NATO SENIOR DEFENSE GROUP ON PROLIFERATION (DGP)

C O N F I D E N T I A L USNATO 000320 SIPDIS SIPDIS STATE FOR T, EUR/PRA, EUR/RPM, AND AC/SEA DEFENSE FOR GSA (BENKERT, GROSS) E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/21/2017 TAGS: MARR MCAP MNUC NATO PARM PREL SUBJECT: NATO SENIOR DEFENSE GROUP ON PROLIFERATION (DGP) STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING, APR 25, 2007 Classified By: D/DEFAD CLARENCE JUHL FOR REASONS 1.4 (B&D) ¶1. (C) SUMMARY. On April 25, 2007, Ms. Deanna DeSante, Senior Assistant for Combating WMD 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, the Prevention of Trafficking Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) through Maritime Interdiction, the DGP contribution to the Joint Committee on Proliferation (JCP) Progress Report, the 2007-2008 Work Programme, the upcoming 2007 North Atlantic Council (NAC) Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Seminar, a Disease Surveillance System capability, the CBRN Virtual Stockpile, the next steps in the DGP consultations with Ukraine and the Euro-Atlantc Partnership Council (EAPC),and NATO-European nion (EU) Cooperation in CBRN Defense. The next meeting will be in Plenary format on May 24. -------------- DGP POLICY GUIDANCE -------------- ¶2. (U) Under the heading of DGP Policy Guidance, the Group first considered a discussion paper on Maritime Interdiction Operations. France, Spain, Germany, and Belgium delegations offered comments that, while they supported the policy guidance within the paper, that they were not in favor of expanding Operation Active Endeavor (OAE). The French representative commented that the paper should focus on the political decision to undertake maritime interdiction of WMD and not yet presuppose the mechanism to accomplish this mission. The Spanish delegate also recommended that the Policy Coordination Group (PCG) review the document before it went to the North Atlantic Council (NAC). The Turkish delegate commented that the intelligence sharing was the primary issue and wished to see the identification of options and the clarification of governing legal issues. A new version of the paper will be produced in time for the May Plenary. ¶3. (U) The next topic was a discussion of a Food-for-Thought paper on Building Host Nation CBRN Defense Capabilities. Italy opined that the paper is workable, but that some capabilities will take a long time to develop. They would like to see a list of the non-NATO countries under consideration and an elaboration of the methods to be used. Turkey would like to see the paper re-focused on building host nation capabilities in out-of-area operations as resources are scarce and the procedures need to be de-conflicted with other existing mechanisms and appropriate to the threat. Germany felt that there was some question about what the term "host nation" meant in the context of current NATO operations and would like this term defined in the paper. National comments will be incorporated in a new version to be issued prior to the May 24 Plenary. -------------- DGP AND NATO ACTIVITIES -------------- ¶4. (U) A report from the Joint Committee on Proliferation (JCP) is under preparation for submission to the Defense Ministerial in June. The draft DGP portion of this document was recently issued and discussion covered the period of the report and handling procedures for the Ministerial. The WMD Center (WMDC) advised that the period of the report should be "since Riga" (instead of 2006-2007). In view of the count-down to June, delegates were requested to submit comments on this document within two weeks, and a new version will be circulated prior to the next meeting. As a related topic, the Work Programme for 2007-08 was reviewed with Belgium observing that there were new elements and ambitions, and that identification of the lead bodies and desired outcomes was needed for each item. Alignment with the Comprehensive Political Guidance (CPG) will be essential. Delegates were also asked for comments on this document within two weeks, for incorporation into a new document by the next meeting. -------------- TRAINING, EXERCISES, AND SEMINARS -------------- ¶5. (C) The DGP needs to identify the topic for the next NAC WMD Seminar (scheduled for the Fall 2007). The WMDC gave the DGP a review of the topics that have been featured at each of the past seminars since the series started and some suggestions for this year's topic. Germany stated that the topic must be relevant to the ambassadors and it must guide future work. Denmark proposed exploring how the Alliance would cooperate on bio-surveillance in a CBRN event and would like burden sharing to be a part of the seminar. France stated that several of the proposed topics were interesting but two were problematic: when speaking of partnership and cooperation it is important to preserve the autonomy of each organization, especially the EU and NATO; and the Berlin Plus arrangement only provides for exchange of information. Canada felt that there was a rich menu of ideas and perhaps several of them could be combined. In