CIS INFORMAL SUMMIT IN ST.PETERSBURG: TO BE

C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 002924

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/18/2017
TAGS: PREL PGOV PINR RS
SUBJECT: CIS INFORMAL SUMMIT IN ST.PETERSBURG: TO BE
CONTINUED IN DUSHANBE

REF: A. MOSCOW 2860


B. MOSCOW 06 12711

Classified By: Political M/C Alice G Wells. Reasons 1.4 (B/D).


1. (C) The 45-minute CIS informal summit on June 10
produced no results, but provided a forum for Putin's sidebar
meetings with the Moldovan, Ukrainian and Georgian leaders.
The MFA touted the summit's full roster of attendees and the
Putin-Vornin meeting as noteworthy, but experts see few
prospects for energizing the forum. End Summary.


2. (C) The CIS informal summit held June 10 in St.
Petersburg was more notable for the bilateral meetings which
took place on its margins than for any organizational
accomplishments. All CIS leaders were present at the
meeting, a rarity in the past. No formal agenda was
announced before the summit meeting -- which lasted all of
forty-five minutes -- and the officials and experts we've
talked to were hard pressed to identify any substantive
results. Lukashenko's threat to block the nomination of
former chairman of the GOR Central Election Commission
Aleksandr Veshnyakov as the CIS Executive Secretary was the
only newsworthy item coming out of the summit.


3. (C) Despite the paucity of results, GOR officials
continue to believe that the CIS serves as a valuable forum
for member states. Maksim Peshkov, Director of the MFA's
Third CIS Department, told us immediately before the summit
that while it had no pre-set agenda, the MFA thought that CIS
reform and energy would remain priority items for the
organization. He was particularly satisfied that all five
Central Asian countries, including Turkmenistan -- normally
considered an associate member -- planned to be represented.
Viktor Sorokin, Director of the Second CIS Department, told
us afterwards that it was important that the summit gave
President Putin an opportunity to meet with Yushchenko,
Saakashvili and Voronin separately. (Note: Putin and
Yushchenko agreed on a summit in Moscow later this summer.)
Neither director took Lukashenko's attempt to exert influence
over the CIS seriously. "With a little bit of negotiation,
he will agree on Veshnyakov," said Sorokin.


4. (C) Echoing what we had heard elsewhere (ref A),Sorokin
thought that the brief Putin-Voronin meeting was noteworthy
but that without direct negotiations between Chisinau and
Tiraspol, no dramatic progress toward resolution was likely.
The Russians had been coy about frequent visits to Chisinau
and Tiraspol by Security Council Deputy Secretary Zubakov,
leading to press speculation that some breakthrough might be
announced at the summit. Both directors agreed that the CIS
would endure because member countries continued to believe
there had to be a forum among them, regardless of the
different dynamics among the countries and varying levels of
interest in the organization.


5. (C) However, experts tell us they see little impetus for
the CIS to break from its chronic malaise, which is grounded
in a lack of direction and of a well-defined agenda. Even if
Russia wanted to invigorate the CIS, Moscow would find it
difficult to find effective partners that would share that
agenda. According to Fedor Lukyanov, Editor-in-Chief of
Russia in Global Affairs, Russia respected only Kazakhstan as
an equal economic partner and viewed Ukraine as slipping
deeper into chaos, making it an unattractive as a political
partner. Lukyanov said the CIS as a coordinating mechanism
did not exist anymore; the group served now only as a
platform where leaders who were unlikely to meet otherwise
could keep lines of communication open.


6. (C) Comment: The CIS will meet again in Dushanbe in
October for a formal summit. We are skeptical that any
effort to promote reform would gain much traction. The
organization is likely to continue to stumble along, if only
because no leader is willing to pull the plug on this
marginally useful gathering.
BURNS