Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07USNATO574
2007-10-23 16:26:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Mission USNATO
Cable title:
CHANGING TIDES ON MISSILE DEFENSE? BRUSSELS THINK
how-toVZCZCXRO7204 RR RUEHIK RUEHPOD RUEHYG DE RUEHNO #0574 2961626 ZNR UUUUU ZZH R 231626Z OCT 07 FM USMISSION USNATO TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1307 INFO RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
UNCLAS USNATO 000574
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
OSD PASS U/S EDELMAN
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: MARR PREL NATO
SUBJECT: CHANGING TIDES ON MISSILE DEFENSE? BRUSSELS THINK
TANK BLASTS RUSSIAN REPRESENTATIVE
UNCLAS USNATO 000574
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
OSD PASS U/S EDELMAN
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: MARR PREL NATO
SUBJECT: CHANGING TIDES ON MISSILE DEFENSE? BRUSSELS THINK
TANK BLASTS RUSSIAN REPRESENTATIVE
1. Further evidence that we're making progress on missile
defense with Europe, Russian speakers got an earful from a
previously skeptical leading Brussels think tank at an 22
October European Security Forum entitled &Does Europe need a
new Missile Defense?8 hosted by the Center for European
Policy Studies (CEPS).
2. After presentations describing positions of the US
(former USDP Walt Slocombe),Russian (Alexander Pikayev,
Disarmament and International Security Institute in Moscow)
and Europe (Oliver Thraenert, Security Policy Research Group
in Berlin),USNATO DCM and Armaments Director laid out the
new US positions from the 2 2 talks in Moscow, and as
presented to the NAC and NRC on 17 October. In response to
our presentation, seminar chair Francois Heisbourg (Fondation
Pour La Recherche Strategique) directed at Pikayev a strong
critique of the Russian positions, as follows:
-- While still critical of the basic US proposal, which had
put Europe in the difficult position of being &in the
middle8 between Russia and the US, the latest US position,
especially &phased activation8 was a huge concession.
-- &The US has effectively conceded on a point of principle
regarding threat assessment by deciding that the MD system
would not go live until an Iranian threat was clear.8
-- &It will now be hard for Europeans to defend the Russian
position. You will be very lonely. You will take
countermeasures, but so what?8
-- Heisbourg also made the point that on Kosovo, Russia was
directly running up against European, not American,
interests.
3. Other presentations (except for the Russian one),while
to one degree or another critical of specific US actions,
generally came down in favor of a missile defense system for
Europe.
4. This forum is one example of our success in building
consensus in Europe in that there was no debate about the
need for a European missile defense capability but rather the
discussion was almost completely focused on how to get Russia
to participate.
NULAND
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
OSD PASS U/S EDELMAN
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: MARR PREL NATO
SUBJECT: CHANGING TIDES ON MISSILE DEFENSE? BRUSSELS THINK
TANK BLASTS RUSSIAN REPRESENTATIVE
1. Further evidence that we're making progress on missile
defense with Europe, Russian speakers got an earful from a
previously skeptical leading Brussels think tank at an 22
October European Security Forum entitled &Does Europe need a
new Missile Defense?8 hosted by the Center for European
Policy Studies (CEPS).
2. After presentations describing positions of the US
(former USDP Walt Slocombe),Russian (Alexander Pikayev,
Disarmament and International Security Institute in Moscow)
and Europe (Oliver Thraenert, Security Policy Research Group
in Berlin),USNATO DCM and Armaments Director laid out the
new US positions from the 2 2 talks in Moscow, and as
presented to the NAC and NRC on 17 October. In response to
our presentation, seminar chair Francois Heisbourg (Fondation
Pour La Recherche Strategique) directed at Pikayev a strong
critique of the Russian positions, as follows:
-- While still critical of the basic US proposal, which had
put Europe in the difficult position of being &in the
middle8 between Russia and the US, the latest US position,
especially &phased activation8 was a huge concession.
-- &The US has effectively conceded on a point of principle
regarding threat assessment by deciding that the MD system
would not go live until an Iranian threat was clear.8
-- &It will now be hard for Europeans to defend the Russian
position. You will be very lonely. You will take
countermeasures, but so what?8
-- Heisbourg also made the point that on Kosovo, Russia was
directly running up against European, not American,
interests.
3. Other presentations (except for the Russian one),while
to one degree or another critical of specific US actions,
generally came down in favor of a missile defense system for
Europe.
4. This forum is one example of our success in building
consensus in Europe in that there was no debate about the
need for a European missile defense capability but rather the
discussion was almost completely focused on how to get Russia
to participate.
NULAND