VCC/EXPERTS: U.S. TO CONDUCT VD99 EVALUATION VISIT

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 USNATO 000441

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/25/2018
TAGS: KCFE NATO PARM PREL
SUBJECT: VCC/EXPERTS: U.S. TO CONDUCT VD99 EVALUATION VISIT
IN RUSSIA IN 2009

Classified By: A/DCM W. Scott Reid for reasons 1.4 (B) & (D).


1. (C) Summary. During the 17 November VCC Experts meeting,
USDel secured all primary and secondary objectives for U.S.
VD99 verification activities in 2009. Experts debated
alternative language for the IS working paper on
Implementation Coordination, putting off consideration of
three alternative proposals until the next the next meeting.
Experts agreed to extend the December Experts Meeting by one
day in order to review arms control training Programs of
Instruction (POI) and address Annual Implementation
Assessment Meeting (AIAM) working papers and issues, which,
due to time constraints, were not addressed during this
meeting. The U.S. acquired one more CFE additional paid
inspection in Ukraine. Finally, all but one Ally confirmed
their willingness to discuss MRAPs on the margins in
December.


2. (C) The following summarizes U.S. VD99 verification
activity for 2009:

--Evaluation visit quota:

-The Russian Federation with guest inspectors from Estonia
and Poland.

--Inspection quotas:

-Azerbaijan with guest inspector from Turkey,
-Belarus as a shared quota with Norway (see para 5),
-Turkmenistan with a guest inspector from Belgium,
-Kyrgyzstan with a guest inspector from the Czech Republic,
and
-Finland.

End Summary.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
U.S. 2009 VD99 Verification Activity
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


3. (C) A marathon session to coordinate Allies' bids for
2009 VD99 verification activity dominated the 17 November VCC
Experts Meeting. During the coordination process, USDel
secured U.S. primary objectives for an evaluation visit in
the Russian Federation, and inspections in Azerbaijan and
Belarus. In addition, USDel secured inspection quotas for
Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Finland. While meeting all
primary and secondary U.S. objectives, the results,
particularly concerning U.S.-led evaluation visit, were
hard-won and required considerable compromise.


4. (C) Eight Allies (FR, HU, PL, US, BE, EE, DE and CA)
began the day bidding for an evaluation visit in Russia and
four (US, BE, FR, CA) held firm through most of the day. The
stalemate finally ended through a complicated arrangement
where the U.S. is to invite guest evaluators from Poland and
Estonia on U.S.-led evaluation visit to Russia; and invite a
guest inspector from Belgium on U.S.-led VD99 inspection to
Turkmenistan.


5. (C) Coordinating inspection quotas for Belarus was also
highly competitive with five Allies (NO, EE, US, PT and PL)
vying for three quotas. An agreement was reached after USDel
agreed to drop its primary bid for Belarus with the
understanding that, at Norway's suggestion, Norway will share
its quota with the U.S. Under the sharing arrangement,
Norway will maintain control the quota through mid-year
(through May, but at a specific time TBD),after which time
the U.S. will assume control of the quota for the remainder
of the year. Both sides agreed that, regardless of which
country exercises the quota, the lead nation will invite at
least one guest inspector from the other. (Note. Norway is
one of a few Allies who conduct inspections only when
notifable military activity is taking place or when there is
a suspicion that notifiable military activity is taking
place. In line with this view, Norway's objective is to hold
one VD99 inspection quota in reserve in order to cover a
Belarusian annual military
exercise, to which Belarus has historically only invited
observers from neighboring countries. Expecting this

USNATO 00000441 002 OF 003


exercise to take place in autumn 2009, Norway expressed a
willingness to share a quota with another Ally. USDel does
not expect Norway to use this quota before May unless Belarus
holds a significant military exercise. Therefore the U.S.
should plan for a VD99 inspection in the second half of 2009.
End Note.)


6. (C) Five Allies ( FR, LT, SI, CZ and US) were also
bidding for quotas in Azerbaijan. The Czech Republic Head of
Del brokered a deal that left U.S., France and the Czech
Republic with the three available quotas.


7. (C) Securing additional inspections in Turkmenistan and
Kyrgyzstan during second and third round bidding involved
inviting guest inspectors from Belgium (a compensation for
dropping its evaluation bid for Russia) and the Czech
Republic (for its assistance in arranging the deal on
Azerbaijan) respectively. USDel bid for a quota in Finland
at the end of the session in expectation that Finland may
conduct a large-scale military exercise in 2009.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Implementation Coordination Paper Hung on Para 8
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


8. (C) Prior to plunging into the coordination process,
Experts considered revisions to the IS working paper on
Implementation Coordination (AC/319-WP(2008)0009-REV3 (INV)).
Allies were quickly divided over para 8, which describes the
rules for loss of quota in the event a non-NATO country
conducts an evaluation or inspection before a scheduled
Allied inspection/evaluation. Norway reiterated its argument
against the "last" Ally incurring the loss, as this would
encourage Allies to schedule their inspections/evaluations
early and would only encourage a return to the quota race,
which Allies had avoided in 2008. Canada contended that the
working paper provides for adequately compensating an Ally
for losing its quota and, therefore, the language in REV 3 is
sufficient to curtail the quota race. The Czech Republic
cautioned against always assigning the lost quota to the
"next" or "first" Ally following a non-NATO inspection, as
this might impose a significant financial cost to an Ally
caught in the last stage
s of planning. The Czech Republic, supported by Denmark,
advocated for the loss to go to the first Ally scheduled
following a period of four weeks from the time of the
non-NATO inspection/evaluation.


9. (C) Anticipating the time needed to complete the quota
allocation process, the Chair requested that Norway, Canada
and the Czech Republic draft specific language for review
later in the day. Since the coordination session consumed
the rest of the day, this paper will be considered again in
December.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dec VCC Experts Extended by One Day
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


10. (C) The Chair announced that it had wanted to schedule
an additional meeting in November or December in order for
Experts to review and adopt arms control training POIs from
the NATO School, which must be completed before 1 January

2009. However, due to limited availability of meeting areas
in the lead up to the December Ministerial, the only day with
available space for such a meeting was on 17 December, the
day before the next scheduled VCC and Experts Meeting.
Experts agreed to hold meetings all day on 17 December to
review training POIs and to address agenda items postponed
from November. Experts will reconvene the morning of 18
December to allocate CFE quotas.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -
Chair Announces Three More Additional Paid CFE Inspections
for Ukraine
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -


11. (C) With CFE SP remaining after the Experts meeting, the
Chair announced that Ukraine would accept three more CFE

USNATO 00000441 003 OF 003


additional paid inspections this year (for a total of nine).
USDel expressed interest in one inspection. With no other
Ally expressing interest, USDel noted that the U.S. might
also be interested in the remaining two inspections (to avoid
having them go unused). The Chair asked Allies to consider
the remainng two inspections and to be prepared to confirm
their interest at the December meetings.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Allies Agree to Meet on MRAP
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


12. (C) Per guidance, USDel notified all pertinent Allies of
our interest in holding a discussion on the fielding and
reporting of MRAPs on the margins of the December Experts
meeting. With the exception of Spain, which said it would
have to report back to Capital, all Allies agreed to meet in
December. Several Allies requested more specific information
on the vehicles to be discussed and specifically what
information the U.S. was looking for. USDel suggested that
the U.S. might pass a note or paper forward within the next
two weeks that would provide additional information. With
the meetings being extended by one day, USDel suggests
holding the meeting on the afternoon or evening of 17
December.
VOLKER