CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): WRAP-UP FOR TWO

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 001615

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

STATE FOR ISN/CB, VCI/CCB, L/ACV, IO/S
SECDEF FOR OSD/ISP
JOINT STAFF FOR DD PMA-A FOR WTC
COMMERCE FOR BIS (GOLDMAN)
NSC FOR LEDDY
WINPAC FOR WALTER

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): WRAP-UP FOR TWO
WEEKS ENDING AUGUST 31

This is CWC-73-07.

--------------
2008 BUDGET CONSULTATIONS ) ROUND 1
--------------


1. (U) On August 29, Diana Gosens (Netherlands) chaired the
first consultation on the DG,s Draft Program and Budget for

2008. She was careful to point out that this meeting was
only to cover Programme 1 (Verification),thus avoiding
premature (and expected to be contentious) discussions on
numbers and allocation of inspections. Per Runn (acting
Director, Verification while Horst Reeps was traveling in the
U.S.) gave a brief summary of this Programme, noting that
staffing numbers remain static and that there are no plans
for the use of outside consultants.


2. (U) Japan and Canada asked some basic questions on the
assumptions behind the consultancy and overtime planning.
Japan then asked about the discussion in para 5.52 (the
possible restructuring of the Equipment Store under the
Inspectorate rather than Verification) and whether this could
be done under the DG,s initiative or whether it required EC
approval. Ron Nelson (Director, Administration) pointed out
that the structure of the TS is now 10 years old and several
areas were being looked at for possible restructuring. He
also noted that these possible restructurings would only
require EC approval in the case that a given position was
reclassified.


3. (U) Belgium, Canada, and India commented on electronic
declarations ) progress to date, whether this would be done
for Article VI only, and ties to VIS. Per Runn noted that
nine (9) States Parties (SPs) submitted e-declarations this
year and that the 2008 goal of 70 percent, while ambitious,
is achievable. He also said that they expected to have all
of the e-declaration tools out to SPs by the end of this year.


4. (U) France asked when SPs should expect to see a report
on the results-based budgeting (RBB) report for 2006. The TS
stated that this report is basically done now and expects to
release it to SPs within a month. Canada emphasized the
importance of training within the budget. India asked about
the TS,s forthcoming paper on the VIS and whether it would
discuss security provisions. Per Runn stated that this paper
would be coming out soon, but pointed out that the security
provisions are reviewed by a separate audit team


5. (U) Germany asked about para 4.12 (biomedical sampling
and analysis) and the TS,s plans to deal with this. Per
Runn stated that the TS is not looking for in-house
capability in this area but will likely depend on a structure
similar to the Designated Laboratories system for chemical
sampling and analysis.

--------------
EC VISIT PLANNING
--------------


6. (U) Del rep continues to work with Technical Secretariat
(TS) officials and delegations to complete the administrative
and logistical planning necessary for the EC visit to the
Anniston Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility in October.
Del has alerted the U.S. consulate in Amsterdam to the
potential visa applications, and has provided the list of
participants from the EC and TS to Washington. The TS has
agreed to assist in domestic travel reservations, and has
expressed an interest in providing a technical,
verification-focused briefing on Anniston prior to the
delegation,s departure from The Hague. Del has received
several questions about the level of representation and
expertise the visitors can expect to encounter, with an
additional emphasis from the French delegation on the
political element of the visit. Del recommends Washington
carefully consider its interagency representation in order to
clearly demonstrate the U.S. political commitment to chemical
weapons destruction, a topic that will likely figure
prominently in post-visit reporting in The Hague. The
appropriate representation may be critical in discouraging

continued interest in including Washington in the visit
program, an element del was expressly instructed to exclude
from the visit decision last year.


