UN/RWANDA SANCTIONS: RWANDA SEEKS US SUPPORT FOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 USUN NEW YORK 000159 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/28/2017 TAGS: PREL UNSC ETTC RW SUBJECT: UN/RWANDA SANCTIONS: RWANDA SEEKS US SUPPORT FOR EASING OF THE ARMS EMBARGO Classified By: MINISTER COUNSELOR WILLIAM BRENCICK, FOR REASONS: 1.4(B) AND (D) ¶1. (U) This is a guidance request, please see paragraph 7. ¶2. (C) USUN Sanctions Unit Chief was approached by Rwandan First Counselor Nicholas Shalita on February 23 to request that the United States support a new resolution to modify the arms embargo on Rwanda. The Rwandans are consulting with all Council members (with the exception of the French) to push for an end to the requirement imposed under resolution 1011 (1995) that all states notify the Rwanda Sanctions Committee of exports of arms or materiel to the Government of Rwanda (GOR). ¶3. (C) Shalita argued that the political and security situation in Rwanda has vastly improved since the imposition of the embargo during the genocide in 1994, and that the notification requirement is no longer necessary given the stable situation on the ground. Shalita pointed to the Committee's 1996 press release, in which the Committee stated such that notifications were no longer required of states, as evidence that Committee has not considered the provision to be necessary in over ten years. Shalita provided USUN with the points in paragraph 8 below. -------------- BACKGROUND -------------- ¶4. (U) Resolution 1011 (1995) lifted the embargo imposed under resolution 918 (1994) on arms exports to the Government of Rwanda (GOR),while reaffirming the embargo on non-governmental forces. It also required member states--including Rwanda--to notify the Committee of all shipments of arms or materiel to the GOR (paragraph 11). ¶5. (U) However, on September 11, 1996, the Committee issued a press release stating that since the comprehensive embargo imposed by resolution 918 had been terminated, "no notifications (were) required to be submitted by States of exports from their territories of arms or related materiel to the Government of Rwanda or by the Government of Rwanda of imports of arms and related materiel." ¶6. (SBU) The question of notifications remained dormant for ten years until the Rwanda Committee chair received a letter, dated March 14, 2006, from the Chair of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Sanctions Committee regarding a potential violation of the notification provision by Bulgaria that had been uncovered by the DRC Group of Experts. The letter prompted the Committee to reconsider the status of the notification provision. USUN and France argued that the provision remains in force absent a resolution formally terminating the requirement, regardless of the content of the 1996 press release. ¶7. (C) USUN seeks Department guidance on whether to support a new resolution terminating the embargo notification in paragraph 11 of resolution 1011 (1995). ¶8. (C) Begin Rwandan paper: 918 Committee on Rwanda Background In May 1994 the Security Council adopted resolution 918 which, in para. 13, imposes an arms embargo on Rwanda. The circumstances under which the embargo was imposed are clear; the Genocide was on-going. Any arms importations would make a catastrophic situation even worse. In September 1996 the Council adopted resolution 1011 which lifted the arms embargo for the Rwanda government, but in para. 11, imposed a requirement for all exports of arms and related materiel to Rwanda to be brought to the attention of the 918 Committee. On 11 September of the same year, the Committee issued a press statement in which it said that notifications were not required. This decision was reiterated in the Committee's report to the Security Council for 1996. This is the status quo. USUN NEW Y 00000159 002 OF 002 The Chairman of the Security Council Committee for 2006 presented his report to the Security Council on 19 December ¶2006. In his statement, the Chairman said that the future status of the notification requirement was yet to be decided. A meeting held on 3 November 2006 was unable to resolve the issue of the future status of the notification requirement. At the same meeting the UN Office of Legal Affairs presented a legal opinion stating that the 11 September 1996 Committee statement did not lift the notification requirement, and that only the Security Council has the mandate to do this. On 10 March 2006, the Chairman of the 1533 committee on the DRC wrote a letter to the Chairman of the 918 committee observing that the arms imports into Rwanda referred to in the Group of Experts report should fall under the paragraph 11 of resolution 1011 notification requirement. In his response, the Chairman of the 918 committee stated that the status of the notification requirement had not changed since the 11 September 1996 statement. The future status of the notification requirement will again be considered by the 918 committee at its next meeting in March 2007 under the Chairmanship of Indonesia. Key questions: Given positive political and security developments in Rwanda over the last decade, is the notification requirement that had been deemed unnecessary in 1996 necessary now? Should the Committee not take account of the positive developments on the ground? Given positive developments in the wider sub-region in the last 3-4 years, in particular the signing of the Peace Pact at the 2nd Summit of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region in December 2006, is the notification requirement that had been deemed unnecessary in 1996 necessary now? How will the notification requirement impact on Rwanda's capacity to equip its Troops and Police serving in UN and AU peacekeeping missions in Sudan, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire and Haiti? Given the above, shouldn't the notification requirement be lifted altogether? The 918 Committee was established in the context of genocide in Rwanda. Given that the genocide ended 13 years ago and tremendous progress has been registered in all areas, including peace, security and human rights, should the 918 Committee consider its status? WOLFF