JUNE 4 MEETING OF THE G-8 GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP

C O N F I D E N T I A L STATE 062400 NSC FOR JOYCE CONNERY E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/16/2019 TAGS: PARM PREL ETTC KNNP CB TRGY GM JA RS CA UK FR IT SUBJECT: JUNE 4 MEETING OF THE G-8 GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP WORKING GROUP (GPWG) IN ROME REF: STATE 56239 Classified By: ISN Acting DAS Matthias Mitman, Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: ISN Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary Matthias Mitman led the USDEL to the G-8 Global Partnership Working Group (GPWG) meeting in Rome on June 4--the final meeting prior to the G-8 Summit July 8-10. The GPWG focused on achieving consensus on the final GP Annual Report and the GP language in the stand-alone Leaders Statement on Nonproliferation. GP Report text outlines a continued commitment to implement GP geographic and membership expansion, while also stressing the need to fulfill current GP pledges for projects in Russia and Ukraine. Bracketed text remains however on plutonium disposition, nuclear security cooperation, the role of the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC) in global scientist engagement, and extension of the GP timeline beyond 2012. Agreement was reached on publishing the first GPWG Annex of global activities (outside FSU) despite debate within the G8 on the validity of counting global threat reduction activities as GP projects. Mitman also reported on recent U.S. action to gauge the interest of 14 new countries in becoming GP members, with Canada and Japan agreeing to support such outreach. Department is working with GPWG Chair Gianluca Alberini and other GPWG representatives to finalize edits to the GP Annual Report and Nonproliferation Leaders Statement well in advance of the G-8 Summit. END SUMMARY. -------------- -------------- UPDATE ON CURRENT GP COMMITMENTS IN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE -------------- -------------- ¶2. (SBU) On June 4, ISN Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary Matthias Mitman led the USDEL to the fourth annual G-8 Global Partnership Working Group (GPWG) meeting in Rome. The first agenda item as usual was to discuss current activities in Russia and Ukraine. GPWG members offered congratulations to Russia regarding the opening ceremony on May 29 of the Shchuch'ye Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility. Mitman noted that the U.S. had contributed over one billion to the Shchuch'ye Facility as part of its GP commitment. He added that U.S. Ambassador Beyrle and Senator Lugar, co-founder of the Cooperative Threat Reduction program, were in attendance at the ceremony and provided remarks. -------------- ;GP Membership Expansion -------------- ¶3. (SBU) Mitman updated the GPWG on U.S. efforts to reach out to potential new GP members, citing the June 1 cable (reftel-State 056239) to 14 posts (Argentina, China, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, Austria, Spain, Kazakhstan, Singapore, Morocco, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar) requesting that they provide information about the GP to appropriate interlocutors in each country. Mitman emphasized that the purpose of U.S. outreach at this stage is to gauge the interest of these 14 countries in joining the GP rather than a formal invitation of membership, which had been an issue of concern for other G8 members during the April GPWG. Mitman also provided the GPWG with the U.S. nonpaper that was included in the action cable, which gives an overview of the GP and lists potential threat reduction activities that new GP countries could consider supporting. ¶4. (SBU) Mitman stressed the continued need for other GPWG members to assist in outreach efforts to potential new GP members, emphasizing that new GP member outreach should be an ongoing effort beyond 2009 to secure new donors and members. Canada offered to extend support by reaching out to Brazil, and Japan offered assistance in reaching out to Asian countries (which may include Singapore and China). The U.S. outreach cable requested a response from posts by June 19, and Mitman offered an update to the GPWG prior to the Summit on July 8. The U.S. plans to continue to work with G-8 nations to develop an approach for institutionalizing expanded GP membership, including possibly inviting interested states to the expanded October 27, 2009 GPWG meeting in Rome. ¶5. (SBU) Other G-8 members had generally positive reactions to the U.S. outreach strategy, including the Russian representative Oleg Rozkhov. However, Rozhkov stressed the Russian viewpoint that the GPWG should evaluate potential new GP members on a case-by-case basis. Although the 2008 GP Annual Report includes reference to such a case-by-case approach, the U.S. position is to avoid any overly bureaucratic approaches to accepting new GP members, including drawing unnecessary distinctions between GP donors and recipients, which could stymie progress on GP expansion. Other representatives, including Japan's Yasunari Morino, agreed that distinguishing between GP donors and recipients is not critical, espousing his view that new GP members without significant resources can still provide expertise and hosting capabilities for GP activities. On GP member outreach, French representative Jean-Hugues Simon-Michel, German representative Dietrich Becker, and EU representative Bruno Dupre, continued to raise concerns over how to institutionalize an expanded GP and expressed the need for caution in addressing how GP expansion could affect GP extension beyond 2012. In response, Mitman joined GPWG Chairman Gianluca Alberini, and Canadian representative Martin Larose in assuring the rest of the GPWG that implementation of GP membership expansion should continue to be a united GPWG decision in 2009 and beyond. -------------- KNOWLEDGE PROLIFERATION PREVENTION -------------- ¶6. (SBU) Italy's proposed non-binding "recommendations for a coordinated approach in the field of Global WMD knowledge proliferation prevention and scientist engagement" were agreed during the June 4 GPWG and will be found at Annex B of the published 2009 GP Annual Report. The recommendations focus on scientist engagement and lessons learned from the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC) in Moscow; however, the Chair reiterated that references to the future of the ISTC are a decision for the ISTC Governing Board only, and the GPWG will only mention the Center's relevance to global scientist engagement activities. -------------- GP ANNUAL REPORT -------------- ¶7. (SBU) The GPWG reached consensus on most of the language for the 2009 GP Annual Report. However, language on plutonium disposition remains bracketed at the request of U.S. representative Mitman pending outcome of U.S.