CZECH PRIORITIES FOR OSCE MADRID MINISTERIAL

C O N F I D E N T I A L PRAGUE 001241 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/20/2017 TAGS: OSCE PGOV PHUM PREL EZ SUBJECT: CZECH PRIORITIES FOR OSCE MADRID MINISTERIAL REF: STATE 157672 Classified By: POLEC Counselor Michael Dodman for reasons 1.4 (b) and ( d). ¶1. (C) Poloffs met November 20 with Veronika Kuchynova-Smigolova, Director of the Czech MFA's Security Policy Department, to discuss the OSCE Ministerial that will take place in Madrid 29-30 November. The Czechs reviewed our proposals (reftel) and raised their three priorities for the Ministerial, specifically the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE),the Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR),and Kazakhstan's bid for the Chairman in Office position. -------------- CFE Treaty -------------- ¶2. (C) Kuchynova-Smigolova emphasized Czech exasperation with Russia on CFE. The Czechs see no sign that Russia is prepared to compromise, but rather a tough "Soviet" style in their positions. The Czech view is that there can be no compromise on CFE's ceilings and flank limits. The Czechs expect no progress on CFE at Madrid. They see the Duma's recent declaration endorsing the Russian government's intention to suspend CFE participation next month as affirmation of their view that the west needs to begin thinking about a CFE without Russian participation. -------------- ODIHR -------------- ¶3. (C) The Czechs continue to strongly support the ODIHR and reject any reforms or modifications to its framework. Regarding the ODIHR decision not to send monitors to the Duma election in Russia, the Czechs support ODIHR's decision, but they believe that it would have been preferable for the ODIHR monitors to actually travel to Russia and attempt to carry out an observer mission, and then submit a full report on their experiences and observations. The ODIHR decision will allow Russia to claim that ODIHR saw no need to monitor the election and to avoid responsibility for the failure to have a full observer mission. The Czechs believe this decision sets a negative precedent allowing other countries to use Russia's technique to dissuade election monitors from observing their elections. -------------- Kazakhstan -------------- ¶4. (C) Regarding the selection of the future Chairs in Office of the OSCE for 2009, 2010, and 2011, the Czechs are ready to support a consensus decision giving Kazakhstan the Chair in 2010 or 2011, but only if there are clear conditions attached. The most immediate of these would be that Kazakhstan withdraw its co-sponsorship of ODIHR reform proposal. The Czechs would also like to see agreement that the Kazakhs could lose the CiO position if they do not meet the specific conditions, although they admit this would be difficult to implement. The Czechs feel strongly that any decision to give Kazakhstan the Chair in 2010 be part of a package that gives Lithuania the Chair in 2011. The Czechs fear that Russia would veto a future Lithuania bid if it is not part of a package. -------------- Afghanistan -------------- ¶5. (C) In response to the U.S. points, Kuchynova-Smigolova said the Czechs would not oppose an OSCE role in Afghanistan, but that this is not a priority for the Czechs. They do not see the OSCE's added value given the other organizations already involved in Afghanistan, and fear overlap or problems in coordination. Graber