CWC: WRAP UP FOR NOVEMBER 3-12, 2008

C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 000972

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 AND DENYER)
NSC FOR FLY
WINPAC FOR WALTER

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/20/2018
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CWC: WRAP UP FOR NOVEMBER 3-12, 2008

REF: A. THE HAGUE 928

B. GRANGER-ISN/CB E-MAIL 11-6-08

Classified By: Ambassador Eric M. Javits for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D)

This is CWC-55-08


1. (U) ACTION REQUEST: Please see para 26.

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


2. (U) The pace of meetings began to speed up in
anticipation of the Conference of the States Parties
(CSP-13). The Western European and Others Group
(WEOG) held regular weekly meetings on November 4 and
November 12. Informal consultations continued on

Articles XI and VII, with no agreement on action to
be taken on either issue at the CSP. The CSP-12
General Committee met on November 6 to accept
nominations for leadership positions and committee
members for the upcoming CSP.


3. (C) Ambassador Javits and Delreps called on the
Chinese Ambassador and his delegation to discuss
current issues, including the OPCW budget and
Taiwan's request to have its Chemical Industry
Association attend the CSP as an observer. A
Washington-based FBI official met with the Delegation
for a briefing on the Del's work with the OPCW.


4. (U) Septel on the Industry Cluster meetings
November 13-14 follows.

--------------
WEOG
--------------


5. (U) At the November 4 meeting of WEOG, Coordinator
Ruth Surkau confirmed WEOG candidacies for the
Conference of the States Parties (CSP) had been
approved: the U.S. and Germany as Vice-Chairs;
Portugal and Finland for the Credentials Committee
(with Finland as Chair); and experts from Sweden, the
U.S., and Germany for the Confidentiality Commission.
Italy confirmed that it did not have a replacement
for its departing expert, after which the UK offered
a candidate absent any other nominations for the
fourth WEOG slot on the Confidentiality Commission.


6. (SBU) On current consultations, delegations noted
the variety of interventions by delegations during
the Article VII meeting on October 30, and Iran's
evident isolation (ref A). Budget facilitator Martin
Strub noted that he was still gathering views from
interested delegations and would schedule
consultations a bit later than others might have
expected in order to avoid giving delegations too
many opportunities before the CSP to re-open the
entire budget discussion. Delegations raised the
continuing issue of OCPF (Other Chemical Production
Facility) inspections resting with China and India,
and the UK reminded the group that Iran's goals on
the budget are not yet apparent.


7. (SBU) On Article XI, the group briefly discussed
the Iranian and Cuban proposals, and there was
general agreement that no funding should be committed
for an Article XI workshop until a clear program had
been agreed, in order to avoid financing an
"Australia Group bashing" event. Italy and the
Netherlands also noted that there is currently no
delegation willing to move the workshop proposal
forward, a situation which is certainly not
problematic for WEOG. Amb. Javits advocated taking
the high road on Article XI, speaking positively
about the workshop but without worrying how long
discussions continue if others block action.


8. (U) Under Any Other Business, Surkau noted that
all references to non-proliferation had been removed
from the final version of the UN First Committee's
annual CWC resolution. France noted that an
Ethiopian member of the UNSCR 1540 Committee has been
invited to give a lunchtime presentation on 1540
during the EU-sponsored National Authorities Day on
December 1.


9. (U) At the November 12 meeting of the WEOG, Surkau
noted that WEOG was the only group to have completed
its CSP nominations, and there had been no objections
to the WEOG candidates. Japan was the only candidate
to date for the Chairmanship, but there was no news
on an African candidate for the Committee of the
Whole.


10. (U) On current consultations, delegations noted
the unusually frank discussions that had taken place
on the Chinese facilitator's Article XI paper during
the meeting on November 4 (see below). On Article
VII, the group discussed the form of facilitator Said
Moussi's draft proposal, which looks very much like a
decision, and the fact that it perhaps
underemphasized the amount of work still remaining
for full and effective implementation of the
Convention to be realized. The UK expressed concern
that an Article VII decision might open the door for
an Article XI decision, which could be far more
problematic. EU delegations were unsure as to
whether a decision would be required for continued EU
funding of Article VII activities, and the WEOG
agreed that the best tactic for now would be to leave
the format (decision or report language) in question.