--------------
IRAQI ACCESSION
--------------


7. (U) After some initial confusion, del has confirmed with
Director of Verification Horst Reeps that the TS does not
intend to move forward with a September 15-20 workshop in
Amman to finalize the Iraqi initial declaration. Del has
recommended postponing the workshop, particularly given the
uncertainty surrounding the availability of Iraqi experts.
Following the August 16 meeting with Reeps, del has learned
in subsequent discussions that the UK is concerned by their
perception that the TS is &rushing8 completion of the
initial declaration, and that the TS seems inclined to rely
heavily on the UK and U.S. to provide information the Iraqis
may be missing. Reeps, request for video footage, photos or
satellite imagery of damaged or destroyed former chemical
weapons facilities in Iraq has also caused some concern in
London; del understands that the UK does not currently plan
to provide assistance in this area.

--------------
INDUSTRY AND PROTECTION FORUM
--------------


8. (U) Del rep met on August 17 with Krzysztof Paturej (TS,
Director, Office of Special Projects),at his request. The
topic was the upcoming Industry and Protection Forum (IPF),a
part of the 10th Anniversary activities. The ideas he
presented were not new but have been raised earlier with
senior management within ISN/CB and BIS. Paturej,s hope is
that careful planning of the IPF will create a platform for
supporting effective national implementation by engaging all
key stakeholders, including industry, trade and import/export
control experts, and security experts. He fairly pointed out
that the TS,s continual efforts to raise awareness with
National Authorities do not always result in subsequent
awareness within industry and other stakeholders. He hoped
that perhaps active sharing of lessons learned between the
industries of various States Parties could result in more
awareness of the CWC and allow the sharing of methodologies,
lessons learned, etc. Paturej finally alluded to the fact
that his staff is minimal (i.e., he and one other
administrative person),and that he hoped some delegations
could provide logistical and (where possible) financial
support of these ongoing efforts. He will keep the Del on
the e-mail list for IPF planning.

-------------- --------------
DUTCH MFA REQUEST FOR SEPTEMBER DONOR COORDINATION MEETING
-------------- --------------


9. (U) Del rep received an inquiry from the Dutch MFA as to
whether or not the U.S. intends to provide a more substantive
briefing on the U.S. program to assist in Russia,s
destruction of its chemical weapons stockpile. Delegation
understands that DOD intends to present an overview of U.S.
Cooperative Threat Reduction assistance efforts at the
September 24 informal meeting of States Parties assisting
Russia with chemical weapons destruction. Delegation will
await confirmation from Washington before providing a
positive response to the Dutch MFA.

-------------- --------------
INFORMAL MEETING WITH ARTICLE X FACILITATOR
-------------- --------------


10. (U) Del reps met with Article X Facilitator Jitka Brodska
(Czech Republic) on August 21 to discuss upcoming meetings.
Brodska is planning for the next consultative meeting to take
place during the week of October 8. In this meeting the
focus will be on Paragraph 7, the Protection Network and the
Qualified Experts List.


11. (U) In regard to Paragraph 7, Brodska reported that
voluntary contributions have increased. This has generated
some discussion among a variety of delegations about an
excessive use of voluntary contributions for Article X
instead of line items in the OPCW budget.


12. (U) Brodska noted that regular meetings on the Protection
Network need to be re-established. She feels that there
still needs to be discussion and agreement on how the
Protection Network will work. She believes that the TS needs
more experts and a clearer idea of its intention in regard to
the Protection Network.

--------------
VERIFICATION IMPLEMENTATION REPORT (VIR)
--------------


13. (U) Del reps met with Head of Policy Review Branch Per
Runn to discuss the TS Corrigendum to the 2006 VIR. Runn,
who lost most of his experienced staff over the summer, has
agreed to look into the issues raised in the U.S. written
comments that were not addressed in the corrigendum. As in
past years, Runn does anticipate providing a specific written
response to the U.S. comments, and agreed that a second
corrigendum will be necessary; due to his personnel
situation, timing on availability of these documents is
unclear. In accordance with STATE 081267, del reps also
initiated follow-up on several additional issues not covered
in the U.S. written comments; initial response has been
forwarded via classified email to Washington.


14. BEIK SENDS.
Gallagher