CWC: WRAP-UP FOR OPCW 56TH EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 000288 SENSITIVE 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 (BROWN AND DENYER) NSC FOR LUTES WINPAC FOR WALTER E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PARM PREL CWC SUBJECT: CWC: WRAP-UP FOR OPCW 56TH EXECUTIVE COUNCIL SESSION, APRIL 21-24, 2009 (EC-56) REF: A. THE HAGUE 286 ¶B. THE HAGUE 287 ¶C. THE HAGUE 179 ¶D. THE HAGUE 236 ¶E. STATE 38618 (U) This is CWC-26-09 -------------- Summary -------------- ¶1. (SBU) Executive Council (EC) 56 was characterized by a high interest in the search for a new Director-General (DG),an extensive agenda of routine business and increasingly obstructive behavior by the South African delegation. Iraq's presentation of its former chemical weapons (CW) program to the EC destruction informals, as well as the U.S. and UK supplementary information on CW recovered and destroyed in Iraq, caused a stir at the beginning of the week (see report by septel). The Council discussed the DG selection process at length both in formal sessions and in the corridors. Despite a push by a few states for a rotation of the DG position through the five regional groups, the EC held to the step-by-step process begun during the previous session. The next step is an invitation to all candidates to address EC-57 in July. ¶2. (SBU) The Council deferred once again the Secretariat's recommendations for future verification of the UK's converted chemical weapons production facility (CWPF) after ten years. The EC also deferred the Secretariat's proposed general guidelines on continued verification measures of converted CWPFs. It did, however, note the Director-General's Note on a converted Russian CWPF after ten years. After several bilateral meetings, the U.S. and Iran agreed to approve the U.S. Schedule 1 Facility Agreement and to approve and note the changes in a previously-approved Iranian Facility Agreement (now an Arrangement) that had been deferred at the previous two sessions. ¶3. (SBU) Key EC issues are detailed below, followed by a synopsis of the Director-General's opening statement and the general debate, the debate on the DG selection process, and lists of the agenda items approved (para 34),noted (para 35) and deferred to the next session (para 36). Meetings with the Iraqi delegation as well as a meeting with the OPCW Legal Advisor on U.S. �0A;recoveries in Iraq were reported in refs A and B, respectively. The informal meeting on the status of destruction on April 20 and other meetings on the margins of the EC will be reported separately. End Summary. -------------- DG Search -------------- ¶4. (SBU) The "buzz" at EC-56 was all about the search for a new Director-General. The Turkish candidate, Ahmet Uzumcu, visited The Hague for two days during the session and met with numerous delegations individually and at a lunch hosted by the Turkish Ambassador (see septel on the U.S. meeting with him). Deputy Director-General John Freeman, also a candidate, kept a low profile outside the Council meetings, although he took his usual seat on the podium for the plenary sessions. Many delegations discussed the awkwardness of having Freeman in the center of the Technical Secretariat (TS) throughout the months before the choice is made in the fall. The other local candidate, Ambassador Benchaa Dani of Algeria, is reportedly holding a series of dinners and meetings with delegations; U.S. Rep met with him at his embassy (see septel report). ¶5. (SBU) The EC Chairperson wrote and distributed a report on her consultations since EC-55. She opened debate on the issue (and her report) on Wednesday afternoon, April 22 (detailed below),but managed to avoid the effort by a few delegations led by South Africa and Pakistan to edit her report. On April 23, she adjourned the afternoon plenary to an informal meeting to discuss report language on the issue. Delegations argued over language through the evening, agreeing in the end to a convoluted single sentence that reaffirmed the process begun during EC-55, and indicated that all candidates would be invited to appear at EC-57 in July, with the modalities for their interaction with the Council to be discussed further in consultations. The UK urged that all States Parties with candidates, or those with an interest in hearing from the candidates, should be invited to attend the next session, but found no support for this idea among Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) delegations despite their calls for transparency in the consultations. ¶6. (SBU) Del Comment: That a clear invitation to candidates could not be agreed does not bode well for future consultations. Certain delegations (South Africa and Iran) appear to be trying to hold up the process deliberately, probably to send the list of candidates to the Conference of the States Parties in December for a vote, where they see an advantage in numbers. End Comment. -------------- -- Schedule 1 Facility Agreements -- U.S. and Iran -------------- -- ¶7. (U) The EC considered and approved the U.S. Schedule 1 facility agreement that had been deferred by the Iran at the last two sessions. The EC also noted the two TS notes on amendments and modifications to the Iranian Schedule 1 facility agreement. At the insistence of the Iranian delegation, both the U.S and Iranian documents were presented to the Council for consideration as a package. U.S. Rep Mikulak then made a brief intervention