CDG MINUS COUNTRIES UNITED IN CONCERN ABOUT KOSOVO

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000123 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/12/2018 TAGS: PGOV PREL UNSC YI SUBJECT: CDG MINUS COUNTRIES UNITED IN CONCERN ABOUT KOSOVO DI-RECOGNITIONS GAP Classified By: Ambassador Alejandro Wolff, Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) Summary: The Coordinating and Drafting Group Minus Russia (CDG-1) on February 8 discussed the run-up to a Kosovo declaration of independence (DI) and its aftermath. There was agreement that there should be no pretext provided for Russian efforts to de-legitimize Kosovo's independence. Therefore, the EU's Solana should not send any kind of letter to SYG Ban regarding the ESDP Rule of Law mission before a declaration and that no other written communication should come to Ban from the US or EU that he would have to pass on to the Council. There was also general agreement that group members should try to be as low key as possible in New York from now until a declaration and not pressure Ban to the extent that they are not compelled to do so by Russia. The group considered but did not come to agreement on other questions including: 1) Should CDG-1 ambassadors make a strong public statement after any emergency session called by Russia; 2) what are the best arguments to use if Russia calls an emergency session during a gap between a DI and recognitions; 3) What are the best arguments to make if the joint actions re ESDP are attacked in New York (presumably before a DI)? End Summary. CDG MINUS RUSSIA COUNTRIES DISCUSS POSSIBLE UNHELPFUL RUSSIAN UN ACTIONS ¶2. (C) Deputy Permreps of the CDG Minus Russia (US,UK, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium and Croatia) on February 8 discussed how to handle in New York the run-up to a Kosovar declaration of independence and its immediate aftermath. UK DPR Pierce suggested that participants work to minimize the extent to which the Security Council takes a view on a DI and also to ensure that Russia cannot use the Security Council to block actions on the ground or, later, block the SYG from allowing the transfer of authorities in Kosovo and the downsizing of UNMIK. She said we also need at a minimum the SYG to not annul a DI or send the question of UNMIK's reconfiguration to the Security Council. Pierce also asked whether participants supported making a joint statement following a post-DI emergency UNSC session that Russia might call. She underscored that the group should also be prepared for Russia to take other possible, unhelpful actions, such as raising Kosovo in the General Assembly. ¶3. (C) Ambassador Wolff agreed that Pierce had raised the right questions, but underscored that Russia might well take any of these actions even before a DI. Thus, it would be important to make sure there is no action in New York from the EU or US from now until a DI that could provide Russia a hook for such actions. He also stressed that it is critical to minimize the time gap between a DI and U.S. and EU recognitions because the CDG-1 countries will be on much firmer ground defending a DI if complemented by the recognitions of their capitals. ¶4. (C) French DPR LaCroix said an emergency session called by Russia could even be positive in the sense that it would demonstrate again blockage in the Security Council. LaCroix agreed that the SYG will be on much firmer ground after recognitions. Belgian Permrep Verbeke concurred with others that it is necessary to ensure that Russia has no hook before a declaration. German DPR Ney expressed strong concern about the gap and expressed hope that Quint Political Directors would address it in an upcoming discussion. Germany was doubtful that a CDG-1 statement would be workable before recognitions because of the weaker ground the group would be on. Italy agreed. ¶5. (C) The UK Polcoordinator reviewed UK thinking on how a Russian request for a Security Council meeting on the ESDP decision in advance of a DI might play out and argued that EU Council members should say it involved a sovereign EU decision that does not require Security Council action and, furthermore, that discussion is premature because the recent decision to approve the ESDP mission involved only one stage in a complex process that has not yet become operational. Italy argued that for the time being the group should stick to arguing that ESDP has nothing to do with status and is full legitimized under EU law. ¶6. (C) The UK's Pierce suggested that it would be helpful to convey to Ban that the group would have no objection if he chose to be absent, perhaps even from New York, on the likely date of a Security Council emergency session. All agreed to task experts with drafting counter-arguments against Russia, drawing on what had they had discussed during the day's meeting. KHALILZAD