any case, we need to identify what key issues need guidance. The United States offered that bio-terrorism attack on deployed forces would be a suitable topic and it could contain elements of disease surveillance, the virtual stockpile and host nation support. Poland pointed out that important issues were capabilities and international outreach. A tiger team will start work immediately with the objective of defining three potential seminar scenarios to choose from at the May Plenary. -------------- CAPABILITIES -------------- ¶6. (C) The Group received an informative presentation from Mr Andy Weber (OSD/ISP) on the Biological Threat Reduction Program (BTRP). The scope, mission and funding of the BTRP were covered as well as the Threat Agent Detection and Response software developed by DTRA. In response to a question on who generally has responsibility for such affairs, the briefer explained that usually the Ministries of Health or Agriculture worked these issues. The BTRP coordinates its efforts with the World Health Organization (WHO) and others and encourages participation with other national agencies. The BTRP endeavors to provide improved infrastructure to the WHO in the interest of global public health information. France has offered to brief the committee on their disease surveillance system at a future meeting. Initial Operating Capability of the NATO Disease Surveillance System will be featured in the JCP report to Defense Ministers. The co-chairs will circulate a paper summarizing the Disease Surveillance System concept for delegation review. ¶7. (U) The DGP considered a WMDC discussion paper on the CBRN Virtual Stockpile. The most recent activity with this project was a workshop in May 2006 that used the existing database to stage a small scale exercise. Since then, no substantive progress has been made and the question to the nations was what sort of follow-on work should there be? Belgium began with the question: who is the database for -- the military or the civilians, and what purpose does it serve? Germany advised the delegates that military authorities were already on record as having no need for it and there appeared to be no interest in participation from the civilian side as well. The WMDC advised that the discussion should be simplified: the system was simply a list of POCs to contact if one country needs help. They stated that the Stockpile was being used and that it was simple to keep the list of POCs updated, if people would just log onto the system. The UK and The Netherlands announced that they would not be inclined to include their information on an unclassified, albeit password-protected, website. The SIPDIS co-chairs invited written comments and indicated that a new version of the paper would be forthcoming. -------------- INTERNATIONAL OUTREACH -------------- ¶8. (C) The WMD Center provided a briefing on the outcome of the joint meeting with Ukraine held at NATO in March. The three areas focused on in the discussions included: exchange of information; CBRN protection equipment; and training. The objective was to permit more participation by Ukraine in NATO operations and to ensure that Ukraine's equipment was compatible with NATO standards. The International Military Staff (IMS) announced that the soon-to-be released CONOPS for the CBRN battalion would provide for engagement of partners and that they would be evaluated against NATO standards. The identification of CBRN training opportunities for Ukraine will be pursued. Continuing on the subject of international outreach, the committee heard a report on recent tiger-team sessions dealing with joint DGP-EAPC meetings. The past activities were reviewed and the decision taken to hold a DGP-EAPC workshop this autumn on a theme yet to be determined. -------------- NATO-EU COOPERATION -------------- ¶9. (C) The NATO-EU Capabilities Group will meet in June to discuss CBRN issues and the DGP circulated a framework document for presentation to that group on NATO CBRN activities, structure, contacts and work plan. France reminded the Group of the requirement to work through the NATO-EU Capabilities Group for all correspondence (not directly to the EU). Spain asked if the EU has expressed the same level of interest in cooperation on such matters. The United States pointed out that the existing agreement does provide for informal contact between NATO and EU staffs and that the DGP initiative could be seen in that light. A DGP briefing for the June NATO-EU Capabilities Group meeting will be created by the WMDC and will be on the May Plenary agenda for discussion. -------------- ANY OTHER BUSINESS -------------- ¶10. (U) The Co-Chairs announced the publishing of the NATO Media Strategy to deal with CBRN Situations on April 25th (CM(2007)0033) and reminded delegations that the Administrative Arrangements for the 2007 DGP Seminar in Prague (July 10-13) have been distributed and that Delegations are requested to submit their paperwork by May 31st. The Chairman also reminded delegates that the next meeting, the DGP Plenary meeting, will occur on May 24th. NULAND