LUXEMBOURG SUPPORTS NATO MEMBERSHIP FOR CROATIA,

C O N F I D E N T I A L LUXEMBOURG 000069 SIPDIS NOFORN SIPDIS DEPT FOR EUR/RPM, EUR/WE E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/13/2018 TAGS: MARR NATO PREL PGOV GR MK LU SUBJECT: LUXEMBOURG SUPPORTS NATO MEMBERSHIP FOR CROATIA, MACEDONIA, AND ALBANIA REF: STATE 14821 Classified By: DCM Steven H. Kraft, for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (C/NF) SUMMARY. Ambassador discussed the Greece-Macedonia name dispute with Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn on 11 March emphasizing points contained reftel. Asselborn confirmed that Luxembourg was in agreement that Allies must work with both sides and that he was committed to the Nimetz process. He added however, that there were "some other European Countries" which were still considering the "3 or 1" approach based on his conversations with EU counterparts at the GAERC on 10 March. Follow up consultations with the MFA in Luxembourg confirm that Luxembourg supports membership for all three candidate nations at Bucharest. END SUMMARY. ¶2. (C) During a private social luncheon on 11 March hosted by Ambassador Wagner at her residence, Ambassador and DCM discussed the Greece-Macedonia name dispute with Luxembourg FM Jean Asselborn and MFA Political Director Sylvie Lucas. Ambassador stressed that the U.S. supports the most ambitious NATO enlargement round possible at the Bucharest Summit. She emphasized that the U.S. views the naming issue as a bi-lateral issue between Greece and Macedonia and that we have appealed to both sides of the dispute to be constructive and flexible. The Ambassador suggested that while we understood the Greeks might block Macedonia's membership over the issue, we still believe the Nimetz process to be key to eventual resolution. ¶3. (C/NF) FM Asselborn responded that Luxembourg was in agreement that Allies must work with both sides, and that he stood behind the Nimetz process, as well. Asselborn commented, however, that Greece could be a "particularly difficult" Ally at times. The FM also shared some of his personal insights about his GAERC discussions on the issue on 10 March. While he said there was clear agreement on Croatia's entry, the case for Albania was much more problematic and indeed might be in trouble if Greece's effort to prevent Macedonia's entry succeeded. Asselborn said that "some other European countries" (NFI) were still envisioning a "3 or 1" approach, meaning either all three candidates (Croatia, Albania, and Macedonia) would be invited to join, or only Croatia. ¶4. (C) In separate discussions, MFA Deputy Political Director Stephan Mueller confirmed that the GoL's main goal is "stability in the Balkans" and therefore supports offers of membership for Croatia, Albania, and Macedonia at Bucharest. In response to points contained reftel, Claude Faber, MFA desk officer for Security and Defense Affairs, noted our points and suggested that in Luxembourg's opinion Macedonia has "given a bit more (on the name dispute) than Greece." However, he openly questioned if there was any use in our asking European Allies to put additional pressure on Greece since "they have a veto and there is nothing we can do to change their minds." ¶5. (C/NF) COMMENT: We are not surprised by Luxembourg's support for all three candidates given its long-standing support for stability in the Balkans. Consultations with the British Embassy here suggest that one of Asselborn's un-named "other European countries" may include Romania. We will continue to follow up on this matter and report any significant developments Septel. END COMMENT. WAGNER