CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): WRAP UP FOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 09 THE HAGUE 000249

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR ISN/CB, VCI/CCA, L/NPV, IO/MPR,
SECDEF FOR OSD/GSA/CN,CP>
JOINT STAFF FOR DD PMA-A FOR WTC
COMMERCE FOR BIS (ROBERTS)
NSC FOR SMITH
WINPAC FOR WALTER

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/30/2016
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): WRAP UP FOR
OPCW EXECUTIVE COUNCIL SESSION, MARCH 4-7, 2008 (EC-52)

REF: A. STATE 21246 (GUIDANCE FOR EC-52)


B. STATE 17328 (U.S. OBJECTIVES AND REDLINES)

Classified By: Deputy Permanent Representative Janet E. Biek for reason
s 1.5 (B) and (D).

(U) This is CWC-11-08

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


1. (SBU) Executive Council 52 (EC-52) followed the
unfortunate recent pattern of deferring a large proportion of
its substantive business to the next session )- not only the
facility and verification documents, but also some routine
reports from the Technical Secretariat (TS) and Director
General (DG). The U.S. Delegation (Del) made no progress in
a bilateral meeting with the Russian delegation on language
that would allow us to approve their agreements for
Marakykovsky and the new documents for Leonidovka.
Consultations with close allies and the TS showed little
support for further delays on the Russian documents.


2. (U) On its final day, the Council agreed on a provisional
agenda for the Review Conference (RevCon) based on a
compromise proposal from the Cuban delegation. While the
agenda does not have a specific item on terrorism, there is
now EC report language clarifying the "pledge" among States
Parties (SPs) that any issue of relevance to the Convention
could be discussed during the RevCon without requiring a
separate agenda item, using anti-terrorist contributions as
an example.


3. (U) The other highly controversial issue for this EC was
the report, deferred from the last Council session, on the EC
delegation's visit to the Anniston destruction facility in
October. In a special informal meeting, chaired by the Irish
Ambassador, the members of the visiting delegation met with
interested parties to discuss the report. Iran and South
Africa expressed concerns with the process during the
meeting, and then negotiated at length to try to get language
unacceptable to the U.S. and others into the Council's
report. A compromise on the report language was only reached
late Friday afternoon.


4. (U) This cable will summarize the informal meetings on the
budget and destruction updates on March 3; the donors meeting
on assistance to Russia; meetings on the margins of the EC
with the Russian delegation, the TS, and the Libyan
delegation; and finally the formal Executive Council meetings.

--------------
BUDGET INFORMAL
--------------


5. (U) On March 3, Ron Nelson (Director, Administration) and
Labib Sahab (Head, Budget) unveiled the updated budget format
that they plan to use for the 2009 draft budget and solicited
feedback from delegations. The new format was presented as
part of the Secretariat's efforts toward adopting results
based budgeting (RBB) and was developed based on input
received in 2007 from the Advisory Body on Administrative and
Financial Matters (ABAF) and bilaterally from delegations
(including the U.S). Del has forwarded samples to ISN/CB and
IO/MPR. The TS plans follow-up consultations on March 13 for
comments from delegations before preparing the draft 2009
program and budget (to be released in June).

--------------
DONORS MEETING
--------------


6. (U) Dutch MFA rep Frank van Beuningen chaired the
semi-annual Donors Coordination meeting on March 3 to discuss
CW destruction assistance efforts in the Russian Federation.

THE HAGUE 00000249 002 OF 009


The usual tour-de-table of assistance efforts was
complemented by more detailed statements from the U.S., the
UK, and Russia. Dr. Hopkins, Principal Deputy Assistant to
the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological
Defense Programs, gave a presentation on U.S. efforts through
the Cooperative Threat Reduction program, to include an
update on the implementation of the recent change in
procedures for signing and overseeing Russian contracts.


7. (U) The Russian delegation noted at the beginning of the
meeting that their senior experts had not been able to come
to The Hague and that they would not be able to answer
questions. Their statement was somewhat less confrontational
than at past meetings, although references to the role of
donors in Russia's progress toward its deadlines prompted
interventions by the Chair and the German delegation,
reminding Russia of its obligations under the CWC. Of note,
neither Russia nor the UK mentioned the UK's decision to pull
out of a project to fund a future destruction facility at
Khizner.


