NATO SENIOR DEFENSE GROUP ON PROLIFERATION (DGP)

C O N F I D E N T I A L USNATO 000625

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

STATE FOR T, EUR/PRA, EUR/RPM, AND AC/SEA
DEFENSE FOR GSA (BENKERT, GROSS)

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/01/2017
TAGS: MARR MCAP MNUC NATO PARM PREL
SUBJECT: NATO SENIOR DEFENSE GROUP ON PROLIFERATION (DGP)
PLENARY MEETING, NOV 14, 2007, AND NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL
(NAC) WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WMD) SEMINAR, NOV 15,
2007

Classified By: D/DEFAD CLARENCE JUHL FOR REASONS 1.4 (B) and (D)


1. (C) SUMMARY: The NATO Senior Defense Group on
Proliferation (DGP) met in plenary session at NATO HQ on
November 14. The committee was co-chaired by Mr. Joseph
Benkert (PDASD/OSD/GSA) of the United States and Mr. Cezary
Lusinski (MOD) of Poland. Associated with this month's
Plenary, the DGP also sponsored the annual North Atlantic
Council (NAC) Seminar on Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) on
November 15. END SUMMARY.


--------------
DGP PLENARY
--------------

Policy Guidance:


2. (C) During the DGP Plenary, the committee discussed the
recently approved policy document on Fostering Host Nation
and Partners, CBRN Defense Capabilities. The Chair noted
that the paper had been sent to the North Atlantic Council
(NAC) under silence to expire on November 23rd (document has
since passed silence). The document explores ways that NATO
could increase outreach to partners, potential host nations
and international organizations with the objective of
improving defenses against CBRN threats to NATO deployed
forces.


3. (C) PDASD Benkert then opened discussion on a
food-for-thought paper on potential DGP deliverables to the
Bucharest Summit by recalling conclusions reached during a
working lunch that immediately preceded the Plenary. During
the lunch, which was attended by senior DGP representatives
from many of the 26 nations, discussion focused on proposals
identified in the paper, such as the need for an overarching
NATO CBRN Defense Strategy, possibilities for increased
outreach to partners on CBRN defense, accelerating
non-proliferation initiatives such as development of a NATO
WMD Maritime Interdiction capability, and ways that the DGP
can communicate to the Heads of State and Government (HOSG)
the many Alliance CBRN defense accomplishments since Prague
and Riga. During the Plenary, the WMD Center also
highlighted guidance from the Secretary General's Operational
Roadmap for the Bucharest Summit and provided an historical
overview of DGP contributions to past summits. Canada saw
merit in the creation of a NATO CBRN Defense Strategy as it
would legitimize DGP work and could provide a framework to
enhance outreach activities with partners. Concerning the
proposal for a maritime interdiction capability, Canada
requested clarification regarding what would be presented to
HOSG at Riga, stating that announcing that NATO would create
this capability at Bucharest might be premature. The
&deliverable8 for Bucharest would not be such an
announcement, but rather a notation that since maritime
interdiction of WMD was identified in the Bucharest Summit
Roadmap as a potential means for combating terrorism, the DGP
is accelerating the implementation of recommendations from
the recently approved policy paper on this topic, which calls
for the development of proposals for NAC consideration.
Spain and the Czech Republic voiced their support for a
strategy document and found the questions of international
outreach and NATO-EU cooperation worthy of further
discussion. France added that a defense strategy document
could be beneficial and, noted that while strengthening of
NATO-EU cooperation might be acceptable in principle, the
process is premature and needs further discussion. The UK
wished to see Bucharest as an opportunity to advertise NATO
CBRN capabilities to an external audience. The Chair
requested formal comments from nations on the paper by 30
November. A revised food-for-thought paper will include a
draft framework for an overall CBRN defense strategy,
possible wording for the communiqu, and suggested avenues to
communicate DGP accomplishments.

