(S) BRITISH QUESTION TWO NAMES ON PROPOSED 1518

S E C R E T LONDON 003283

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

EEB/ESC/TFS FOR JJALLORINA
IO FOR ECROWE
NEA/I-ECON
TREASURY FOR OFAC

E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/24/2017
TAGS: EFIN KTFN UK UNSC
SUBJECT: (S) BRITISH QUESTION TWO NAMES ON PROPOSED 1518
COMMITTEE LIST: POSSIBLE INVOLVEMENT WITH IRAQ
RECONCILIATION

REF: A. E-MAILS STATE/IO ECROWE-LONDON ECON MCJOHNSON


B. LONDON 3228

C. LONDON 3096

D. LONDON 2984

E. SECSTATE 104666

Classified By: AE/MIN COUNS JOHN MCNAMARA, REASONS 1.4 (B) & (D)


1. (S) Two of the names on Ref E's proposed listings to the
UN's 1518 Committee "might be promising" participants in the
Iraq Reconciliation process, according to the FCO's James
Smith, Desk Officer Iraq Directorate, and Sarah Bennett,
Sanctions Team, International Organizations Department. The
FCO learned from their embassy in Baghdad that the two Yunis
Al-Ahmad brothers might be in the early stages of
participating in the process of reconciling the Sunni tribes
back into the Iraq government. SMITH and Bennett had no
further information on the brothers' participation, but asked
whether the USG was aware of and had considered this
information in its decision to list them to the 1518
Committee. The FCO had forwarded our initial request to the
Minister for approval, but pulled it back when this
information surfaced. They are seeking more time with these
two in order to confirm the report. SMITH and Bennett
suggested we could move forward with the list, excluding
these two names at this point pending further investigation,
or go forward if all parties (specifically the Multi-National
Force) were aware of the Reconciliation angle but decided it
was in everyone's interest to list the brothers now.


2. (S) On a separate issue on this listing, Bennett and SMITH
said the FCO was still concerned about the proposed U.S.
text, despite draft revisions by the U.S. (Ref A.) The
revised language continues to refer to current activity and
also, in many cases, does not show a strong-enough linkage to
the former regime, both of which will "sink the proposal"
according to James and Bennett. The FCO supports listing all
of these names, but fears the current language will be
opposed by not only the usual suspects - Russia and China -
but also by some allies for not being on point legally. They
do not think the listing, as written currently, will make it
through the committee. Bennett will draft language she
believes will make it through the committee, and we will pass
it by e-mail to Erin Crowe at State/International
Organizations.


3. (S) The FCO has asked about the USG's motive for listing
the individuals using the current text. If our purpose is to
weaken the insurgency in Iraq, then the British government is
on board with listing, although they believe this effort is
merely a "drop in the bucket," said James. If the purpose is
to try to test Syria's reaction, the UK would be "less
likely" to want to co-sponsor the listings. The UK wants to
support listings that have the goal of getting through the
committee, not just sending a message, said Bennett.


4. (S) Bennett again asked about the timing of our listing,
and inquired about our strategy for rolling out the proposal.
Would the French be brought into the early discussions?
When will the other P-5 members and other members of the
Security Council be notified? Please advise.

Visit London's Classified Website:
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/london/index. cfm
LeBaron