8. (U) The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, 13 October
2008, and a revision of the minutes from the meeting of 24
September 2007 needs to be published. In a private
conversation following the meeting, Van Beuningen noted to
U.S. reps that the current format of the meeting may need to
be reconsidered as many assistance efforts draw to a close
over the next year.

--------------
DESTRUCTION INFORMALS
--------------


9. (U) During the destruction informals, the TS presented the
progress of CW destruction and verification activities as of
28 February, highlighting the U.S. destruction of 51.8
percent of its Category 1 stockpile and Russia's destruction
of 25.5 percent, as of 28 February. For 2008, the TS has
planned 200 routine inspections, 31 of which have been
completed, and eight to ten sampling and analysis missions.


10. (U) Dr. Hopkins, Principal Deputy Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological

SIPDIS
Defense Programs, presented the U.S. report, noting that the
differences in figures from the TS report were due to
different dates for the information (1 February vs. 28
February). The only question came from the Russian
delegation on what "as soon as feasible" meant for the
completion of the U.S. destruction.


11. (U) Russia reported that it had destroyed 25.6 percent of
its stockpile as of 26 February 2008. Of note, the Russian
delegation welcomed an EC delegation visit to Shchuch'ye
probably in September 2008. Russia anticipates that the
Shchuch'ye destruction facility will commence live agent
testing by the end of 2008, as will Leonidovka by June 2008.
The Russian rep reiterated the importance of bringing these
new facilities on line in order to meet Russia's 45 percent
deadline of December 31, 2009.


12. (U) A State Party reported destruction of 96 percent of
its stockpile, and stated that it will meet its 31 December
2008 deadline. India noted that 97 percent of its stockpile
was destroyed and that India is on course to complete
destruction by the extended deadline of April 2009.


13. (U) Libya provided an update to the same slide show on
the Rabta conversion presented at EC-51. The speaker stated
that site preparation for the Rabta destruction facility
began in December 2007 and that the detailed site designs
would be presented to the TS for approval within the week.


14. (U) China and Japan briefed separately on their efforts
to recover and destroy abandoned chemical weapons (ACW). In
2007, Japan conducted 16 recovery missions, excavating 7380
munitions. Both SPs reported on the decision to use

THE HAGUE 00000249 003 OF 009


detonation and incineration for destruction at the Haerbaling
facility. Starting in 2009, mobile destruction facilities
are planned for use in Nanjing and other locations.

--------------
MEETINGS ON RUSSIAN CW DESTRUCTION
--------------


15. (SBU) Del reps met with the Russian delegation to discuss
whether progress had been made in addressing U.S. concerns
about Russia's Maradykovsky documents. Konstantin Gavrilov
(Alternate Permanent Representative in The Hague) was acting
head of delegation in the absence of Elena Rodyushkina, the
senior Rosprom representative who normally heads the Moscow
delegation. It was clear that Russia had done nothing to
meet the U.S. and others halfway in offering assurances that
Russia was committed to second-stage destruction under TS
verification and fully funded by Russia. U.S. Del suggested
that Russia consider making the Maradykovsky documents a
precedent for future two-stage facilities, in order to
enshrine the concept of TS verification of the second stage,
an idea the Russian delegation committed to send back to
Moscow.


16. (SBU) Together with the UK, France, and Germany, U.S. Del
reps also met with the Secretariat to discuss the provisions
of the Leonidovka documents, both on their own merits and as
compared to the Maradykovsky documents. Horst Reeps
(Director, Verification),Santiago Onate (Legal Advisor),and
Branch Heads Per Runn and Dominique Anelli all firmly
defended the verification provisions at Leonidovka and
responded to various technical questions, primarily from the
UK. U.S. Del clarified U.S. accounting procedures, and noted
the need for modifications to the Maradykovsky documents to
reflect a change in measures taken to mutilate the munitions.



17. (SBU) Following the meeting, UK reps noted privately that
they were quite comfortable with the documents for
Leonidovka, but would not stand in the way of U.S. efforts to
force a stronger commitment from the Russians on second stage
destruction and verification. UK MOD Rep James Harrison
noted, however, that the UK view was that approved
verification plans and facility agreements would provide more
legal assurance of the terms than the drafts under which
Russia is currently operating. The French delegation made a
similar comment about the questionable value of continued
deferral. Although there was general agreement among close
allies that forcing the matter to an open debate was best
postponed until after the RevCon, there seems to be a growing
sentiment that the Russian documents currently on the agenda
do offer adequate assurance of second stage verification and
should be agreed.

