SWEDEN: VIEWS ON CLUSTER MUNITIONS

C O N F I D E N T I A L STOCKHOLM 000098 SIPDIS SIPDIS STATE PM/WRA FOR KATHERINE BAKER E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/26/2017 TAGS: MOPS PARM PREL NATO PGOV SW SUBJECT: SWEDEN: VIEWS ON CLUSTER MUNITIONS REF: STATE 6667 Classified By: Polcouns Casey Christensen, reason 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (c) Polcouns met January 26 with MFA Deputy Director General and head of International Law and Human Rights Department Bosse Hedberg in connection with the proposed February 22-23 cluster munitions conference in Oslo. Hedberg noted that he was closely involved with developments on cluster munitions (CM) at the Conference on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW),and would head the Swedish delegation to Oslo. Hedberg said he was aware of the U.S. position on CM, which he characterized as being "existing laws on CM are sufficient," and said that Sweden disagreed. Sweden believed there needed to be specific guidelines on CM; at the same time, Sweden wanted to ensure that the right balance was found between military and humanitarian concerns. Sweden's "political goal" was to see formal, more specific regulation of the use of CM, as well as the prohibition of the use and transfer of the older generation of CM, and provisions for their destruction. ¶2. (c) Hedberg said one of Sweden's purposes in participating in Oslo was to make sure the process did not get out of hand. Some countries (he mentioned Mexico and the Holy See) and interest groups that would be participating could seek a complete ban on cluster weapons. He said the ICRC would participate at Oslo. Hedberg said Sweden used, and may -- he was not certain -- produce and did assemble cluster weapons, and did not want this capability curtailed. He had been assured, he said, that Sweden's CM were "more than 98 percent reliable," and were of the new generation, such that they would not, in the Swedish scenario, be affected by a ban. Sweden would seek to avoid an outcome that sought to ban CM entirely, because that would produce a much smaller critical mass of support. Hedberg said he had spoken extensively with Norwegian officials, and they were also seeking a regulation, not a prohibition of CM. ¶3. (c) Hedberg said Sweden will also participate in the April ICRC meeting on CM. He expected these meetings would be more at the expert level, following up on the Oslo "political" initiative Sweden hoped to influence along the lines described. He expected that the Oslo conference would adopt a declaration or issue a chairman's statement stating the political conclusions; he did not expect a draft of a binding instrument to be a result. WOOD