OPEN SKIES: NOVEMBER 10 INFORMALS: UPHILL ON

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 USOSCE 000275

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR VCI/CCA, EUR/PRA, EUR/RPM, SCA/CEN
JCS FOR COL NORWOOD
OSD FOR ISA (PERENYI)
NSC FOR HAYES

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PARM PREL OSCE
SUBJECT: OPEN SKIES: NOVEMBER 10 INFORMALS: UPHILL ON
COSTS

REF: MARVIN-WRIGHT EMAIL 11/7/08


1. (SBU) Summary: The Open Skies Consultative Commission
(OSCC) Plenary met in informal session on November 10 to
discuss the draft letter from the OSCC Chairperson to the
Ministerial Council. The Informal Working Group on Rules and
Procedures (IWGRP) followed the informal Plenary and
continued discussion on both the draft decision on alternate
airfields and revision five of Decision Number One to the
Treaty on Open Skies. The Slovak delegation announced yet
another informal meeting on November 11 to discuss recently
proposed edits by delegations on the draft decision on
alternative airfields. U.S. concerns over language contained
in Section V.2 of the draft decision on revision five of
Decision Number One resulted in an alternate approach
proposed by Russia, which appears in Revision 3 of the
document. Washington guidance requested. Please see
paragraphs 10 and 11. End Summary.

--------------
Plenary
--------------


2. (SBU) During the November 10 OSCC informal plenary
Belarus (Pavlov),in its capacity as OSCC Chair, announced
two changes to the text of the draft letter to the MC. The
first edit will add additional language to the second
sentence of the first paragraph on page two of the draft
letter to better characterize the aim of the draft decision
on alternate airfields. The sentence will be: "At present
time the IWGRP is continuing the discussion on the decision
on alternative airfields which aims at ensuring flight safety
as well as at establishing administrative and financial
procedures in case of landings of observation aircraft at
alternate airfields." The second edit will correct the dates
of the active quota distribution meeting to October 9 and 10,
mentioned in paragraph three of page two of the letter.


3. (SBU) Romania (Matei) gave its support to the draft
letter and said it was a "good, well-balanced, comprehensive
document." Romania proposed an addition to the end of
paragraph four on the first page of the draft letter that
would mention the certification of Romania's Open Skies
platform, which occurred in September 2008 with the
assistance of Germany and the POD group. The Chair (Pavlov)
said it had no objection to mentioning this "important
event." No delegation objected. The Chair will issue a
revised version of the draft letter, as Revision 1, to
reflect the Chair's and Romania's proposed edits. Pavlov
expects there will be agreement at the November 24 Plenary to
send the draft letter to the MC.


4. (SBU) Pavlov announced that his assignment had come to an
end and he would depart Vienna on November 13. Pavlov's
replacement, First Secretary Dmitry Krayushkin, will continue
as OSCC Chairman.

--------------
IWGRP
--------------


5. (SBU) The Informal Working Group on Rules & Procedures
(IWGRP),chaired by Russia (Kozlov),met following the
informal Plenary. Igor Jancovic of the Slovak delegation,
coordinator of the draft decision on alternate airfields
(OSCC.RP/3/08),discussed recent changes to the text and
announced that, in light of additional proposals received by
delegations in the last few days, an informal meeting would
be held on November 11. Canada (Linteau) expressed thanks to
the Russian delegation for considering Canada's concern
during the October 27 IWGRP wherein Canada asked the working
group to reconsider the idea of a decision to designate
alternate airfields. Canada appreciated that the current
text seems to retain the authority of the pilot to designate
an alternate airfield during an emergency.

6. (SBU) On revision five of Decision Number One to the

USOSCE 00000275 002 OF 003


Treaty on Open Skies (OSCC.RP/17/08,Rev.2),Slovakia
(Jancovic) suggested deleting the last two paragraphs of
Section V as the content of these paragraphs was already
covered in paragraph 11. Russia (Kozlov) said it had
considered the proposed amendment by Slovakia and agreed the
first of the two last paragraphs of Section 5 (which begins,
'unless otherwise agreed...') could be dropped, but cautioned
against "overloading" paragraph 11.


