Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07THEHAGUE1935
2007-10-24 12:36:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy The Hague
Cable title:  

CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): WRAP UP FOR THE

Tags:  PARM PREL CWC 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #1935/01 2971236
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 241236Z OCT 07
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 0604
INFO RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY
UNCLAS THE HAGUE 001935 

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
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 THE
WEEK ENDING OCTOBER 19, 2007

This is CWC-84-07.

-----------
ARTICLE VII
-----------
UNCLAS THE HAGUE 001935

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
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 THE
WEEK ENDING OCTOBER 19, 2007

This is CWC-84-07.

--------------
ARTICLE VII
--------------

1. (U) On October 15, Kimmo Laukkanen (Finland) chaired a
consultation to draft decision text for the upcoming CSP on
Article VII. The meeting was well-attended but not
productive. Iran raised two significant points that
seriously sidetracked discussions: (1) as the EC did not make
recommendations at EC-50 and has no regular meeting before
the CSP, the EC does not have a formal way to make
recommendations in the form of a decision but should rely on
report language that allows the work of the action plan to
continue; and (2) in this light, the text should be written
as generic elements that could be used for either a decision
or report language at the CSP. This led to lengthy
discussions about procedure and very little of substance.
Del rep presented USG concerns with portions of the current
text that were covered during the meeting.


2. (U) During the October 16 WEOG meeting, this situation was
discussed. The Dutch delegation were very firm on the need
for a decision, stating that Dutch voluntary contributions
for Article VII assistance and support for a continued EU
Joint Action would end without a clear indication that the
OPCW had not suddenly reduced its priority for Article VII
efforts. Also, the Germans expressed concern with paragraph
6 of the current text (giving priority assistance to SPs with
chemical industries, etc.) because it differentiates between
SPs in need, something they are looking to avoid in areas
like universality.


3. (U) Because of the lack of progress on October 15, the
facilitator called another meeting on October 19. The tone
was much more productive. However, it was clear that Iran
was still making seemingly minor editorial suggestions in
order to justify having only report language at the CSP that
calls for work to continue under the Action Plan. The Dutch
delegation made the point they had made during the WEOG
meeting ) no decision, no Dutch voluntary contributions in
support of Article VII outreach, etc.
The facilitator scheduled the next meeting for October 25,

promising a new draft text.


--------------
WEOG DISCUSSION: MANY MOVING PARTS
--------------

4. (SBU) At its weekly meeting October 16, in addition to
Article VII as noted above, the WEOG discussed the rotation
of chairmen for the Second Review Conference. Canada noted
that legally the Conference chairman would also chair any
special meeting during the year, including the RevCon. U.K.
rep noted that the Review Conference Board has discussed the
Asian Group taking the chair, with the African
representative/future CSP chair (Sudan) present and not
objecting. Discussion followed on whether a procedural
decision will be necessary in the CSP, and on possible Asian
candidates other than Iran ) no one knew of any candidates
coming forward other than Iran.


5. (SBU) There was also discussion of whether any of the
ongoing facilitations (Articles VI, VII, X, XI and
universality) would have agreed language in time for the CSP
and whether a meeting of the EC would be necessary to approve
decisions before the Conference. The TS Legal Advisor had
advised delegates that a consensus text would not/not require
a special session of the EC. Several WEOG delegations
questioned whether it was desirable to take decisions
directly to the full Conference, and whether such a procedure
would not, in fact, undermine the authority and role of the
EC.

--------------
OEWG: PREPARATIONS FOR THE REVIEW CONFERENCE
--------------

6. (U) On October 16, U.K. Amb. Lyn Parker chaired the first

RevCon Working Group meeting since distribution of the draft
outline report on October 2. In general, feedback on the
draft outline was positive, and delegations seemed to agree
that it offered a good basis for future work. Portugal,
speaking on behalf of the EU, also referred delegations to
the EU common position posted on the external server. A
surprising number of delegations had clearly reviewed the
outline in detail and were prepared to offer at least initial
thoughts. France recommended adding terrorism to the
implications for global security session, a suggestion that
was echoed by several other delegations.


7. (U) Noteworthy was the presence of Iranian Ambassador
Ziaran, who offered several suggestions on separating
discussions of the organization of work from the progress in
implementation, and inquired as to whether a political
declaration, separate from the report (as was tabled at the
first RevCon),would be necessary this time. South Africa
noted that this is a preliminary draft, and that it might be
useful to look at the future implementation of Article XI, a
suggestion neatly dealt with by the Chair, who replied that
the general declaration could likely include forward-looking
thoughts. Dutch Ambassador Maarten Lak suggested that the
role of industry be highlighted in several areas, a
suggestion in keeping with previous Dutch recommendations on
industry outreach as one of the key future efforts for the
OPCW. Amb. Parker concluded by responding to an earlier
question about the organization of work/drafting,
recommending that the working group first address the
substance of the report, then later pull out particularly
important elements to be highlighted in a general
declaration.


8. (U) The Director General,s paper for the Review
Conference was reported to be in progress and will include
the Secretariat,s ideas for dealing with new challenges. It
is expected to be finalized in early November, in time for
the next discussion of the OEWG after the CSP.


9. (U) Amb. Parker also reminded delegations of the upcoming
NGO forum on November 19, and noted that the group of
attendees is rather limited so far, a fact he attributes
partly to the wide participation of many NGOs in the Tenth
Anniversary Academic Forum last month.

