CWC REVIEW CONFERENCE PART I - FORMAL OPENING

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 000420 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: N/A TAGS: PARM PREL CWC SUBJECT: CWC REVIEW CONFERENCE PART I - FORMAL OPENING MEETINGS, APRIL 7-9, 2008 REF: THE HAGUE 349 This is CWC-20-08. ¶1. (U) This cable is part of a series on the Second Chemical Weapons Convention Review Conference (RevCon) April 7-18, 2008. It follows the initial report at the end of the Conference (reftel) and covers the opening plenary sessions of the Conference and the general debate. Other cables will follow focusing on the process for the remainder of the Conference, an analysis of the final RevCon report, and a report on other meetings and events that occurred on the margins of the Conference. ¶2. (U) Summary. Prior to the convening of the Review Conference, a special session of the Conference of the States Parties (CSP) had to be convened April 7 to amend Rule 8 of the CSP Rules of Procedure to provide for a separate rotation of the Review Conference Chairmanship. Immediately thereafter, the Second CWC Review Conference opened, heard a report from the CSP Chairman, appointed its own Chairman, took decisions on a series of procedural issues, and heard a series of statements from the OPCW Director- General, the UN Secretary-General, several groups of States, and 45 States Parties. Among the common themes of these statements were: the reaffirmation of CWC obligations, calls for those states possessing chemical weapons to complete destruction within the deadlines, and the importance of universality of the convention, national implementation measures, assistance and protection, and international cooperation. Some states spoke to the increasing threat of terrorism and use of toxic chemicals by terrorist groups, the importance of developments in science and technology, and industry verification. End Summary. -------------- -------------- Third Special Session of the Conference of States Parties (CSP) -------------- -------------- ¶3. (U) The Third Special Session of the Conference of the States Parties (CSP) was held on April 7 to amend Rule 8 of the Rules of Procedure of the CSP. The Session adopted text allowing Special Review Sessions to elect a Chairman and ten Vice Chairmen to ensure that the chairmanship of the CWC Review Conference rotates on a fair and equitable basis among the regional groups represented at the Conference. The issue arose due to the fact that there are five recognized regional groups and the Review Conferences take place every five years. Without rotation, the same regional group (Africa) would chair every Review Conference. Although the problem was recognized at the first Review Conference, and discussed on the margins of the CSP in November, no action had yet been taken to change the procedures. The CSP Special Session in April formally amended the rules, allowing the Review Conference to elect its own leadership, with the Asian group choosing the Chair and the African group the Chair of the Committee of the Whole. -------------- -------------- Opening session of the Second Special Conference to Review the Operation of the Chemical Weapons Convention: April 7, 2008 -------------- -------------- ¶4. (U) Chairman and General Committee Elected: CSP Chairman Ambassador Abuelgasim Abdelwahid Sheikh Idris of Sudan opened the RevCon with great optimism for a positive outcome and called upon States Parties to continue the momentum initiated in the Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) under the able leadership of UK Ambassador Lyn Parker. The Chair highlighted the successes of the Organization over the past five years since the first Review Conference, to include, inter alia: the increase of membership to 183 States Parties; the continued destruction efforts and decline in the global stockpile; the increased adoption of implementing legislation; and the momentous events surrounding the tenth anniversary of the Convention in 2007. ¶5. (U) The Review Conference elected Saudi Arabian Ambassador Waleed El Khereiji as Chair, Algerian Ambassador Benchaa Dani as the Chair of the Committee of the Whole, and appointed ten Vice Chairpersons (two from each regional group). The Vice Chairs include representatives from China, Iran, Uruguay, Costa Rica, France, the United States, Kenya, Nigeria, Russia, and the Czech Republic. Further, States Parties approved the following documents without discussion: the provisional agenda drafted at the 52nd Executive Council (RC-2/1, dated March 2, 2008); the Organization of Work and Subsidiary Bodies (RC-2 Dec CRP-2, dated April 7, 2008); and the attendance of observers, NGOs, and academia under relevant Rules of Procedure. ¶6. (U) Director General's (DG) Statement: Director General Rogelio Pfirter set the stage for the Review Conference by remarking on the successes achieved by the OPCW over the past 11 years in disarmament, citing the possible