START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA

S E C R E T GENEVA 001240

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) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WORKING
GROUP MEETING, DECEMBER 14, 2009

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


1. (U) This is SFO-GVA-VII-150.


2. (U) Meeting Date: December 15, 2009
Time: 10:00 A.M. - 12:30 P.M.
Place: U.S. Mission, Geneva

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


3. (S) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Working Group
Chairs, Mr. Trout and Gen Orlov, met at the U.S. Mission on
December 15, Orlov and Trout again discussed the nomenclature
for nuclear weapons for heavy bombers. The Russian position
was finally clarified to be "Nuclear Warheads Counted for
Deployed Heavy Bombers." Orlov announced that the Russian
Federation had agreed to the three U.S. categories of heavy
bombers, and had deleted the "non-deployed" categories
related to heavy bombers. Trout agreed, based on a U.S.
non-paper dated December 7, 2009, to include "heavy bombers
equipped for non-nuclear armaments" as a category of data in
the database. End Summary.


4. (U) SUBJECT SUMMARY: Let's Talk Heavy Bombers; and Some
Remaining Issues

--------------
LET'S TALK HEAVY BOMBERS
--------------


5. (S) Orlov started out the meeting by asking to continue
the discussion from the previous day regarding the
nomenclature for nuclear weapons for heavy bombers. This
time, with the help of U.S. lawyer, Mr. Brown, and numerous
references to the START Treaty, the Russian position was
determined to be "nuclear warheads counted for deployed heavy
bombers." Trout again told Orlov that he would take the new
information back to his head of delegation.


6. (S) Orlov announced that the Russian side had agreed to
the U.S. construct regarding heavy bombers. First, he said,
we agree that there are three categories of heavy boQers:
deployed heavy bombers; heavy bombers equipped for
non-nuclear armaments; and test heavy bombers. Additionally,
he stated, the Russian side was dropping all references to
"non-deployed" in relation to heavy bombers as the Russian
side agreed with the U.S. position that all heavy bombers
equipped for nuclear armaments were deployed. Finally, he
stated that the Russian side was deleting the category of
"airbase for heavy bombers equipped for non-nuclear
armaments" as the Russian side understood the United States
would have both nuclear and non-nuclear types of bombers at
some bases.


7. (S) Trout thanked Orlov for such good news but clarified
that the U.S. position was to not list heavy bombers equipped
for non-nuclear armaments in the database. Orlov and Mr.
Pischulov looked at each other in surprise, stating that the
U.S. paper (dated December 7, 2009) regarding heavy bombers,
delivered last week, included this category of heavy bomber.


Orlov commented that the Russian side had been up until
nearly 3:00 a.m. discussing this issue and had based their
decision on this paper.


8. (S) Trout decided to take a break and see if he could
obtain further clarification on this issue. He returned
later and explained that he had discussed this issue with his
head of delegation, and the United States would agree to list
heavy bombers equipped for non-nuclear armaments in the
database. However, Trout asked some clarifying questions
regarding the inclusion of this category, specifically asking
whether the notifications associated with heavy bomber
movement and changes of data in the database would apply to
this category. Orlov deferred, stating that this
notification issue was for the Notification Working Group.
Trout asked that, as the U.S. understood the Agreed Statement
on B-1Bs, after the last bomber had been converted all
numerical data regarding the converted B-1Bs would be deleted
from the database. Orlov replied that no, this was not the
case, but agreed to discuss the matter further with his
delegation, stating that perhaps after the last B-1B was
converted this matter could be brought before the Bilateral
Consultation Commission (BCC) to decide what to do.

--------------
SOME REMAINING ISSUES
--------------


9. (S) Turning to space launch facilities, Orlov asked
whether Trout had accepted the Russian-proposed language for
space launch facilities using "non-deployed ICBMs and SLBMs"
and "non-deployed launchers for ICBMs and SLBMs." Trout
agreed to use the first term, but said he would get back with
Orlov on the use of the Russian-proposed text regarding
launchers.


10. (S) Trout agreed to drop references to throw-weight and
launch weight in Section VII, ICBM and SLBM Technical Data.


11. (S) Orlov agreed to drop some technical data in Section
VIII in the heavy bomber technical section, but not all.
Specifically, he stated that the Russian side had decided to
delete their proposed technical characteristics for heavy
bombers equipped for non-nuclear armaments, but not for heavy
bombers equipped for nuclear armaments.


12. (S) Trout and Orlov agreed to make some changes to
Section X, Other Data, to track some of the decisions and
changes made in the past 2 days.

--------------
CLOSING COMMENTS
--------------


13. (S) Trout asked to have another meeting the next morning
to allow for discussion of any issues that could arise from
the evening's first technical conforming meeting for the
database. Orlov agreed that this was a good idea, and
commented that the group had made great progress.


14. (U) Documents provided: None.


15. (U) Participants:



UNITED STATES

Mr. Trout
Mr. Brown
LT. Lobner
Mr. French (Int)

RUSSIA:

Gen Orlov
Col Pischulov
Ms. Evarovskaya (Int)


16. (U) Gottemoeller sends.
GRIFFITHS