GUIDANCE: UN ILLICIT SA/LW TRAFFICKING RESOLUTION

UNCLAS STATE 150916 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV UNGA SUBJECT: GUIDANCE: UN ILLICIT SA/LW TRAFFICKING RESOLUTION ¶1. (U) This is an action request (see paras. 2 and 3). ¶2. (SBU) Washington has considered USDEL's request for guidance on joining consensus on the draft resolution regarding "The Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects" put forward by the delegations from Colombia, Japan, and South Africa. There are several elements of the resolution that, if not corrected or deleted, will prevent the United States from joining consensus. (Note: As originally written, this guidance cable reversed the USG position on UN Reforms that began in 2001. In 2001, it was agreed that the USG would limit its participation in a review conference on the Program of Action for Small Arms and Light Weapons to one time only. In July 2006, DNSA Crouch, U/S Joseph, and A/S Silverberg agreed to reject a UK proposal to have additional meetings on the Program of Action under different titles. The agreement reached within the interagency was that meetings under different names, e.g., biennial meeting of States Parties, etc., in fact constitute de facto review conferences and would be rejected. The USG voted no on this resolution last year, precisely for this reason.) a. (SBU) USDEL should be alert to, and oppose, efforts to insert text that calls for any review or biennial meetings on this subject, on the basis that review meetings are unnecessary. Pursuant to the U.S. policy of opposing new mandates, in particular review conferences, biennial meetings and the like, if the final text calls for review meetings of the recently concluded Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) meeting on brokering, or for additional meetings to consider implementation of the Program of Action, USDEL should call for a vote and vote no. b. (SBU) USDEL should work to delete PP6 as now formulated and re-insert previously deleted language, "Reiterating the significance of the International Instrument to Enable States to Identify and Trace, in a Timely and Reliable Manner, Illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons." If the delegation is unsuccessful, USDEL should vote no. c. (SBU) USDEL should work to delete the language "as the main framework for measures in the activities of the international community to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects, beyond 2006," in PP10. If the delegation is unsuccessful in deleting this language, USDEL should vote no. d. (SBU) USDEL should work to delete OP4 and OP4bis. If the delegation is unsuccessful in deleting these paragraphs, USDEL should vote no. e. (SBU) USDEL should work to delete the language in OP5, "well in advance of the next Biennial Meeting of States;" If the delegation is unsuccessful in deleting this phrase, USDEL should vote no. However, if the delegation is successful, then the delegation should seek to add the phrase "and to highlight their implementation challenges and opportunities" (which would then be deleted from the end of OP7) to the end of OP5. f. (SBU) USDEL should work to delete OP7 in its entirety except for the clause noted in the guidance paragraph above. If the delegation is unsuccessful, USDEL should vote no. g. (SBU) USDEL should work to delete OP8. If the delegation is unsuccessful, USDEL should vote no. h. (SBU) USDEL should work to delete OP14. If the delegation is unsuccessful, USDEL should vote no. Washington considers these points to be red lines. ¶3. (SBU) USDEL should propose the following language modifications to improve the text of this resolution. USDEL is instructed to join consensus regardless of acceptance of these modifications, assuming the text does not cross any of the red lines above: a. (SBU) Delete the phrase in PP2 "and full" before "implementation" as the phrase makes the statement too broad; b. (SBU) Modify the language in PP7 from "that the international community should address urgently" to "that each State and Region should address urgently;" c. (SBU) Modify the language in PP8 to "Emphasizing the importance of comprehensive national reporting on implementation of the Programme of Action with a view to facilitating international cooperation and the rendering of assistance where such assistance is needed;" d. (SBU) Modify OP1 to read "Encourages relevant initiatives, including those of the United Nations, other international organizations, and regional and subregional organizations for the successful implementation . . . " All initiatives are not relevant or helpful, and there is questionable value in soliciting initiatives from NGOs and "civil society" in general; e. (SBU) Delete the phrase in OP2, "among others," as it does not make sense in this context; f. (SBU) Modify the language in OP9 to conclude with "where appropriate." g. (SBU) Modify the language in OP11 to state "Recognizes the necessity of States with limited resources to identify needs and request support accordingly from interested States in the implementation of the Programme of Action to make international cooperation and assistance more effective." ¶4. (U) Questions regarding the subject of brokering should be directed to Deborah Carroll, PM/DDTC, at (202) 663-2809. All other questions can be coordinated through Sho Morimoto, PM/WRA, at (202) 663-0290. Department thanks USDEL for its assistance and hard work in attending to the formulation of this resolution. RICE