CWC: WRAP UP FOR WEEK ENDING JUNE 6, 2008

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 000503

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 FLY
WINPAC FOR WALTER

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CWC: WRAP UP FOR WEEK ENDING JUNE 6, 2008

REF: A. THE HAGUE 455

B. THE HAGUE 472

C. THE HAGUE 480

D. THE HAGUE 482

This is CWC-29-08

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


1. (U) During the weeks of May 27 and June 2, no
official OPCW meetings took place. The Western
European and Others Group (WEOG) met twice and was
briefed by the new head of public affairs for the
Technical Secretariat (TS). The Dutch government
hosted a visit to a DuPont plant site on May 29. The
FBI Assistant Director for Weapons of Mass
Destruction and the FBI Chief of the WMD
Countermeasures Unit visited OPCW on June 5 to
discuss possible collaboration on future conferences.
CEFIC President Van Sloten gave a presentation on the
future of the chemical industry on June 5.


2. (U) Ambassador Javits hosted the ambassadors of
the Permanent Five members of the UN Security Council
for a post-Review Conference discussion on June 6.
Delreps also met with TS officials to discuss visas
to the U.S., personnel and recruiting issues, and the
U.S. industry Schedule 1 facility agreement. At a
lunch hosted by the Article XI facilitator, Delrep
and other delegations discussed ways to move forward
on assistance programs. Last, but not least, the
Advisory Body on Administrative and Financial Matters
(ABAF) met the week of June 2. U.S. ABAF member Rios
briefed Amb. Javits at the end of the week. Details
on all of these events follow.

--------------
WEOG MEETINGS
--------------


3. (U) On May 27, the new head of public affairs for
the Technical Secretariat, Michael Luhan (U.S.),
presented an outline of his plans to the WEOG. Under
a new OPCW policy, press releases will only be issued
when there are major news developments or events (10-
12 a year rather than the previous hundreds). He has
created a second category of &OPCW news8 for
delegations and national authorities, including
reports of the DG,s travel. These will not go to the
press and would likely number about 10 per month.
For the Review Conference, he began updating the
media contacts lists and focusing on outreach to
critical media outlets. His unit is also working on
revamping the public website and expects to unveil it
in August. The new system will be automated to
upload information onto the site, freeing staff time
to develop and solicit good input. Another project
is to turn the OPCW reception area into a public
information space, including racks with OPCW
publications and a plasma screen with information on
meetings and events.


4. (U) Luhan is actively expanding OPCW,s networking
to NGOs, industry and other key players. One of the
tools for this is a structured questionnaire to
industry. He will also be developing a three-year
strategic plan, including media benchmarks and
opportunities (destruction of CW stockpiles in two
states in the next two years, accession of new States
Parties, DG,s visits, etc.),and networking with
policy institutes, NGOs and industry. He admitted
that the PR and media budget is miniscule (65,000
euro) but he is hoping to develop projects for which
voluntary contributions could be earmarked. Reaction
from WEOG members was positive, including for
voluntary contributions for outreach.


5. (U) Following Luhan,s presentation, German
delegate Ruth Surkau briefed the group on the first
EC bureau meeting (May 22),noting that the new EC
chair, Ambassador Oksana Tomova (Slovakia),made
clear that she intends to actively consult the
regional groups and expects her vice chairs to report
back to their groups. Algeria will retain the
industry cluster of issues; Germany will take over
the CW cluster of issues formerly held by WEOG Vice
Chair Ireland; Costa Rica will assume the budget and
administration cluster from outgoing Vice Chair
Chile; and Iran will take the legal cluster from
Russia.


6. (U) Amb. Javits nominated Amb. Werner Burkhart
(Germany),who was not present at the meeting, to be
the WEOG representative to the Russian-hosted visit
to the Shchuch,ye destruction facility, seconded by
UK and France. Other WEOG members had no objections
but asked for more time to consider the matter, as it
was the first they had heard nominations were due;
WEOG coordinator subsequently forwarded the WEOG
invitation letter of May 13 from the new EC
Chairperson to all members under a silence procedure.
Delrep announced that the U.S. participant for the
Shchuch,ye visit would be Dr. Robert Mikulak.


