MISSILE TECHNOLOGY CONTROL REGIME (MTCR) --

C O N F I D E N T I A L STATE 034976

SIPDIS


PARIS FOR EST:H.SMITH

E.O. 12958: DECL: (1.6, X5, X6)
TAGS: PARM MTCRE PREL MNUC TSPA KSCA FR

SUBJECT: MISSILE TECHNOLOGY CONTROL REGIME (MTCR) --
GUIDANCE FOR THE APRIL 10-11, 2008 RPOC MEETING (C)

REF: A) STATE 26726 (SMALL GROUP)
B) STATE 27694 (IE)
C) STATE 633 (POC GUIDANCE)
D) STATE 2929 (ATHENS)
E) 04 STATE 070819
F) 07 STATE 151182
G) DURHAM-CONWAY E MAIL OF 02-21-08



Classified by ISN Acting DAS Ambassador Donald A. Mahley.
Reasons: 1.4 (B) and (D).


1. (C) This message provides guidance for the U.S.
delegation to the MTCR Reinforced Point of Contact (RPOC)
meeting in Paris on April 10-11, 2008, and the small-group
meeting on April 9.

///////////////////
Small Group Meeting
///////////////////


2. (C) Per REF A, on April 9, France will host a meeting
of the MTCR Small Group members (the U.S., the UK, Japan,
Germany, France and Australia) to assess lessons learned
from 2007 and to consider initiatives for 2008. The U.S.
objectives for this meeting are to discuss the specific
U.S. proposals for 2008 outlined in REF A, as well as
ideas for additional or alternate proposals group members
might have, and agree on a way forward consistent with the
approach outlined in REF A.

//////////////////////////
Specific RPOC Agenda Items
//////////////////////////

(C) In discussing RPOC agenda items, the delegation
should pursue courses of action that are consistent with
U.S. nonproliferation policy objectives.


3. (C) Operations of the Point of Contact (POC)
///////////////////////////////////////////// ////

(A) As appropriate, the delegation should indicate that
the U.S. believes the Regime's intersessional decision-
making process generally works well and should be
continued. The delegation also should note that,
consistent with long-standing Regime practice, all
requests to initiate the intersessional decision-making
process must be made via the POC.

(B) If questions are raised concerning the monthly POC
meetings in Paris, the delegation should seek to ensure
that monthly POC meetings remain primarily informational
and administrative sessions.

(C) The delegation should express appreciation for the
continued success and evolution of the French-funded ePOC
computerized information sharing system. The delegation
also should ensure that any discussion of the
implementation and further development of the ePOC does
not result in a financial or administrative burden on the
U.S. and that any issues relating to information security
are resolved in a manner consistent with U.S. national
policy.

(D) The delegation should seek to ensure that the French
MTCR POC continues to update and distribute the Compendium
of Regime Decisions and that the POC continues to maintain
and distribute to MTCR Partners updates lists of Annex-
item denials and catch-all denials.


4. (C) Activities of the MTCR Chair
/////////////////////////////////////

The delegation should support a role for the MTCR Chair
that includes informing key non-members of missile
nonproliferation developments, the results of Plenary
meetings, and the purpose and activities of the MTCR. The
delegation also may support a role for the Chair in
leading outreach activities and other contacts mandated by
previous MTCR decisions. The delegation also may support
a mandate for the Chair (or Partner countries specifically
designated by the Chair) to engage with appropriate
regional organizations to promote the MTCR's missile
nonproliferation objectives and underscore the need to
implement and effectively enforce missile-related export
controls. However, the role of the Chair should continue
not to include issuing membership invitations without
prior approval of the MTCR Partners.


5. (C) Regional Nonproliferation/Outreach to Non-members
///////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////

(A) The delegation should urge the MTCR Partners to build
on previous Plenary and RPOC discussions of regional
proliferation issues, and to take steps to increase
awareness of the missile proliferation threat and address
ongoing missile-related activities of concern.

(B) The delegation also should urge other Partners to
continue to report on their activities to implement
previous Regime decisions, as agreed at previous
plenaries.

(C) The delegation should encourage further discussion of
regional nonproliferation/outreach at the 2008 Plenary.
As appropriate, the delegation may note that the U.S.
plans to circulate a report on its outreach to non-
Partners prior to the 2008 Plenary.

(D) The delegation should indicate general support for
efforts to enhance transparency of MTCR activities and
promote increased dialogue with non-members, and may
support new outreach and transparency measures that
support U.S. interests. As appropriate, and consistent
with U.S. nonproliferation goals, the delegation may join
consensus to hold MTCR-sponsored workshops and/or
roundtables, provided such events have specific mandates
that are consistent with U.S. policy objectives, e.g., on
enforcement. In addition, the delegation may join
consensus on targeted outreach strategies to key
countries, consistent with U.S. nonproliferation policy
objectives.

