START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA (SFO-GVA-VI):

S E C R E T GENEVA 000964

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: 11/04/2019
TAGS: KACT MARR PARM PREL RS US START
SUBJECT: START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA (SFO-GVA-VI):
(U) CONVERSION OR ELIMINATION WORKING GROUP MEETING/LUNCH,
OCTOBER 27, 2009

REF: A. GENEVA 0856 (SFO-GVA-V-044)

B. GENEVA 0774 (SFO-GVA-V-007)

C. GENEVA 0951 (SFO-GVA-VI-024)

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


1. (U) This is SFO-GVA-VI-031.


2. (U) Meeting Date: October 27, 2009
Time: 11:30 A.M. - 1:45 P.M.
Place: U.S. Mission, Geneva

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


3. (S) During the October 27 meeting of the Conversion or
Elimination (CorE) Working Group, the Russian side provided
and reviewed, in detail, a revised Russian proposal for the
draft Treaty Article VII, on CorE. It also provided and
reviewed a revised version of its proposed Annex Section III,
Procedures for Conversion or Elimination. The U.S. side
provided and presented a revised U.S. proposal for General
Provisions for Section III, responding to an earlier proposal
by the Russian side to economize text that appeared
repeatedly throughout the CorE Section. The presentations
continued to show similarities between the Russian and U.S.
texts. A fundamental difference remained concerning mobile
ICBMs, launch canisters for mobile ICBMs and mobile launchers
of ICBMs. The Russian side strenuously objected to the U.S.
requirement to observe the elimination process for mobile
ICBMs and their launchers. The Russian side opined that this
requirement was expensive and unnecessary, and risked
rejection by the Russian parliament.


4. (S) SUBJECT SUMMARY: A Continued Push to Reduce CorE
Text; U.S. View of General Provisions; and, Continued Russian
Sensitivities Concerning Mobile Missiles and Their Launchers.

--------------
A CONTINUED PUSH
TO REDUCE CORE TEXT
--------------


5. (S) Colonel Ryzhkov began the third meeting of the CorE
Working Group for this session with a presentation of revised
Russian-proposed texts for Treaty Article VII and Section III
of the Annex. He commented that both sides were working to
place general CorE provisions at the beginning of Section
III. He emphasized that the Russian and U.S. approaches were
similar, with certain exceptions.


6. (S) Ryzhkov first reviewed the similarities and
differences between the original U.S.- and Russian-proposed
texts of Article VII (REFS A and B). He highlighted four
points where the Russians disagreed with the U.S. approach or
had decided to change their own position:

-- In the first paragraph, on discussion of general CorE
procedures, the United States referred to fixed structures
for mobile launchers. Russia proposed to refer to fixed
structures in the facility elimination subsection of its


Annex.

-- Russia's paragraph 2 of Article VII was like the U.S.
paragraphs 3 and 4. These paragraphs described the period
during which strategic offensive arms remained subject to the
treaty--they dealt with accountability. Russia proposed
moving the provisions on when items were removed from
accountability Article VII to Article III of the treaty, so
that all provisions relating to accountability would be
together. As an aside, Ryzhkov also commented that Russia
had failed to mention how Russia planned to treat ground
trainers. He said that Russia agreed with the United States,
that is, such items would not be subject to the treaty.

-- Russian paragraph 3 of Article VII, provisions
pertaining to use of ICBMs or SLBMs to place a payload in
space or the upper atmosphere, was not in the U.S. text.
Russia believed this provision should be moved into Article V
of the treaty, because it was a prohibition. (Begin comment:
On delivering a weapon into space. End comment.)

-- The U.S. and Russian paragraph 4 of Article VII
specified where CorE could be carried out. Russia wanted the
flexibility to conduct CorE at any facility, not just at CorE
facilities.


7. (S) Ryzhkov related that the Russian Delegation had
decided Article VII could be reduced down to two paragraphs.


