CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): SCENESETTER FOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 000365 SIPDIS SIPDIS STATE FOR ISN, 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: DECL: 02/27/2017 TAGS: PARM PREL CWC SUBJECT: CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): SCENESETTER FOR 48TH EXECUTIVE COUNCIL SESSION, MARCH 13-16 Classified By: Ambassador Eric M. Javits, Permanent Representative to t he Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Reasons 1.4 ( B) and (D). This is CWC-19-07. -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (C) There are two important U.S. goals at EC-48. The first is to ensure that the Asian Group does not select Iran as its candidate to serve as the next EC Chair. The Malaysian Ambassador informed Ambassador Javits on Feb. 26 that the group decided that day to nominate the Ambassador of the Philippines to be the EC Chair. The second U.S. goal is to set forth priorities for the coming year. Those points will be set out in the draft statement for Ambassador Javits which has been submitted to Washington. End Summary. -------------- EC CHAIR -------------- ¶2. (C) The top priority has been to ensure that the Asian Group does not select Iran as its candidate to be the next EC Chair. Ambassador Javits maintained close contact with key Ambassadors in the group, and was informed by Malaysian Ambassador Dato Noor Farida Ariffin on Feb. 26 that the group had taken a decision that day to nominate Ambassador of the Philippines, Romeo Arguelles, to be the EC Chair. Arguelles, who has been in The Hague since 2002, is well-liked, and there is a good working relationship between the U.S. and Philippine delegations. -------------- IRAQ CHLORINE GAS ATTACK -------------- ¶3. (U) Quickly responding to U.S. prompting, DG Pfirter provided a strong, clear statement after the recent terrorist attacks in Iraq using chlorine gas. Should Washington wish to have the current EC Chair (Amb. Mkhize of South Africa) include a similar statement in the EC record, delegation anticipates no problems, and simply requests receipt of the specific request well before the EC. -------------- U.S. DESTRUCTION -------------- ¶4. (U) Although some delegations have raised the various press reports on the status of the U.S. destruction program, this has, so far, not been a major item of concern. The del ;has briefed the WEOG in response to queries about press reports, but there has not been a concerted effort in the group to dig into the matter. The DG did note privately his serious concern at implications of public affirmation that the U.S. may be unable to complete destruction before 2023, highlighting in particular his concern that Revcon discussions not be dominated by discussions of the lagging pace of CW destruction, at the expense of other important issues. ¶5. (U) The February 20 meeting of the working group for the Second Revcon was just such an opportunity to raise questions about the status of U.S. destruction, but with the exception of an expected statement from Iran alluding to U.S. non-compliance in 2012, and one from the UK noting concern at the slow progress of destruction, delegations seemed content to avoid the sensitive topic for the time being. However, it will be important for the U.S. to provide a presentation at the March 12 destruction informals that reaffirms the U.S. commitment to completing destruction, while not downplaying problems. ¶6. (U) Del would note that the Russian presentation at the destruction informals could generate a discussion of end-point of destruction. It is an issue which has seized the attention of a number of WEOG delegations, and the group coordinator is arranging for the Technical Secretariat to brief the WEOG (and other regional groups) on its visit to Maradykovsky last month. Should EPOD arise, the del does not see any benefit in the U.S. actively engaging on this issue, and recommends coordination with the Allies, who can more appropriately take the lead on this issue. ¶7. (U) Del would also note that there seem to be several advocates in senior levels of the TS for giving Russia destruction credit after the first stage, likely motivated in part by a desire on the part of the OPCW to claim that a possessor state has met another major milestone, but it is unclear at this time whether/how this may influence the debate. However, we would note that Washington may wish to consider possible responses if the discussion turns to U.S. destruction or U.S. views, past