Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08GENEVA987
2008-11-20 07:47:00
SECRET
US Mission Geneva
Cable title:  

JCIC-XXXIII: (U) WORKING GROUP MEETING ON

Tags:  KACT PARM START JCIC INF US RS UP BO KZ 
pdf how-to read a cable
O 200747Z NOV 08
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7505
CIA WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
DIA WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
SECDEF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
USMISSION USNATO IMMEDIATE
DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
DTRA-OSES DARMSTADT GE IMMEDIATE
CNO WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
DIRSSP WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
INFO AMEMBASSY ASTANA PRIORITY
AMEMBASSY KYIV PRIORITY
AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY
S E C R E T GENEVA 000987 


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) WORKING GROUP MEETING ON
COMPLETION OF CONTINUOUS MONITORING, NOVEMBER 13, 2008

REF: A. STATE 115554 (JCIC-DIP-08-008A)

B. STATE 115555 (JCIC-DIP-08-008B)

C. 00 GENEVA 6828 (SVC-XXVI-022)

D. GENEVA 602 (JCIC-XXXII-017)

Classified By: Jerry A. Taylor, United States Representative
to the Joint Compliance and Inspection Commission.
Reasons: 1.5(b) and (d).

S E C R E T GENEVA 000987


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) WORKING GROUP MEETING ON
COMPLETION OF CONTINUOUS MONITORING, NOVEMBER 13, 2008

REF: A. STATE 115554 (JCIC-DIP-08-008A)

B. STATE 115555 (JCIC-DIP-08-008B)

C. 00 GENEVA 6828 (SVC-XXVI-022)

D. GENEVA 602 (JCIC-XXXII-017)

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-009.


2. (U) Meeting Date: November 13, 2008
Time: 3:30 P.M. - 5:00 P.M.
Place: U.S. Mission, Geneva

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


3. (S) Following the introduction of the issue at a Heads of
Delegation (HOD) Meeting, a Working Group (WG) Meeting was
held at the U.S. Mission on November 13, 2008, to discuss the
completion of continuous monitoring at the Votkinsk Portal
Monitoring Facility (VPMF). The United States, Russia, and
Kazakhstan were represented.


4. (S) The U.S. Delegation provided U.S.-proposed texts of a
draft JCIC Agreement on Principles and Procedures for
Completion of Continuous Monitoring Activities, and draft
Exchanges of Letters on Ground Transportation and Settlement
of Accounts related to closing the VPMF (Refs A and B). The
Russian Delegation said it found the U.S. approach very
acceptable, but had concerns about whether any documents
signed by JCIC representatives, or within the framework of
the JCIC, would have any legal standing once the Treaty
expired or was superseded.

--------------
INTRODUCING...COMPLETION OF
CONTINUOUS MONITORING
--------------


5. (S) At a HOD Meeting at the Russian Mission on November
13, 2008, the Parties discussed the U.S. approach to
Completion of Continuous Monitoring Activities at Votkinsk.
Kashirin thanked the United States for its hard work

preparing the draft documents and highlighted the fact that
this was a complicated issue that would require a lot of
work. Because the United States provided the documents so
close to the session, and they were so voluminous, it would
take some time before the Russian side would be ready to
discuss the documents in any detail.


6. (S) Kashirin then stated that the Russian Federation
agreed with the format of using a JCIC agreement to codify
the requirements for completing the monitoring mission, and
an exchange of letters to handle cost settlement and
provision of ground transportation to facilitate the removal
of equipment from the VPMF.


7. (S) Kashirin highlighted one issue that was confusing to
the Russian side. He asked about the legitimacy of
signatures of the JCIC Heads of Delegation (HODs) on such
letters. The Russian concern was if the HODs signed as
representatives to the JCIC, would those signatures be valid
after the Treaty expired or was superseded by a new agreement?


8. (S) Kashirin opined that the parties might need as much
as half a year to finalize the necessary agreements for
completing monitoring at Votkinsk and another half-year to
implement them.


9. (S) Taylor thanked the Russian side for its views and
looked forward to progress on this issue in the WG.

--------------
THE WORKING GROUP IS
WHERE THE MAGIC HAPPENS
--------------


10. (S) Smith opened the WG meeting following the HOD and
provided drafts of the U.S.-proposed draft JCIC Agreement,
and a draft Exchange of Letters on Ground Transportation, and
a draft Exchange of Letters on Settlement of Accounts. Smith
then began a review of the draft documents noting that the
U.S. approach was modeled on the process used at the
completion of continuous monitoring under the INF Treaty (Ref
C). He highlighted important differences between then and
now. First, the START Treaty would expire or be superseded
and so it was necessary to have a mechanism in place to
handle cost settlement after START no longer existed.
Second, there was not a ground transportation-type
arrangement in place that needed to be modified to support
completion of INF continuous monitoring.


11. (S) Smith explained that the purpose of the draft JCIC
Agreement was to add Annex 16 to the Inspection Protocol
(IP). This new annex would establish specific procedures and
requirements related to the completion of continuous
monitoring at the VPMF.


12. (S) Smith then reviewed the Exchange of Letters on
Settlement of Accounts which would extend the existing cost
settlement procedures in Annex 14 of the IP beyond the date
of expiration or supersession of the Treaty. He explained
that, because costs related to the completion of continuous
monitoring would be settled after the Treaty expired or was
superseded, a specific process would be needed to handle
these costs.


