GOR OPEN TO NRC STRUCTURAL REFORM, BUT NOT NOW

C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 002900 SIPDIS STATE FOR EUR/RPM E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/26/2019 TAGS: PREL PGOV PINR MARR NATO RS SUBJECT: GOR OPEN TO NRC STRUCTURAL REFORM, BUT NOT NOW REF: A. STATE 118921 ¶B. NATO 526 ¶C. MOSCOW 2878 Classified By: Ambassador John Beyrle for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). SUMMARY AND COMMENT -------------- ¶1. (C) DFM Grushko confirmed Russia sees no urgency in completing the NRC "Way Forward" document prior to the NATO ministerial. He claimed this move should not be interpreted as a lack of interest in the NRC, but reflective of Russia's desire to "put substance first" before taking decisions on structural reforms of the NRC. Grushko also referred obliquely to internal bureaucratic reasons the MFA is reluctant to alter the NRC structure. The middle levels of the GOR's foreign policy apparatus are focused on advancing Medvedev's "European Security Treaty," which is intended, inter alia, to limit further NATO expansion. Until the GOR can assess the prospects for achieving this goal, NRC reform is likely to remain on the back burner. End summary and comment. "WAY FORWARD" TO THE BACK BURNER -------------- ¶2. (C) Ambassador raised reftel points with Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko during a meeting on November 26, noting that Russia's decision to withdraw from work on the "Way Forward" document raises questions about Russia's interest in advancing the work of the NRC. Grushko confirmed that Russia is not interested in completing the NRC "Way Forward" document prior to the ministerial, though he professed Russia's continued commitment to the NRC and openness to structural reform in the future. For the ministerial, Grushko said Russia favors completing the 2010 NRC Work Plan and affirming the NRC's determination to fulfill the tasking on Joint Security Challenges for the 21st Century. ¶3. (C) Grushko floated a variety of arguments for shelving the "Way Forward," noting the document was conceived as a "bridge" to overcome the August 2008 crisis. Since the NRC has been renewed, he offered, there is less need for this document. Grushko repeatedly stressed the GOR's strong opposition to jettisoning existing committees from the NRC; even if some groups are currently dormant, there is no harm leaving them in existence and reviving them at a later stage. He also alluded to internal GOR bureaucratic regulations, implying that the Finance Ministry links its budgetary allocations for the NRC to the number of committees, hence the MFA would be disadvantaged by the proposed changes (later in the conversation, he deemphasized this line of argument). SUBSTANCE BEFORE STRUCTURE -------------- ¶4. (C) Asked whether Russia favored structural reform of the NRC, Grushko said Russia supports making changes using the "Way Forward" document, but "we're not in a rush to finish it before the ministerial." He said Russia is puzzled that this subject has become so sensitive since it is really a technical document that does not add real substance to the 2010 Work Plan. He mused that he would have difficulty explaining the significance of this document to his minister. The Ambassador said the Allies were disturbed by this abrupt change in attitude because the NRC had been working on the document for six months and it was seen as part of the process of restoring mutual trust and renewing cooperation that had been suspended in 2008. ¶5. (C) Grushko reiterated Russia's interest in enhancing cooperation through the NRC, such as transit support for operations in Afghanistan, including reviewing the possibility of using Russian military assets. But, he said, "we want substance first" so it is better to focus on the work plan and on the tasking to study 21st century security challenges. Beyrle