CREATING THE REGIONAL COOPERATION COUNCIL: FIRST

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 000373 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/02/2017 TAGS: PREL ECON EAID SR HR EUN MI RO BU GR BK MW YI, TU, UNMIK SUBJECT: CREATING THE REGIONAL COOPERATION COUNCIL: FIRST STEPS REF: BRUSSELS 00194 Classified By: POLMINCOUNS LAURENCE WOHLERS FOR REASONS 1.5(B) AND (E) Summary ¶1. (SBU) Representatives of key donor governments and of SEECP countries met in Brussels on January 23 and 24 to begin the process of establishing a Regional Cooperation Council and secretariat as a regional cooperation vehicle to replace the Stability Pact by early 2008. Discussions were productive -- donor commitments approached those already made by the SEECP and the EU -- and the complex task of establishing the RCC mandate and structure was launched. Strong statements of support for the process and the objective were universal; key issues to be resolved by the March 2 meeting of SEECP Foreign Ministers include a precise definition of the relationship between the RCC and the SEECP, agreement on a location for the RCC, and selection of a Secretary General (SYG) to head it. SIPDIS ¶2. (C) Of the two candidates for the seat of the RCC, Sarajevo and Belgrade, the former appears to be the front-runner, despite the logistical challenges it would offer. As for the SYG, there is a split on whether a political figure or a senior diplomat should fill the position. Former Serbian foreign minister (and Stability Pact Working Table I Chair) Goran Svilanovic is lobbying openly for the position and is widely seen as the best qualified person for it, but Croatia appears unreceptive to his candidacy. In addition, Belgrade (where talks on forming a new government are underway following January 21 elections) has not yet officially put Svilanovic's name forward. End Summary. Donor Meeting: Overall target within Reach ¶3. (U) Citing firm commitments by Austria, Switzerland, and Germany, and notional commitments by the U.S. and Norway, Stability Pact Special Coordinator Erhard Busek pressed other attendees to come forth with concrete offers of funding support for the operating expenses of the RCC, which may reach as much as three million euros a year. Dr. Busek called on donors to match the one million euros annually over three years already committed by both SEECP governments and the European Commission. ¶4. (U) Donor governments stressed the need for a firm presentation on the structure of the RCC and the proposed ;staffing of the RCC secretariat before commitments could be made final. Funding commitments presented included: Austria - 150,000 euros; Germany - up to 200,000 euros; Switzerland - 120,000 euros; US - up to USD 200,000; Sweden - considering 150,000 euros; and Finland - considering 50,000 euros. In addition, Belgium, Ireland, Slovenia, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic are considering minimal participation. For their part, the U.K. and France, given that that their legislation limits funding to program activities only, argued that their overall assistance to the region should justify their participation in the RCC. ¶5. (U) The Regional Cooperation Council, intended to be the coordinating body supporting regional cooperation under SEECP leadership, is likely to have an inner circle comprised of SEECP governments and key donors, possibly those offering funding above a threshold of 50,000 euros and possibly to include others (U.K. in the first instance) with substantial assistance programs in the region. As presently envisioned, this executive circle of the RCC would likely meet quarterly and the overall council once annually. Institutional Working Group: Founding the RCC ¶6. (U) With Croatia Stability Pact National Coordinator Ambassador Boris Grigic and Stability Pact Deputy Special Coordinator Mozur as co-chairs, the IWG met on January 24 in Brussels on the basis of five point agenda conveyed in Ref tel. Discussion of the various elements of the RCC structure and the terms of the mandate for the proposed Secretary General of the RCC was active and clarified concerns. Key points raised by SEECP participants included: Macedonia queried as to whether the Secretary General (SYG) or the RCC seat should by decision come from a non-EU member of the SEECP. (Comment: the issue is whether new EU members BRUSSELS 00000373 002 OF 003 Bulgaria and Romania should stay out of the running when the first SYG is chosen. Several states in the region appear to prefer that the first SYG come from an EU aspirant, although there is a recognition that the distinction would lose importance over time. End Comment.) Serbia referred to its paper on the structure and mandate of the RCC, proposing that the RCC SYG be "a strong political figure from the region" serving