7. (SBU) The U.S. (Wright),per ref email, said it had
concerns with the exclusion of 5 (D),which refers to "air
traffic control instructions related to circumstances brought
about by force majeure," from the last paragraph of Section
V.2, which discusses costs attributed to factors in
accordance with Article III, Section II, paragraphs 5 (A),
(B),and (C). USDel noted that the observing Party should
not be held liable for factors related to 5 (D). Wright
suggested further discussion take place on the distinction
between these paragraphs as related to costs. Russia
commented that language in the last paragraph of Section V.2
had been proposed by USDel during the October 27 IWGRP and,
therefore, if further clarification was sought we should ask
Washington. (NOTE: During the October 27 working group
USDel provided a drafting suggestion to the Russian proposed
text in the last paragraph of Section V.2 to help clarify
the language, which was confusing to the U.S. and other
delegations.) Turkey supported the U.S. comment on 5 (D).


8. (SBU) After the working group concluded, Kozlov
approached USDel and re-iterated that the USDel had not
mentioned any concern over the exclusion of 5 (D) when USDel
suggested edits to Section V.2 on October 27. Kozlov
questioned why there should be concern over 5 (D) now since
we had not raised it previously. USDel (Wright) said that
the draft decision on revision five of Decision Number One
was still under review in Washington; inputs received
recently had raised the concern over the exclusion of 5 (D)
to costs that would be incurred by the observing Party.
Wright also commented that since Decision Number One was open
for discussion in the IWGRP pending an outcome on the draft
decision on alternate airfields, we believed it was worth
seeking further clarification on language related to costs in
Section V.2.

--------------
Informal Meeting on Alternate Airfields
--------------


9. (SBU) During the informal meeting chaired by Slovakia on
November 11, the Slovak delegation (Jancovic) gave an
overview of the most recent changes to paragraphs 3, 6, 7,
and 8 of the draft decision on alternate airfields, as
suggested by the U.S., France, Slovakia, and Russia. USDel
briefly explained its proposed edits that sought to help
clarify the text. France, not represented during the
informal, had passed on a suggestion to include text in
paragraph 8(a) that would require the form of payment (either
delayed payment, cash, or credit card) to be notified prior
to the start of the mission in the remark section of OSF26.
Jancovic stated that, as discussed during the IWGRP, the last
two paragraphs of Section V.2 had been deleted from Decision
Number One. Initially there was discussion to retain the
very last paragraph (which refers to Article III, Section II,
paragraphs 5 (A),(B),or (C) of the Treaty) of Section V.2
and insert it where appropriate into the draft decision on
alternate airfields. Later in the meeting, however, Russia
(Kozlov) proposed deleting that paragraph from the draft
decision on alternate airfields as well and proposed,
instead, that new text (which it believed addressed the same
concern) be added to Section V, paragraph 13 of Decision
Number One.


10. (SBU) Russia (Kozlov) said that the rationale behind
its proposal for new text in Section V.13 of Decision Number
One was that conditions in accordance with Article III,
Section II, paragraphs 5 (A),(B),and (C) might not only

USOSCE 00000275 003 OF 003


occur during the observation mission, but also could occur
during flights to and from the points of entry/exit. Kozlov
suggested that, for this reason, Russia was proposing new
language to address costs incurred by these conditions; he
felt that this new language fit more appropriately in Section
V, paragraph 13 of Decision Number One. (COMMENT: This
appears to be an attempt to provide another approach to
address how conditions as set forth in 5 (A),(B),(C),and
(D) of the Treaty may affect costs incurred by the observed
and/or observing Party.)


11. (SBU) Revised versions of both the draft decision on
alternate airfields (OSCC.RP/13/08/Rev.4) and the draft
decision on revision five to Decision Number One
(OSCC.RP/17/08 Rev.3) were distributed by the respective
chairs on November 12. Washington guidance requested before
the next IWGRP meeting.

--------------
Next Meeting
--------------


12. (SBU) The IWGRP will meet again on November 24. The
next plenary also will be on November 24.
FINLEY