NETHERLANDS/NUSOG: REMEDIATION STILL AN ISSUE

S E C R E T THE HAGUE 000565

NOFORN
SIPDIS

STATE FOR ISN/WMDT (TLOWE),OES/FO, EUR/WE (TSMITH)
DEFENSE FOR OSD/ATL (DBINIAZ)

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/26/2018
TAGS: MARR MNUC PARM TRGY KRAD NL
SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS/NUSOG: REMEDIATION STILL AN ISSUE

REF: THE HAGUE 397

Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Michael Gallagher, reasons
1.4 (a) and (d)


1. (S) Summary and action request: The issue of whether to
discuss remediation under the Netherlands - United States
Operational Group (NUSOG) auspices once again proved
contentious at the NUSOG Plenary on June 18-19. The Dutch
argued that environmental remediation in the event of an
incident involving a U.S. nuclear weapon or component is an
integral part of the NUSOG, and outlined plans for a "first
step" remediation workshop -- hopefully with USG
participation -- to be held later in the year. The U.S.
delegation questioned whether any discussion of remediation
falls under the NUSOG mandate. A temporary compromise was
reached when the Dutch agreed to hold the workshop outside of
the NUSOG, to which they would invite U.S. experts whom post
would help identify. Dutch civilian and military
participants were visibly agitated by the U.S. position
questioning whether remediation is an appropriate topic for
discussion in the NUSOG. It is clear the Dutch attach great
importance to this issue; Post believes non-engagement is
untenable and could negatively impact our bilateral
relationship with a strong ally. We urge the Department to
identify guidelines or parameters in which limited engagement
on remediation in the NUSOG is possible. End summary and
action request.

The Crux of the Matter
--------------

2. (C) CDA and Emboffs attended the NUSOG Plenary on June
18-19 in Amsterdam. As anticipated, the issue of remediation
led to a contentious and at times heated discussion. The
Dutch maintained that since remediation, that is, not just
financial responsibility but all issues concerning clean-up,
is identified as one of the functional areas in the NUSOG and
is discussed in the Implementing Joint Operation Plan (IJOP),
it is an integral part of the NUSOG and an appropriate topic
of discussion. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the
Environment (VROM) Crisis Management Division Director, Chris
Dijkens, gave an overview of a remediation workshop with a
broad agenda that the Dutch had previously proposed for
October or November 2008. Dijkens acknowledged that
remediation was admittedly a "complicated subject" that
lacked a clear definition. He suggested the workshop would
be used as a "first step" to acquaint Dutch actors with U.S.
subject matter experts, the results of which could
potentially be used to help develop a Dutch national
remediation plan.


3. (C) In response, the U.S. co-chair questioned whether a
policy-level discussion on remediation fell under the NUSOG
mandate. He pointed out that unlike other functional areas,
there is no tasking in the NUSOG to establish a remediation
working group, and that language regarding remediation is
purposefully vague. This in effect creates a "chicken or
egg" scenario in which an operational group such as the NUSOG
should not discuss remediation issues without clear policy --
nor should the NUSOG attempt to create remediation policy in
its absence. Dijkens agreed that NUSOG was not a
policy-making body, but argued that the proposed workshop
would not address policy issues. CDA stated that the U.S.
delegation could not engage on this issue without official
guidance, but that we would report Dutch questions and
concerns back to Washington.


4. (S) Side discussions yielded a temporary compromise -- the
Dutch will organize an internal/GONL remediation workshop
outside the NUSOG to begin developing a national remediation
plan, to which they would invite U.S. experts. The workshop
will remain on the NUSOG five-year training calendar for
informational purposes only. Dutch civilian and military
participants were visibly agitated by the U.S. position
questioning whether remediation is an appropriate topic for
discussion in the NUSOG; DAO Air Attache reported that in a
side conversation the Dutch co-chair hinted to him that if
the USG remains unwilling to engage on remediation, the
Dutch might have to consider reviewing overflight rights.

The Proposed Workshop: Questions Beyond Financial Liability
-------------- --------------

5. (C) Dijkens presented a proposal for an all-encompassing
NUSOG remediation workshop whose ultimate goal would be to
develop a remediation plan based on information gathered
during proposed discussions between Dutch and U.S. subject
matter experts over the issue. The broad agenda would
include a discussion of fundamental questions such as what is
meant by remediation, contamination, and cleanup, as well as
response organization, information management, legal issues,
safety, zoning, communication, finances, logistics, and
elements necessary for developing a remediation plan. The
Dutch would also welcome a discussion of U.S. experiences
with remediation. Participants would include relevant
government and local community representatives, and emergency
fire responders. Dijkens stated that the GONL does not
currently have a national remediation plan, although he later
acknowledged that a patchwork of policies exists on specific
issues such as cleaning up contaminated soil. (Note: Dijkens
denied that VROM had discussions regarding remediation with
U.S. experts outside the NUSOG. However, he later confirmed
that experts from his ministry frequently met with their U.S.
counterparts on technical and other issues. End note.)

Comment and Action Request
--------------

6. (S) Post received ISN/WMDT,s preliminary response to our
May 9 guidance request (reftel),which stated the U.S.
position that remediation is primarily an issue of financial
liability, and therefore should not be discussed in the
NUSOG. We are convinced that a policy of absolute
non-engagement is untenable, and will negatively impact our
bilateral relationship with a strong ally. Recently, the
Dutch media reported on a Time magazine article questioning
the safety of U.S. thermonuclear weapons stored in several
European countries, including the Netherlands, as well as the
recent visit of USAFE Commander Gen. Brady to Volkel AFB.
Public and parliamentary interest is rising. The Dutch will
continue to raise this issue, presumably at higher levels.
Agreeing to discuss any aspect of remediation is potentially
a slippery slope, but perhaps a limited discussion is
possible, provided strict ground rules make clear that
financial liability is not open for discussion.
Participation by U.S. subject-matter experts in the Dutch
internal remediation workshop this fall also could help
assuage Dutch remediation concerns. We urge the Department
to identify guidelines or parameters in which engagement on
remediation in the NUSOG is possible. End comment and action
request.


7. (U) The next NUSOG plenary is tentatively scheduled for
November 17-19, to be hosted by the United States in Germany.

Gallagher