7. (U) At the June 3 WEOG meeting, coordinator Annie
Mari (France) announced that all WEOG delegations had
agreed that Ruth Surkau (Germany) would take over
WEOG coordination this summer, at a date to be
determined. Mari also reported that she had
consulted with the coordinators of other regional
groups and with the Costa Rican ambassador (Vice
Chair for Administrative Matters) and had received no
objections to Martin Strub (Switzerland) facilitating
the upcoming budget consultations.


8. (SBU) Discussion once again turned to a review of
the RevCon. Italy stated that we need a plan to go
forward on the industry issues, which ones require
consultations and which might be better resolved
among interested parties and the TS. Germany noted
that for OCPFs, the studies the TS had undertaken
will be important for discussion. UK rep suggested
that for the site selection methodology, it might be
premature to go into consultations, without working
out a WEOG position first. Several delegations spoke
to their hope to resolve the issue of transfer
discrepancies during EC-53 before the departure of
the Japanese co-facilitator. All agreed with the
suggestion to invite the TS (Bill Kane) to brief the
WEOG on TS activities concerning industry at the next
meeting.


9. (U) On EC-53 matters, Delrep informed the group
that the U.S. Schedule 1 facility agreement will be
delayed now until EC-54. UK rep noted that there
would be a corrigendum coming out on their document
on a converted site, which will be a precedent as the
first to pass the 10-year deadline. Germany
suggested that the EC might request improved
reporting for the Article X and Article XI annual
reports; currently the reports just list projects
with no evaluation. Netherlands Amb. Lak agreed,
noting that the language in the Review Conference
report on assessment would be helpful for that
purpose. UK rep suggested phrasing it in positive
terms, &welcoming future assessment,8 which would
also be a useful precedent for the budget.


10. (U) Coordinator Mari, who is also the chair for
the Open Ended Working Group on Terrorism, informed
WEOG that she is arranging a meeting on Article X
with the UN Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Assistance (OCHA). OCHA is willing to
meet on Article X but did not want the meeting to be
associated with terrorism, emphasizing assistance
instead. Mari also announced the next OEWG meeting
for July 10 focusing on EU coordination on terrorism,
with presentations by Spain and France.

--------------
REVIEW CONFERENCE FOLLOW-UP
--------------


11. (U) Daniel Feakes, a research fellow with the
Harvard Sussex Program, was in The Hague during the
week of May 27. He met with a number of TS officials
and participating delegations, including Amb. Lyn
Parker (Chair, Open-Ended Working Group on
preparations for the RevCon). Delrep met with Feakes
as his request to briefly discuss the &increased
partnership with industry8 mentioned in the U.S.
RevCon statement. Delrep shared generally the ideas
raised during the April 9 dinner with industry
representatives hosted by Amb Javits (e.g.,
industry,s active promotion of the CWC in the early
days, the challenges that industry faces with the
public in being associated with a chemical weapons
treaty, industry,s important role in the associate
program and internships, etc.). Feakes also asked
for general impressions about the RevCon, as well as
what he had from others about the counter-productive
role Iran played during the RevCon. Delrep was
careful to focus on the challenges of the process
rather than assigning full blame to one delegation.

--------------
DUTCH-HOSTED VISIT TO DU PONT PLANT SITE
--------------


12. (U) On May 29, the Dutch National Authority
hosted a visit for delegations and TS staff to a Du
Pont plant site in Dordrecht. Amb Javits and Delrep
participated in this event. This site is declared
and has been inspected under the Schedule 2 and OCPF
regimes. This was the second time in the past three
years that the Dutch National Authority has chosen a
site whose parent is a U.S. company.