--------------
ARTICLE XI
--------------


11. (U) Li Hong (China) chaired consultations on
Article XI on November 4. The meeting was well-
attended but made no progress on the boundaries of
the proposed workshop to brainstorm concrete
implementation measures. Amb. Javits set a positive
tone, noting that the workshop is something everyone
wants to see succeed but it needs to be shaped first
before budget considerations enter into the
discussion. A number of delegations (France, Italy,
Japan, Algeria, South Africa) agreed on the positive
approach and the need for specifics as to what the
event will address. After some veiled references to
political difficulties, Amb. Javits responded that
the workshop should be a constructive discussion, not
a political one, and that it should avoid "Australia
Group bashing." This led to greater frankness in the
subsequent discussion on the political issues behind
the normally indirect discussions. While a
refreshing change, it did not lead to any further
agreement on what the workshop (or the facilitation)
should address. Delrep suggested that the objectives
of the workshop might be framed as questions that
need to be answered rather than pre-determining the
results. The Irish and Australian delegates called
for more specifics and noted the need for achievable
results. Chairman Li noted the need for technical
expertise in designing the workshop, rather than
trying to plan all of the specifics in the
consultation.


12. (U) Iran, true to form, said a full discussion of
all aspects of Article XI is needed and asked for a
Qall aspects of Article XI is needed and asked for a
new paper well in advance of the next meeting so that
the delegation could get instructions from Tehran.
The Iranian delegate also questioned what progress
the consultation could report to the Conference of
the States Parties, strongly implying that nothing
has been done. Several delegations, including
Germany and Cuba, responded that the proposed
workshop has taken a lot of time in discussion and
should be reflected in the CSP report.

--------------
FBI VISIT
--------------


13. (SBU) Joseph Campbell, Section Chief of the FBI's
WMD Directorate in Washington, met with Delreps on
November 5 during a visit to The Hague. Timothy
Wallach, the FBI legal Attache in The Hague,
accompanied him. Delreps briefed them on the
Delegation's role at the OPCW and responded to
Campbell's questions on possible training and
challenge inspection exercises following the earlier
visit to OPCW of Dr. Vahid Majiki and Jeff Muller of
the WMD Directorate. Delrep advised that ISN/CB
would be the best point of contact for the FBI in
planning any potential programs with OPCW.

--------------
CHINESE AMBASSADOR
--------------


14. (SBU) On November 6, Amb. Javits and Delreps met
with Chinese Ambassador Zhang Jun and members of his
OPCW delegation. Amb. Javits raised the draft 2009
budget as the main issue at the upcoming CSP and the
number of OCPF inspections as the only point of
contention with the budget. He expressed his
understanding that China wants outstanding issues
involving OCPF inspections to be addressed, and
shared his belief that the Industry Cluster
facilitations will make progress in solving problems
and developing better methodology. Amb. Javits said
that the pressure to increase OCPF inspections is
driven by the large number of OCPFs and the fact that
there is no clear indication which ones pose the
greatest risk. He stressed that it was advisable to
follow the Director-General's (DG) recommendation and
that increasing the number by ten would not adversely
affect China. Amb. Javits also noted that the annual
cap on Schedule 3 and OCPF inspections protects
countries from being over-burdened.


15. (SBU) Amb. Zhang responded that China's
principled objection to increasing OCPF inspections
is due to its belief that the OPCW should focus on
destruction, rather than non-proliferation, before

2012. He said that destruction of Japanese abandoned
chemical weapons was a burning issue in China; that
there were frequent incidents and injuries; that it
was a potential source of civil unrest; that
destruction of "JACWs" still has not started and that
China does not want Japan to procrastinate in
meetings its obligations. Amb. Zhang said that China
has had to host increased inspections of ACW sites,
in addition to industrial facilities. He emphasized
that ACW inspections are more important than OCPF
inspections and that even one more OCPF inspection in
China will make allocating already-stretched
resources difficult. Amb. Javits replied that he
would include Old and Abandoned Chemical Weapons in
his national statement at the CSP but urged Chinese
re-consideration of the OCPF numbers in order to pass
the budget.