--------------
LIBYA BILAT
--------------


18. (C) Del reps met with the Libyan delegation, headed by
Dr. Ahmed Hesnawy, to discuss the status of conversion of the
former CW production facility at Rabta, and CW destruction
projects. Both Dr. Hesnawy and Dr. Fathi Asseid, General
Director of the General Manufacturing of Pharmaceuticals and
Medical Supplies Company, responded to questions regarding
the status of conversion efforts. The Libyan delegation
explained that Libya had decided to focus on completion of
the pharmaceuticals formulation and packaging facility in
order to expedite the approval process for the overall
pharmaceutical production facility. Tests are currently
being conducted in the completed formulation and packaging
plant.


19. (C) The Libyan Government has partnered with a Libyan
contractor on the conversion, with 85 percent of the existing
equipment fully operational, and Libya seems confident of
meeting the December 2009 date set out in its national paper

THE HAGUE 00000249 004 OF 009


from September 2007. Little acknowledgement was given to the
fact that December 2009 is seventeen months after the date
approved when Libya joined the Convention.


20. (C) On CW destruction, Dr. Hesnawy sidestepped direct
questions about the status of the contract with an Italian
engineering firm, noting that work was proceeding under an
arrangement whereby payments were made upon acceptable
completion of discrete tasks and that "a letter had been
signed." Hesnawy also stated that Libya intends to use the
destruction facility to destroy chemical wastes after CW
destruction had been completed. In order to be suitable for
the eventual destruction of chemical waste with high
concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls, the facility is
being designed with the capability to vary the operation of
the pollution abatement system and to operate the incinerator
under more rigorous conditions than those required for CW
destruction. Dr. Hesnawy was optimistic that Category 1 CW
destruction would be completed ahead of the December 31, 2010
deadline and planned to meet with the TS on the margins of
the EC to discuss revisions to the detailed facility
information.

-------------- --------------
MEETINGS WITH THE TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT ON U.S. DESTRUCTION
-------------- --------------


21. (U) Del reps met with Verification staff to discuss
various technical issues at U.S. facilities. Of note was a
detailed discussion of the plans for verification of
emergency GB ton container destruction at Blue Grass, which
is being declared as a non-contiguous part of the Newport
destruction facility.

--------------
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL 52
--------------
Opening Session and General Debate
--------------


22. (U) Following agreement to invite Iraq as an observer,
the March 4 opening of the 52nd meeting of the Executive
Council heard reports from the Vice Chairmen on consultations
and facilitations during the intersessional period.
Following adoption of the EC agenda, the Director-General
made his report. Statements followed from Slovenia (an
observer state) for the EU and associated states, Cuba for
the NAM and China, South Africa for the African Group, Japan,
Pakistan, China, Russia, Algeria, Mexico, Korea, and in the
afternoon session, the U.S., Serbia, India, and Libya. There
were no surprises in the statements, but delegations took
advantage of the opportunity to set the stage for the Review
Conference, outlining priorities including terrorism, an
action plan for Article XI, and greater implementation of
Article VII.


23. (U) Director General's Statement: The DG provided a more
condensed update than in past sessions on the broad spectrum
of issues before the OPCW. On industry inspections, he
reported that the TS was working on a comprehensive proposal
aimed at encouraging States Parties to increase the
information provided on their OCPF declarations, with a view
to enhancing the probabilities of selecting sites of high
relevance. He noted that the Secretariat is developing
software to enable electronic declarations via the
Verification Information System (VIS),which will be
available to National Authorities in the second half of 2008.
The TS will be assessing the results of the sampling and
analysis conducted at Schedule 2 facilities from the first 12
plant sites and reporting "in due course." The DG also
reported on a number of activities the TS has engaged in
relating to implementation of Articles X and XI, and that the
TS is moving forward with its work on the Program to

SIPDIS
Strengthen Cooperation with Africa. He cited further
progress on Article VII implementation: the Central African
Republic has established a National Authority, and the Cook

THE HAGUE 00000249 005 OF 009


Islands, Qatar, and Turkey have adopted comprehensive
measures to implement the Convention. The Republic of the
Congo has become the 183rd State Party, and the DG spoke to
steps to bring others on board.