13. (U) Of interest was the fact that the Dutch
National Authority chose a fluoropolymer plant site
(i.e., Teflon and related products). This comes on
the heels of the RevCon, which resurrected the
ongoing discussion regarding concentration thresholds
for Schedule 2A/2A* chemicals. (PFIB, a Schedule 2A
chemical, is produced as an unwanted and unavoidable
waste product in the production of these materials.)


14. (U) Also of interest was the method this site
uses for handling the PFIB waste that is generated.
Although they thermal treat this waste, as is the
pattern for nearly all such plants throughout the
world, they incorporate some technology to capture
certain chemicals resulting from the break-down of
PFIB. For example, this site captures aqueous HF
(hydrofluoric acid) and sells it to another company
for use as a raw material in the production of
toothpaste.


15. (SBU) In discussions with Bill Kane (TS, Industry
Verification) during the site visit, he said that
this type of thermal treatment was typical of most
such plant sites, although the capture of resulting
chemicals was somewhat unique. He said that the case
of concern often referred to by the UK delegation of
sites that drum up PFIB waste and send it off site
for destruction is very rare and may be unique to one
site in the UK itself.

--------------
INDUSTRY SCHEDULE 1 FACILITY AGREEMENT
--------------

16. (U) Discussions continue regarding the facility
agreement for the single industrial Schedule 1
facility that falls under the verification regime.
One last-minute issue has arisen regarding health and
safety practices, and this issue will require further
review by Commerce experts and then TS health and
safety staff. It now seems unlikely that this
facility agreement can be considered for approval
during the June meeting of the Executive Council (EC-
53). In that case, the TS will prepare the final
document with an EC-54 number and distribute it as
soon as possible (preferable before or during EC-53),
so that capitals will have sufficient time to review
it and recommend approval during EC-54.

--------------
OFFICIAL VISAS FOR TS STAFF
--------------


17. (U) On May 27, Delreps met with Milijana Danevska
(Head, Protocol and Visa Branch) and Serban Coman-
Enescu (Senior Protocol Officer) to follow-up on
previous meetings about official visas to the U.S.
for TS staff and inspectors. Danevska expressed her
thanks that two-year multiple-entry visas were now
being issued for official travel, in accordance with
CWC requirements. Delreps discussed the regulatory
need for travelers using UN laissez-passers to have a
letter from the UN,s Transportation Division
authorizing travel. Danevska stated that the OPCW
would like to remove this unnecessary administrative
burden, especially as the OPCW is an independent
organization and the OPCW,s use of UN laissez-passers
is governed through its cooperation agreement with
the UN. Delreps agreed to stay in touch and to
explore the possibility of the U.S. making an
exception for the OPCW visa processing, eliminating
the need for the extra step of a UN letter.

--------------
HR AND RECRUITMENT ISSUES
--------------


18. (U) On May 29, Delrep met with Ali Asghar (Head,
Human Resources) to discuss recruiting and other
administrative issues. Asghar noted that the number
of U.S. citizens working at the TS now stands at 33
(25 in Professional positions and eight in General
Services positions); this represents an increase of
seven (six Professional and one GS) since the
beginning of the year and makes the U.S. the country
with the largest share of Professional staff
positions in the TS.


19. (U) Asghar said that the TS,s e-recruitment
system is due to be launched in June, well ahead of
the originally-expected December launch date. The
system is based on the one currently used by the WHO
and will allow applicants to fully track their
applications through the entire recruitment process.

--------------
ARTICLE XI LUNCHEON
--------------


20. (U) Li Hong (China),the facilitator for Article
XI issues, hosted a lunch on June 4 to discuss the
way forward on developing concrete measures, as
directed by the CSP and RevCon. Delegates from the
Netherlands, South Africa, Cuba, Japan, Germany,
France, and the U.S. attended, as well as a senior TS
officer from the International Cooperation and
Assistance (ICA) division. Discussion was wide-
ranging, with Dutch Amb. Lak emphasizing that we need
to put ideology aside and focus on pragmatic efforts.
U.S. Delrep noted the role of industry in this effort
and described Amb. Javits, dinner for industry
representatives during the RevCon. Cuban rep noted
that the ideology will remain part of the dialogue
but agreed that the facilitations should focus on the
pragmatic. He suggested that the group needs a tool
to develop new programs and ideas and proposed a
workshop, carefully planned and designed to develop
new programs. In the discussion following, several
delegates liked the idea of a series of regional
workshops leading up to a larger meeting in The
Hague, possibly added to the agendas of the regional
meetings of the National Authorities. EU reps
thought that funding for such workshops could be
easily sought through voluntary funding.