16. (SBU) Amb. Zhang said that China shares the
concerns of some other developing countries, like
India, but not always of others, like Iran. He
remarked that a view among developing countries is
that increasing OCPF inspections symbolizes a shift
in focus in the OPCW's priorities; any increase in
OCPF inspections needs to be accompanied by a firm
QOCPF inspections needs to be accompanied by a firm
commitment to the CWC's destruction aims. Amb.
Javits commented that an extra ten OCPF inspections
will not shift the OPCW's focus away from destruction
and stressed the U.S.'s commitment to and focus on
destruction.


17. (SBU) Deputy Perm Rep Li Hong interjected that
there have been issues with OCPFs since the
Preparatory Commission, which was one reason why OCPF
inspections did not commence until 2001. With 13% of
inspections in 2007 having been "wasted," Li asked
why there is a rush to increase inspection numbers
while good proposals for fixing the OCPF inspection
regime currently are under consideration. He also
reiterated China's understanding from the Second
Review Conference that the number of OCPF inspection
would not increase until outstanding issues were
resolved. Amb. Javits countered that the RevCon
spoke to frequency of inspections and not overall
numbers. He also noted that solving all outstanding
problems could take three to five years and, while
solving problems should be a priority, inspections
must continue and not be allowed to remain static.


18. (SBU) Turning from OCPFs, Amb. Javits and Delrep
noted that the upcoming departures of Li Hong and Gao
Huijin will be a loss to the OPCW, especially
considering Li's work as facilitator Article XI and
Gao's work on the ABAF. Delreps noted that the U.S.
is looking at possible reform of the Advisory Body on
Administrative and Financial Matters, including
possible funding for experts whose governments could
not fund their travel to meetings, and said they
would like to consult Gao and the Chinese delegation
further on this in the weeks ahead.


19. (SBU) Amb. Zhang shared that the Japanese
ambassador's candidacy for CSP Chairman has been
raised in the Asian Group, to which he did not
foresee any strong opposition. He noted that China
was happy to remain one of the CSP vice-chairs.


20. (C) Amb. Javits also raised the "delicate" issue
of observer status at the CSP for Taiwan's industry
association. Amb. Zhang commented that the situation
with Taiwan is improving but that the policy had not
yet changed. He believed that when Taiwanese
participation in the World Health Organization is
resolved, an issue on which he had worked in his
previous posting, Taiwan's status with other
international organizations would follow. Amb. Javits
noted his promise to Zhang's predecessor, which he
extended to Amb. Zhang, that the U.S. would not take
any action on Taiwan's status at the OPCW ahead of
China.

--------------
CSP GENERAL COMMITTEE
--------------


21. (U) Ambassador Idris (Sudan),the CSP-12
Chairman, held a General Committee meeting on
November 6 to discussion nominations and planning for
CSP-13. Secretary Khodakov reported that for the
Executive Council before the Conference, there should
be 72 hours notice. Most of the documentation for
CSP-13 was available, he said, with the annotated
agenda expected shortly. The Iranian delegate asked
whether the EC could be held after the CSP. The
Director-General replied quite pointedly that the
Organization would be paralyzed with no budget, and
that there would then be no money to hold another EC
or CWP to pass the budget. A heated discussion
ensued on whether the EC to pass the budget had to be
held before the CSP began, with the Russian
Ambassador requesting the EC-54 report on the
QAmbassador requesting the EC-54 report on the
deferral be read to the group. Amb. Tomova,
Chairperson of the EC, stated that the EC would be
held before the CSP. Amb. Javits noted past
experience with needing an EC during the Conference,
echoed by France and Germany. The Costa Rican and
Russian Ambassadors weighed in to emphasize that the
EC should be held prior to the CSP.