future need for a special conference of States Parties on meeting the 2012 destruction deadline, and looking to the future of the Organization when it will be able to assume a greater nonproliferation focus. Many U.S. objectives were addressed in the Director General's speech: he focused on developments in the chemical industry, and called for the use of open source data during inspections; reaffirmed the General Purpose Criterion that the Convention covers all toxic chemicals and not just those included in the Schedules; and stressed the importance of universality and the need for the twelve states not party to the Convention to accede as soon as possible. ¶7. (U) Report from the Chairman of the OPCW Executive Council and on the work of the Open Ended Working Group: OPCW Executive Council Chair Ambassador Romeo Arguelles (Philippines) briefly outlined the EC's work in preparing for the Review Conference, and introduced UK Ambassador Lyn Parker who chaired the Council's Open-Ended Working Group that spearheaded the drafting effort of the Review Conference report text. After 34 meetings and several informal sessions, Parker stated his belief that the draft text was not prejudicial to any delegation, but cautioned that there was still much work needed to complete the report. While the chairman's text had no formal standing, he expressed the hope that it would serve as a guide for the RevCon's work in drawing up its report. -------------- -------------- General Debate Statements: UN SYG and Groups -------------- -------------- ¶8. (U) The Review Conference's General Debate was conducted from the afternoon of 7 April through mid- day 9 April. Statements included a message from UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, Slovenia on behalf of the European Union, the Dutch Foreign Minister as host country for the OPCW, Cuba on behalf of the Non- Aligned Movement and China, South Africa on behalf of the African Group, and Kyrgyzstan on behalf of the Central Independent States. General summaries of statements follow. ¶9. (U) Message from UN SYG Ban Ki-Moon: UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's message was delivered by Mr. Tim Caughley, Director of the Geneva Branch of the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs. The UN SYG said that the Review Conference should be a time for States Parties to reflect on the provisions of the CWC and the key developments in science and technology over the past 11 years. He commended the success of the destruction of 27,000 tons of chemical weapons, but urged possessor states to continue to destroy remaining stockpiles. He also stressed the need for universality. ¶10. (U) European Union: The EU highlighted the common position agreed to by EU members with regard to the Review Conference. Issues of importance included: reaffirming the general purpose criterion; addressing the destruction of CW stockpiles and the conversion of all chemical weapons production facilities; implementing and enhancing the verification regime; recalling the availability of challenge inspections; achieving complete universality; reaffirming the need for national implementation to stay abreast of developments in science and technology; contributing to the fight against terrorism; cooperating with chemical industry and the scientific community; and finally, interaction between the OPCW and others within international fora and the relationship between the EU and the OPCW. The EU statement stressed the importance of all CWC treaty provisions and looked to the future on how the OPCW will remain relevant as certain treaty provisions are met. ¶11. (U) Dutch Foreign Minister: Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen spoke as representative of the host country for the OPCW. He stated that the OPCW is an example of effective multilateralism and a key contributor to why The Hague is a city of peace, justice, and security. He called upon States Parties to look to the future on where the OPCW should be in five or ten years and how it can face a number of challenges that lie ahead. These challenges include the accessibility of technologies that could be harmful when in the wrong hands. The Organization needs to look at how developments in science and technology should be monitored, how to combat the proliferation of chemical weapons among non-state actors, and how the OPCW can monitor the growing number of OCPFs while still monitoring schedule 1, 2, and 3 plants. He encouraged the OPCW to intensify its nonproliferation activities, but he also cautioned States Parties not to forget the near-term objectives of the OPCW, to include universality, national implementation, and destruction. He called States Parties to use the Review Conference as an opportunity to turn the OPCW from a good player into a great player. ¶12. (U) Non-Aligned Movement and China: The Statement of the NAM States Parties plus China, presented by the Cuban Ambassador as Chairman of