CWC: WRAP-UP FOR FEBRUARY 23 - MARCH 6

S E C R E T THE HAGUE 000167 SIPDIS STATE FOR ISN/CB, VCI/CCA, L/NPV, IO/MPR, SECDEF FOR OSD/GSA/CN,CP> JOINT STAFF FOR DD PMA-A FOR WTC COMMERCE FOR BIS (ROBERTS AND DENYER) NSC FOR FLY WINPAC FOR WALTER E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/10/2019 TAGS: PARM PREL CWC SUBJECT: CWC: WRAP-UP FOR FEBRUARY 23 - MARCH 6 REF: A. 08 THE HAGUE 01015 ¶B. STATE 15526 Classified By: Janet E. Beik for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) This is CWC-14-09. -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (SBU) The two weeks following EC-55 were relatively quiet, marked by a nearly complete absence of OPCW meetings and/or consultations. The general WEOG assessment of EC-55 was positive, with many delegations noting Iran's unusually cooperative attitude. ABAF reform remains on the agenda, as well as industry issues, with agreement from WEOG members that the DG's recent report on implementation of the current OCPF site selection methodology should be discussed at the next industry cluster. Plans continue for the Universality Workshop in Istanbul. Delrep also delivered a new version of Iraq's draft declaration to the Technical Secretariat. (Del note: On March 10, Iraqi Embassy official told Delreps that Baghdad was sending the declaration by DHL, although it had not yet arrived in The Hague.) -------------- WEOG -------------- ¶2. (SBU) The February 24 meeting of the Western Europe and Others Group (WEOG) focused on the outcome of EC-55. WEOG coordinator Ruth Surkau (Germany) described the kick-off of the selection process for a new Director-General (DG) as the "big show," with appointments to the Advisory Body on Administrative and Financial Matters (ABAF) and the EC Bureau as the two main "side shows." French delegate Annie Mari said EC-55 was a success, despite a number of items being deferred to the next EC. Mari noted that WEOG got what it wanted with the DG selection process and highlighted Iran's "mild approach" -- particularly on the 90- day destruction reports. Italian delegate Giuseppe Cornacchia agreed that the EC went smoothly and that Iran had been cooperative, but he questioned Iran's motivation. However, Cornacchia was less sanguine on the DG selection process, noting Iran's fixation on clarifying the "modalities" of the process and the possibility of everything being hijacked by an open-ended working group. Dutch Ambassador Pieter de Savornin Lohman stated that Iran's approach at the EC was partly due to the outcome of the last Conference of the States Parties in December (ref A). He also noted Cuba was torn between GRULAC (Group of Latin America and Caribbean) and NAM (Non-Aligned Movement),with GRULAC activism rendering NAM virtually silent and unable to provide cover for Iran. ¶3. (SBU) Delrep noted U.S. surprise that Iran had agreed to note the entire set of 90-day destruction reports with repetition of the "chapeau" report language from EC-54. Delrep also noted that the term "modalities" had been removed from the report language on the DG selection process and that the entire process had been left open-ended without any requirement for the EC Chair to report back to the Council. Delrep pointed to the positive activism of GRULAC delegations during the EC as an encouraging new development, including the group's joint statement on the DG selection process and the presence and involvement of GRULAC ambassadors in negotiations. ¶4. (SBU) German Ambassador Werner Burkart echoed other comments about Iran's approach during the EC but questioned how long Iran would remain reasonable. Burkart also thanked the U.S. for mentioning in its national statement the "gentlemen's agreement" on the DG position rotating between developed and developing countries. He noted a build-up in Chinese rhetoric on Japanese abandoned chemical weapons, suggesting it is likely to increase. On Russian destruction, Burkart said that it is impossible for Khizner to complete its activities in 16 months and that Russia seems increasingly likely to miss the 2012 deadline, despite Russian insistence to the contrary. ¶5. (SBU) Discussion turned to ABAF, with Dutch delegate Diana Gosens suggesting the likelihood of consultations on ABAF reform. Gosens spoke in favor of increased transparency and expertise on ABAF, stating that funding for travel and per diem of members would attract experts. Gosens reiterated that with a majority of local delegates serving on ABAF, the body was in danger of becoming a parallel forum for political discussions on the budget, as well as internal oversight and external auditor reports. Burkart questioned the utility of providing funding for ABAF experts but agreed that the body was only worthwhile if it could provide real expertise. Cornacchia and UK delegate Karen Wolstenholme both echoed Burkart's cautionary views on funding. Swedish delegate