22. (U) WEOG was the only regional group that had
nominated candidates for all of its positions:
CSP-13 Vice Chairs -- Germany and U.S.,
Credentials Committee -- Finland and Portugal;
Executive Council members for 2009-2011 -- France,
Germany, Italy, UK and U.S.


23. (U) For the Asian Group, China reported that
Japan had been nominated for the Chair of the
Conference, with no other candidates, but that the
group had not yet met to confirm the nomination. For
the EC members, Asia had nominated China, India,
Korea, Japan and Saudi Arabia, all to be confirmed.
GRULAC had nominations for three of its four EC
seats: Argentina, Brazil and Mexico. (Del note: At a
later WEOG meeting, Amb. Burkart reported that GRULAC
had agreed on CSP-13 Vice Chairs -- Costa Rica and
Ecuador, Credentials Committee -- Argentina and
Bolivia, and EC members -- Argentina, Brazil, Mexico
and Uruquay. There was still no update from the
other regional groups).


24. (U) The Chairman closed the meeting, noting that
another General Committee would have to be held
before the CSP-13 and that regional groups needed to
agree on their candidates.

--------------
NEW OCPF FACILITATOR
--------------


25. (U) On November 6, Delreps met with the newly
appointed facilitator for OCPF Declaration
Enhancements, Marthinus van Schalkwyk (South Africa).
Van Schalkwyk said that he was meeting informally
with delegations from countries with 50 or more OCPFs
to gather their views prior to the first consultation
on OCPF Declaration Enhancements on November 14. He
informed Delreps of his plan to focus only on the
Technical Secretariat's (TS) Note on enhancing
information on OCPF plant site characteristics that
required a decision by States Parties (EC-53/S/5).
He noted that action on the DG's Note on enhancing
OCPF declarations (EC-53/DG.11) is within the
Technical Secretariat's purview and he did not want
to prolong discussion on something SP's cannot
change. Based on discussions with Bill Kane (Head,
Industry Verification Branch),van Schalkwyk said
that the TS was ready to implement the DG's note
without further consultations. He also said that the
TS would like to limit the pool of relevant
inspectable OCPFs to 500-800 sites (out of
approximately declared 4500 sites).


26. (U) On the TS Note, van Schalkwyk said that he
planned for Legal Advisor Santiago Onate to address
any legal concerns raised by delegations. He
predicted possible problems when discussion turns to
the A-14 algorithm, specifically assigning a value to
the new information. Van Schalkwyk noted that -- for
security reasons -- South Africa already collects
information on plant site characteristics and asked
if the U.S. does the same. He also asked if
implementing the TS's Note -- i.e., changing the OCPF
declaration form to include questions on plant site
characteristics -- would require legislative or
regulatory changes for the U.S. (ACTION REQUEST:
Please provide guidance/answers for Del to pass to
van Schalkwyk on these two questions.)


27. (U) Van Schalkwyk stated that he intended to use
the first consultation on November 14 for delegations
Qthe first consultation on November 14 for delegations
to air their views and initial positions before
getting down to business in early 2009. He told
Delreps that he intends to hold regular consultations
between sessions of the Industry Cluster. Van
Schalkwyk recognized that this might pose
difficulties for delegations relying on experts from
capitals but said that it would be necessary to
maintain the momentum of discussion and promised to
give sufficient notice in advance of meetings to
either allow for travel or for delegations to obtain
instructions.