for a three year term with the possibility of a second term. Serbia also proposed that RCC membership include SEECP members, UNMIK/Kosovo, the EU Troika, and "interested key Stability Pact partner countries, and that a committee of national coordinators be established. (Ambassador Grigic responded to the Serbian proposals on the SYG, commenting that there is "no Balkan clone of Busek" and that the term should be shorter, perhaps two years.) Romania: Pressed for attention to the SECI Regional Center for Combating Transborder Crime in Bucharest as a potential model for the RCC Seat agreement. Montenegro suggested that the RCC mandate place the RCC in the lead on the EU accession process's link to regional cooperation. ¶7. (U) From the donor side, there was clear interest in seeing more details on the RCC structure and mandate: Norway underscored the need for the RCC mandate to allow sufficient flexibility to include all donors and to establish clearly defined political linkages between the SEECP and the RCC; further, there was a need to ensure that key initiatives and task forces (citing the initiative on disaster preparedness (DPPI),and refugee returns (MARRI),and on defense issues (RACVIAC) have clear links to the RCC. The U.K., citing domestic statutory limitations on its ability to support the RCC secretariat directly, asserted the need for the RCC mandate to allow participation by those countries with substantial assistance programs in the region Germany pushed for greater clarity on the members and partners of the RCC. ¶8. (U) The European Commission spoke forcefully in support of making the RCC Secretary General a strong regional interlocutor for the EU on strategic issues related to regional cooperation. The EU rep proposed that the SG be required to prepare an annual report on the state of regional cooperation, while reporting operationally to the SEECP and the RCC. Politics of location and SecGen; Differing views on role of SYG ¶9. (SBU) On prospective candidates for the position of RCC Secretary General, SP Special Coordinator Busek, during his SIPDIS January 20 visit to Belgrade, received some encouraging signals from an advisor to PM Kostunica that Serbia was beginning to view favorably a possible candidacy by former Serbian FM Svilanovic, and might even take the step to propose him when nominations are opened. ¶10. (C) In a January 25 meeting in Belgrade with the US National Coordinator for the Stability Pact, Svilanovic said that he had been offered support for his (unofficial) candidacy to become RCC SYG by Montenegro, Bosnia, Macedonia and Greece. Reviewing likely candidates for foreign minister in the Serbian government to be formed over the coming weeks, Svilanovic said that all - both those close to President Tadic and those close to Prime Minister Kostunica -- would support him. Svilanovic acknowledged that Croatian officials had said they could not support his candidacy ("they don't want a Serb"). He said Zagreb was trying to play down the role of the SYG and would seek to have the post filled by a career diplomat. Concerning the selection of the seat of the RCC, Svilanovic said with Macedonia supporting Bosnia's offer of Sarajevo and Albania expressing willingness to join a consensus, it was likely that Sarajevo would be chosen. ¶11. (C) Serbian Assistant Minister of International Economic Relations Dusko Lopandic told the US National Coordinator on January 26 that Serbia "has ideas" on both the location of the RCC and who should head it. (The Serbian government has BRUSSELS 00000373 003 OF 003 officially offered to host the RCC in Belgrade.) Lopandic noted that there were few candidates for the SYG position and that "Serbia would benefit from the connection" if its candidate were chosen. However, he said that proposing a candidate was a political decision and that without a (new, post-election) government, Serbia could not take an official position on who should be SYG. Lopandic added that in any case, the SYG needs to be a political-level official, and that the Croatian proposal to select a senior diplomat is "not enough." Comment: Working toward late February deadline ¶12. (SBU) The January 23-24 meetings gave the Stability Pact transition process additional energy, and the IWG sub-working groups are now tackling the specifics issues involved in creating the RCC structure. In the meantime, the SEECP leadership troika (CiO Croatia, Greece, and incoming SEECP CiO Bulgaria) are working on the fundamental rewrite of the SEECP's own charter, which may include provision for a liaison office in Brussels under SEECP -- rather than RCC -- auspices. This issue and others will form the agenda at the IWG's next meeting in Zagreb on February 14-15 and the goal remains to conclude this preparatory process by February 26. GRAY .