Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09GENEVA1237
2009-12-20 20:30:00
SECRET
Mission Geneva
Cable title:  

START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA

Tags:  KACT MARR PARM PREL RS US START 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0005
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHGV #1237/01 3542030
ZNY SSSSS ZZH
O 202030Z DEC 09
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1041
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/CJCS WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/VCJCS WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHEHNSC/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO IMMEDIATE 6100
RHMFISS/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHMFISS/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUESDT/DTRA-OSES DARMSTADT GE IMMEDIATE
RUENAAA/CNO WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHMFISS/DIRSSP WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
INFO RUEHTA/AMEMBASSY ASTANA PRIORITY 3279
RUEHKV/AMEMBASSY KYIV PRIORITY 2289
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY 7496
S E C R E T GENEVA 001237 

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR T, VCI AND EUR/PRA
DOE FOR NNSA/NA-24
CIA FOR WINPAC
JCS FOR J5/DDGSA
SECDEF FOR OSD(P)/STRATCAP
NAVY FOR CNO-N5JA AND DIRSSP
AIRFORCE FOR HQ USAF/ASX AND ASXP
DTRA FOR OP-OS OP-OSA AND DIRECTOR
NSC FOR LOOK
DIA FOR LEA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/19/2019
TAGS: KACT MARR PARM PREL RS US START
SUBJECT: START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA
(SFO-GVA-VII): (U) JOINT TREATY TEXT AND DEFINITIONS
WORKING GROUPS MEETING, DECEMBER 17, 2009

REF: A. GENEVA XXXX (SFO-GVA-VII-134)

B. GENEVA XXXX (SFO-GVA-VII-155)

Classified By: A/S Rose E. Gottemoeller, United States
START Negotiator. Reasons: 1.4(b) and (d).

S E C R E T GENEVA 001237

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR T, VCI AND EUR/PRA
DOE FOR NNSA/NA-24
CIA FOR WINPAC
JCS FOR J5/DDGSA
SECDEF FOR OSD(P)/STRATCAP
NAVY FOR CNO-N5JA AND DIRSSP
AIRFORCE FOR HQ USAF/ASX AND ASXP
DTRA FOR OP-OS OP-OSA AND DIRECTOR
NSC FOR LOOK
DIA FOR LEA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/19/2019
TAGS: KACT MARR PARM PREL RS US START
SUBJECT: START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA
(SFO-GVA-VII): (U) JOINT TREATY TEXT AND DEFINITIONS
WORKING GROUPS MEETING, DECEMBER 17, 2009

REF: A. GENEVA XXXX (SFO-GVA-VII-134)

B. GENEVA XXXX (SFO-GVA-VII-155)

Classified By: A/S Rose E. Gottemoeller, United States
START Negotiator. Reasons: 1.4(b) and (d).


1. (U) This is SFO-GVA-VII-158.


2. (U) Meeting Date: December 17, 2009
Time: 3:30 P.M. - 5:00 P.M.
Place: U.S. Mission, Geneva

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


3. (S) The Counting Rules and Definitions Sub-groups met in
succession to review new and existing language in Articles
II, III and IV and agreed to send seven terms to the
Conforming Group ("air base," "deployed launcher of ICBMS,"
"deployed launcher of SLBMs," non-deployed ICBM,"
"non-deployed launcher of ICBMs" "non-deployed launcher of
SLBMs," and "non-deployed mobile launcher of ICBMs").


4. (S) SUBJECT SUMMARY: Article II: Warhead Versus
Armaments for Heavy Bombers; Article III: What's the
Attribution Number?; III: When Heavy Bombers Die; Article VII
and XI Clean Up; Definitions Sent to Conforming; and
Additional Discussions.

-------------- --------------
ARTICLE II: WARHEAD VERSUS ARAMAMENTS FOR HEAVY BOMBERS
-------------- --------------


5. (S) Mr. Taylor began the Counting Rules portion of this
meeting of the sub-groups of the Treaty Text and Definitions
Working Group by handing over a U.S. working paper with new
text for paragraph 1(b) of Article II, which read: "((500))1
((1550))2 , for warheads on deployed ICBMs, warheads on
deployed SLBMs, and nuclear warheads counted for deployed
heavy bombers in accordance with Article III." He noted that
the U.S. was largely accepting the Russian delegation's
formulation for "counted for." Adm Kuznetsov pointed out a

difference between this subparagraph and the language in
paragraph 2(b) of Article III, where the term "nuclear
armaments" was used. After a brief discussion, the sides
agreed to drop the last five words of paragraph 2 (b) of the
U.S. proposed Article II, because a reference to Article III
already existed in the paragraph's chapeau. The sides agreed
to send this Article to conforming.

--------------
ARTICEL III: WHAT'S THE ATTRIBUTION NUMBER?
--------------


6. (S) Taylor provided a new version of subparagraph 2 (b)
of Article III, as follows: "For each deployed heavy bomber,
the number of nuclear armaments shall be ((three))1 ((one))2
. ((If there are no nuclear armaments on a deployed heavy
bomber, one warhead shall be counted for each deployed heavy
bomber)) 2." Kuznetsov asserted, as he had in previous
meetings, that the Heads of Delegation had reached agreement
on the number of warheads that would be counted (attributed


to) each deployed heavy bomber; that number, he said, was
one. Taylor repeated that the numbers would remain
bracketed, as no agreement had been reached.

--------------
III: WHEN HEAVY BOMBERS DIE
--------------


7. (S) Taylor provided a U.S. working paper with a sentence
to be added to subparagraph 6 (c) of Article III:

Begin text:

(c) Heavy bombers of a type shall cease to be subject to this
Treaty when the last heavy bomber equipped for nuclear
armaments of that type is either eliminated or converted to a
heavy bomber equipped for non-nuclear armaments in accordance
with Part Three of the Protocol to this Treaty.