--------------
GENEVA GROUP MEETING
--------------


28. (U) On November 7, Co-chair Diana Gosens
(Netherlands) hosted a meeting of the local Geneva
Group primarily to discuss the pending 2009 draft
budget. Gosens and the Group welcomed Mexico as the
newest Geneva Group member, represented by Amb. Jorge
Lomanoco and Blanca Polo at the meeting. Budget
facilitator Martin Strub (Switzerland) said that the
main outstanding issue is the number of inspections,
specifically the increase in OCPF inspections by ten.
He noted that the DG has decided to stick to the
draft budget and is unwilling to make any new
proposals; therefore, any compromise proposals will
have to come from delegations. Strub announced his
plan to re-start consultations on November 14 without
a TS presence. He also briefed the Group on his
discussions with Non-aligned Movement (NAM)
delegations, noting that the NAM does not have a
unified position:
- India wants a redistribution of the additional ten
inspections between scheduled chemical facilities and
OCPFs;
- China wants to get rid of the additional ten
inspections altogether, on principle;
- South Africa still has concerns on some key
performance indicators (KPIs);
- Iran is fixated with the Medium-term Plan, the
Office of Special Projects and some KPIs.


29. (U) In addition to discussing how to proceed with
budget negotiations, Delreps also highlighted the
issue of reform of the Advisory Body on
Administrative and Financial matters (ABAF) as a
topic for future discussion, noting that the Del has
begun looking into mechanisms for improving the
ABAF's functioning.

--------------
ARTICLE VII
--------------


30. (U) On November 12, Article VII facilitator Said
Moussi (Algeria) presented a draft proposal on how to
address Article VII at the CSP. (NOTE: Moussi's
proposal was sent to Washington by unclassified
email, ref B.) Moussi noted his intention to have
the special EC meeting consider the proposal before
sending it to the CSP. In consideration of previous
discussion, Moussi left the proposal's format
unresolved, though it most closely resembled a draft
decision.


31. (U) Reiterating views from previous
consultations, the Russian delegate spoke in favor of
having a strong decision and said that Moussi's draft
was a good start. Russia said that progress has not
been "steady" -- as indicated in the draft -- and
suggested adding "concern" as well as a deadline for
action, as in previous years' decisions.


32. (U) In the first of many interventions, Iran said
it wanted to discuss the pros and cons of each
paragraph be&YlNSWQQica noted that the proposed title --
specifically "full and effective implementation" --
differs from previous years and asked that it be
Qdiffers from previous years and asked that it be
changed. South Africa also reiterated that data on
submissions of annual declarations in the annual
Article VII report is misleading and should be
removed from future reports.


33. (U) Taking the floor again, Iran insisted that it
needed to have a discussion on the overall approach
before delving into a textual analysis of the
facilitator's draft proposal. Moussi responded that
his proposal was based on previous discussions and
specific comments raised by many different
delegations. He noted his attempt to balance
different views in the text and stressed that the
goal is to enhance the TS's capacity, encourage
States Parties to act, and promote synergies.


34. (U) Germany commented that the draft proposal
addressed the need for State Parties to take further
action, for the TS to continue its work and for other
States Parties to help. While agreeing that the
text's tone should remain positive and encouraging,
Germany suggested that it should also be clear that
more needs to be done. The Netherlands and the UK
echoed many of Germany's comments, noting that the
draft reflects discussions to date and reiterating
the need for a balance between welcoming progress and
noting concern at the need for more action and
further progress.


35. (U) Reflecting on what it saw as large
differences on how to reflect elements within the
proposal, China suggested delegations take more time
to reflect and to consider past documents. Pakistan
agreed with China on the need for more time to
reflect and discuss but also said that there appeared
to be consensus on what approach to take and that the
draft proposal was well balanced. Iran stated that
some of its desired elements -- including reference
to Article XI(e) -- were missing from the draft.
Iran also stressed that it does not want to criticize
any States Parties making honest efforts toward
implementation.


36. (U) Delrep suggested that the text could simply
cite actual data rather than using adjectives to
describe progress, as had been done during the
RevCon. Delrep also echoed the Russian suggestion to
introduce new deadlines for action and explained the
need to show that more work needs to be done, partly
in order to justify further assistance. South Africa
closed discussion by referring to the previous year's
decision, calling it more balanced and asking for the
facilitator to consider replacing elements of his
draft with those from the previous decision.


37. (U) Javits sends.
FOSTER