DEMARCHE REQUEST ON GEORGIA/SOUTH OSSETIA: MAKING

C O N F I D E N T I A L STATE 023657

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/25/2017
TAGS: PREL PBTS OSCE GG
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE REQUEST ON GEORGIA/SOUTH OSSETIA: MAKING
PROGRESS IN THE JCC

Classified By: EUR Deputy Assistant Secretary Matt Bryza.
Reason: 1.4 (b),(d).


1. (C) ACTION REQUEST: Department requests that post
demarche the GoG at the highest appropriate level drawing on
the points in para 3 below to gain Georgian support for
substantive discussions in formal meetings of the Joint
Control Commission (JCC) as soon as dates can be agreed, even
while Georgia and its Euro-Atlantic allies continue to
implement and devise strategies for transforming the
situation on the ground in South Ossetia and achieving a
peaceful resolution of the South Ossetia conflict.


2. (C) BACKGROUND: With a continued fragile security
situation in South Ossetia, a planned informal February
28-March 2 meeting of the JCC (Georgia, Russia, South
Ossetia, North Ossetia) has fallen apart, possibly over
disagreements on the purpose and nature of the meeting.
Moreover, the most recent meetings of the JCC have been
unproductive, in part because Georgia has reportedly been
unprepared to discuss issues other than modifying the format
for negotiations. While the Department sympathizes with the
GoG's wish to replace the JCC, an inefficient mechanism
unfairly biased toward South Ossetia, we are concerned that
the Georgians risk further stagnation of a negotiation
process (and trying the patience of the Euro-Atlantic
community) by persisting in their rejection of the existing
negotiating format. We are also concerned that reluctance to
use the JCC hinders progress on implementing the 2005 South
Ossetia peace plan, some elements of which envisioned working
within the JCC. Blockage of the JCC process could also
potentially impede implementation of the OSCE's
reconstruction projects, in which the U.S. and our
Euro-Atlantic partners have invested resources, and which are
beginning to make a difference on the ground and build a
basis for U.S. and European involvement.


3. (C) TALKING POINTS (REL/GEORGIA):

-- The USG supports Georgia in its aim to broaden the
negotiating format for the resolution of the South Ossetia
conflict; however, we believe there is use in future JCC
meetings, even if they do not focus on how to change the JCC
format.

-- The USG recommends strongly that the GoG return to the JCC
table as quickly as agreement can be reached on dates and
timing. We believe the GOG should use that mechanism, to the
extent possible, to effect a transformation on the ground.
We recognize that the JCC format is structurally biased in
favor of South Ossetia, but the GoG should work within the
JCC to propose constructive ideas for resolving the conflict
peacefully.

-- Georgia's allies in Europe will welcome Georgia's
continuing use of "existing formats" while we all actively
seek ways to expand these or set up new formats, thereby
helping U.S. efforts to boost support for Georgia in
international fora.

-- For example, we note that the JPKF Commander has referred
a request for a checkpoint at Didi Gupta to the next JCC
meeting. An OSCE checkpoint at Didi Gupta is one of the
measures we and our European partners are pressing for
strongly through the OSCE and in our bilateral contacts, and
which we believe can change the dynamic on the ground in a
positive way. If Georgia deals with this proposal within the
JCC, you will either get agreement on a vital strategic
checkpoint that can stop diversion of weapons and contraband
or expose Russian/Ossetian obstructionism and give the
Euro-Atlantic community an opportunity to press for better
Russian cooperation in broader multilateral fora.

-- The Euro-Atlantic community will pay attention if your
cooperation in the JCC highlights Russian obstructionism. If
you do not work within the JCC, Georgia risks being seen by
that same group as the obstructionist.

-- Trying to use the JCC to your best advantage will not
compromise Georgia's efforts to achieve a transformation on
the ground in South Ossetia by other means, for example,
through OSCE economic rehabilitation projects. We hope
Georgia will continue support for OSCE-sponsored assistance
projects that build bridges between Georgians and Ossetians
in South Ossetia and, by extension, between South Ossetians
and the outside world.

-- These projects are also already offering the desired
opportunity for greater U.S. and European involvement in
resolving the conflict. We do not want to see any setbacks.

-- We have noted that GoG agreed on a USD 3.5 million
construction and rehabilitation program for
Georgian-controlled villages in the zone of conflict.
Georgian action to improve the lives of its citizens is
commendable. We believe those funds should benefit all
Georgian citizens in the Tskhinvali Region, both ethnic
Georgians and ethnic Ossetians.

-- Redirecting those construction and rehabilitation funds to
OSCE-sponsored projects that benefit all of Georgia's
citizens in South Ossetia would send a powerful statement not
only to the international community, but also to the
residents of South Ossetia themselves, about Georgia's
intentions to create a safe, multi-ethnic, unified state
under an umbrella of Euro-Atlantic values.

-- You can best work with our efforts by using fully every
available avenue for progress, including the JCC as long as
it is the only place the South Ossetians and Russia will
cooperate.

-- Finally, we have reviewed your draft memorandum on further
activities aimed at resolving the South Ossetia conflict. We
find many elements of this document positive and consistent
with efforts already underway.

-- We believe such a new initiative would have greatest
resonance if presented against a backdrop of full cooperation
on the part of Georgia within the JCC. Otherwise, it could
be met with skepticism that there will be any chance of
dialogue or agreement on it with the South Ossetian side, and
thus no viable means to advance it.
RICE