GICNT: AUSTRALIAN QUERIES ON OUTREACH, PLENARY AND

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 CANBERRA 000503 SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR ISN/WMDT E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PARM PTER MNUC KNNP PREL AS SUBJECT: GICNT: AUSTRALIAN QUERIES ON OUTREACH, PLENARY AND GIIP ACCESS REF: A. CANBERRA 54399 ¶B. STATE 35549 ¶1. (U) This is an action request for ISN/WMDT -- please see para 8 below. ¶2. (SBU) James Nachipo, Director for Counter-Terrorism Coordination, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), invited poloff to DFAT on May 29 to convey some questions and seek assistance on GICNT issues. Mohan Mathews, Executive Officer and Action Officer for the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism (GICNT),joined the meeting. REGIONAL OUTREACH -------------- ¶3. (SBU) Nachipo and Mathews said joint outreach efforts so far by Australia, United States, Japan and Russia to promote GICNT had met with good receptivity in Singapore and Vietnam. Thailand had reacted more cautiously, indicating it wanted to see greater involvement in ASEAN in GICNT. Thailand also had requested specific additional information as follows: -- a) a list of the points of contacts in countries that have endorsed the GICNT, in order to ascertain the type of agencies nominated and relevant level of representation; -- b) clarification of the reporting requirements for members under the Terms of Reference (TOR) in relation to domestic agency reporting on progress of implementation of the TOR. In particular, Thailand wanted to know whether the requirement was for formal or informal reporting; what type of reporting details were required; to whom or to which body within GICNT were reports to be submitted; and the frequency and format of such reports; and -- c) Further details regarding the role and responsibilities of the Assessments and Implementation Group (AIG). ¶4. (SBU) Noting the Thai requests may already have been submitted to Washington by U.S. Embassy Bangkok rep, Nachipo requested a copy of the Department's response to the questions. The GOA was particularly interested in the response to the last question about role of the AIG, to which Australia also belonged. He noted the AIG had not met in some time, with membership questions apparently being decided by the co-chairs. While Australia had no problems with the co-chairs taking such decisions, there was a continuing question about the status and role of the AIG. Nachipo asked whether the co-chairs planned to address this issue at the Plenary, in particular, if the AIG is now defunct, would the co-chairs suggest updating or amending the TOR? ¶5. (SBU) He also asked for help from the U.S. Embassy in Manila to assist in coordinating the fourth and last outreach meeting with Philippine officials as a matter of urgency, preferably before the Plenary, as Canberra had heard nothing from the other partners or from the Philippine officials. PLENARY -------------- ¶5. (U) Mathews requested the names of the U.S. and Russian co-chairs for the Plenary. Both Nachipo and Mathews plan to attend the Plenary, but will be unable to attend all of the four concurrent working groups sessions. Mathews said the GOA likely would be represented at the Exercise Planning Group, the Information Portal Working Group and the Public-Private Sector Working Group only. ¶6. (U) He also wondered if the co-chairs planned to make a Q6. (U) He also wondered if the co-chairs planned to make a brief report on the regional outreach results in Southeast Asia. Australia would be prepared to say a few words about the outreach, if the co-chairs wished. Mathews noted that the parties conducting the Southeast Asian outreach sessions had devoted substantial work on the GICNT talking points, and that the co-chairs may wish to recommend the points for possible use as a template in other outreach efforts, for example in South America. NGO ACCESS TO THE GLOBAL INITIATIVE PORTAL -------------- ¶7. (SBU) Mathews reccalled that a question had arisen during Australia's recent Discussion Exercise "Blue Glow" about CANBERRA 00000503 002 OF 002 whether CT-related researchers, institutions or other NGO representatives might be accorded access to the Global Initiative Information Portal. He stressed that Australia was not pushing this issue and had taken no position on the question, but supposed it might arise at the Plenary or in the GIIP working group meeting. He asked if the U.S. had a view. Nachipo and Mathews outlined some of the subsidiary issues that would need to be addressed if access was accorded to those outside participating governments, including devising a means of nominating, vetting and providing security clearances; systems for tracking and accountability; qualifications and conditions of non-governmental users; and the need for an oversight tier within GICNT to manage NGO access. Nachipo offered his personal view that it might be too complicated an issue to address in the near term. ¶8. (U) ACTION REQUESTED: Embassy would appreciate ISN/WMDT's assistance in furnishing answers to the above questions that we can share with our Australian colleagues, and in seeking Embassy Manila's assistance on organizing an outreach meeting with Philippine government officials. CLUNE