MISSILE TECHNOLOGY CONTROL REGIME (MTCR):

C O N F I D E N T I A L STATE 017183


PARIS FOR POL

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/28/2009
TAGS: MTCRE PARM MNUC KSCA TSPA ETTC

SUBJECT: MISSILE TECHNOLOGY CONTROL REGIME (MTCR):
RESPONDING TO THE CHAIR'S REQUEST FOR VIEWS ON INFORMAL
BRAINSTORMING SESSION (C)

REF: A. STATE 4690

B. 08 STATE 129729

C. STATE 11102

D. 2009 MTCR POC DOC 008

Classified By: isn/mtr director Pam Durham.
Reason: 1.4 (B),(D).


1. (U) This is an action request. Embassies Canberra and
Paris please see paragraph 4.


2. (C/REL MTCR) BACKGROUND: At the 2008 Missile Technology
Control Regime (MTCR) Plenary in Canberra, the MTCR Partners
agreed &to the idea of an informal brainstorming process in
2009, initially with time to be devoted at RPOC, on the
challenges facing the MTCR provided this process did not
interfere with the work of the MTCR or create a need for new
structures or impose additional financial burdens8 (REF B).
Inasmuch as the MTCR is scheduled to hold the 2009 Reinforced
Point of Contact (RPOC) in Paris on April 29-30, 2009, the
Australian MTCR Chair has requested Partner views, by
February 27, on how to manage the informal brainstorming
process(REF D). In particular, the Chair has asked whether
there should be an agenda for the brainstorming session at
the RPOC and whether Partners envision developing papers to
facilitate discussion.


3. (C/REL MTCR) PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: In response to the
Chair,s request, we want to advise both the Australian MTCR
Chair and the French MTCR Point of Contact (POC),which will
host the RPOC, that we do not believe we need a formal agenda
for the brainstorming discussion. The brainstorming session
is intended to be informal and should be a reflection of the
issues individual Partners believe merit discussion. If
Partners have specific topics they would like to raise as
part of the brainstorming process, they should be encouraged
to circulate a short paper well in advance of the RPOC
(ideally by April 1) outlining their ideas and inviting
Partner reaction. This will help stimulate discussion and
also facilitate delegations, preparation for the
brainstorming discussion.

NOTE: We understand informally that some Partners would like
the MTCR Chair to prepare a Chair,s paper for the
brainstorming discussion. The United States would not
support such a proposal as that would be inconsistent with
the Canberra decision. END NOTE.


4. (U) ACTION REQUEST: Drawing on the talking points
provided in paragraph 5 below and the information in
paragraphs 2-3 above, request Embassy Canberra advise the
MTCR Chair (and other appropriate GOA staff) of U.S. views on
the MTCR,s informal brainstorming session. Also request
Embassy Paris advise the MTCR POC of U.S. views. Talking
points may be left as a non-paper. Info addressee posts also
may share talking points with host government officials as
appropriate. Embassies Canberra and Paris should deliver
message to the MTCR Chair and POC on or before February 27,

2009.


5. (C) TALKING POINTS:

U.S. Views on Informal Brainstorming Session at the 2009 RPOC

(C/REL MTCR)

--As agreed at the Canberra Plenary, the United States
supports an informal brainstorming session at the 2009
Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) Reinforced Point of
Contact Meeting (RPOC),provided this effort does not
interfere with the work of the MTCR.

--Consistent with the Canberra agreement, our understanding
is that this brainstorming session will be an informal
discussion that reflects issues that individual Partners
believe merit discussion. Accordingly, we do not believe we
need to establish a formal agenda for this discussion.

--However, if Partners have specific issues they wish to
raise during the RPOC brainstorming session, we would
strongly urge them to circulate a short paper conveying their
ideas to all Partners well in advance of the RPOC, preferably
by April 1, 2009. This will help stimulate discussion and
also facilitate delegations, preparation for the
brainstorming discussion.

--We look forward to coordinating closely with our Partners
as we prepare for the RPOC and to detailed and productive
discussions at the April 2009 meeting.

--(if asked only) The United States would not support
tasking the MTCR Chair to prepare a paper to shape the
brainstorming discussion. Such an approach would be
inconsistent with the Canberra decision.


6. (U) Please slug any reporting on this issue or other
MTCR issues for ISN/MTR. Department POC is ISN/MTR Director
Pam Durham, 202-647-4931, durhampk@state.gov.
CLINTON


NNNN




End Cable Text