JCIC-XXXIV: (U) U.S.-UKRAINIAN BILATERAL MEETING

1. (U) This is JCIC-XXXIV-006.



2. (U) Meeting Date: June 9, 2009
Time: 3:30 - 4:00 P.M.
Place: U.S. Mission, Geneva

U.S. Ukraine

Mr. Taylor Mr. Nykonenko



--------------------------


UKRAINE ADAMANT ABOUT
BEING INCLUDED IN START
FOLLOW-ON ARRANGEMENT


--------------------------





3. (S) At a bilateral meeting held at the U.S. Mission on
June 9, 2009, the Ukrainian Head of Delegation Nykonenko met
with U.S. Head of Delegation Taylor, at Nykonenko's request,
to express Ukraine's serious concerns with regard to the U.S.
and Russia bilateral negotiations of the START Follow-on
Treaty. Nykonenko stated that it was very important that
Ukraine play a role in the follow-on negotiations and
suggested that he saw the possibility that Ukraine could be
an ad-hoc partner in the new treaty. Maybe Ukraine could
play the role of an independent party and be invited to be
involved in verification as a third party. This issue had
become very important from a domestic point of view.



4. (S) Nykonenko recalled that all of Ukraine's foreign
policy was created on the basis of a peaceful arrangement
with the United States and the Russian Federation with the
signing of the Lisbon Protocol and entry into force of the
START Treaty. Ukraine acknowledged that the United States
had helped Ukraine in many ways. However, it now seemed that
the United States was saying thank you very much, good-bye,
as Nykonenko motioned by wiping his hands. Ukraine had made
very large contributions to nuclear disarmament and had
followed U.S. advice. Now, where was Ukraine? It was
outside the process and now many politicians were using the
situation for their own interest. Ukraine needed something
for the expiration of the Treaty.



5. (S) Nykonenko continued by saying that he was concerned
that there was not much time before the START Treaty expired
and that there was the likelihood of a legal void. With this
void, there were concerns over National Security from
Ukraine's view. Nykonenko pointed out that Ukraine was in a
very unique situation as it was not a member of any military
bloc. In fact, it was the largest country outside any
military bloc. Belarus and Kazakhstan were both members of
the Tashkent Security Bloc. All of Ukraine's neighbors to
the west were members of NATO. With the expiration of START,
Ukraine was concerned that there would no longer be any
security guarantees. The events of last August should be
enough notice for anyone to see the possibilities, not to
mention Romania, Tuzla, the Black Sea fleet, and the gas
supply issues with Russia. Ukraine did not feel protected by
the Budapest memorandum. It was looking for something
legally binding to provide security assurances.
Relationships with Russian had worsened during the last year.
Russia was a big neighbor and had much influence in the


political arena, especially with the new elections that would
be coming this year. The only mechanism in place was the UN
Security Council and that was valid only if Russia invaded
its territory. There was no such help in the economic and
political spheres.



6. (S) The Ukrainian people were looking for help and needed
an umbrella at least until Ukraine was a member of NATO.
Nykonenko urged the United States to begin talks immediately
to conclude a new multilateral, legally-binding arrangement
of security assurances. Nykonenko closed by saying that he
would be presenting a paper from his government on Wednesday,
June 10, outlining a way ahead and urged Taylor to ensure
that Washington received this information. Nykonenko said
that he hoped to hold meetings with Ms. Anita Friedt, Acting
DAS for State/EUR in the very near future to discuss this
issue further.



7. (S) Taylor responded thanking Nykonenko for the
information saying that he would indeed report the
conversation back to Washington and that he would await the
presentation of Ukraine's position on Wednesday with
interest. Taylor further stated that the United States
recognized the historical and valuable disarmament
contributions made by Ukraine through its accession to the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons
state. Ukraine had indeed been a valued partner in the
implementation of the START Treaty since its entry into
force. As far as security guarantees, the United States
stood behind the assurances it provided in December 1994,
which were further reinforced through UN Security Council
Resolution 984 in 1995. Moreover, these assurances were not
tied to obligations under the START Treaty, nor would they
expire with the expiration of START.



8. (S) Nykonenko thanked Taylor for his time again and urged
him to relay his concerns to Washington.



9. (U) Documents exchanged. None.



10. (U) Taylor sends.
STORELLA