READOUT OF 1540 EXPERTS MEETING IN BERLIN

UNCLAS BERLIN 001412 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KNNP MNUC PARM PGOV PREL GM SUBJECT: READOUT OF 1540 EXPERTS MEETING IN BERLIN ¶1. (U) Summary. UNSCR 1540 implementation experts from the G8 met in Berlin from October 22-23, 2009 at the invitation of the German Foreign Office. All participants felt this was a useful and successful undertaking. The purpose of the meeting was to exchange views on the status of 1540 implementation, share information about their ongoing and planned activities supporting 1540 implementation, and generate ideas for the way ahead and a G8 response to the 1540 Committee,s letter to the G8 of August 14, 2008. The meeting was not intended to make formal decisions or recommendations. See para 7 for way ahead ideas. End summary. -------------- General Background on Outcomes -------------- ¶2. (U) Participants noted that while there have been some signs of progress in 1540 implementation (such as more states adopting legislation with regard to various aspects of the resolution) there still are considerable gaps in implementation and that the quality of reporting to the 1540 Committee is highly variable. They also noted that even though states may adopt legislation, it may not always be followed with effective implementation. Key areas noted: -- Outreach and assistance projects have helped to raise awareness of 1540 obligations and promote the implementation of some of its key substantive obligations. Over time, projects should move towards detailed implementation. There was general agreement that the 1540 Committee has focused primarily on export controls and border controls to date, and that attention is needed on all areas involving obligations imposed by UNSCR 1540 on Member States. These areas include, among others, border controls, proliferation financing, effective measures to account for and secure WMD-related items in production, use, storage or transport, and effective physical protection measures. This effort will require stronger, ongoing regional and bilateral efforts, engagement of officials from across a range of government departments responsible for 1540-related obligations (e.g. foreign affairs, customs, and transportation),and tailored activities such as country-visits by experts. -- Participants discussed the prominent role of the 1540 Committee in implementation, and the support of the UNODA for several outreach events. The limited capacity of these bodies -- for instance, the Committee has only eight experts and an annual budget of less than US $2 million -- was noted. The Committee performs an important clearing-house function for offers of and requests for assistance. Participants observed that coordination in this mechanism could be improved, entailing more timely processing of assistance offers and requests, and in the future perhaps active match-making between the two. -- Attendees agreed that the G8 can be more effective in advancing 1540 implementation than issuing an annual demarche to non-reporting states. To achieve this objective, they surveyed a range of options for sustainable action on the national level, with regional organizations and international organizations, possibly including NGOs, and among the G8. -------------- Options For Future Consideration -------------- ¶3. (U) The following items were raised as potential areas for further consideration. Consistent with the G8,s emphasis on consensus, no state was bound to support or participate in the following items. The German MFA indicated that it would provide these ideas informally to the Nonproliferation Director,s Group (NPDG). ¶4. (U) Tools -- Adjust strategy of demarching non-reporting states. This could include demarching reporting states with regional influence and/or regional organizations that may be able to encourage non-reporting neighbors and members to change their behavior. -- Update information on opportunities for direct assistance, assistance through international organizations, and points of contact for the 1540 Committee website, and engage the 1540 Committee to ensure that these updates are posted promptly. -- Consult internally on possible development of lists of 1540 implementation experts who could be drawn upon to provide capacity-building information to states which request it. The modalities of these requests would still require discussion, and the role of national points of contact in facilitating assistance requests should be respected. -- Agree on procedures for providing information on 1540 assistance activities to other G8 members to review overlap and identify potential areas of coordination and specialization, and then consult informally with the 1540 Committee and its experts. -- Review opportunities to prepare summary action plans to demonstrate G8 leadership and engage the G20. Such leadership could help to catalyze other states to also file these reports, which would assist them in identifying their capacity-building requirements. ¶5. (U) Funding -- Following UNSCR 1887 and acknowledging the capacity limitations of the 1540 Committee, continue to explore options for sustainable funding for 1540 capacity-building. These options could include a new 1540 voluntary fund, the use of existing UN-based funding mechanisms, and the Global Partnership Program. ¶6. (U) Engagement -- Prepare a reply under the G8 Presidency to the 1540 Committee Chair,s letter of August 14, 2008, outlining the G8,s responses to the 1540 Committee,s specific items for consideration (incorporating capacity-building to enhance implementation of the resolution in its own discussions and activities; information from G8 member states on their technical assistance programs; promoting states, reporting; summary action plans; working with relevant regional international and regional organizations to promote 1540 implementation; and information on 1540-related training events or workshops that G8 member-states are organizing). -- Hold a follow-up meeting of the G8,s 1540 implementation experts in the first quarter of 2010 to review progress. -- Approach the 1540 Committee regarding a potential meeting with the larger community of 1540 partners to discuss respective planned projects and coordination issues. -- Hold a meeting between the 2010 G8 Presidency and the 1540 Committee Chair to discuss the G8,s contribution to 1540 implementation and opportunities for further work together, and/or invite the Chair to a NPDG meeting after the completion of the Comprehensive Review report. -------------- Way Ahead -------------- ¶7. (U) We asked Germany and Canada to support the summary as a first-step in an informal process to gain good ideas and not to haggle over wording in an outcome document. Canada particularly noted its frustration with the NPDG group meeting conducting too many drafting sessions. We underscored our support and that this was an expert-level brainstorming and not redefining 1540. Canada helped considerably to set agenda in tandem with Italy as a smooth transition between Presidencies. Canada wants to work hard on UNSCR 1540 among other items in its Presidency. Japan thought US-Japan export control outreach coordination was quite good and Deputy Director Church encouraged improvement of information-sharing and seeking to coordinate as early as possible, ideally during the planning process. UK, France, and EU Council reps discussed separately the future of funding and we agreed that there needed to be a small group meeting to further refine a joint strategy -- before the EU issues its next joint action on UNSCR 1540. Among all the issues discussed the immediate three priorities were: -- To endorse a follow-on meeting to coincide before or after the March NPDG -- to turn this first effort into building on the ideas outlined above and to put them into some practical application before the next G8 Summit. -- Support G8 Presidency communicating with 1540 Committee on behalf of G8, and to share a summary with the Committee. -- Last, Russian participation was one of listening per admitted instructions from Moscow by the attendee. However, we noted to him that we are comfortable with all the ideas proposed and view them as consistent with the UNSCR 1540 Program of Work, UNSCR 1887, and the letter from the Committee to the G8 (all which Russia approved by consensus). ¶8. (U) This cable was cleared with the 1540 Coordinator, Thomas Wuchte. MURPHY