JCIC-XXXIII: (U) TAYLOR/KOSHELEV DISCUSSIONS AND

S E C R E T GENEVA 001015 DEPT FOR T, VCI AND EUR/PRA DOE FOR NNSA/NA-24 CIA FOR WINPAC JCS FOR J5/DDGSA SECDEF FOR OSD(P)/STRATCAP NAVY FOR CNO-N5JA AND DIRSSP AIRFORCE FOR HQ USAF/ASX AND ASXP DTRA FOR OP-OS OP-OSA AND DIRECTOR NSC FOR HAYES DIA FOR LEA E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/17/2018 TAGS: KACT PARM START JCIC INF US RS UP BO KZ SUBJECT: JCIC-XXXIII: (U) TAYLOR/KOSHELEV DISCUSSIONS AND STATEMENTS BY NYKONENKO AND KOSHELEV REGARDING JCIC SESSIONS IN 2009 AT CLOSING PLENARY, NOVEMBER 21, 2008 REF: GENEVA 0991 (JCIC-XXXIII-013) Classified By: Jerry A. Taylor, United States Representative to the Joint Compliance and Inspection Commission. Reasons: 1.5(b) and (d). ¶1. (U) This is JCIC-XXXIII-030. ¶2. (U) Meeting Date: November 21, 2008 Time: 11:45 A.M. - 12:00 P.M. Place: U.S. Mission, Geneva -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶3. (S) Given the preparation requested for the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference (RevCon) in 2009, Russian and Ukrainian representatives to the JCIC urged all Parties to begin to think about scheduling JCIC sessions in 2009. Ukraine proposed three sessions in 2009. The Russian representative met separately with U.S. Head of Delegation (HOD) to indicate support for an informal joint briefing to the other START Parties on post-START and to register Russian rejection of their inclusion in that regime. He also remarked that Russia would be unable to support a third JCIC session in 2009, as proposed by Ukraine. -------------- SCHEDULING OF JCIC SESSIONS IN 2009 -------------- ¶4. (S) As Taylor was about to close the plenary, Russian HOD Koshelev raised the issue of scheduling the next JCIC session. He remarked that 2009 was going to be quite busy in terms of disarmament and non-proliferation meetings, which included a meeting to prepare for the NPT RevCon that would include many of the representatives of the START Parties. He proposed that the representatives should think about a date before which the JCIC would meet for its next session, and, given that the NPT meeting would be held in April or May, he proposed that the JCIC should meet no later than June. ¶5. (S) Nykonenko then took the floor to state the Ukrainian preference for three JCIC sessions in 2009, to take into account the issues that have been raised by Ukraine, proposing April, July and the end of the year. ¶6. (S) Taylor took note of the need for preparations for the NPT meetings and asked whether the end of March or the beginning of April would be a possibility, while not making this a formal proposal. Koshelev responded that this was a good idea but that it depended upon the availability of funding. Taylor closed the discussion on this issue by saying that the Parties needed to discuss as early as possible the date for the next session. -------------- SEPARATE DISCUSSION WITH KOSHELEV -------------- ¶7. (S) After the closing plenary Koshelev asked Taylor if he could speak informally one-on-one. Koshelev reminded Taylor of Antonov's proposal that the Parties meet informally prior to the next JCIC session as a means of sharing information about what the United States and Russia were doing regarding a post-START agreement (REFTEL). He stated that this proposal was even more relevant now that Belarus and Kazakhstan, as well as Ukraine, were seeking to be included in the post-START deliberations. Koshelev allowed that, for Russia, the possibility that Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus, as non-nuclear weapons states Party to the NPT, would be included in a new treaty on the limitation of nuclear armaments with the United States and Russia was unacceptable, and that was why Antonov's proposal was so important. The idea would be to share information and thereby resolve concerns with the other Parties. Koshelev emphasized that it was vital that the United States and Russia meet on this issue prior to including the other Parties, in order to coordinate positions. ¶8. (S) With regard to Nykonenko's proposal to meet at least three times next year, Koshelev said that obtaining funding to cover such a schedule would be impossible. He repeated the comment that he had made earlier at the plenary meeting that it would be difficult to schedule a meeting in the first half of the year due to other pressing non-proliferation meetings and preparation for the NPT RevCon in April and May. ¶9. (S) Taylor said that he would be discussing the proposal by Antonov and the results of this conversation with his leadership in Washington next week. Taylor indicated his belief that Antonov's proposal would be a matter of discussion, albeit short, between Acting Under Secretary Rood and DFM Ryabkov when they next meet. ¶10. (U) Taylor sends. TICHENOR NNNN End Cable Text