Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08GENEVA998
2008-11-21 07:17:00
SECRET
US Mission Geneva
Cable title:  

JCIC-XXXIII: (U) HEAD OF DELEGATION MEETING ON

Tags:  KACT PARM START JCIC INF US RS UP BO KZ 
pdf how-to read a cable
O 210717Z NOV 08
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7531
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 000998 


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) HEAD OF DELEGATION MEETING ON
THE UKRAINIAN PROPOSAL TO CHANGE THE CATEGORY OF ELIMINATED
ICBMS AND COURTLAND MISSILE ASSEMBLY FACILITY, NOVEMBER 18,
2008

REF: ANC/STR 07-614/17 26 AUGUST 2007

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 000998


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) HEAD OF DELEGATION MEETING ON
THE UKRAINIAN PROPOSAL TO CHANGE THE CATEGORY OF ELIMINATED
ICBMS AND COURTLAND MISSILE ASSEMBLY FACILITY, NOVEMBER 18,
2008

REF: ANC/STR 07-614/17 26 AUGUST 2007

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-015.


2. (U) Meeting Date: November 18, 2008
Time: 10:30 A.M. - 11:50 A.M.
Place: Russian Mission, Geneva

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


3. (S) A Heads of Delegation (HOD) Meeting was held at the
Russian Mission on November 18, 2008, to discuss the
Ukrainian proposal to change the category of those Ukrainian
ICBMs that have been completely eliminated to date to
formerly declared types of ICBMs; and the status of the
Courtland ICBM Missile Assembly Facility. All Parties were
represented.


4. (S) The Ukrainian Delegation introduced a proposal to
change the designation of its completely eliminated ICBMs to
former types under the START Treaty. The Ukrainian side
expressed its belief that the redesignation of these ICBMs
would simplify implementation of the Treaty and would not
require any amendment to the Treaty.


5. (S) On the issue of the Courtland Missile Assembly
Facility, the Russian Federation reiterated its concerns and
the United States again provided clarification. The Russian
Delegation repeatedly asked the U.S. side what it considers
the target vehicles produced at the Courtland facility to be,
SLBMs or something else. It asked if the United States would
consider drafting a Joint Statement similar to Joint
Statements 21 and 31 to capture the target vehicles.

--------------
YOU WANT TO DO WHAT?
--------------


6. (S) At a Heads of Delegation (HOD) Meeting on November

18, 2008, at the Russian Mission, the Ukrainian Delegation
introduced a proposal to change the category of SS-24 and
SS-17 ICBMs to former types as defined under the START
Treaty. Shevtsov explained that the proposal would apply to
ICBMs whose launchers had been completely eliminated to date
under the Treaty. Shevtsov stated that after 14 years of
reducing strategic offensive arms there were significantly
fewer existing types of strategic arms than those listed in
Paragraph 10 of Article III of the Treaty at the time of
signature. By using the Treaty definition of former type,
the Ukrainian side expressed its belief that the
redesignation of these ICBMs would simplify implementation of
the Treaty and would not require any amendments.


7. (S) Shevtsov stated that the under the Ukrainian proposal
the SS-17 and SS-24 ICBMs could be designated as former types
and that additional types of missiles could be added to this
list by the other Parties as applicable.


8. (S) The Ukrainian Delegation proposed a new JCIC
Agreement to provide a legal format for establishing what
types of ICBMs and SLBMs would be on this new list of former
types as of an agreed upon date such as December 2009.
(Begin Comment: The Ukrainian proposal appears to be an
attempt to establish an updated list of former types of ICBMs
and SLBMs under the conditions of an extended START Treaty.
End Comment.)


9. (S) The other Delegations agreed that the Ukrainian
proposal was complex and required further examination before
any formal responses could be made.


10. (S) Begin text of the official translation of the
Ukrainian Non-Paper:

Official Translation

JCIC-XXXIII
Non-Paper of the
Ukrainian Side
November 18, 2008

The Ukrainian side placed on the agenda of this session
the issue of "Moving types of ICBMs that have been completely
eliminated to date into the category of former type of ICBMs."

The advisability of discussing this issue and adopting
an agreed solution is based on the following considerations:


1. To date, after fourteen years of reducing strategic
offensive arms in accordance with the Treaty requirements,
the number of "existing types" of strategic arms (including
ICBMs) is significantly less than those recorded in paragraph
10 of Article III of the Treaty as of the date of signature.


2. The substance of definition 34 (11) of the
Definitions Annex allows a significant portion of "existing
types of ICBMs" as of the date of signature to be moved into
a different category, i.e., "former type of ICBMs."


3. Since the Treaty provisions do not apply to this
category of arms, such a solution would in practice mean
considerably simplifying the current Treaty.

In other words implementation of this proposal creates
totally new conditions for implementing the Treaty, without
completely revising it and working out a new agreement.

As the main argument in favor of such a solution we
note the following: it derives from the substance of the
term "former type" that all types of ICBMs, the deployment of
which was completed prior to entry into force of the Treaty
and none of which is currently deployed, can be classified as
"former types of ICBMs."

Under this principle, the following should be
classified as former types of ICBMs for the Ukrainian side:

- SS-17 (RS-16);
- SS-24 (RS-22).

As a precedent for the use of this category in the
Treaty we note subparagraph 10(c) of Article III:

"Article III


10. As of the date of signature of this Treaty:




(c) Former types of ICBMs and SLBMs are the types of
missiles designated by the United States of America as, and
known to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as,
Minuteman I and Polaris A-3."