DGP and NATO Activities:


4. (C) The Chair recalled that cooperation with other NATO



bodies was a continuing item on the DGP,s agenda and that
all bodies engaged in NATO CBRN defense activities would gain
by exchanging information and promoting joint work. At a
meeting of Assistant Secretaries General in May there was
agreement to conduct an ad hoc workshop on scenarios,
training and exercises, and international outreach. A
day-long workshop will be hosted by the WMD Center on the
margins of the February DGP Plenary. The UK welcomed this
initiative and observed that we are, in fact, getting
progressively better at coordinating our efforts with other
NATO bodies.

Training, Exercises and Seminars:


5. (C) Poland announced that the annual DGP seminar would
take place in Torun, Poland, June 16-20, 2008, focusing on
the theme &CBRN Defense Transformation.8 The medieval town
of Torun will provide an interesting venue and is located
close to a military CBRN defense facility that will feature
in the agenda. Detailed administrative arrangements will be
available at the February DGP meeting.


6. (C) The WMD Center reviewed final preparations for the
annual NAC WMD Seminar scheduled for the next day. The WMD
Center held a preparatory session for DGP points-of-contact
the previous week, which was well attended. As the committee
reviewed the seminar questions for the ambassadors, Greece
asked about the relationship of the capability shortfalls,
specifically stand-off detection and the disease surveillance
system, with NATO common funding. The consensus of the
response was that there was no direct linkage but that this
was a legitimate subject for discussion.


7. (C) The NATO Crisis Management Exercise (CMX) for 2008
will take place April 16-22. The DGP has a standing interest
in ensuring that CBRN events are featured in the scenario.
The WMD Center briefed the committee on the general themes
and arrangements for the exercise. CMX08 will occur in the
context of phases two and three of the NATO Crises Response
System and will involve interaction with other organizations
such as the UN. The Final Planning Conference will take
place in January but planning status and relevant documents
can be found at any time on the SHAPE/J8/CMX08 web site. It
was agreed to move the date of the April Steering Committee
meeting to the 14th to avoid conflict with the CMX dates.

Capabilities:


8. (C) Under the Capabilities section of the DGP agenda, the
committee was updated by SHAPE on the Combined Joint CBRN
Task Force. The briefing covered the recently revised
Concept of Operations, which includes changes in terminology;
incorporates new capabilities such as a CBRN Reachback
Coordination Centre, Intelligence Fusion and Render Safe; and
permits participation by Partners, if approved by the NAC.
SHAPE also discussed force generation for the battalion and
recalled the SACEUR assessment of the NRF situation in July
and the resulting proposal for a NRF Graduated Option. An
assessment of the fills for the Battalion during NRF cycles
nine and ten was provided. Partner nations were encouraged
to participate by making offers at the spring force
generation conference. Turkey reminded the committee that
acceptance of any partner participation was subject to NAC
approval.


9. (C) The Committee of Medical Advisors (COMEDS) updated
the DGP on recent activity on disease surveillance. Four
nations have agreed to provide support to a Multinational
Medical Analysis Center to be co-located with a German
medical facility in Munich. This analysis center will form
one element of the surveillance pillar in the COMEDS,
Medical Information & Communication System (MEDICS) and will
provide near-real time analysis on unusual aggregations of
symptoms to the operational commander. Working relationships
with the U.S. CDC, EU, WHO and civil organizations in host
nations will be a vital part of maintaining a comprehensive
medical picture. The actions in the field will consist of
electronically forwarding to Munich data on symptoms in a



standardized format. Turkey asked about the status of the
center and was advised that it is a multilateral arrangement
and not a formal NATO structure. Portugal asked how the
relations with external organizations was going to be pursued
and was informed that those issues were on the agenda of the
Joint Medical Committee (JMC). France saw the Munich
capability as an example of pragmatic cooperation and
encouraged others to consider what they might do.