Christer Ahlstrom suggested it would be good to solicit the DG's ideas on ABAF. ¶6. (SBU) Taking up industry issues, Surkau recapped the last Industry Cluster meetings before EC-55. She noted that there was little progress on discussions about enhancements to declarations of Other Chemical Production Facilities (OCPFs). Speaking as the facilitator for 2A/2A* low concentrations, Cornacchia was more upbeat on the progress made in his consultations and claimed that a shift to the lower end of the spectrum has "gained momentum." Cornacchia also indicated his desire to reach agreement on an initial -- even if only interim -- level. ¶7. (SBU) WEOG's weekly meeting on March 2 was unusually brief with OCPF site selection and the June visit to two U.S. chemical weapons destruction facilities (CWDFs) the only items on the agenda. On OCPF site selection, Surkau asked for views on how to address the DG's assessment of his revised site selection methodology for OCPFs. There was general agreement on discussing the issue during the Industry Cluster in April, with support for extending the currently-scheduled cluster to one and a half days. ¶8. (SBU) Delrep gave a brief overview of planning for the June trip to U.S. CWDFs by EC representatives. Savornin Lohman expressed his interest in going as the WEOG representative. Citing past practice, the UK spoke in favor of compiling questions for the WEOG representative to ask on behalf of the group. ¶9. (SBU) Under Any Other Business, Universality facilitator Lee Litman (UK) announced he would hold a consultation on March 5 to discuss the upcoming Universality workshop in Istanbul. Confirming that Egypt will not officially attend the April workshop, Litman said he wanted to focus on Qworkshop, Litman said he wanted to focus on realistic objectives for the workshop. Ahlstrom, speaking on behalf of the current EU Troika (France, Czech Republic and Sweden),said that the Troika feels the workshop should continue as planned, even if Israel and Syria still have not confirmed participation. He noted that the Czech Republic will demarche Egypt, Israel and Syria on behalf of the EU to encourage their participation. -------------- IRAQ'S DRAFT DECLARATION -------------- ¶10. (SBU) On February 24, Delrep delivered the most recent copy of Iraq's draft initial declaration to the Technical Secretariat (TS). Delrep met with Chemical Demilitarization Branch officer Oleg Ukharov (Russia),who was noticeably reluctant to handle the document according to OPCW approved procedures for classified information. At Delrep's insistence, Ukharov finally agreed to count and sign for the OPCW Highly Protected contents of the declaration. Ukharov noted that the format of the document seemed much improved from previous version, and said the TS would review the latest draft. -------------- JAPANESE QUESTIONS ON IRANIAN INSPECTOR -------------- ¶11. (S) On March 4, Delrep met with Japanese delegate Takayuki Kitagawa to respond to questions from Tokyo, following deployment of talking points from ref B on February 20. According to Kitagawa, an internal conflict had arisen in Tokyo between the ministry with oversight of non-proliferation, which favored barring the Iranian inspector from future inspections in Japan and the regional ministry, which was reluctant to jeopardize bilateral relations with Iran. Tokyo officials were apparently under the impression that the discussion of the inspector, a former employee of Melli Agrochemical, was a U.S. initiative; Delrep explained that the U.S. shared the information in response to France having raised an initial concern. Kitagawa replied that Tokyo suspects the French concern could actually be in response to a French inspector having been kicked out of Tehran. ¶12. (C) Delrep raised the upcoming Executive Council (EC) visit to two U.S. destruction facilities, and asked Kitagawa whether he had heard any delegations in the Asia Group express interest in participating. Delrep pointed out that Iran, despite its role as EC Vice Chair, would not be permitted to participate in such a visit, and recommended Japan and other Asia Group colleagues keep this in mind. Kitagawa noted that South Korea had recently expressed an interest in becoming more active, and had apparently made a deal with Iran to back down from pursuing the EC Vice Chair slot this year in return for guaranteed Iranian support of Korea as one of the Vice Chairs at the next Conference of States Parties. Kitagawa said he would raise the subject of the EC visit with the Korean delegation. -------------- UNIVERSALITY CONSULTATIONS -------------- ¶13. (U) On March 5, Universality facilitator Lee Litman (UK) held a consultation primarily focused on discussing the upcoming April 16-17 Universality Workshop in Istanbul, Turkey. Zhixian Liu, OPCW Director of External Relations, stated that at present none of the three Middle Eastern States not