(U) START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA

S E C R E T GENEVA 000904 SIPDIS DEPT FOR T, VC 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: 10/23/2019 TAGS: KACT MARR PARM PREL RS US START SUBJECT: (U) START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA (SFO-GVA-VI): HEADS AND DEPUTY HEADS OF DELEGATION MEETING, OCTOBER 19, 2009 REF: GENEVA 0863 (SFO-GVA-V-040) Classified By: A/S Rose E. Gottemoeller, United States START Negotiator. Reasons: 1.4(b) and (d). ¶1. (U) This is SFO-GVA-VI-001. ¶2. (U) Meeting Date: October 19, 2009 Time: 10:00 - 11:00 A.M. Place: U.S. Mission, Geneva Participants: U.S. RUSSIA A/S Gottemoeller Amb Antonov Amb Ries Mr. Koshelev Dr. Warner Gen Orlov Mr. Vogel (Notetaker) Ms. Komshilova (Int) ¶3. (S) On Monday, October 19, 2009 at 10:00 A.M., a coffee took place at the U.S. Mission prior to the start of the first plenary meeting of the session. Participants were Assistant Secretary Gottemoeller, Ambassador Ries, and Dr. Warner on the U.S. side, and Ambassador Antonov, Mr. Koshelev, and Gen Orlov on the Russian side. The sides discussed the work plan for the session, and established that an Ad-Hoc Working Group would meet periodically to address counting rules, aggregate warhead and launcher limits, and other key issues. ¶4. (U) SUBJECT SUMMARY: U.S.-proposed Work Schedule; Ad-Hoc Working Group on Counting Rules; Revisiting Missile Defense; Return to the Schedule; and Russia on Other START Parties' Security. -------------- U.S.-proposed Work Schedule -------------- ¶5. (S) A/S Gottemoeller opened the discussion by handing over a U.S.-proposed schedule for the current week's work for Antonov's review and comment. She began to highlight the proposed schedule when Antonov asked whether the U.S. side would present the briefing requested during the previous round in Geneva and promised in Moscow. (Begin comment: The Russians had requested a briefing on U.S. plans for conventionally-armed ICBMs and SLBMs. End comment.) Gottemoeller said that a briefing to the Russian side would take place at Thursday's plenary meeting, as promised. She walked through the U.S.-proposed schedule and highlighted that the signing ceremony of the documents that contained the principles and procedures for completion of continuous monitoring activity at Votkinsk would take place on Tuesday. The sides also agreed to informally discuss Russian concerns with the U.S. Missile Defense (MD) Program. -------------- Ad-Hoc Working Group on Counting Rules -------------- ¶6. (S) Gottemoeller said that she wanted to establish an ad-hoc working group to work on important issues outside the established working group channels. She proposed that the ad-hoc group meet to address counting rules, aggregate warhead and launcher limits, and other key issues. She suggested that there should be a "five plus five" format for attendees and noted that the U.S. Delegation at the meetings would include Ries, Warner, Mr. Elliott, Mr. Trout, and Mr. Siemon. ¶7. (S) Ambassador Antonov asked some clarifying questions on the proposed schedule which included questions on meeting details for the new Ad-Hoc Group and the existing working groups. Ries replied that the Treaty Text and Definitions Working Group (TTDWG) would try to resolve issues on Treaty Article XIII and the Bilateral Consultative Commission Protocol and, if time permitted, work treaty prohibition issues under Article V. Ries also proposed that the TTDWG continue its work on terms and definitions. ¶8. (S) Antonov clarified that the TTDWG would compare U.S. and Russian texts for compatibility. He said that ADM Kuznetsov would head the Russian side for work on definitions. Antonov said that, in order to make the best use of the delegations time, the sides' military experts should review Article V issues. ¶9. (S) Koshelev asked when a discussion on the issue of non-transfer of strategic offensive arms to third States would occur. Ries replied that Koshelev referred to Article XIV in the U.S.-proposed text, which could be addressed along with the other final articles. She said that the TTDWG should begin work on the substantive articles this week where they touched on issues that had been previously addressed either in the Moscow discussions or in the protocol working groups. ¶10. (S) Gottemoeller said that a great deal of progress had been made in the Inspection Protocol Working Group (IPWG) and Conversion or Elimination (CorE) and Notifications Working Groups. She said that the Russian side needed to work on Article V (Prohibitions) to reinsert START language back into the draft text. Antonov agreed to discuss this issue during a heads of delegation (HOD) meeting later in the week. -------------- Revisiting Missile Defense -------------- ¶11. (S) Moving on to the issue of MD, Antonov asked Warner whether the U.S. side understood Russia's concerns. Warner stated that the U.S. side understood the Russian side's