International Outreach:


10. (C) Poland and the Czech Republic recently hosted a
tiger team to consider the format and content of a DGP
workshop with Ukraine on CBRN defense policy. The workshop
is a result of approved DGP policy guidance on cooperation
with Ukraine, which calls for greater cooperation, including
the exchange of information on CBRN defense concepts. The
objective of the workshop is to exchange briefings between
select Alliance members and Ukraine on their respective
national CBRN policies, structures and planning. The target
Ukrainian audience is civilian policy makers from Kiev.
Ukraine informed the co-Chairs during side meetings that
because the Ministry of Defense is undergoing considerable
transformation, including in the area of CBRN Defense, it
might be difficult to assemble the appropriate Ukrainian
civilians to attend the workshop. The Co-Chairs opined that
the workshop could provide Ukraine ideas for consideration as
it proceeds with its transformation in this area. The
committee will wait for a response to the invitation letter
for the January 16-17 workshop with modest expectations.


11. (C) The WMD Center announced that planning was underway
for the second DGP meeting in EAPC format, scheduled for the
same day as the February 27 DGP plenary. EAPC nations will
also be invited, along with other selected partners, to
participate in an international tabletop exercise on CBRN
Defense. The TTX is a tasking from the recently approved
policy paper on &Fostering Host Nation and Partners, CBRN
Defense Capabilities.8 The WMD Center will utilize some
materials from the NAC WMD Seminar as a scene-setting
scenario for the TTX.

Any Other Business:


12. (C) The co-chairs closed the Plenary proceedings with an
announcement of future meetings, including: a DGP Steering
Committee on January 16; the DGP-Ukraine workshop on 16-17
January; an ad hoc NATO bodies meeting on 26 February; and a
DGP Plenary and meeting with the EAPC on February 27.


--------------
NAC WMD SEMINAR
--------------


13. (C) The sixth annual NAC WMD Seminar was chaired by the
Secretary General on 15 November 2007, and focused on CBRN

SIPDIS
Defense Transformation. The seminar sought to weave together
various strands of on-going work within the DGP, among them:
accelerating the development of a robust NATO disease
surveillance system (DSS) by fostering links with partners
and other organizations, which will improve overall public
health; developing partner and host nation CBRN defense
capabilities; improving outreach and coordination among NATO
and civilian organizations on CBRN defense; improving
cooperation among NATO bodies; and developing an overall NATO
strategy on CBRN defense.


14. (C) The seminar opened with a briefing by Mr. Ted
Whiteside, Director of the NATO WMD Centre, on CBRN threats
to NATO deployed forces, capabilities that NATO has already
developed to counter those threats, and current
"transformation8 initiatives to enhance capabilities.
Seminar discussion was then facilitated by two videos
featuring a biological threat to NATO deployed forces and
local populations, one considering NATO's response with
current capabilities and the other portraying the use of
potential enhanced capabilities. The videos elicited much



discussion on what additional work must done to improve
NATO,s CBRN defense posture.


15. (C) The Polish PermRep noted that the gap between WMD
and traditional weapons is narrowing, as perpetrators utilize
weapons such as IEDs to deliver toxins and pathogens. He
also raised the question of support for common funding or a
merging of national funding to address challenges. The Czech
PermRep highlighted the need for continued transformation,
including shifting NATO,s approach from a focus on force
protection to include non-proliferation, fighting terrorism
and consequence management; he also noted the need to
transform by creating smaller mobile units for consequence
management outside of NATO,s borders and making wider use of
national facilities such as the CBRN Center of Excellence or
the Czech Republic's BSL-4 lab and medical facility. The UK
PermRep raised the importance of greater cooperation among
military and civilian sides of NATO (SCEPC and the military
committees). U.S. Ambassador Nuland noted the absence of a
single integrated plan and stated that endorsement by Heads
of State and Government of an overarching CBRN defense
strategy should be pursued at the Bucharest or Berlin
Summits. The Spanish PermRep added to this point by noting
that there should be short, medium and long-term objectives
identified in such a strategy. The Bulgarian PermRep noted
the need for threat assessment and also suggested that NATO
consider common funding to develop certain capabilities. The
Italian PermRep opined that action must be taken quickly to
improve civil-military cooperation and coordination among
NATO bodies. Other comments included the need to better
define what types of outreach we can employ with partners,
potential host nations, other international organizations and
civilian authorities. A report of lessons learned will be
distributed to nations for agreement and submission to the
Council.
NULAND