the NAM, called States Parties to reaffirm their commitment "to the effective and balanced implementation of all of (the CWC's) provisions" and expressed its view that the Review Conference should review the operation of the Organization, but not change the focus of the Convention. It came as no surprise that the NAM's main focus for the RevCon was destruction (disarmament),"a fundamental pillar of the convention," and more particularly, meeting destruction deadlines. The NAM also commented on the need for universality in meeting the object and purpose of the convention. They called on States Parties to ensure that the CWC not be implemented in such a way that interferes with, or obstructs the economic or technological developments of other States Parties. Such restrictions erode the trust between States Parties and are contrary to the spirit of the Convention. Regarding other "fundamental pillars" of the Convention, the NAM called for an Action Plan under Article XI for the full implementation of international cooperation and assistance programs for capacity building. The NAM made a brief mention of terrorism, but believed it is best addressed by the full implementation of the treaty and universality. The NAM called for continued consultation on the frequency of industry inspections. They expressed satisfaction that so far no challenge inspections have been called, and argued that the consultation and clarification procedures should be exhausted before any decision to proceed with a challenge inspection occurs. In concluding the NAM reaffirmed the importance of consensus decision-making by the Policy Making Organs, expressed concern about unresolved issues related to the full implementation of the Headquarters Agreement, and cited the importance of recruiting TS staff on a wider geographic basis. ¶13. (U) The African Group: South Africa spoke on behalf of the African Group, which aligned itself with the statement made by the Non-Aligned Movement and China. The Statement opened with a summary of the successes of the organization since its entry into force, but then looked to the work still needed in order for the pillars of the Convention to be fully implemented. The African Group put great emphasis on destruction and the need to destroy the remaining 60 percent of chemical weapons stockpiles by 2012. The African Group reported that they have made advancements in implementing their Article VII obligations and establishing National Authorities. The African Group called for full implementation of Article XI and asked that the Review Conference to establish an agreed upon framework to promote international cooperation. The African Group also recalled the need for the Program for Africa to be implemented to raise awareness of the Convention in Africa and to provide assistance with national implementing legislation and establishing National Authorities. The African Group also looked to the implementation of Article X to provide assistance and capacity building. The African Group viewed Article X as vital to address the threat of global terrorism. ¶14. (U) Central Independent States (CIS): Kyrgyzstan spoke on behalf of CIS Countries, stressing the need for universality in order to meet the objectives of the Convention and address the threats and global challenges that currently exist. CIS countries welcomed the progress of destruction made to date and stressed the importance of adhering to treaty provisions. Further, CIS countries called upon State Parties to review the operation of the Organization and provide strategic guidance for the next phase of the Convention. The Statement also addressed the need for continued international assistance implementing the CWC and called on states not party to the treaty to join as soon as possible. -------------- -------------- General Debate Statements: States Parties ) Thematic Summaries -------------- -------------- ¶15. (U) During the course of General Debate, 45 representatives of States Parties spoke, including: United States, Saudi Arabia, China, Russia, Singapore, Japan, Pakistan, Iran, Serbia, Switzerland, Mexico, Algeria, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, Ukraine, Indonesia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Peru, Republic of Korea, Australia, Brazil, Tunisia, Yemen, Norway, Sudan, El Salvador, Mongolia, India, Colombia, Nigeria, Albania, Libya, Thailand, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Zambia, Uganda, Belarus, Morocco, China (Hong Kong Special Administrative Region),and Argentina. National themes for the most part paralleled those contained in the Group statements. Thematic summaries follow. ¶16. (U) Reaffirmation of CWC Obligations: States Parties reaffirmed their commitment to the Convention and its provisions. Many reaffirmed the General Purpose Criteria, and pointed to its importance in providing an underpinning to stem proliferation. The NAM, plus China, sought to prioritize among