Party to the Convention (Egypt, Israel, Syria),the targeted audience of the Workshop, have confirmed their participation. The Egyptian Embassy to the Netherlands formally declined the invitation. The Director-General (DG) held a follow-up meeting with QDirector-General (DG) held a follow-up meeting with the Egyptian Ambassador, but Egypt still declined. The DG has also sent a letter to the Egyptian Council of Foreign Affairs on the Workshop, but to date there has not been a response. Israel is considering the invitation, with the DG holding a meeting with the Israeli Ambassador on March 5 to discuss this and setting a date for an OPCW technical assistance visit to Israel. Liu believes that Israel, in the end, will agree to attend and does not see any reason why they would not. Syria, on the other hand, has not responded to the invitation, and the Syrian Embassy in Belgium has not responded to the DG's request for a meeting with the Syrian Ambassador. ¶14. (U) The Technical Secretariat and the DG are actively working to encourage participation at the Workshop. At present, only 17 participants are registered from 12 countries, including four Permanent Representatives to the OPCW from The Hague and a member of Iran's National Authority from Tehran. The DG had also written letters to each of the three Middle Eastern States not Party encouraging them to attend, and planned to write a letter to each regional Vice-Chair at the OPCW encouraging each regional group to do all it can to persuade non-State Parties to participate in the Workshop. Turkey, in conjunction with the TS, has sent a demarche to the three Middle Eastern countries as well, and the Czech delegate, on behalf of the EU Presidency, indicated that the EU is considering its options on how to encourage participation from Egypt, Israel, and Syria. ¶15. (U) The South African delegate asked what the purpose would be of holding the Workshop if none of the three Middle Eastern non-member attend. The TS conceded that this is the "billion dollar" question and would be addressed closer to the date of the Workshop based on a cost-benefit analysis. The TS argued, however, that there is still merit in the Workshop if only because the very purpose of it is to encourage universality; to that end, the TS once again encouraged all delegations present at the consultation to redouble their efforts to encourage participation, including from their own countries. The Dutch delegate noted that the Workshop should not just focus on the Middle East region and recommended that the TS broaden invitations to other countries outside the Convention, especially Angola. ¶16. (U) Litman also briefed delegations on the current TS efforts with regard to promoting universality. Litman provided a few details surrounding the late February TS visit to the Bahamas and indicated that ratification is expected quite soon. U.S. Delrep provided additional details on this visit, drawing on information from Washington. Regarding the Dominican Republic, Litman reported that the instrument of accession had been approved by the Parliament and all that was left was the signature by the President. As for Angola, two Angolan representatives, sponsored by the TS, are attending a customs workshop in Tanzania on March 5. Litman noted that Angolan progress in acceding to the Convention is inadequate. Regarding North Korea and Burma, Litman had no real developments to report. Litman admitted that he is even trying to use his personal connections, from his time on the North Korea Desk Qconnections, from his time on the North Korea Desk at the British Foreign Office, to make inroads with Pyongyang but has been unsuccessful so far. The South Korean delegate added that the TS Special Representative for Universality, Dutch Ambassador Mark Vogelaar, planned to visit China, Japan, and South Korea in the near future specifically to discuss North Korea. The TS added that Ambassador Vogelaar would try to explore how chemical weapons might be included in the framework of the Six Party Talks when the time is appropriate. -------------- -- START-UP OF RUSSIA'S CW DESTRUCTION FACILITY AT SHCHUCHYE -------------- -- ¶17. (U) On March 6, Delrep confirmed with the OPCW Chemical Demilitarization Branch that Russia's Shchuchye Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility had started on March 5, as briefed by Russian officials at the last Executive Council session. As of March 6, Russia had processed approximately fifty items. TS officer Gabriela Coman-Enescu clarified that she believed processing was limited to drilling and draining items and running munitions through the Metal Parts Furnace. She also noted that Russia does not technically view the destruction process as having fully started, but that the Technical Secretariat considers it destruction, as Russia is processing OPCW declared items. ¶18. (U) BEIK SENDS. GALLAGHER