Francesco Fini, Counter Terrorism team responsible for UN affairs US James P. McAnulty, Mission Counselor for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement (INL) Affairs Kathleen Conway, Mission Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Attache BRUSSELS 00002667 005 OF 007 Thomas A. Scarantino, Mission Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Assistant Regional Director. Erin Barclay, Asian, African, and European Programs (INL/AAE) Office Director, International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Bureau, U.S. Department of State Russia Administration of the President of the Russian Federation Sergey Gerasimov, Deputy Head of the Presidential Directorate of the Russian Federation for the Promotion of Constitutional Rights Ministry of Foreign Affairs Nikolay Kornchunov Head of Unit, European Cooperation Department Mikhail Shurgalin, Head of Unit, Department on New Challenges and Threats Alexander Zhurov, Second secretary, European Cooperation Department Federal Security Service Victor Orlov, Head of Directorate, National Antiterrorist Committee Vasiliy Letunovskiy, Head of Directorate, Border Guards Service Sergey Gerasimenkov, Expert, National Antiterrorist Committee Ministry of Interior Sergey Galdkin, Head of International Cooperation Directorate Vladimir Didenko, Deputy Head of Directorate Federal Drugs Control Service Igor Smirnov, Deputy Head of International Cooperation Directorate Dmitriy Chernyshev, Senior Inspector Russian Mission to the EC Nikolay Revenko, Deputy Head of the Mission Alexander Skoryukov, Senior Counsellor Anatoliy Didenko, Counsellor Alexander Goloshapov, Counsellor Viacheslav Chernichenko, First Secretary Alexey Budarev First Secretary - Russian Proposals on Trilateral Cooperation Between Russia, EU and USA in the Area of Internal Security - I. Combating Terrorism -- 1. To agree a set of measures to converge positions of the states, including Muslim countries, on the international legal definition of terrorism. -- 2. To establish the exchange of information on the best practices in raising information awareness about malignancy of ideas of terrorism. -- 3. To develop proposals on coordination of the parties' activities to prevent use of Internet as a means of promoting the ideology and practices of terrorism. -- 4. To establish the exchange of information about educational institutions (both legal and illegal) in Islamist countries, that are involved in training of radical religious ministers as well as to establish the exchange of data on the persons who passed the training at these institutions. -- 5. To establish the exchange of information on activities carried out by Islamist radicals under the cover of non-governmental organizations. -- 6. To sum up the experiences in protecting the critical infrastructure, to arrange a conference on this issue with participation of competent agencies of the parties. -- 7. To use the international counter-terrorism database which is being set up at the National Antiterrorist Committee BRUSSELS 00002667 006 OF 007 (NAC) of Russia to store information on the results of joint antiterrorist activities and to ensure access to this database for the competent agencies of the parties (the database is due to be ready by September 2007; its concept and invitations to join have been sent out to 72 countries). To study other possibilities to take stock of results of the joint work. -- 8. To establish the exchange of information, including that obtained with support of private businesses, on companies (legal entities) involved in or suspected of contacts with criminal groups, including the information - II. Fighting Against Drugs -- 1. To develop proposals on coordination of activities related to the training of the law enforcement personnel of Afghanistan and Central Asian states, including the activities carried out within the current projects by UNODC, UN, EU and NATO-Russia Council. -- 2. To consider the possibility and the ways to ensure participation of Afghan law enforcement representatives in international police operations to prevent trafficking of Afghan drugs and their precursors, including in the operation "Kanal" (Channel). -- 3. To develop proposals about possible joint projects to strengthen the international system of monitoring precursors used for production of drugs and psychotropic agents, including projects to detect and suppress illegal channels of their trafficking to Afghanistan. -- 4. To make proposals about the forms to ensure involvement of financial intelligence agencies in international police operations to detect funding sources of the Afghan drug trafficking businesses. -- 5. To develop a joint system of monitoring passenger traffic and cargo shipments to prevent transit and smuggling of drugs and precursors primarily to and from Central Asia. -- 6. To consider the possibility of establishing a working group of experts to address the issue of combating the drug threat. - III. Cooperation of Border and Migration Services -- 1. To prepare proposals for developing common approaches and models for evaluation of risks and threats in the area of border protection for the period of 2007-2010. -- During the first stage (2007-2008) to jointly develop and test the model for addressing threats related to the transportation of drugs from Afghanistan. -- 2. To ensure exchange of information about experiences in training border guard personnel to include arranging joint seminars to exchange best practices in border protection. -- 3. To develop proposals on the procedure for the exchange of data on lost and stolen passports. (End of Text of Final Agreed Minutes) -------------- COMMENT -------------- ¶9. (SBU) Before the meeting convened, the U.S. and EU sides agreed that the High Level Trilateral Working Group should meet only briefly to address the definition of terrorism, already under discussion by experts in New York, and that the group should not convene again, unless additional useful work not addressed by other multilateral fora could be identified. In this way, the U.S. and EU delegations headed off efforts by the Russian side (whose delegation included 17 officials) to establish yet another senior multilateral group to discuss BRUSSELS 00002667 007 OF 007 terrorism. In an apparent rarity for such fora, this senior working group met only once, after which participants (albeit, with some reluctance from one party) agreed to disband. Mission expresses appreciation for the valuable background and talking points provided by Washington officials before the meeting, which contributed to this successful outcome. END COMMENT. MURRAY .