NATO SENIOR DEFENSE GROUP ON PROLIFERATION (DGP)

C O N F I D E N T I A L USNATO 000181

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

STATE FOR T, ISN (GODBY),EUR/RPM
DEFENSE FOR OUSD POLICY (GREEN, STEIN, VEIT),OUSD
ACQUISITION TECHNOLOGY AND LOGISTICS (HOPKINS, HENRY,
HENNEGAN, DELANEY),JOINT STAFF/J-5 (CDR SWAIN),DEFENSE
INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (UNGER),EUCOM FOR CS (MAJ GEN CATTO)
AND ECJ5 (MAJ GEN REMKES)

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/20/2017
TAGS: MARR MCAP MNUC NATO PARM PREL
SUBJECT: NATO SENIOR DEFENSE GROUP ON PROLIFERATION (DGP)
STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING, MAR 1, 2007

Classified By: DEFAD EVAN GALBRAITH FOR REASONS 1.4 (B&D)


1. (C) SUMMARY. On March 1, 2007, Ms. Laura Gross,
Director, Counterproliferation Policy, OASD/GSA and Mr. Ivo
Halak, Director of Strategic Planning Department, Czech
Republic, co-chaired the Senior Defense Group on
Proliferation Steering Committee (DGP-SC) meeting. The
DGP-SC discussed Strengthening Host-Nation Chemical,
Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Defense
Capabilities, Improved Coordination with other NATO Bodies,
the 2006 North Atlantic Council (NAC) Weapons of Mass
Destruction (WMD) Seminar Report, 2006 NATO Field and Command
Post Exercises, a Disease Surveillance System Capability, the
upcoming meeting of the DGP with Ukraine, the next steps in
the DGP meetings with Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council
(EAPC),and NATO - European Union (EU) Cooperation in CBRN
Defense. The next meeting will be in Plenary format on March

27.

--------------
DGP POLICY GUIDANCE
--------------


2. (C) The Committee considered first a presentation from
the International Military Staff (IMS) on the subject of
host-nation support. The presentation served to set the
stage for a discussion of the topic of strengthening
host-nation CBRN defense capabilities. The IMS provided an
overview of key principles from the Comprehensive Political
Guidance (CPG) and highlighted the importance of practical
cooperation with national authorities. The IMS detailed how
elements of the NATO Response Force (NRF) will arrive at
deployed locations with all support needed for thirty days of
operations; however, after this point forces will be reliant
on the host-nation for some support (consumables, depending
on the situation). Steps should be taken now to develop an
Alliance Host-Nation Support (HNS) Concept that defines the
key principles, roles, and responsibilities involved. This
issue will also need to be extended for support to partners
in the future. The HNS issue will certainly be considered
when the CBRN Battalion CONOPS is reviewed. The command and
control involved in logistics issues is one important area
that should receive attention.


3. (U) Following the IMS briefing, the UK introduced the
subject of strengthening host-nation CBRN defense
capabilities, a topic born of their experience in the Persian
Gulf in 2003. A Food-for-Thought paper has been developed but
not yet distributed. NATO should promote host-nation
capabilities to respond to CBRN events and suggest ways to do
this. The strategic context for this is contained in the
Comprehensive Political Guidance (CPG) and MC511. Deployed
forces are vulnerable and NATO will likely be reliant upon
host-nation capabilities during extended operations. Nations
were requested to review the discussion paper when received
and to engage in the debate on how to carry this project
further.

--------------
DGP AND NATO ACTIVITIES
--------------


4. (U) The DGP-SC addressed a working paper on Improved
Coordination with other NATO Bodies. Following a break in
silence by France to the fourth revision of the paper, the US
Chair offered another compromise to address French concerns.
The proposal suggested a two-phase approach in which the DGP
Co-Chairs would host an informal meeting with the chairs of
other NATO bodies involved in CBRN defense, to be followed by
an ad-hoc workshop hosted by the International Staff (WMD
Center) which would be open to all members of those
committees, as well as DGP members. The Chairman highlighted
the various documentation that supported her rational for
believing that hosting such a meeting was within the remit of
the DGP and its work program. France provided rationale
about the action being more appropriately led by the

International Staff, but agreed to seek guidance again from
Paris on the new proposal. The working paper remains in-work
and the proposed date for the initial informal meeting
remains March 26.


5. (U) The Belgian delegate proposed that formal minutes of
DGP-SC meetings be maintained and tabled a paper to that
effect. According to Belgium, the procedure of issuing an
action-list after each meeting--a practice that was
introduced eighteen months ago--has been an improvement; but,
more is needed. France supported the Belgian position but
the UK tempered the argument by calling for new ways of doing
business and a recognition of the workload implications of
Belgium,s proposal. The International Staff provided a
rundown of the administrative rules of the house and proposed
as an alternative to include as part of the action list any
national position statements that were promptly submitted.
This proposal achieved consensus and will be used following
this DGP-SC.