-Russian negotiations of a Protocol prior to the G-8 Summit. Russian representative Rozhkov also insisted on brackets for language on nuclear security assistance in Russia and language on the future role of the ISTC in scientist engagement. German representative Becker called for brackets on language pertaining to the future of the GP pending consultations with Berlin. ¶8. (C) USDEL was pleased with the agreed GP Annual report language on GP geographic and membership expansion, despite questions raised by Russian representative Rozhkov as to what constitutes a GP project if the project is performed outside Russia/FSU. The Russian position continues to be a desire to slow-roll GP expansion, a strategy driven by Russia's interest in preventing any (perceived or real) diversion of GP resources away from Russian priorities of chemical weapons destruction and nuclear submarine dismantlement in Russia. ¶9. (C) ISTC: Russia representative Rozhkov insisted on brackets for all GP Annual Report references to the ISTC. Rozkhov stated that the ISTC December Governing Board (GB) language on transforming the ISTC "no longer represents Russian Government views," and Rozhkov further stated that the Russian representatives, who agreed to the GB language on ISTC transformation, no longer work for the Russian Government. (Note: the ISTC GB language from December stated that ISTC GB members recognize "the success of the ISTC's initial mission" in redirecting scientists and its decision to "transform the ISTC" into a center of excellence to achieve shared goals in multiple fields, including in nonproliferation. End Note). Rozhkov went on to say that Russia would reject any reference to ISTC transformation in the GP Annual Report and stated that an alternative to ISTC transformation could be to shut down the ISTC altogether. Rozkhov also told the GPWG that Russia has made a decision about the future of the ISTC, but he did not elaborate further. On June 5, Russian Nonproliferation Directors Group representative Anatoly Antonov insisted to Mitman that the mission of the ISTC is complete. Antonov further stated Russia's view that there is no proliferation threat from Russia, saying that, if the U.S. wants to continue to use the ISTC, the U.S. should move the center to Washington, DC. Antonov also reinforced Rozhkov's statement that a Russian decision has been made on the future of the ISTC at the highest levels of Government, but he declined to say when Russia would announce this decision. ¶10. (U) GP GEOGRAPHIC AND MEMBERSHIP EXPANSION LANGUAGE: The 2009 GP Annual Report continues to commit GPWG members to implement geographic and membership expansion. Canadian representative Larose was particularly supportive of the U.S. position to retain strong reference to ongoing global WMD threat reduction projects already funded by GP members The agreed GP Annual Report language on geographic expansion references the new global GP Annex, which will outline WMD threat reduction projects funded by GPWG members for the first time, as confirmation that nuclear, chemical, biological weapons and terrorism threats and scientist engagement "need to be addressed in every region of the world." ¶11. (SBU) GP PROJECTS ANNEX: GPWG Chairman Alberini held the line on his initial decision to publish global activities--in addition to Russia/FSU activities--in the GP Annual Report annex. The U.S., Canada, UK, and Japan all agreed that, as long as projects outlined in the GP Global Annex are in line with the Kananaskis Principles, the projects may be counted as GP projects. ¶12. (SBU) The FUTURE OF THE GP BEYOND 2012: A strong UK-proposed paragraph on extending G8 threat reduction activities (via the GP or other means) beyond 2012 was diluted down to two sentences stating that the future of the GP will be discussed "in due course" in the context of developing projects to mitigate the continuing threat of WMD proliferation and terrorism. French representative Simon-Michel strongly pushed back on any reference to extension of the GP beyond 2012 because France does not have agreement in Paris on future financial commitments, particularly to Russia. German representative Becker also rejected any references to GP extension beyond 2012, stating that he is under similar instructions from Berlin for political and economic reasons. Canadian representative Larose accepted the more general language, referencing that it could be a placeholder for further discussions on GP extension during Canada's 2010 G-8 Presidency. USDEL expects GPWG debate in 2010 to also include discussion about how best to link the GP to other multilateral threat reduction instruments such as United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 and the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. To avoid duplication and ensure that financial assistance instruments like the GP can remain relevant into the future will require G-8 agreement that the GP can be an effective mechanism for implementation of new global threat reduction activities. -------------- -------------- GP Language in the G-8 Leaders Statement on Nonproliferation -------------- -------------- ¶13. (SBU) U.S. concerns regarding Russian edits to the proposed draft GP paragraph for the Leaders Statement on Nonproliferation were mitigated following concensus on compromise language. The Russian edits attempted to walk back 2008 G-8 Leaders commitment to pursue GP expansion by stating the GP would "consider" expansion, but the U.S. and other G-8 members pushed back. Russia also sought to specify that primarily Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries would be considered for expanded participation in the GP; however other G-8 members counter-proposed language that was for such outreach to be based on commitment to the Kananskis Principles and to be threat driven. -------------- UPCOMING GP-Related EVENTS and NEXT STEPS -------------- ¶14. (U) The G-8 Summit will take place July 8-10 in L'Aquila, Italy, where the GP Annual Report, Annex of projects in Russia/FSU, the new Global Annex, the scientist engagement recommendations, and the stand-alone Leaders Statement on Nonproliferation will be published. Italy will host the next GPWG in Rome on October 27, 2009 in the expanded format, which will be preceded by a workshop on global scientist engagement activities on October 26 (further information TBD). CLINTON