--------------
P-5 PERIODIC MEETING
--------------

10. (SBU) The Chinese Embassy hosted a P-5 meeting on
October 17, with Ambassadors plus one delegate from Russia,
France, the U.K. and U.S. as well as China. OPCW Deputy
Director General Freeman presented a detailed report on the
progress of universality, noting that in 2003 there were 40
states not party to the convention and now only 13. He then
gave an update on each of the 13 states and the OPCW,s
outreach efforts. Ambassadors raised questions on why some
of the states had not yet completed accession, but the OPCW
had no specifics on why Angola, Dominican Republic and the
Bahamas have not yet joined. The French ambassador stated
that his government plans to host a Middle East conference,
similar to the Rome seminar, during their EU presidency next
year (July to December 2008). When asked about North Korea,
the Chinese ambassador stated that it is too early to add
chemical weapons to the nuclear agenda of the six-party
talks; the Russian ambassador agreed.


11. (SBU) Discussion then turned to the CWC anniversary
events and the OPCW,s efforts to encourage implementation of
the convention with the added publicity. The British
ambassador said that while governments were aware of the
convention, public knowledge remains low; he cited the need
to deepen awareness in academia, industry and the media. The
French noted that the upcoming Review Conference would be a
good public relations opportunity. The Russian ambassador
suggested that the P-5 exchange views on key issues before
the RevCon. The U.K. recommended late January as a good time
to do so. The French will host the next P-5 meeting and will
put the Review Conference as the main agenda item.


--------------
REGIONAL RECEPTIONS
--------------

12. (U) Ambassador Javits is hosting a series of receptions
for each of the regional groups before the CSP. First up was
the Western European and Others Group (WEOG) on October 17,
then the Eastern European Group on October 18. Delegations,
particularly those from eastern Europe, expressed gratitude
for the opportunity to meet with the del and each other.
Future receptions include the Asian Group October 23, the
Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC) on October 29,
and the African Group on November 6. The African Group
reception will be during the CSP since so many of the African
countries do not have resident staff in The Hague.

--------------
INDUSTRY CLUSTER ) TRANSFER DISCREPANCIES
--------------

13. (U) On October 17, Kiwako Tanaka (Japan) chaired a
consultation to discuss the latest facilitator,s note and
draft decision text on guidelines regarding declarations of
import/export data for Schedule 2/3 chemicals. Many
delegations (e.g., U.S. and U.K.) spoke favorably about the
new text, in general. Several delegations (e.g., Australia
and Italy) were concerned that the lack of specific
definitions for terms like &dispatch8 and &long term
storage8 made these guidelines difficult to interpret and
implement. Del rep deployed guidance and reserved the right
to reevaluate the text in light of accommodations of changes
requested from other delegations. Germany had similar
comments.


14. (U) Iran (without guidance from capital) said that they
found the approach impractical because transit countries are
not asked to report. (Their representative, Hajizadeh,
claimed to have experience dealing with transfer discrepancy
issues in Tehran before joining their delegation.) Iran also
objected to any mention of Article VII in this decision, even
after the Legal Adviser,s Office staff member stated it
would be appropriate to be here if the decision would mean a
need to arrange or modify administrative measures to put the
guidelines into practice (which certainly seems to be the
case given the large number of SPs still lacking in this
area).


15. (U) The facilitator will work on a modified draft to try
to incorporate the suggestions by delegations. She also
announced that Rebekka Wullimann (Swiss NA) has agreed to
join her as co-facilitator (taking the place of Merel Jonker
of the Dutch delegation who has moved on to new
responsibilities). The EC Chair has been informed and the
approval process initiated.

--------------
INDUSTRY CLUSTER ) LATE DECLARATIONS
--------------

16. (U) On October 17, Larry Denyer (US Del) chaired a
consultation on the draft decision regarding late submission
of declarations. Input was constructive and progress was
made. In the end, Iran made a last-minute suggestion to
delete the last five paragraphs of the decision (focused on
assistance and reporting),claiming that these were already
dealt with under Article VII efforts. Although lacking real
logic, it seems obvious that they want to use this as a way
to balance this with Article VII with Article XI.


17. (U) Given the progress made and the limited time
available during this first meeting, a second meeting was
called on October 19. Iran and a few other delegations did
not attend, presumably because of the relatively short
notice. However, good progress was made again with this
smaller group. Iran,s proposal to remove the final
paragraphs of the decision was rebuffed as these are the most
important aspect of the decision for delegations like South
Africa.


18. (U) The facilitator will prepare a new draft based on

comments from delegations early in the week of October 29,
with the intent to hold another consultation later that week.

--------------
PREPARATIONS FOR EC VISIT
--------------

19. (U) Amb. Javits and Del rep met with EC visit
participants on October 18 to review the visit program,
safety requirements, and additional administrative
arrangements prior to the departure of the delegation on
October 21 for Washington. Del rep provided a one-page
update on progress at the Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal
Facility, and Chemical Demilitarization Branch officer
Gabriela Coman-Enescu, who will be accompanying the
delegation to Anniston, provided an overview of verification
and optimization measures at the facility. EC participants
had some questions about terminology used in the TS
presentation, and about whether they would have access to
inspectors (France) during the visit, but none on the visit
program itself.


20. JAVITS SENDS.
Gallagher