8. (S) Begin text (Russian-proposed text of Article VII,
provided October 27, 2009):

Official Translation

October 27, 2009

Article VII


1. Conversion or elimination of strategic offensive arms, as
well as the facilities where they are located, shall be
carried out pursuant to this Article and in accordance with
the procedures provided for in Section III of the Annex to
this Treaty.


2. Verification of the completion by the Parties of the
conversion or elimination procedures for strategic offensive
arms and the facilities where they are located shall be
carried out:

a) by national technical means of verification;

b) by provision of notifications;

c) by inspections, which may be carried out by the
inspecting Party upon the completion of conversion or
elimination procedures.

End text.


9. (S) Ryzhkov noted one difference in the U.S. and Russian
views; Russia viewed the exchange of notifications to be one
method of verification, in the broad sense. In certain
situations of removal from accountability, such as accidental


loss, e.g., a submarine sank, a notification was the only
procedure existing. The Russian Federation also strongly
objected to inspections conducted during elimination
procedures. They were not consistent with the goal of making
CorE simpler and less costly, and were more than what was
necessary. They probably would not be accepted by the
Russian parliament. Ryzhkov then presented Russia's revised
text for Article VII to Elliott in Russian.


10. (S) Ryzhkov reviewed his "General Provisions" chapeau
from the Russian proposal for "Section III Conversion or
Elimination Procedures." Ryzhkov stated that the General
Provisions section captured provisions and notifications that
were repeated throughout the various sections of both U.S.
and Russian texts.

Begin text:

Official Translation

Document of the Russian side
October 27, 2009

Draft

Section III
Conversion or Elimination Procedures

Pursuant to and in implementation of this Treaty, the
Parties hereby agree upon procedures governing the conversion
or elimination of the strategic offensive arms limited by
this Treaty, as well as facilities at which they are located.


I. General Provisions


1. Notifications, regarding the conversion or elimination of
strategic offensive arms limited by this treaty, shall be
sent in accordance with Section IV, subsection IV of the
Annex to this Treaty.


2. Conversion or elimination of strategic offensive arms
limited by this Treaty shall be carried out at a location,
chosen by the Party conducting the elimination or conversion.


3. Conversion of strategic offensive arms limited by this
Treaty shall be carried out in such a manner so as to
preclude their use for their original purpose. As part of
this conversion, the converted item must have either external
or functional differences from the item prior to its
conversion. The converting Party shall notify the other
Party about these differences. The elimination of strategic
offensive arms limited by this Treaty and of facilities must
be conducted in such a manner so as to render them inoperable
and preclude their use for their original purpose. The
procedures, which shall be used for conversion or elimination
of strategic offensive arms limited by this Treaty and
facilities, must achieve the goals set forth in this
paragraph.


4. If a Party conducts conversion or elimination of
strategic offensive arms limited by this Treaty using
procedures which it developed, then the Party shall notify
the other Party about these procedures in accordance with


section IV, subsection IV, paragraph (X) of the Annex to
this Treaty. If, in the opinion of the other Party, the
procedures developed by the Party conducting the conversion
or elimination do not achieve the goals set forth in
paragraph 3 of this subsection, those procedures shall be
discussed within the framework of the BCC. In such a case,
the Party, conducting the conversion or elimination, shall
conduct a demonstration of the procedures, which it
developed, within the framework of the BCC. The procedures,
discussed by the Parties within the framework of the BCC,
shall be used thereafter during elimination or conversion of
the same strategic offensive arms limited by this Treaty. In
this case, the Party, which received notification from the
Party conducting the conversion or elimination about the use
of such discussed procedures, shall not object to their use.


5. After completion of conversion of an item of strategic
offensive arms limited by this Treaty into another item of
strategic offensive arms limited by this Treaty or of an item
of strategic offensive arms limited by this Treaty into an
item other than an item of strategic offensive arms, the
converting Party shall conduct a demonstration in accordance
with paragraph (X) of Article XI of this Treaty.