End text.


8. (S) Taylor explained that the purpose of this sentence
was similar to the sentence regarding when existing tyes of
ICBMs "die" under the Treaty, which is when they ceased to be
considered existing types. Kuznetsov recognized quickly that
this provision would mean the bombers were no longer subject
to inspections under the treaty. He argued that the treaty
gave the right to inspect converted bombers to make sure they
had not been reconverted back to equipped for nuclear
armaments. Taylor explained that the Agreed Statement on the
B-1B Heavy Bomber would provide the necessary inspection
rights. Kuznetsov said the phrase "subject to the
limitations of the Treaty" should be used instead of "subject
to the treaty" to make clear that the converted bombers would
still be inspectable. The sides agreed to reflect the
Russian position in brackets.


9. (S) The Qdes agreed to send Article III to conforming.
Taylor also handed over a new version of paragraph 3 of
Article IV, to rephrase the limit on non-deployed launchers.
There was no discussion of this language:

Begin text:

((3. Each Party shall limit deployed and non-deployed
launchers of ICBMs and deployed and non-deployed launchers of
SLBMs so that seven years after entry into force of this
Treaty and thereafter, the aggregate number of such launchers
shall not exceed 800.))1

End text.


10. (S) After initial resistance, the Russian delegation
agreed to send this Article to conforming.

--------------
ARTICLE VII AND XI CLEAN UP
--------------


11. (S) The sides quickly reviewed the status of a
conforming issue in Article VII on Conversion or Elimination
about whether the verification activity was "inspections" or
"inspection activities." The Russian delegation confirmed


its brackets nd insistence on "inspections." Moving to
Artice XI on inspections, the U.S. side agreed to drop ts
bracket in the last sentence of paragraph 2 around the phrase
"equipped for nuclear armaments" ince it was redundant of
the term "deployed heav bomber." The sides agreed to send
Article XI t conforming.

--------------
DFINITIONS SENT TO CONFOMING
--------------


12. (S) The following terms were set to the Conforming
Group:

-- The term "air bse" means a facility at which deployed
heavy bomers are based and their operation is supported.
-- The term "deployed launcher of ICBMs" means an IBM
launcher that contains an ICBM and is not a tst launcher, a
training launcher, or a launcher ocated at a space launch
facility.

-- The ter "deployed launcher of SLBMs" means an SLBM
launcher installed on a submarine that has been launched,
that contains an SLBM, and is not used for testing or
training.

-- The term "non-deployed ICBM" means an ICBM not contained
in or on a deployed launcher of ICBMs.

-- The term "non-deployed launcher of ICBMs" means an ICBM
launcher that does not contain a deployed ICBM, or an ICBM
launcher that is used for testing or training, or that is
located at a space launch facility.

-- The term "non-deployed launcher of SLBMs" means an SLBM
launcher that does not contain a deployed SLBM, or an SLBM
launcher that is used for testing or training.

-- The term "non-deployed mobile launcher of ICBMs" means a
mobile launcher of ICBMs that does not contain an ICBM, or a
mobile test launcher, or a mobile launcher of ICBMs located
at a space launch facility.

--------------
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS
--------------


13. (S) Adm Kuznetsov opened the discussion with a new
proposal for the term warhead. The sides discussed the need
for this term and whether or not it should be "warhead" or
"nuclear warhead."


14. (S) The sides continued to discuss using the terms "ICBM
base" and "basing area" in place of "deployment area" and "re
stricted area" but did not reach agreement(Ref A). Mr.
Siemon proposed more specific limitations in the definitions
that would specify a limited area of 125,000 sq km for an
ICBM base and 5 sq km for a basing area.


15. (S) Col Kamenskiy reported back, after reviewing
paragraph 2 of Article IV of the INF Treaty following the
suggestion of the U.S. side (B),that Russia had no concerns
(SFO-GVA-VII): (U) JOINT TREATY TEXT AND DEFINITIONS
WORKING GROUPS MEETING, DECEMBER 17, 2009

about compliance. Taylor and Mr. Fraley explained that the
concern was that if the Russian proposal for the "new type"
definition were to be accepted together with the declaration
of the RS-12M2 as an existing type in Article III, there
could potentially be a INF violation. The U.S. side further
clarified that the purpose of this intervention only was to
be sure that no problems were created with this new treaty.
Kuznetsov said the Russian delegation would continue to study
this issue.


16. (U) Documents Provided:

- UNITED STATES:

--U.S. Working Paper, Article II, paragraph 1(b),dated
December 17, 2009, in English;

--U.S.Working Paper, Article III, paragraph 2(b),dated
December 17, 2009, in English;

--U.S. Working Paper, Article III, paragraph 6(c),
dated December 17, 2009, in English;

--U.S. Working Paper, Article IV, paragraph 3, dated
December 17, 2009, in English.

- RUSSIA:

-- Russian Federation proposal on the term "warhead",
17 December 2009;

-- Russian Federation proposal on the term
"missile-defense interceptor", 17 December 2009; and

-- Russian Federation proposal on the term "test heavy
bomber", 17 December 2009


17. (U) Participants:

UNITED STATES

Mr. Siemon
Mr. Taylor
Mr. Dean
Dr. Dreicer
Dr. Fraley
Ms. Stewart
Mrs. Zdravecky
Ms. Gesse (Int)

RUSSIA

ADM Kuznetsov
Ms. Fuzhenkova
Col Kamenskiy
Ms. Melikbekian
Mr. Pogodin (Int)


18. (U) Gottemoeller sends.
GRIFFITHS