24. (U) On Administrative and financial matters, the DG noted
that 98.2 percent of assessed contributions were received
during 2007, but added that major assessments payments made
late in the year, as in 2007, continue to impede the
Secretariat's ability to plan and conduct programs

SIPDIS
efficiently (a diplomatic but direct reference to the U.S.
payment in late December). The DG stated that the TS was
drafting a zero nominal growth (ZNG) budget again for 2009,
citing the significant surplus (2.2 million euro) in 2007
resulting from late payment of arrears as a key factor. He
noted that the 2009 Budget would provide for a second meeting
of the Scientific Advisory Board, which the U.S. had lobbied
for in 2008. He concluded by expressing hope that the
upcoming Second Review Conference will be a success,
providing strategic guidance to the policy making organs, as
well as to the Secretariat.


25. (U) EU Statement: Ambassador Tea Petrin (Slovenia),
speaking on behalf of the EU and associated SPs, appealed for
fulfillment of destruction obligations within the timelines.
The EU welcomed the report of the Anniston visit, and looks
forward to a Russian invitation to visit this year.
Regarding the Maradykovsky chemical weapons destruction
facility agreement and detailed plan for verification, the EU
hoped approval could be reached on the documents and recalled
the DG's statement (EC-49) confirming that that destruction
will take place under on-site verification in both phases, as
required in Article IV of the Convention, which should be the
guiding principle for Leonidovka as well. The EU sought
clarity on Libya's chemical weapons destruction plans, and
urged Libya to move forward quickly on Rabta conversion.
While timely destruction of all chemical weapons continues to
be of utmost importance, Petrin stated, this must be
accompanied by the prevention of new stockpiles being created
in the future. The EU appealed for assessed contributions to
be paid in full and on time, including reimbursement of the
cost of articles IV and V verification.


26. (U) NAM Statement: Ambassador Oscar de los Reyes Ramos
(Cuba) spoke on behalf of the NAM and China, expressing
concern about the general pace of destruction. Reiterating
the importance of the CSP-12 decision on Article XI, the NAM
statement stressed the call for an Action Plan for the full
implementation of Article XI. The NAM also reaffirmed the
importance of the CSP-12 decision under Article X aimed at
developing measures for emergency assistance to States
Parties, including the victims of chemical weapons, and
pointed to the role that Article X can play in addressing the
CWC contribution to global antiterrorism efforts. The NAM
considers it vital that the Open-Ended Working Group (OWEG)
for the RevCon operates in an open, transparent, and
inclusive manner, and work by consensus. The statement
called for early commencement of negotiations on the
Chairman's composite text to reflect the different
substantive views and for intensified efforts to reach
consensus on the provisional RevCon agenda.


27. (U) Other speakers addressed many of the EU and NAM
themes. Many spoke to the importance of CW destruction
within the established deadlines, with Pakistan opining that
destruction efforts should be the primary focus of the
upcoming RevCon. Libya revisited its December 19, 2003
decision to end its CW program (reporting that all CW
production had ceased in 1991) and its commitment to meet all
of its obligations under the CWC, including destruction of
its CW stockpile, and stated that they remain on schedule for
CW destruction as defined in their September 2007 national
paper. While Japan and the U.S. supported the DG's call for
planning for a progressive shift in the OPCW focus from
destruction to nonproliferation efforts, Pakistan averred
that the best way to promote nonproliferation was through

THE HAGUE 00000249 006 OF 009


disarmament.


28. (U) Several speakers stressed the importance of
developing national legislation and implementation measures,
with Russia expressing serious concerns about the number of
States Parties that had yet to promulgate implementing
legislation. Mexico, South Africa, Pakistan, and India
reiterated the NAM statement's call for an Action Plan on
Article XI. Pakistan called for removal of undue
restrictions among States Parties on exchange of technology,
materials, and equipment for peaceful purposes. A number of
delegations, including Serbia, cited the importance of
support to States Parties on protection and assistance under
Article X, with Pakistan, Algeria, and Korea, among others,
pointing to the link between Article X and the ability to
address emerging terrorist threats. Japan called for
effective implementation of the OCPF site selection
methodology, while India pointed to the hierarchy of risk in
implementing OCPF inspections.


29. (U) Many delegations previewed the upcoming RevCon, as
the U.S. did. The NAM statement and several of its member
states pressed for an open, transparent, and inclusive
process, implying that work to date has not been so. All
called for resolution of the provisional agenda as soon as
possible, with most professing flexibility. While China
argued for the principle of balance of the "four pillars" of
the convention, Mexico asserted that not all issues are equal
-- disarmament/destruction and measures to enhance economic
and technological development are of primary importance.
Several states, including Algeria, South Africa, Korea,
Japan, and the U.S. stressed the importance of addressing
global terrorism.