We would like to hear from the U.S. Delegation what the
inclusion of this provision in the Treaty did for the U.S.
side.

In our view, adoption of a JCIC Agreement recording the
actual situation with respect to "existing types" and "former
types" of strategic arms as of December 2009 could be a
possible legal format for codifying an agreement.

Adoption of such a document in the JCIC will be useful
no matter how the discussion of the Treaty's future unfolds.

End text.

--------------
COURTLAND - IT'S DISNEYLAND
WITHOUT THE FUN
--------------


11. (S) Koshelev stated that the Russian Federation had
expressed its concerns about Courtland in a number of
documents including its October 20, 2008, aide-memoire.
Since the United States had not responded to this document,
Koshelev repeated the Russian concerns. He stated that the
United States had not adequately explained how Courtland fit
the definition of a production facility under the START
Treaty and that actual activities at Courtland did not
correlate to those of a production facility. Koshelev
asserted that a target missile utilizing a Trident I SLBM
first stage could not be considered a Trident I SLBM under
Paragraph 3 of Article III to the Treaty. He reminded the
Parties that Joint Statements 21 and 31 were adopted to help
resolve this type of issue but that the United States had not
provided any of the information required by the two Joint
Statements. Additionally, the Russian Delegation inquired as
to which launchers the new target vehicles would be launched
from and sought the procedures that would be used by
inspectors should they encounter the target vehicles during
an inspection.


12. (S) Taylor thanked Koshelev for his comments and
delivered the following points:

-- The U.S. declared the Courtland Missile Assembly Facility,
Alabama, in accordance with Paragraph (10) of Section I of
the Notification Protocol. The Courtland Missile Assembly
Facility, Alabama, is listed in Annex B of the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) as an SLBM production facility.

-- Trident I SLBM first stage motors, which had been used
previously as part of accountable Trident I SLBMs, that are
brought to Courtland will undergo activities consistent with
work done at production facilities, including stage assembly.

-- The technical data of the Trident I SLBM first stage, as
contained in Annex F of the U.S. MOU, remains unchanged.

-- As stated in the remarks section of U.S. notification
ANC/STR 07-614/17, this facility will assemble target
vehicles using Trident I SLBM first-stage motors.

-- These target vehicles will be for use in testing the U.S.
ballistic missile defense system. This facility will not
produce any new Trident I SLBM first stages or any new items
subject to the Treaty.

-- Information required by Joint Statements 21 and 31 will be
provided to the other Parties as required by the Treaty.

-- The United States does not agree with the assertion made
in the October 20, 2008, Russian aide memoire that any
missile system that incorporates the first stage motor of an
ICBM or SLBM cannot be classified as an ICBM or SLBM of the
corresponding type.

-- The United States emphasizes that, in accordance with
Paragraph 3(a),Article III, of the Treaty, all Trident I
SLBM first-stage motors that have been assembled into first
stages remain accountable as a Trident I SLBM and, therefore,
continue to be subject to all the relevant provisions of the
START Treaty as a Trident I SLBM.


13. (S) After quoting Paragraph 3(a) of Article III of the
Treaty, Taylor noted that it was commonly understood that the
Trident I was an SLBM that was maintained, stored and
transported in stages. He assured the Russian Federation and
the other Treaty Parties that the declaration of the SLBM
production facility at Courtland was in full compliance with
the START Treaty.


14. (S) Ryzhkov inquired as to what the Courtland Facility
produced, SLBMs or something else. He continued to ask for
additional information concerning the differences between a
target vehicle and other Trident I first stages. Stating
that since only Trident I launchers declared by the U.S. side
were on submarines, Ryzhkov inquired whether the target
vehicle would be launched from those vessels. He explored
the possibility of making a Joint Statement similar to Joint
Statements 21 and 31 to capture these target vehicles.
Lastly, he asked if the target vehicle system was an SLBM or
something else.


15. (S) Taylor stated again that the Courtland Facility was
a production facility for the Trident I SLBM. He assured all
Parties for a third time that additional data would be
provided as specified in Joint Statements 21 and 31 and that
all required notifications would be made in accordance with
the Treaty.


16. (S) Koshelev thanked Taylor for his comments and
promised to provide the Russian Delegation's additional
questions in writing.


17. (U) Documents exchanged:

-- Ukraine: Non-Paper on Changing the Category of Eliminated
ICBMs to Former Types, November 18, 2008.


18. (U) Participants:

U.S.

Mr. Taylor
Ms. Bosco
Mr. Brown
Lt Col Comeau
Mr. DeNinno
Mr. Dunn
Maj Edinger
Mr. Fortier
Mr. Hanchett
Mr. Johnston
Mr. Kuehne
Mr. Miller
Mrs. Nash
CDR Rust
Mr. Smith
Mr. Vogel
Mr. Yaguchi
Ms. Gross (Int)

BELARUS

Mr. Ugorich
Mr. Ponomarev

Kazakhstan

Col Akhmetalin

RUSSIA

Mr. Koshelev
Mr. Kashirin
Ms. Kotkova
Col Ryzhkov
Capt(1st Rank) Kuz'min
Col Novikov
Mr. Serov
Ms. Sorokina
Col Zaytsev
Mr. Gusev (Int)

UKRAINE

Dr. Shevtsov
Mr. Bondarenko
MGen Fedotov
Mr. Makhonin


19. (U) Taylor sends.
TICHENOR


NNNN




End Cable Text