Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08THEHAGUE308
2008-04-02 14:01:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy The Hague
Cable title:
NETHERLANDS/OSLO PROCESS: DUTCH SUPPORT
how-toVZCZCXYZ0013 RR RUEHWEB DE RUEHTC #0308 0931401 ZNY CCCCC ZZH R 021401Z APR 08 FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1316 INFO RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 1751 RUEHSW/AMEMBASSY BERN 4114 RUEHSL/AMEMBASSY BRATISLAVA 0210 RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 2756 RUEHCP/AMEMBASSY COPENHAGEN 6682 RUEHHE/AMEMBASSY HELSINKI 1879 RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 1762 RUEHNY/AMEMBASSY OSLO 5014 RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA 5199 RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 1402 RUEHPG/AMEMBASSY PRAGUE 1129 RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 2285 RUEHSM/AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM 4711 RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 1802 RHMFISS/SECDEF WASHDC RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 2208 RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 1403
C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 000308
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/31/2018
TAGS: PREL MOPS PGOV PARM NL
SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS/OSLO PROCESS: DUTCH SUPPORT
INTEROPERABILITY AS A REDLINE
REF: SECSTATE 30699
Classified By: POLITICAL COUNSELOR ANDREW SCHOFER FOR REASONS 1.5(B) AN
D (D)
C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 000308
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/31/2018
TAGS: PREL MOPS PGOV PARM NL
SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS/OSLO PROCESS: DUTCH SUPPORT
INTEROPERABILITY AS A REDLINE
REF: SECSTATE 30699
Classified By: POLITICAL COUNSELOR ANDREW SCHOFER FOR REASONS 1.5(B) AN
D (D)
1. (C) SUMMARY: On March 28, 2008, POLOFF delivered reftel
points to Wouter Wormgoor at the Dutch MFA, and in a follow
up conversation, Wormgoor said that resolving the
interoperability issue was a redline for the Netherlands. At
the same time, Wormgoor expressed concern about prospects for
resolving differences between like-minded countries and
Ireland and Norway. END SUMMARY.
2. (C) Wormgoor stated that along with other like-mindeds,
the Netherlands believes that interoperability is a key
condition that should be dealt with in the treaty, and not in
an annex or note. It is "quite important." Wormgoor
disagreed with the idea that "that there is no problem, based
on the land mine experience and joint operations."
Interoperability is a redline for the Dutch because they want
to avoid violating any treaty and want to be able to
participate in joint operations. A second redline for the
Dutch is resolving the issue of exceptions to the ban. For
the Dutch, key criteria for the exceptions are reliability
and precision. The Dutch support "an exception for sensor
fused weapons with a fail safe system."
3. (C) Wormgoor cautioned that the Wellington proposals
opposed by the USG were informal ideas, with the Canadians
"explicitly noting that they were 'food for thought.'" There
are several texts under consideration. A compromise text
can be found. However, the German proposals, among others,
have not been favorably received by either the core group or
NGOs. It will be difficult to convince Ireland and Norway,
but some countries appear willing to compromise. Some
parties are aiming for a norm against the use of cluster
munitions that is so high that most countries will not be
tempted to use them.
Gallagher
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/31/2018
TAGS: PREL MOPS PGOV PARM NL
SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS/OSLO PROCESS: DUTCH SUPPORT
INTEROPERABILITY AS A REDLINE
REF: SECSTATE 30699
Classified By: POLITICAL COUNSELOR ANDREW SCHOFER FOR REASONS 1.5(B) AN
D (D)
1. (C) SUMMARY: On March 28, 2008, POLOFF delivered reftel
points to Wouter Wormgoor at the Dutch MFA, and in a follow
up conversation, Wormgoor said that resolving the
interoperability issue was a redline for the Netherlands. At
the same time, Wormgoor expressed concern about prospects for
resolving differences between like-minded countries and
Ireland and Norway. END SUMMARY.
2. (C) Wormgoor stated that along with other like-mindeds,
the Netherlands believes that interoperability is a key
condition that should be dealt with in the treaty, and not in
an annex or note. It is "quite important." Wormgoor
disagreed with the idea that "that there is no problem, based
on the land mine experience and joint operations."
Interoperability is a redline for the Dutch because they want
to avoid violating any treaty and want to be able to
participate in joint operations. A second redline for the
Dutch is resolving the issue of exceptions to the ban. For
the Dutch, key criteria for the exceptions are reliability
and precision. The Dutch support "an exception for sensor
fused weapons with a fail safe system."
3. (C) Wormgoor cautioned that the Wellington proposals
opposed by the USG were informal ideas, with the Canadians
"explicitly noting that they were 'food for thought.'" There
are several texts under consideration. A compromise text
can be found. However, the German proposals, among others,
have not been favorably received by either the core group or
NGOs. It will be difficult to convince Ireland and Norway,
but some countries appear willing to compromise. Some
parties are aiming for a norm against the use of cluster
munitions that is so high that most countries will not be
tempted to use them.
Gallagher