21. (U) Li then ran through the various ICA programs
and his assessment of their success. The Associate
Program is the most successful, he felt, but the
Intern Program has few opportunities. OPCW rep
stated that the interns at present find their own
sponsors and that 100 percent of the requests have
been satisfied. Other delegation representatives
noted that perhaps there could be ways to help
broaden information and help match interns with
sponsoring organizations. Li said that China would
like to expand the areas of the Research Program to
work in areas such as soil and water safety. Others
in the group agreed that the Research Program could
be more targeted to needs of industry in developing
countries.


22. (U) Facilitator Li is scheduling the next
consultation on Article XI for June 20 and said he
hoped the discussion could build on the ideas
discussed at this lunch.


--------------
OPCW VISIT BY FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
--------------


23. (U) On June 5, Delreps, in conjunction with the
FBI Legal Attache at the embassy (Timothy Wallach),
hosted Dr. Vahid Majidi (Assistant Director, FBI,s
WMD Directorate) and Jeff Muller (FBI Chief of WMD
Countermeasures Unit) for a series of meetings with
the OPCW Technical Secretariat (TS). These meetings
included: (1) a meeting with Gary Mallard and visit
to the OPCW Laboratory and Equipment Store, to better
understand the TS analytical capabilities deployment
capabilities in response to cases of use of chemical
weapons; (2) a meeting with Deputy Director-General
John Freeman; (3) a meeting with Krzyzstof Paturej
regarding the work of the Executive Council,s Open-
Ended Working Group on Terrorism; and (4) a meeting
with Malik Ellahi regarding TS efforts in
coordinating with States Parties and other
international organizations, particularly in showing
how national implementation efforts under the CWC
meet the requirements of UN measures like UNSCR 1540.
Dr. Majidi is pursuing the option of using The Hague
as a venue for future international conferences on
counter-terrorism efforts.


24. (SBU) Krzyzstof Paturej presented to the FBI
delegation a concept for the first of a potential
series of tabletop exercises centered on prevention
of and response to a terrorist attack at a chemical
plant site, and he solicited the assistance of the
FBI in organizing, staffing and funding such an
exercise. Paturej is considering a plant site in
Poland as a possible venue for such an exercise;
however, in later discussions with FBI visitors, they
told Delrep that they would prefer a Hague-based
exercise for the first attempt, which could then be
expanded regionally based on the success of the
undertaking. This type of concept is consistent with
FBI initiatives in the counter-terrorism arena, but
it will need to be studied closely in order to keep
it on topic and of relevance and value. If there are
any costs outside of FBI and its partners (e.g.,
Interpol),consideration would have to be given to
where such Qnding would come from (e.g., whether
U.S. voluntary contributions might be considered).


25. (SBU) During the meeting with Malik Ellahi, a
number of similar training and outreach
opportunities, including a proposal regarding CWC
national implementation as a tool in meeting State
Party obligations under UNSCR 1540. Given the
numerous political landmines that seem to exist in
this arena, Ellahi will be adept in helping the FBI
organize venues with partners like OPCW and Interpol
to address these issues.


26. (U) In Del,s briefing with the FBI team, Delrep
requested that they contact ISN Director Mikulak
after their return to Washington to coordinate any
future projects.