--------------
Verification Plans and Facility Agreements
--------------


30. (U) Upon receiving information from the U.S. regarding
the need for additional amendments to the agreed detailed
plan for verification at the Newport Chemical Agent Disposal
Facility and the related facility agreement (agenda items 5.1
and 5.17),the Chair deferred consideration of both documents
to the next regular Session of the Executive Council (EC-53).
These additional amendments will reflect Blue Grass as a
noncontiguous part of the Newport CWDF prior to emergency
destruction operations at Blue Grass.


31. (SBU) The U.S. deferred discussion to later in the
session for the Maradykovsky verification plan and facility
agreement. After U.S. reps pointed out to the TS that the
change in measures the Russians have taken to mutilate the
drained munition bodies should be reflected in the documents,
the TS discussed it with the Russian delegation. On March 6,
when the EC returned to these agenda items (5.2 and 5.19),
the Chairman deferred both documents to EC-53.


32. (SBU) Despite a U.S. formal intervention that the Pine
Bluff Binary Destruction Facility had completed both first-
and second-stage operations, Russia requested deferral of
both the verification plan and facility agreement (agenda
items 5.3 and 5.20) to EC-53. The U.S. did not/not request
that the documents be removed from the agenda due to a
request from the German, UK, and French delegations.


33. (U) The U.S. requested deferral of the Leonidovka
verification plan and facility agreement (agenda items 5.4
and 5.21) to EC-53.


34. (U) The Council approved the Schedule 2 facility
arrangement with the UK regarding on-site inspections at the
Ellesmere Port Incineration Plant (agenda item 5.16).


35. (U) However, Iran requested deferral to the next session
of two single small-scale facility agreements with Canada and
Sweden (agenda items 5.22-5.25). Having had no prior warning

THE HAGUE 00000249 007 OF 009


from Iran, neither the Canadian nor Swedish delegation knew
why their documents were deferred.

--------------
90-day Destruction Progress Reports
--------------


36. (SBU) On March 4, Iran deferred both the Libyan and the
U.S. progress reports until later in the session. The
Council duly noted the progress reports of the other states
that have been granted deadline extensions for the
destruction of their Category 1 chemical weapons: A State
Party, India, and Russia. Iran told the Libyan delegation
privately that the delay was in retaliation for Libyan
support of the March 3 UN Security Council resolution on
Iranian sanctions.


37. (U) Later in the week, when the Council again considered
the Libyan and U.S. reports, Iran, true to form, made vague
references to the format and content without any actual
objections, and finally agreed to note the documents on the
condition that the EC report contain familiar chapeau
language on the obligations of possessor states.


38. (U) The Council also noted national papers by China and
Japan on the status of ACW in China (agenda item 5.13).

--------------
Report on the Anniston Visit
--------------


39. (U) The previous Executive Council (EC-51) deferred
discussion of the EC delegation's October 2007 visit to the
Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility due to receiving
the report mid-session. This agenda item (5.11) generated
some of the liveliest debate in recent EC history, prompted
by an Iranian request to defer consideration yet again to
EC-53. As this was not unexpected, the members of the
visiting delegation countered by insisting the report be
considered during this session, particularly since several
members of the visiting delegation would be leaving the
Council before the June EC. Iran was supported by the South
African delegation, which had voiced doubts about the value
of the visits during the negotiation of the CSP decision in
2006, and the Indian delegation from a more procedural
standpoint.


40. (SBU) Amb. Ryan (Ireland),Vice Chair for the CW Cluster
of issues, chaired an informal meeting on March 6, at which
it became apparent that despite a clear desire to highlight
U.S. destruction delays, Iran had reasonable concerns
regarding the process of the report introduction and Council
consideration and the clarity of content. South Africa
supported Iran throughout the negotiations, as did China for
full discussion of the report. In the end, the Iranian and
South African concerns focused on the appropriate report
language to describe the EC's consideration. Small group
negotiation of report language was further complicated by
Russian interventions clearly designed to discredit the EC
visit mechanism. Despite many past statements about the
value of such visits, European colleagues seemed largely
unwilling to counter this tactic, and appropriate report
language was eventually agreed primarily through U.S. and UK
efforts.