concerns better. He said that Russia was concerned that qualitative and quantitative growth in U.S. MD could be grounds for Russian withdrawal from the Treaty. ¶12. (S) Antonov said the Parties needed to address whether or not to include additional language on MD in the START Follow-on Treaty. He asked that the sides address this and other Russian concerns during this session. Antonov offered to discuss MD issues in an informal way. Gottemoeller asked for Antonov's views on Lt Gen O'Riley's Moscow briefing on MD. Antonov agreed to provide his views on the matter on the margins of this session. Antonov said that his primary concerns were focused on Phase 4 of the U.S. ten-year plan for MD in Europe. -------------- Return to the Schedule -------------- ¶13. (S) Regarding the TTDWG, Antonov said he could discuss the issue of reinserting prohibitions into Article V drawn from START, but not formulate new definitions. He agreed that Gottemoeller's approach to addressing the definitions and terms in an iterative manner, correlating the examination of key terms with the appropriate articles in the treaty and not reviewing the entire list of definitions at one time was a more efficient way to proceed. Antonov said that Kuznetsov would lead the work on definitions for the Russian side. ¶14. (S) Addressing Koshelev's question on how to resolve the Parties' differences regarding the Preamble, Gottemoeller said the U.S. side would provide a revised version this week. ¶15. (S) Warner offered a path to proceed regarding review of Article XI which addresses inspection activities. He has provided a list of inspection activities for the Russian side to review. Warner noted that Col I'lin previously said that he only wanted to focus on the Inspection Protocol (IP),but he has a relevant part in the treaty text too. He noted that the IPWG and TTDWG should work together in reaching agreement on Article XI. ¶16. (S) Gottemoeller pointed out that the main idea is to have a more dynamic interrelationship between working groups; doing so would allow good momentum through the week. ¶17. (S) Warner highlighted the proposed activity for the IPWG, which included separating the issues that should go into the treaty and protocol from those that would go into the so-called "third tier" annexes. He wanted the Parties to agree on an approach as soon as possible and apply that approach during the remainder of the session. ¶18. (S) Antonov said that the work would be slightly delayed because some Russian delegation members, including Col I'lin, Russian co-chair of the IPWG, had not arrived in Geneva yet. He lamented that he had some delegation problems to wade through. -------------- Russia on other START Parties' Security -------------- ¶19. (S) Antonov said he wanted to work on the Joint Statement regarding Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus, to reinsert language that had previously been removed by the U.S. side. He wanted to send a signal to the other START Parties that removing nuclear weapons from their territories did not decrease their security. He noted that Ukraine, in particular, was sensitive on this matter. Gottemoeller said that the U.S. side could work with the Russian side on this issue. ¶20. (S) On the issue of convening an ad-hoc group on aggregate limits, Antonov said that a substantial number of Russian Delegation members would want to attend. Gottemoeller suggested that the Parties experiment with the five plus five format and have a plenary meeting to follow up on the issues on Thursday (October 22). ¶21. (S) Gottemoeller ended the meeting after a general discussion to adjust the U.S.-proposed work schedule. She noted that she was looking forward to a lot of progress this session. ¶22. (S) Ries remained behind to review details of the proposed TTDWG work schedule with Koshelev while the others departed to attend a plenary meeting. She said the U.S. side wanted to discuss the logic behind the U.S. proposal for three months versus six months to terminate the treaty which was contained in Treaty Article XV. She also said that the U.S. side was concerned about the time remaining to negotiate the treaty; but noted that the IPWG and the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Working Group had accomplished a lot of work which could serve as the basis for working on the relevant treaty articles. She noted that telemetry and non-interference with national technical means were complicated issues that could wait until later to be addressed. She said that, all in all, there were about nine substantive issues and that four or five could be discussed in the next two weeks. She suggested that work on terms and definitions could begin by starting on the approximately 30 definitions that the sides have essentially the same text. ¶23. (U) Documents exchanged. - U.S.: -- U.S.-proposed work schedule; and -- U.S.-proposed IPWG activity list. ¶24. (U) Gottemoeller sends. GRIFFITHS