-------------- --------------
CEFIC PRESENTATION ON CWC IMPLEMENTATION IN INDUSTRY
-------------- --------------


27. (U) On June 5, Delrep participated in a
presentation by Rene van Sloten (President, CEFIC,
the European chemical council) on the topic &Eleven
Years of CWC Implementation: Moving Forward with the
Chemical Industry.8 In that presentation, Van Sloten
touched on a number of different topics regarding
industry implementation of the CWC - Responsible
Care, balanced trade controls, world chemicals
sales, change in share of world chemicals exports,
migration of Western industry production to emerging
countries, market trends, globalization and
consequences, specific industry contributions to the
CWC (both pre-entry into force and more recently),
and extending industry compliance. After completion
of his presentation, Van Sloten asked a series of
open-ended questions or statements meant to stimulate
discussion: the focus of the CWC post-destruction;
industry verification as a confidence-building
measure only; a possible role for the OPCW in wider
chemical management support; and whether industry (as
&a stakeholder with a capital S8) could play a larger
day-to-day role with the OPCW.


28. (U) This presentation, along with the repeated
raising by CEFIC of the shift of industry from West
to East appeared to offend several delegations,
particularly from within the developing world.
Algeria made a strange intervention implying that
some companies were using the CWC as an excuse to re-
negotiate (read, raise) prices, and that a more open
dialogue with industry was needed to establish
complete trust. The Netherlands asked about
discussions within CEFIC regarding ways to reach out
to developing countries/industries (e.g., training)
as a tool in helping to meet Article XI goals,
including the use of existing venues such as the
annual meeting of National Authorities or new venues
(Del Comment: see section on Article XI above).


29. (U) A TS inspector asked how CEFIC might play a
role in assessing developments in science and
technology, particularly within the OCPF industries.
Italy emphasized that, even though the priorities of
the OPCW are very focused, that they are part and
parcel of industry,s priorities, particularly the
desire to create a level playing field globally.
Germany asked about CEFIC,s thoughts on improving
industries, interactions with the OPCW. Cuba stated
that the discussion clearly indicated the need to
focus on the full implementation of Article XI and
industry,s role in these efforts. South Africa
stressed the necessary caution that comes from
Western companies importing their views on
implementation along with the plant sites built in

developing countries.


30. (U) Van Sloten responded by pointing out that the
cost of trade controls are more administrative than
real; a level playing field can be achieved by all
States Parties fully implementing the CWC; that
implementation is easily balanced against
environmental and other such impacts; no company
looks to a State Party,s lack of implementation as an
opportunity for easy development there; that the OPCW
cannot do capacity-building - only industry can; and
the fact that the expansion of industry into new
parts of the world means that the developing world
often has superior technology than the historically
established industries. He also suggested areas
where industry can do more (e.g., helping the TS in
its recruiting efforts of capable inspectors from
within industry) and that perhaps industry be given a
more formal role in the plenary sessions of future
meetings. Also, as CEFIC has done many times in the
past, he made several passing references to disparity
within the global industry in mixture rules.

--------------
P-5 MEETING
--------------


31. (SBU) On June 6, Amb. Javits hosted the
Ambassadors from the Permanent five members of the UN
Security Council in the series of periodic meetings
of this group. The agenda included the traditional
topic of universality and a discussion of the Review
Conference. It was the first P-5 meeting for new
Chinese Ambassador Zhang Jun and possibly the last
for Russian Ambassador Kirill Gevorgian, who will be
leaving this summer. Ambassadors Lyn Parker (UK) and
Jean Gaussot (France) and staff from all five
missions also attended. There was little news on
universality, noting that Guinea Bissau has now
joined the Convention and Lebanon may finally be able
to accede under the new president. The Chinese
Ambassador stated that there are &other priorities8
for Burma and North Korea. Amb. Gevorgian reported
that the new chairperson of the Executive Council,
Amb. Tomova of Slovakia, is working on an initiative
to host a seminar in Slovakia, but he thought she did
not yet have the support of her government. Amb.
Gaussot noted that France had considered hosting a
meeting for the Middle East but had not thought the
timing right just yet.