--------------
TRAINING, EXERCISES, AND SEMINARS
--------------


6. (U) The U.S. co-chair coordinated numerous compromises on
the latest version of the 2006 NAC WMD Seminar Report; among
them, removing the recommendations from the report and
suggesting that they instead be included in a Maritime
Interdiction Food-for-Thought paper. Canada asked that the
description of Maritime Situation Awareness (MSA) be moved to
the Food-for-Thought paper as well. Wording was adjusted on
"Intelligence" such that it can be accepted rather than
collected, open sources as well as classified. Specific
mention of SCEPC was replaced with reference to "other NATO
bodies." A new revision of the paper has been placed into
circulation for comment and will go under a silence procedure
(through March 21).


7. (C) A briefing by the IMS covered the topic of NATO Field
and Command Post Exercises. Six major exercises with CBRN
events took place in 2006 and upcoming exercises in the NATO,
JFC, and national series were mentioned. CBRN-related
courses at the NATO School in Oberammergau were covered as
well. The challenges involved with ensuring adequate CBRN
emphasis include improving cooperation with other NATO bodies
and a growing number of partner nations. In addition, the
lessons-learned process needs improvement, with emphasis on
the ability to determine which, among the many events,
actually do involve CBRN activity.

--------------
CAPABILITIES
--------------


8. (C) An IMS representative of the Chiefs of the Military
Medical Services (COMEDS) provided an update report on the
Disease Surveillance System (DSS). He reviewed the various
reports to the DGP on this subject over the past few years
and the history of relevant activity in the COMEDS. The DGP
sees this system as one of the deliverables from the Prague
Capability Initiative while the COMEDS considers it to be a
work-in-progress under their remit, but with a broader scope
under their Health Surveillance Structure. The COMEDS
briefing explained the starting point of their work, the
status of implementation at the moment, and their plan for
future development. Analyses of data is expected to be
available in 2008 and a full NATO capability is likely in
2010-2012. Nations were encouraged to support implementation
of the DSS through the NATO force-goals process.


9. (U) A representative from the Senior Civil Emergency
Planning Committee (SCEPC) Joint Medical Committee informed
the DGP-SC about a conference to be conducted in Halifax, 3-5
June, on the civil-military interface of the DSS. She
announced that the DGP was invited to participate. The Head
of the WMDC encouraged nations to consider attending as this

was a good opportunity for constructive exchange between the
DGP and the SCEPC.

--------------
INTERNATIONAL OUTREACH
--------------


10. (C) The DGP-SC next discussed consultations with Ukraine.
The co-chairs distributed a notional agenda for the upcoming
27 March meeting with Ukraine. The agenda and suggested
areas for collaboration were derived from the 6-nation
Food-for-Thought paper on cooperation with Ukraine in the
area of CBRN defense, which was approved under a silence
procedure on February 28. Three Ukrainian military officials
are expected to participate in the March 27 meeting and their
presentation will closely follow that given during the
January Joint DGP-EAPC event. Two nations raised concerns
about the composition of the Ukrainian delegation, indicating
that representatives from the civilian political leadership
should also be involved. Ukraine will be invited to consider
attendance by civilian CBRN defense leadership, as well.


11. (U) The topic of DGP cooperation with the EAPC was
discussed. The proceedings of the January meeting in EAPC
format were reviewed and questions raised about possibilities
for future meetings, for topics (e.g. Forensics,
Environmental and Industrial Hazards, etc) and for locations.
How to involve EAPC nations that do not normally participate
was discussed and a proposal made that a suitable topic might
be Host-Nation Support. A Tiger Team will be set up by the
WMDC to work the issue and provide recommendations back to
the Steering Committee at the April meeting.


12. (U) The last item under International Outreach was NATO
cooperation with the European Union (EU). A Food-for-Thought
paper on the subject was developed by ten interested nations
and received general support at the meeting. The paper aims
to investigate what has been accomplished to date with
respect to CBRN defense cooperation, and proposes some steps
for further cooperation on mutual issues. France found the
paper interesting and offered some specific suggestions about
the recommendation section of the paper. Several nations
voiced caution about moving too quickly and advised revising
the paper and allowing ample time for analysis and comment.


13. (U) The Co-Chairs reminded the group of meetings,
including the upcoming informal Co-Chair meeting with Chairs
of other NATO Bodies (March 26),the March DGP Plenary (March
27) and the DGP-Ukraine Dialogue (March 27).
NULAND