obligations, most citing elimination of chemical weapons as the core objective, and implementation of Articles X and XI (assistance, protection and international cooperation) as of "fundamental" importance. Western States, on the other hand, sought to reinforce the importance of all convention provisions, including national implementation. Several States raised concerns about "non-lethal agents," incapacitants or riot control agents (RCAs), with Switzerland alleging that uncertainty concerning the status of incapacitating agents under the CWC risks to undermine it. Switzerland proposed discussions of this issue, a move supported by several States, including Norway. Iran noted the obligation not to use RCA's as a method of warfare, and deplored the recent use of such non-lethals as a means of warfare. (Comment: When asked informally to what they were referring, Iranian delegates refused to provide clarification. End comment) ¶17. (U) Universality: Almost all speakers noted the progress made towards universality, and many called upon, or urged, the twelve countries outside the regime to join. Middle East/North Africa countries cited the importance of the Middle East as a Zone Free of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and several (Saudi Arabia, Iran) singled out Israel by name as the obstacle to achieving this objective. Several countries commended the OPCW and TS efforts in pursuit of universality, and highlighted their own national efforts to this end. ¶18. (U) Destruction: Possessor States reported on destruction progress, reaffirming their commitments. Russia (Victor Kholstov) stated it "rules out the possibility of not complying with the conventional deadlines for the destruction of its CW stockpile," thanked those states which have helped and opined that the predictability of assistance will be particularly important over the next two years (Comment: In other words, if Russia misses the deadlines, they are not to blame. End Comment) Almost all speakers cited the importance of achieving elimination of chemical weapons as soon as possible, and within the extended deadlines; many called for intensification of efforts. At the same time, a number of states welcomed progress to date in destruction and encouraged states able to do so to continue providing assistance. The NAM plus China argued that destruction was the core objective and central task of the OPCW, with many NAM states stressing that any serious discussions about the evolution of the OPCW work to focus on changing needs, such as non-proliferation objectives, should not be held until destruction is complete. Pakistan cited the UNGA Resolution on Compliance with Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-proliferation Objectives in speaking to meeting the deadlines, while Iran opined that non-compliance with deadlines would raise concerns "that domestic policies have resulted in preferences for retaining certain stockpiles as 'security reserves.'" Nigeria echoed a similar theme. Still a handful of others alleged that not meeting destruction deadlines would call into question the CWC's credibility or integrity (South Africa, Serbia). While China acknowledged there has been some progress in addressing the abandoned chemical weapons left by Japan in China, it reiterated that not one weapon has been destroyed so far, urging Japan to fulfill its obligations. Japan replied that this issue was a top priority for it. ¶19. (U) Verification/Compliance: Most verification discussion revolved around industry inspections, in particular OCPF inspections, risk assessment as a factor in determining where to inspect, and site selection methodology. Iran and some NAM countries argued in support of their concept of a hierarchy of risk approach (Comment: a transparent effort to keep many of their facilities off the inspection list). While welcoming the DG's initiative on site selection methodology as a temporary measure, a number called for a new methodology to be agreed. Still others, including the U.S., noted that the intent in adjusting how OCPF inspections were decided was not motivated simply by a desire to inspect more, but rather to focus on those 10-15 per cent of facilities that could really pose a risk. Several countries stressed the importance of a well-trained inspectorate, called upon the TS to maintain its capabilities to conduct an inspection, including a challenge inspection. Canada suggested as useful a challenge inspection exercise involving the Executive Council. India, among others, cautioned against abuse of the challenge inspection regime, arguing that it should only be used in exceptional circumstances, and as a last resort. In the meantime, no call for a challenge inspection, India opined, meant the regime is working. Canada and Australia cited the need to decide on levels of concentration for Schedule 2/2A chemicals. ¶20. (U) National Implementation Measures/Article VII: Many countries cited the importance of