13. (S) Smith then introduced the Exchange of Letters on
Ground Transportation. He explained the United States
envisioned one last truck departing the VPMF after Treaty
expiration or supersession. This truck would transit through
Russia and Belarus, drop off cargo in Germany, and then
transit back through Belarus and Russia. This process would
take several days following the end of the Treaty. This
Exchange of Letters would extend the provisions of the
existing ground transportation agreement to cover that period.


14. (S) Ryzhkov responded explaining that the Russian
Federation found the U.S. approach very acceptable,
particularly with the format of the draft JCIC Agreement and
the Exchange of Letters. He opined that despite the late
receipt of the documents, the Russian Delegation would do its
best to solve this issue during the current session. He
added that there was red tape and beauracracy in Russia as
well and these things would require time to navigate through.


15. (S) During JCIC-XXXII the Russian Federation provided a
paper containing questions on closing Votkinsk (Ref D).
Ryzhkov related that the U.S. non-paper that provided the
response to that paper (Ref A) mentioned a number of
legally-binding documents that the United States drew from
when developing these draft documents. Some of these related
to START and some to INF. He explained that the Russian
Federation did not believe the INF-related documents were all
good examples because the INF Treaty had an indefinite
duration and that theoretically the Special Verification
Commission could meet and decide on measures related to the
INF Treaty and put them into force anytime.


16. (S) Ryzhkov noted that Russia's principal concern was
the fact the activities in the two letters would occur in a
period of time after expiration or supersession of the Treaty
and that JCIC representatives would have no authority to bind
their respective governments after December 5, 2009, because
the JCIC would not exist, and he questioned whether those
representatives could sign such agreements. He remarked that
Russian legislation may pose difficulties with respect to the
settlement of costs once START is no longer in force,
although he admitted that he would be happy if it turned out
that he was wrong in his assessment. He then explained that
Russia needed to conduct a more thorough review by its legal
experts, but if those experts determined the U.S. approach
was possible then Russia would support it.


17. (S) Ryzhkov offered an alternative option where
officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs/State
Department would sign the required documents because, in
their normal professional role they were authorized
representatives of their respective governments.


18. (S) Smith then turned over the WG to Brown who offered a
more detailed explanation of the U.S. thought process as
these documents were developed.

--------------
GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE
--------------


19. (S) Brown explained that the concerns Russia had raised
about the intended duration of the agreements were the same
ones the United States had identified while developing the
documents. The United States recognized that a JCIC
Agreement would only remain in force until expiration or
supersession of the Treaty. The remedy that the United
States was proposing would be an Exchange of Letters, but a
determination would need to be made regarding who would sign
them and what the duration would be. Brown highlighted that
neither of the draft letters identified a signing official,
and that was deliberate to allow the parties to discuss their
respective practices. He explained in any event these would
be government-to-government agreements and that any official
specifically authorized to sign them would be sufficient,
even if that official at the time of signing was that
government's representative to the JCIC.


20. (S) Brown concluded his remarks by saying that to be
legally sufficient all agreements required an entry into
force date and duration, and that the draft letters had both
conditions clearly defined in them.


21. (S) Ryzhkov explained that Brown's remarks answered
several questions the Russian Federation had and reiterated
Russia would need more time for legal review of the
documents, adding that the Russian lawyer would be in Geneva
the following week and that her main task, would be to review
the U.S.-proposed texts. (Begin Comment: In a side-bar,
Ryzhkov admitted to Brown that he understood that any
official could be authorized by his government to sign the
letter but he had raised the issue to make certain that the
required procedures were followed so that there was no
question that the letters were binding after START is no
longer in force. End Comment.)


22. (S) Smith thanked Brown and then began a more detailed
review of the draft JCIC Agreement. He summarized the
document, highlighting the themes of each section, and the
specific requirements of both Parties.


23. (S) Ryzhkov expressed gratitude for the detailed
explanation and explained that he had a few questions but
would wait until the next WG.


24. (S) Smith closed the WG hopeful that the review of the
draft agreement had been helpful to the members.


25. (U) Documents exchanged:

-- U.S.:

- U.S.-Proposed Text for an Agreement on Principles and
Procedures for Completion of Continuous Monitoring
Activities, dated November 13, 2008;

- U.S.-Proposed Text for an Exchange of Letters on Ground
Transportation, dated November 13, 2008;

- U.S.-Proposed Text for an Exchange of Letters on Settlement
of Accounts, dated November 13, 2008; and

- U.S. Non-Paper on the U.S. Approach to Closing the Portal
Monitoring Facility at Votkinsk, dated November 13, 2008.


26. (U) Participants:

U.S.

Mr. Taylor
Mr. Smith
Mr. Brown
Lt Col Comeau
Mr. DeNinno
Mr. Dunn
Maj Edinger
Mr. Fortier
Mr. Johnston
Mr. Miller
LTC Oppenheim
CDR Rust
Col Summers
Mr. Yaguchi
Ms. Gross (Int)

Kazakhstan

Col Akhmetalin
Mr. Kasenov

Russia
Mr. Kashirin
Col Ryzhkov
Capt(1st Rank) Kuz'min
Col Novikov
Mr. Bolotov
Mr. Gusev (Int)


27. (U) Taylor sends.
TICHENOR


NNNN




End Cable Text