LATVIA/RUSSIA: BORDER TREATY SEEMINGLY DELAYED,

C O N F I D E N T I A L RIGA 000647

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/29/2012
TAGS: PREL PBTS PGOV RS LG
SUBJECT: LATVIA/RUSSIA: BORDER TREATY SEEMINGLY DELAYED,
WHAT ABOUT LAVROV VISIT?

REF: RIGA 591

Classified By: Charge d'Affaires a.i. Stuart M. Seldowitz. Reason: 1.4
(b and d)


1. (C) Summary: Earlier reports of a September 17 Lavrov trip
to Riga to exchange instruments of ratification on the
Latvian-Russian border treaty appear unlikely. Moscow has
told the Latvians of challenges in the sequencing of events
mean they would not be ready for action on the treaty by
September 17. The Latvians appear comfortable that this was
simply not fully thought through and believe the treaty will
eventually be ratified. The Latvians are ready for Lavrov to
visit as planned, but suspect that the Russians may cancel
without ratification of the border treaty as a deliverable.
The Latvians plan to invite DFM Titov to Riga if Lavrov does
not come and strongly hope he would visit. The likely delay
on the border treaty would remove the political difficultly
for the GOL of bringing the treaty into to force before the
Constitutional Court has ruled on the legal challenge to the
accord. End summary.


2. (C) Despite earlier reports (reftel) that Russian FM
Lavrv would visit Riga September 17 to exchange instruments
of ratification for the Latvia-Russia border treaty, the
Russians have indicated to the Latvians that they may not be
ready by that date. MFA State Secretary Normans Penke told
Charge August 28 that Russian DFM Titov had laid out the full
process needed for ratification of the treaty, including
votes in the State Duma and upper legislative house,
signature by Putin, and publication in the register. The
Latvians do not see how this process could be completed by
September 17. Penke said they remained willing to host
Lavrov on that date, but suspected he might not come without
the ability to exchange instruments of ratification. Penke
said if Lavrov cancelled, the Latvians would propose that
Titov come to prepare a later Lavrov visit.


3. (C) Peteris Ustubs, foreign policy advisor to PM Kalvitis,
told pol/econ chief on August 29 that it seemed as if the
Russians proposed the Sep. 17 date without thinking through
their own schedule. Not only was there not enough time
before the 17th to take the necessary steps, but the upper
house was not scheduled to return to session until September

19. Ustubs ascribed this a bureaucratic error in proposing
the 17th rather than an actual snub by the Russians. He
speculated, like Penke, that Lavrov would not come and
half-jokingly suggested that the Russians would find a way to
blame the Latvians. Ustubs thought a mid-October exchange of
instruments was more likely.


4. (C) Comment: The Latvians are being calm on this, unlike
their approach to earlier difficulties with the treaty. Two
factors likely motivate this attitude. First, it really does
seem to be a bureaucratic error and a failure by Moscow to
think though their needed timeline. A similar thing happened
in June when the Russians said they could deliver
ratification by a certain date, even though the Duma was
scheduled to be in recess and Putin out of the country. The
fact that Titov reached out to explain the problem is viewed
here positively. The second reason is that the likely delay
means that the Constitutional Court's ruling on whether the
treaty violates Latvia's constitution by effectively changing
the borders from those that existed in 1922 will be handed
down before the treaty enters into force. As we noted
reftel, the Latvians were worried that exchange of
instruments of ratification before the court rules could lead
to political protests by opponents of the treaty. It is
expected that the court will rule by the end of September and
Latvian officials seem comfortable that the court will
approve the treaty (although we have no way of knowing why
they are so sanguine).
SELDOWITZ