implementing national measures, with Russia stating that such measures were the main guarantee of non-proliferation of chemical weapons. Turkey and Switzerland recalled that national implementing measures were one of the essential conditions for the functioning of the CWC. Many described their own national efforts and assistance they were providing to others, and still others encouraged continued assistance. Russia and Pakistan, for example, noted the correlation between implementing Article VII and Article XI on international cooperation. While welcoming progress made, most Western countries expressed concern that many states still did not have CWC implementing legislation in place, and stressed the need for a sustained effort in putting such legislation in place. Iran, on the other hand, expressed dismay that "some State Parties have incorporated certain conditions contrary to the Convention in its national legislation." This paralleled the stated NAM and China's concern that "undue restrictions" amongst States Parties on exchange of technology, materials, and equipment for peaceful purposes are contrary to the letter and spirit of the Convention, affect its long term viability and jeopardize the trust that exists amongst States, which resulted in a NAM/China call for removal of such undue restrictions. ¶21. (U) Assistance and Protection/Article X: Many called for implementation of Article X. South Africa recommended that the current training program be augmented, and that the RevCon examine the role regional and sub-regional response mechanisms could play in providing assistance to States Parties. Some States noted assistance they have provided; others asked for more, including an increase in the budget and capacity building. Iran recalled its proposal for establishment of a "CW Victim's International Funding and Assistance Network," expressing expectations that the Executive Council would consider the details of such a network. Pakistan noted a link between Article X and protection against terrorism. ¶22. (U) International Cooperation (ICA),Economic and Technical Development/Article XI: Many NAM countries recalled the CSP-12 decision on Article XI, and called for development of a follow-up Action Plan. Many also called for a steady increase in the regular budget to fund ICA and assistance programs. South Africa articulated the challenge: to balance genuine security concerns with development objectives within the context of non-proliferation of WMD. ¶23. (U) Terrorism/UNSC 1540: A number of countries, including Iran and Algeria, expressed concern about the growing risk of terrorism, including use of chemical weapons, with Algeria and others pointing to the roll the OPCW can play in assisting in global efforts to combat terrorism and cooperation with international and regional organizations. Some States stressed the importance of implementing UNSC 1540 and supporting the UN global Counterterrorism Strategy, and of capacity building. ¶24. (U) Non-Proliferation/Evolution of the OPCW: Canada elaborated upon a theme voiced by many, namely, that as the end of the destruction phase approaches, the OPCW must gradually shift the balance of its collective efforts towards non-proliferation, particularly focusing on Article VI Activities not Prohibited. Russia called for preventing proliferation and strengthening multilateral efforts. Pakistan observed that mechanisms shore up support for disarmament and non-proliferation when they promote peaceful purposes. ¶25. (U) Science and Technology/Scientific Advisory Board (SAB): While all speakers gave lip service to the need to keep scientific and technological developments under review, including so that the verification regime can keep abreast of relevant developments, the NAM and India and Iran in particular sought to tie the hands of the OPCW in responding to such developments. India proposed creation of a standing committee of governmental experts of States Parties as a permanent mechanism to thoroughly examine the findings reached by the Scientific Advisory Board and prepare recommendations for the Policy Making Organs. (Comment: In practice, this would be inconsistent with the Convention's stipulation that the SAB report directly to the DG. End comment) Iran made a similar suggestion. On the other hand, the U.S. found some resonance to its proposal for more focused, directed meetings of the SAB on a more frequent basis. ¶26. (U) Functioning of the Organization/Technical Secretariat: States Parties commended the Technical Secretariat on its good work in implementing the Convention, with Iran citing the close cooperation between the TS and the States Parties as a positive feature. Several countries, including the African Group, argued for better geographical representation in the TS. Japan harkened back to discussions about adjusting to meet new requirements, and commended results based budgeting and zero nominal growth. ¶27. (U) Javits sends. Gallagher