(C) UK RESPONSE TO DEMARCHES ON GERMAN OBSTINACY

C O N F I D E N T I A L LONDON 001338 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/07/2018 TAGS: PARM PREL MOPS PGOV NATO GM UK SUBJECT: (C) UK RESPONSE TO DEMARCHES ON GERMAN OBSTINACY AND NATO INTEROPERABILITY CONCERNS IN OSLO PROCESS REF: A. STATE 48124 ¶B. STATE 45302 Classified By: Political Counselor Richard Mills for reasons 1.4 b and d ¶1. (C) In response to refs a and b, Andrew Ford, Head of the International Security and Arms Control Security Group at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO),reiterated HMG's position that the USG's unwillingness to participate in the Oslo process has been an impediment to a successful agreement. Nonetheless, Ford told Poloffs that HMG agrees with the USG position that the current draft text contains language that may negatively impact NATO operations. ¶2. (C) HMG has several concerns about the Oslo draft language: What the final definitions of "banned" and "not-banned" will be in the text; the possible impact on the legal liability of individual soldiers, and whether text in the agreement will impact interoperability. Specifically with regard to definitions, HMG is concerned that German sensor-based munitions will be put under the "not-banned" category while UK munitions (although Ford acknowledged HMG has also bought the German technology) will be defined under the "banned" category. In addition, HMG is concerned that no individual military service members face legal jeopardy on the basis of provisions in the Oslo agreement. Regarding interoperability, HMG believes maintaining interoperability is paramount, and agrees with the USG that if the Oslo agreement is signed as currently drafted, interoperability will be significantly impacted. ¶3. (C) On the question of pressing Germany and other allies to revise the text, Ford said HMG was in regular discussions with France and Germany on this issue and the need for revisions. HMG wants to "be in good company" if it ultimately decides not to sign that agreement, Ford said, as the Brown Government is under enormous domestic political pressure from anti-war and human rights groups to support an agreement. ¶4. (C) Although a MOD representative was unable to attend Ford's meeting with Poloffs, Ford said that he and Colonel Julian Wofford of MOD closely cooperated on this issue within HMG, and both were in close consultation with Simon Shercliff, who has responsibility for the cluster munitions issue at the UK Embassy in Washington. Visit London's Classified Website: http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/Portal:Unit ed_Kingdom TUTTLE