and present, on EPOD. -------------- ITALIAN DESTRUCTION -------------- ¶8. (U) The Italian request for an extension of the deadlines for destruction of old CW has become an unfortunately time-consuming irritation. Italy has not taken any requested U.S. changes to its decision document, although in recent discussions the Italian delegation seems more amenable to "streamlining" the operative section of the draft decision. Italy has requested U.S. support, particularly in addressing concerns raised by Germany and Russia, but informal discussions with these two delegations have contradicted the Italian portrayal of their positions. Del will continue to press Italy to present a more consistent draft decision, and will continue informal discussions with "concerned" delegations to ascertain their position on any revised decision. -------------- DONORS MEETING -------------- ¶9. (U) The Russian delegation hosted a meeting, ostensibly tied to the recent Global Partnership meeting in Berlin, but effectively a pitch to donors to the Russian CW destruction program. One request was for donors who are "piggy-backing" onto programs of other donors to set up individual programs. Subsequent discussions at WEOG have indicated a strong desire to continue the "piggy-backing" as the most effective way to provide assistance. WEOG discussions also touched on a possible need to correct past and future discrepancies often presented by Russia in its summary of funds committed/expended to date. Another Russian request was for a more robust attendance at the March 12 donors meeting. However, at present, the expectation is that Viktor Kholstov, deputy head of the Russian Federal Agency for Industry, will not/not be coming to the EC. -------------- ARTICLE VII -------------- ¶10. (U) While there is a substantial amount of work to be done on Article VII, particularly with respect to the Padilla initiative, the del anticipates that most of this work, in the first half of the year, will be done via close cooperation with the TS and like-minded delegations. There is a consultation set for March 8 by facilitator Maarten Lak (Netherlands) to discuss the status report that has been provided by the TS. Del sees no/no reason at this time for another consultation to be held before the summer break. Such meetings would only provide an opportunity for certain delegations to slow up or even block work. Del will coordinate with the new Article VII facilitator, Kimmo Laukkanen of Finland, to ensure that consultations are held when they hold the prospect of making a positive contribution. -------------- SECOND REVCON -------------- ¶11. (U) The chairman of the working group (Amb. Parker of the UK) has continued to proceed at an appropriately slow and steady pace. Del sees no reason for any acceleration until the autumn. The one key item for the first half of the year is to ensure that voluntary contributions are gathered so that the Scientific Advisory Board can hold a May meeting to address requests in connection with the RevCon. The TS estimate is that some 50,000 Euros will be needed for this SAB meeting. Amb. Javits recommends that the U.S. offer up 10,000 Euros out of the voluntary contribution he acquired in January, but on the condition that this amount would only be transferred if other States Parties come up with the additional 40,000 Euros. -------------- AGENDA ITEMS -------------- ¶12. (U) The provisional agenda for EC-48 has a large number of reports and a number of housekeeping items for decision. The following are listed in accordance with the numbering in the annotated provisional agenda (EC-48/INF.1, dated 22 February 2007) 5.1: EC is asked to adopt a draft decision approving the combined plan for Phase 3 of destruction and verification at the CWPF (lewisite production) Dzerzhinsk (EC-48/DEC/CRP.1, dated 14 Nov. 2006). 5.2: EC is asked to approve the correction to detailed plans for conversion for CWPF (VX) Novocheboksarsk (EC-48/S/1, dated 2 January 2007). 5.3: EC is asked to approve corrections to the detailed plan for conversion for CWPF (soman) Volgograd (EC-48/S/3, dated 15 February 2007). 5.4: EC is asked to note the Russian notification on changes at former facility for production of mustard, Chapaevsk (EC-48/DG.2, dated 14 November 2006). 5.5: EC is asked to note the TS note on progress in converting a former CWPF (document not yet out). 5.7: EC is asked to note the Albanian note on destruction progress (EC-48/NAT.2, dated 8 February 2007). 