6. The conversion or elimination of strategic offensive arms
limited by this Treaty, as well as of facilities, may be
verified by an inspection team during inspection activities
in accordance with paragraph (X) of Article XI of this Treaty.

End text.


11. (S) Ryzhkov stated that, since the Russian side had
moved a large amount of text into the General Provisions
section, all other sections had changed. He then provided an
updated version of the Russian text to Mr. Elliott in
Russian. Elliott confirmed that Ryzhkov had provided a
revised Section III, including General Provisions, and a
revised Article VII of the treaty. Elliott noted that he had
been prepared to hand over a joint draft text (JDT) for
Section III, based on the Russian text from Friday, October
23 (REF C),but that it appeared best to translate the new
Russian products, and then create a revised JDT.

--------------
U.S. VIEW OF GENERAL PROVISIONS
--------------


12. (S) Elliott presented the U.S.-proposed text for the
General Provisions section of the CorE Annex.

Begin text:

SFO-VI
U.S.-Proposed Text
October 27, 2009

General Provisions Section of the CorE Annex


1. Conversion or elimination shall be carried out at
declared facilities and shall be subject to verification by
national technical means or by inspection, as applicable.


2. The Party carrying out conversion or elimination shall


provide notification in accordance with subsection XXX of
Section XXX of this Annex.


3. If an inspection is conducted, a report shall be
completed in accordance with paragraph XXX of subsection XXX
of Section XXX of this Annex.


4. Upon completion of elimination, the eliminated item shall
cease to be subject to the limitations of the Treaty.


5. Upon completion of conversion, the converted item may be
used for purposes not inconsistent with the provisions of the
Treaty.

End text.


13. (S) Elliott sought clarification on topics to discuss in
the next working group meeting. Both sides agreed that
General Provisions and Treaty Article VII would be discussed.
Elliott requested that, if time permitted, joint text on the
elimination of facilities be discussed. He noted there
remained confusion as to how Russia treated the CorE of
mobile missiles and mobile launchers.

--------------
CONTINUED RUSSIAN SENSITIVITIES
CONCERNING MOBILE MISILES AND
THEIR LAUNCHERS
--------------


14. (S) Ryzhkov's mood hardened while he lectured the
working group on Russia's opposition to the inspection of
mobile missile eliminations. He repeated Russian opposition
to the inspections, citing cost and logistical burdens. Mr.
Smirnov emphasized that the bottom line was verifying the
elimination of the missiles, not the process of elimination,
and questioned "should we observe the process or confirm the
fact?" Smirnov opined that American submarines posed a much
greater threat than Russian missiles on mobile launchers. At
the end of the mobile missile monologue, Ryzhkov acknowledged
that a decision on mobiles needed to be made at the highest
levels so that the negotiations could move forward. Elliott
agreed. Col Zaitsev launched one final salvo on the cost of
CorE inspections and again stated that the U.S. position on
mobiles was detrimental to the process. Both Ryzhkov and
Elliott agreed that the issue had to be resolved at the
highest level and that, for now, both sides would have to
remain within their respective guidance on the mobile issue.


15. (U) Documents exchanged.

- U.S.:

-- U.S.-proposed Language for General Provisions Section
of the CorE Annex, dated October 27, 2009.

- Russia:

-- Revised version of Russian-proposed Treaty Article VII
Conversion or Elimination, dated October 27, 2009; and

-- Revised version of Russian Section III of the Annex to
the draft Treaty: Procedures For Conversion or Elimination,


dated October 27, 2009.


16. (S) Participants:

U.S.

Mr. Elliott
LCDR Brons
Mr. Brown
Mr. Dwyer
Lt Col Goodman
Mr. Hanchett
Mr. McConnell
Ms. Purcell
LT Sicks
Mr. Strauss
Dr. Hopkins (Int)

RUSSIA

Col Ryzhkov
Mr. Ivanov
Mr. Leontiev
Ms. Melikbekyan
Mr. Smirnov
Col Zaitsev
Ms. Komshilova (Int)


17. (U) Ries sends.
GRIFFITHS