(E) The delegation may support other initiatives in this
area consistent with U.S. nonproliferation policy and U.S.
counterproliferation policy.


6. (C) Membership
///////////////////

(A) The delegation should express views consistent with
the positions on specific countries outlined in REF E and
U.S. national criteria for MTCR membership.

(B) With regard to China, the delegation should continue
to support the Regime's 1994 decision to admit China to
the MTCR once it meets the specified membership criteria.
But the delegation should also stress that China does not
meet these criteria and that the U.S. will not agree to
Chinese membership until those criteria are met. The
delegation should stress that Chinese entities continue to
export to programs of missile proliferation concern and
that China has some important export control deficiencies.

(C) As necessary and appropriate, the delegation should
reiterate how the U.S. national criteria for Regime
membership are intertwined with the U.S. view of the
future of the Regime.


7. (C) Export Control Issues
//////////////////////////////

(A) The delegation should stress the importance of the
Partners giving continued high priority attention to
export control issues, particularly catch-all controls,
controls over the intangible transfer of MTCR-controlled
technology, and controls over transit, transshipment, and
brokering activities.

(B) As appropriate, the delegation may suggest that
Partners continue to report, on a voluntary basis, on
their experience implementing intangible-technology and
catch-all controls and, for those countries not having
catch-all controls, on their efforts to put such controls
in place.

(C) The delegation should urge Partners to continue to
report on a voluntary basis on national enactment of
changes to MTCR controls and information on their national
export controls, as agreed at the 2003 Buenos Aires
Plenary. Changes to U.S. regulations to incorporate MTCR
Annex changes agreed in Athens are in final review and the
USG expects them to be implemented by the end of May 2008.

(D) The delegation may support further action on the
German Proposal on end use controls consistent with U.S.
nonproliferation policy and the views conveyed in REF G.

(E) The delegation may support other initiatives in this
area consistent with U.S. nonproliferation policy.


8. (C) Self Assessment
////////////////////////

In any discussion of MTCR self-assessment activities, the
delegation should seek to ensure that the Regime does not
engage in introspective activities that divert resources
away from real world proliferation problems emanating from
non-members like Iran and North Korea.


9. (C) Information Exchange
//////////////////////////////

In discussions relating to the Information Exchange (IE),
the delegation should:

--encourage more countries to make presentations and share
information during the IE;

--seek agreement on a draft agenda for the Plenary IE
meeting (delegation should use U.S. proposal in REF B as a
guide, but can agree to other proposals that it believes
to be consistent with U.S. interests and objectives);

--foreshadow U.S. papers/presentations for the 2008 IE, as
outlined in REF B;

--urge all Partners to share national experiences and
present case studies of actual interdiction activities;

--encourage countries to circulate IE papers one month in
advance of the 2008 Plenary;

--remind Partners to include brief executive summaries in
their papers and that the Plenary IE report will consist
of the summaries of all the papers presented, with no
characterization of the IE discussion and no conclusions
drawn;

--recommend that IE meetings do not begin any earlier than
the afternoon (vice the morning) of the first day of
Plenary week; and

--oppose proposals to hold intersessional IE meetings.



10. (C) Law Enforcement Officers Meeting
/////////////////////////////////////

In discussions relating to the Law Enforcement Experts
Meeting (LEEM),the delegation should:

--encourage more countries to make presentations and share
information during the LEEM, and to present case studies
of actual enforcement activities; and

--encourage countries to send actual licensing and
enforcement officers to the LEEM, and to circulate LEEM
papers one month in advance of the 2008 Plenary.


11. (C) Technical Experts Meeting (TEM)
///////////////////////////////////////////

(A) As necessary and appropriate, the delegation should
confirm U.S. support for the intersessional TEM scheduled
for June 4-6, 2008 in Bonn. The delegation also may
indicate that the U.S. expects to present several new U.S.
proposals and white papers concerning potential changes to
the MTCR Annex.

(B) The delegation should encourage support for the U.S.
UAV/CM proposal, making clear that it continues to enjoy
support at a high political level from our government, and
we attach high priority to having it adopted by the MTCR.
The delegation should note that the goal of the proposal
is to adapt and expand the focus of the MTCR to take into
account technological changes to the threat picture. To
do so today, we believe the MTCR should strengthen
controls on cruise missiles while permitting greater
flexibility on UAV exports. In view of ongoing
technological advances and the underlying trend lines in
both cruise missiles and UAVs, we are convinced MTCR needs
to address this issue now.



12. (SBU) Future Plenary Meetings
///////////////////////////////////

The delegation should cooperate with other Partners in
achieving consensus on the dates and host for the next
Plenary. The delegation also should encourage Partners to
identify a Plenary host/venue for 2009 in advance of the
2008 Plenary.

END GUIDANCE.
RICE


NNNN




End Cable Text