5.8: EC is asked to note the DG's note on progress of CW destruction (document not yet out). 5.10: EC is asked to note the DG's report on Article VII progress. The document "Update on the Status of Implementation of Article VII," dated February 20, has been placed on the External Server. While it does not have an EC-48 number, the facilitator reported that this will be the document under consideration and he believes will receive a document number. He added that this matter will be discussed at a March 8 consultation. 5.11: EC is asked to note the DG's report on status of implementation of Article X (document not yet out). 5.12: EC is asked to note the DG's note on status of implementation of Article XI (document not yet out). 5.13-5.14: EC is asked to approve amendments to the facility agreement with the UK on on-site inspections at a single small-scale facility (EC-48/DEC/CRP.2, dated 15 February 2007). 5.15: EC is asked to approve a facility agreement with the UK regarding on-site inspection at converted CWPF at Randel Island (EC-48/DEC/CRP.4, dated 15 February 2007). 5.16: EC is asked to approve a facility agreement with the UK on on-site inspection at former CWPF at Valley Site (EC-48/DEC/CRP.4, dated 19 February 2007). 5.17: EC is asked to approve a facility agreement with the UK on on-site inspection at converted CWPF at CRP Portreath (document not yet out). 5.18: EC is asked to note the DG's note on progress made on Schedule 2 facility agreements (EC-48/DG.6, dated 16 February 2007). 5.19: EC-47 had noted the Chairperson's summary of consultations on the 2005 Verification Implementation Report. There was also agreement to consider further issues identified in para 4 of that summary. The EC will consider a DG's note on outstanding matters (document not yet out). 5.20: EC will consider the DG's report on TS handling of confidential information (EC-48/DG.5, dated 14 February 2007). SIPDIS 5.21: EC is asked to approve a TS Note on correction to revised specifications for two items of approved equipment (EC-48/S/2, dated 6 February 2007). 6: EC is asked to approve the DG's note on lists of new validated data (document not yet out). 7.1: EC is asked to note the DG's Note on implementation of recommendations of Office of Internal Oversight (EC-48/DG.8, dated 22 February 2007). The facilitator (Snelsire/U.S.) will likely ask that action on this item be deferred until consultations can be held to review the documents. 7.2: EC is asked to note the TS Note on implementation of recommendations of External Auditor (document not yet out). Again, the facilitator will likely ask that consideration of this item be deferred until consultations can be held. 8.1: EC is asked to note the DG's report on income and expenditure for financial year to Dec. 31, 2006 (EC-48/DG.9, dated 22 February 2007). 8.2: EC is asked to note the DG's note on transfer of funds in 2006 (EC-48/DG.7C-12/DG.1, dated 16 February 2007). 8.3: EC is asked to consider proposals for creation of multi-year payment plans for States Parties that are in arrears. Del understands that Moldova is in the process of submitting a repayment plan proposal to the TS, but it is not clear if the proposal will be finalized in time for EC-48 to consider. 8.4: EC is asked to adopt a decision adjusting the DG's salary to keep it in line with those of other executive heads within the UN system (EC-48/DEC/CRP.6, 22 February 2007). This decision would bring the DG's salary into parity with the salaries of the executive heads of other international organizations and of specialized agencies of the UN based on a salary increase for senior officials approved by the UNGA at its sixty-first session. 8.5: EC is asked to consider proposed alignment of the OPCW Staff Regulation with the corresponding UN Staff Regulations (EC-48/DG.4, dated 14 February 2007). This proposed alignment of the regulation would allow the dependents of TS staff to have a fourth year of secondary education paid for by the education grant, even if a degree were already issued after the third year. The TS says that the change would bring its staff regulations into alignment with UN Staff Regulation 3.2(a),which was changed accordingly in 2006. The del has asked the TS to provide information on the budgetary implications of such a change, particularly as no provision for the change was included in the 2007 OPCW budget. 9: EC is asked to conclude a Privileges and Immunities agreement with Chile (EC-48/DEC/CRP.5, dated 19 February 2007). End agenda items. ¶13. (U) Javits sends. BLAKEMAN