HLTF: SHARING RUSSIAN PAPER ON CFE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 STATE 043053 SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KCFE PARM PREL NATO SUBJECT: HLTF: SHARING RUSSIAN PAPER ON CFE ¶1. (U) This is an action cable. ¶2. (SBU) Mission is requested ask the IS to deliver to delegations promptly on Thursday, April 30, a copy of the paper contained in paper 3 below along with the following explanatory remarks : -- Following up on discussions during the April 28 HLTF meeting, we would like to provide a copy of the translation of the paper provided by Russian Security and Disarmament Director Antonov on April 24 to Assistant Secretary Gottemoeller. -- We look forward to working with Allies to develop a coordinated response and believe the HLTF "away day" at the end of May will provide an excellent opportunity to discuss Russia's position and the non-paper in detail. ¶3. (U) Begin translation of Russian paper (note internal numbering): Restoration of the Viability of the CFE Treaty: A Way Forward (Aide-Memoire) The Russian-U.S. draft of the "package solution," on which Russia and the United States have been working for over a year, bringing in their proposals on ways to resolve existing problems, could become the basis for a comprehensive document on restoring the viability of the control regime for conventional weapons in Europe. For this purpose, however, it needs a thorough and thoughtful revision. The main flaw of the draft as it now stands is that contrary to the concept of "parallel actions" on which it is based, it provides for specific Russian actions in exchange for rather vague promises on the part of NATO, whose fulfillment is not at all guaranteed. It is necessary to ensure the balanced nature of the draft, which should provide for "parallel" or rather, counter actions by the interested parties. Absolutely every aspect that causes or may cause disagreements must be resolved properly, not in the indefinite future, but directly within the framework of the "package," and in such a way as to preclude the possibility of diverse interpretations and the breakdown of the agreements that have been reached. We are certain that all States Parties to the CFE Treaty are interested in reaching an agreement precisely on such a clear and explicit document, which will make it possible to overcome existing differences and ensure the long-term and effective functioning of the treaty regime in the interest of all States Parties. Specifically, the following things are required in order to �00A;achieve this goal. ¶1. The most reliable guarantees possible for ratification of the Agreement on Adaptation within the agreed time frame, including the submission of the instruments of ratification to the depositary. ¶2. Inasmuch as ratification is within the purview of the parliaments, and the executive authorities cannot guarantee it, we ought to make clear provision for temporary application of the adapted CFE Treaty. Let us remind you that the Russian approach provides for a two-stage scenario: during the first six months the States Parties would be guided by the political obligation to act in accordance with the objective and goals of the adapted CFE Treaty, complying with the ceilings and then, unless the Agreement on Adaptation has entered into force by that time, its temporary application would begin. ¶3. A sine qua non for reaching a "package" agreement is abolition of discriminatory territorial subceilings for the Russian Federation, which are totally unjustified when a number of countries in the flank region are joining NATO, and which are hindering the fight against terrorism. If any of our partners feels a need for additional confidence-building measures (reciprocal, of course) in the context of abolishing subceilings, the Russian side is willing to carefully study appropriate proposals. ¶4. Agreement must be reached on reduced levels of armaments for the NATO member states; such levels would enter into force on the date on which the temporary application of the adapted CFE Treaty begins. Relevant indices must become an annex to the "package." STATE 00043053 002 OF 002 ¶5. It is also imperative that the specific conditions for the accession of new NATO members to the CFE Treaty become an annex to the "package solution." ¶6. There is no need to postpone agreement on a definition of "existing combat forces." It must also be appended to the draft. ¶7. The Russian side deems it essential within the framework of the "package" to decide that immediately after the entry into force of the adapted CFE Treaty the States Parties will begin talks on its further updating. This decision could also contain a sample list of issues that they would like to consider at those talks. ¶8. It would be necessary as early as this stage to agree on and append to the "package" the draft of a decision approving and supporting the continuation of the current peacekeeping operation under the Russian-Moldovan Agreement of 1992. After the "package" is agreed upon, the draft of this decision would be submitted by the CFE Treaty States Parties for approval by the Permanent Council of the OSCE. ¶9. In regard to regional aspects, the Russian side is prepared within the framework of the "package," provided that it be made truly balanced, to consider some transparency-related issues. This pertains both to Moldova and to the situation in the Transcaucasus, taking into account the actual situation in the respective regions. ¶10. The draft "package solution" revised with consideration of the foregoing could be approved at the new extraordinary conference of the CFE Treaty States Parties in the form of its final document. ¶11. The Russian side will put the CFE Treaty back in effect upon the entry into force of the Agreement on Adaptation of the CFE or at the beginning of its temporary application as stipulated in the "package solution." After agreement is reached on the "package solution" and taking into account its content, the Russian side would explore the possibility of implementing on a bilateral basis, as a goodwill gesture, reciprocal transparency measures in the CFE area of application during the period preceding the start of temporary application/entry into force of the Agreement on Adaptation. ¶12. In view of the considerable amount of work ahead of us, the Russian side reaffirms its willingness to step up efforts to revise the draft "package solution." It is necessary to continue the Russia-U.S. dialogue on the level of federal government representatives, and to bolster it with daily work on the specific content of the "package" at the level of the Russian and U.S. delegations in Vienna. The Russian side is also willing to become actively involved in bringing other States Parties into this dialogue, including in the JCG format. End translation of Russian paper CLINTON