--------------
Articles X and XI
--------------


41. (U) The Chairman removed the status report on Article X
from the agenda at the request of the facilitator, Jitka
Brodska (Czech Republic). Brodska has now scheduled
consultations on the report for March 28.


42. (U) The facilitator for Article XI, Li Hong (China)
requested that the Director General's report on Article XI be

THE HAGUE 00000249 008 OF 009


deferred to the next regular session, despite an initial
round of consultations on the report before the EC.

--------------
OPCW Central Analytical Database (OCAD)
--------------


43. (SBU) The Council was asked to consider and approve a
Note containing newly validated data (agenda item 6); this
item was deferred surprisingly by Russia to EC-53, although
Iran had initially delayed discussion to later in the current
session. Also of note, India reiterated its request from
EC-44 that the TS issue a note addressing the rationale
behind including unscheduled chemical data in the OCAD and
the implications to States Parties' activities, and Finland
delivered a strong intervention (and later circulated a
national paper) on the importance of the inclusion of limited
unscheduled chemical data in the OCAD.

--------------
OPCW Office in Africa
--------------


44. (SBU) Led by South Africa, the African Group introduced
report language to highlight the DG's Program to Strengthen
Cooperation with Africa, introduced at EC-50, and to move
away from the focus on establishing a bricks-and-mortar
office in Africa. The final report language incorporated
U.S. Del input on donor involvement, budget implications and
the need for regular reporting from the TS on progress and
activities.

--------------
Report of the Scientific Advisory Board
--------------


45. (U) China requested deferral to EC-53 of both the report
of the Eleventh Session of the Scientific Advisory Board
(SAB) and the DG's note about the report, citing the SAB view
that "for technical reasons, undertaking a review of
destruction technologies for OACWs would be inappropriate at
this stage."

--------------
Review Conference
--------------


46. (U) Amb. Lyn Parker (UK),Chair of the RevCon Open-Ended
Working Group (OEWG),presented a report on the OEWG's
activities. His report (agenda item 12) and the convening of
a special session of the Conference of States Parties to
amend the rules of procedure to allow regional rotation of
the RevCon chair (agenda item 13) were gaveled through
without discussion. (Del note: UK del had expected criticism
from NAM delegations on OEWG process and was surprised that
they did not speak.)


47. (SBU) The RevCon provisional agenda (agenda item 14)
continued to be by far the most contentious, despite weeks of
previous meetings in the OEWG and other informal groups.
Amb. Werner Burkart (Germany) agreed to chair "informal
informal" discussions on the margins of the EC, picking up
from Amb. Javits' efforts preceding the EC. Amb. Oscar de
los Reyes Ramos (Cuba) played a constructive role, first
trying to bring the NAM delegations to consensus, and when he
could not, introducing a compromise in his national capacity.
That compromise included dropping the NAM reference to
"general and complete disarmament" that the U.S. has
consistently opposed, along with a formulation of the
"pledge" introduced by Amb. Javits that the agenda would not
preclude the right of States Parties to raise relevant issues
at the RevCon, including terrorism. Amb. Ramos introduced
the compromise text on Thursday afternoon, March 5, in the
"informal informal" in time for consultations with capitals.
The OEWG met on Friday and reached final agreement on the
agenda based on this compromise text.

THE HAGUE 00000249 009 OF 009



--------------
Administrative and Financial Matters
--------------


48. (U) Due to not having held any consultations on the
issue, the facilitator (Takayuki Kitagawa, Japan) requested
deferral to EC-53 of the TS's Note on the status of
implementation in 2007 of the recommendations of the External
Auditor (agenda item 7). All other administrative and
financial matters were quickly noted or approved with little
or no discussion, including the DG's pay increase (agenda
item 9.3) and the appointment of Jonathan Wolstenhome (UK) to
the ABAF (agenda item 16).


49. (U) All of the regional group nominations for new EC
Chair and Vice-Chairs were quickly elected; Slovakia will
take over the Chair in May for Eastern Europe, with Algeria,
Costa Rica, Germany, and Iran as Vice-Chairs.


50. (U) The UK made a brief intervention on the DG's report
on income and expenditure (agenda item 9.1),reminding all
States Parties of their obligation to have fully paid their
current year assessed contributions by January 2008.


51. (U) While joining consensus on concluding the agreements
on privileges and immunities with El Salvador and Serbia
(agenda item 11),the Del made an intervention based on
guidance (Ref A).


52. (U) Beik sends.

Mininize considered

Gallagher