RUSSIA REGROUPING ON ABKHAZ/OSSETIAN PARTICIPATION

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 USUN NEW YORK 000801 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/29/2018 TAGS: UNSC PREL GG RS SUBJECT: RUSSIA REGROUPING ON ABKHAZ/OSSETIAN PARTICIPATION IN UNSC MEETING REF: A. A) SECSTATE 92371 ¶B. B) USUN 757 Classified By: AMBASSADOR ALEJANDRO D. WOLFF FOR REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D ) ¶1. (C) Summary: In closed consultations on August 28, the Security Council decided to hold a public meeting as requested by Georgia and decided not to invite South Ossetian and Abkhaz representatives to participate in it as requested by Russia. Several Council members said inviting the separatists to participate in a meeting in the aftermath of Russia's recognition of these regions as sovereign states would signal a slackening of the Council's longstanding support of Georgia's territorial integrity. However, most Members said they would be willing to consider South Ossetian and Abkhaz participation at a later date, under a formula to be decided by the Council. Georgian PermRep Alasania later told USUN that Georgia could accept an informal "Arrias-style" Council session for the South Ossetians and Abkhaz if such a session would help keep them out of a formal Council meeting. End Summary. ¶2. (C) On August 28, Belgian Perm Rep Grauls in his capacity as Security Council President called for consultations to discuss the request of Georgia for an emergency, public meeting of the Council that same day. With several members (U.S., UK, France, Italy, Belgium, Costa Rica, Croatia) expressly calling Russia's recent recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia independence a direct threat to Georgia's territorial integrity, the Council eventually agreed to hold an emergency meeting that same afternoon. South Ossetia/Abkhazia Participation: Not Today, But Soon -------------- -------------- ¶3. (C) Russian PermRep Churkin insisted that officials from South Ossetia and Abkhazia, as parties to the conflict, needed to be invited to participate in any Council meeting on Georgia in order to communicate "the real atmosphere" in the region. Council President Grauls proposed the Council take up the participation requests of the de facto officials of South Ossetia and Abkhazia "at a later time and come up with a formula for that purpose in the context of the French-brokered six point ceasefire agreement." ¶4. (C) Churkin objected, arguing that South Ossetians and Abkhaz had an even stronger case to address the Council then the Kosovars, whom Russia had allowed to speak in recent months. He said the Council had been putting off their request to speak for years and informed members that South Ossetian and Abkhaz representatives had already applied for visas in Moscow. ¶5. (C) UK Permrep Sawers said he did not rule out participation of South Ossetian and Abkhazian officials at the appropriate time in the future but insisted that, if the Council said yes now, it would send a signal of recognition that it should not send. ¶6. (C) Ambassador Wolff went a step further. He agreed that this was a particularly bad time to consider South Ossetian and Abkhazian participation because the political message conveyed would legitimize recognitions the Council should reject. He pointed out that the Council receives many requests to participate in Council meetings from many groups under Rule 39 of the provisional rules and does not grant them all or treat them all equally. Many times in the past, he said, the Council has rejected requests from separatist movements to be heard. He said working methods are only a tool for the Council to use to maintain peace and security and the Council must consider the appropriateness and timing of all requests on their individual merits. (Note: Churkin later on suggested that the U.S. was trying to "intimidate Security Council members with references to separatists coming to the Council.") ¶7. (C) Costa Rican PermRep Urbina agreed that Russia's military action on Georgian territory and recognition of the independence of the two entities meant that this was not the right moment for the Council to invite them. Urbina said Costa Rica wanted to hear from them, but "at the right time." France and Croatia made similar comments. PANAMA PermRep Arias said his government would make a decision at a later date about whether to allow South Ossetian and Abkhaz participation but, in principle, the Council should be prepared to listen to anyone who can contribute to the Council's business. USUN NEW Y 00000801 002 OF 002 ¶8. (C) South African PermRep Kumalo strongly supported Churkin, saying the Council cannot continue to deny the South Ossetians and Abkhaz the right to be heard. Burkina Faso Permrep Kafando said the Council must in the near future hear from the representatives of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The modalities for that interaction, he said, could be determined later. ¶9. (C) Belgian PermRep Grauls said, in his national capacity, that Belgium was not opposed to the Council addressing the issue of South Ossetian and Abkhazian participation at a later date. Italian PermRep Terzi was less critical generally of Russian actions than all other European members of the Council and said Italy supported hearing from South Ossetian and Abkhaz representatives in the future. China, Vietnam and Libya remained silent during the discussion. ¶10. (C) Recognizing that he lacked the required nine votes to force participation of the South Ossetians and Abkhaz, Churkin urged Grauls to tell the press following the meeting that the Council had agreed to allow Abkhaz and South Ossetian appearance at a Council session at a later date. Grauls agreed that most members had expressed this opinion during the session, but the U.S., France, and the U.K. pushed back, arguing that such a statement would itself signal an undermining of the Council's support for the territorial integrity of Georgia. After some debate about what the actual consensus of the Council was, Grauls agreed to tell the press that the Council president "heard no objection against considering with an open mind the request by South Ossetia and Abkhazia to be heard by the Council at an opportune moment and under a formula to be decided. The requests remain on the table. (He) did not note there is now support to respond positively to the request in the present circumstances." ¶11. (C) Comment. Even though the Council rejected the Russian request for representatives of South Ossetia and Abkhazia to participate in the August 28 Council meeting, it was clear that there continues to be support, including among all Europeans, to hear them in a future session. Russia will seek to use such an appearance to legitimize their role as protectors. We will continue to argue to Members that we should not let Russia use procedural tactics to confer recognition on these regions. We should, though, make use of the temporary spike in opposition to the participation of the separatists consequent to Russia's recognitions to devise a palatable format. Georgian PermRep Alasania has made clear to USUN in recent days that he fully understands this dynamic and accordingly would accept an informal "Arria-style" meeting for the South Ossetians and Abkhaz, perhaps to include representatives of the "governments in exile," especially if such a session might forestall participation by the separatists in a formal Council meeting. We should be using this hiatus to create a meeting context and format that allows us to keep the focus on Russia's illegal occupation of parts of Georgia and on the continuing inability of Georgia's internally displaced persons to return to their homes. End Comment. Khalilzad