32. (SBU) All five ambassadors expressed satisfaction
with the outcome of the Review Conference, if not
with the &painful process8 as the Russian ambassador
described it. Several noted disappointment that
UNSCR 1540 had not been cited in the final report.
France noted the great number of decisions in the
text to be implemented, while the UK pointed to the
opportunity in the year ahead -- with a &purposeful
and efficient8 EC Chairperson and a well-run
Technical Secretariat -- to make some real progress.
Amb. Javits noted the importance of leaving a record
for the next Review Conference, something that had
not been done for the first. He also cited the need
for prioritization of the recommended actions and
capturing lessons learned from the Conference for
better future planning. Amb. Parker emphasized that
the actual &review8 takes place in the preparations
leading up to the Conference and not during the
Conference itself, a reality that some delegations --
notably the NAM -- did not participate in as fully as
they should.


33. (SBU) Amb. Parker described the NGO/academic
community as &shocked8 that so many states see
destruction as the sole agenda of the OPCW and fail
to recognize the importance of non-proliferation as
ongoing and of relevance to them. Both Amb. Parker
and Amb. Javits stated that destruction will
undoubtedly continue after 2012, citing Iraq and
other new states parties as being unable to complete
destruction by the deadline, but that those states
must still be encouraged to join the convention and
commit to a reasonable timeline for destruction.
Amb. Gevorgian then intervened to reiterate the
strong position of the Russian Government that &going
beyond the limits of the Convention8 (i.e. failure to
meet the final deadline) will be a breach of
international law. This &principled8 position would
not be modified in the future, he said.


34. (SBU) As to lessons learned from the Conference,
Amb. Gevorgian stated that &politically and
practically, we have put ourselves in an untenable
position8 with the two competing documents that were
introduced to the Second RevCon. The NAM in
principle does not produce documents, and he
pointedly noted that the NAM had also &spoken in the
name of China.8 Although the RevCon was successful
in working out a satisfactory final document, he
continued, the precedent of the dueling documents
will haunt future sessions of the policy making
bodies. Amb. Parker replied that the NAM comments
came in several different versions throughout the
working group process, always late. The NAM paper at
the RevCon was a &maximalist document8 with much new
material, and a lot of questions put down as markers,
not representative of agreed positions by all the NAM
member states. The Cuban ambassador, he said, was
consequently quite clear that he could not negotiate
utilizing the NAM text and that it was up to the
States Parties to defend their individual interests.
He agreed that the problem would persist in future.
Amb. Javits raised the idea of early identification
of facilitators during the working group process and
beginning smaller group discussions of the
contentious issues well before the Conference itself
as a possible way to improve the process and develop
trust and expertise on the issues going into the
Conference.

--------------
ABAF DE-BRIEF
--------------


35. (SBU) U.S. member of the Advisory Body on
Administrative and Financial Matters (ABAF),Mary
Blanca Rios, met with Amb. Javits and Delreps on June
6 to discuss issues arising from the ABAF meeting.
The German chairman will be leaving, and Rios is one
of the potential candidates for the chair, but the
Iranian representative told her he would oppose the
U.S. taking the chair. The OPCW is proceeding with
IPSAS (International Public Sector Accounting
Standards) implementation, in line with the UN Common
System; the Legal Advisor does not believe that this
will require any action by the member states.
However, Rios warned that the amount set aside in the
budget for this process appears to be extremely low;
if additional funds are required for implementation,
it may become a political issue. From the Internal
Oversight report, there were two items that may
become political -- the loss by ICA of 10,000 dollars
cash at the Johannesburg airport, and ICA,s mis-
administration of the EU,s Joint Action funding. For
the latter, ICA illegally moved money from the
General Fund before the EU funding had even arrived,
and did not use any of the EU funding for additional
staff for its programs. Consequently, ICA reimbursed
the General Fund too late for all of the EU money to
be used. In the annual budget debate, Iran will
probably use these examples to push for additional
ICA staffing; but the EU, on the other hand, may
stress ICA,s inability to manage even the funds it
has.

36. (U) Javits sends.
Gallagher