stating that modifications to the Iranian agreement should not set a precedent for future agreements. Iran responded with a similar statement. ¶8. (SBU) Delreps met bilaterally with the Iranian delegation on three separate occasions outside of the plenary to further discuss U.S. concerns with the proposed modifications on sampling and analysis (section 7.4) to the Iranian agreement. In particular, Delreps attempted to obtain feedback on the U.S. non-paper suggesting edits to section 7.4 to emphasize the Inspected State Party's obligation to provide an alternative means to fulfill the inspection mandate in the event sampling and analysis activities are limited or unable to be conducted. Iran, however, saw no value in accepting U.S. changes and further had no instructions to do so, citing previous arguments presented to Delreps during EC-55 (ref C). Qpresented to Delreps during EC-55 (ref C). ¶9. (SBU) Acknowledging the difficulty in attempting to modify language in the Iranian agreement that was copied verbatim from the U.S. agreement, Delreps saw no long-term benefit to once again have these documents deferred. In fact, the broader risk of potentially damaging the credibility of the EC process in reviewing and approving such documents loomed as a much larger problem that outweighed any potential benefit gained in attempting to force an unlikely change in Iran's position. Del therefore did not insist on the U.S.-proposed changes. ¶10. (U) Delreps recommend that Washington and Del coordinate closely on future facility agreements to ensure proposed language would be acceptable if used by other member states. -------------- -------------- Director-General's Statement and the General Debate -------------- -------------- ¶11. (U) Chairperson Tomova (Slovakia) officially opened EC-56 on the morning of April 21. The four EC Vice-Chairpersons then briefed the EC on work undertaken during the intersessional period in their respective portfolios. Ambassador Benchaa Dani (Algeria),Vice-Chair for chemical industry and other Article VI issues, called for a facilitator on site selection methodology for other chemical production facilities (OCPFs). Iranian delegate Hassan Vejdani briefly reported that no consultations had taken place on legal, organizational, and other issues. ¶12. (U) Director-General Rogelio Pfirter then delivered his usual tour d'horizon. Highlights included: - Following the Dominican Republic's accession as the 187th State Party, the Bahamas would be just around the corner (Note: The Bahamas deposited its accession documents before the end of the week.) - He emphasized the importance of Iraq joining the Convention given Iraq's history. Iraq's declaration poses a unique implementation challenge and will require a great deal of assistance. - The TS is developing an OCPF seminar to be held in conjunction with the annual National Authorities meeting in December but is looking for voluntary contributions from member states. - The revised Handbook on Chemicals is now available, along with a revised version of the Declarations Handbook, which has been translated into all official languages. - Noting that the last challenge inspection field exercise was held in 2007, the DG noted the importance of these exercises and that the TS would be seeking a host for a field exercise in 2010. - Following the recent Istanbul universality workshop, the TS will be sending technical assistance visits to both Israel (in June) and Egypt (no date yet). - The DG made an appeal for States Parties to pay their assessed contributions on time, as a matter of concern and urgency. - He announced that the draft budget to come out in July will once again have zero nominal growth. He indicated that this was partly dependent on States Parties paying their assessed contributions on time and repeated his call for payments as soon as possible. - In order to monitor the ongoing financial crisis, the TS Investment Committee has been meeting every other week. ¶13. (U) The general debate included a large number of common themes, including praise for India for completing its CW destruction on time, and welcoming the Dominican Republic as the newest Qwelcoming the Dominican Republic as the newest member state. Many statements recognized Iraq's declaration of its former CW program as an important milestone. The usual calls were made for timely completion of CW destruction efforts, as well as full implementation of Articles X and XI. Some statements urged more progress to be made in the industry cluster, as well as pleas for volunteers to facilitate consultations on the OCPF site selection methodology and on Article XI. Most noted the importance of having a consensus candidate for the next Director-General. ¶14. (U) With regard to the DG search, differences emerged in several of the statements. The European Union called for an open, simple and transparent process, as did the U.S. The NAM and the African Group called for further consultations to lay out "modalities" and procedural steps to ensure a transparent, all-inclusive process. Brazil called for a review of qualifications of candidates without inflicting complex selection modalities. Saudi Arabia urged equitable representation. The African Group also specifically called for the DG to come from Africa and encouraged support for the Algerian candidate, Ambassador Dani. Dani used Algeria's national statement to introduce his own candidacy in flowery French. ¶15. (SBU) Chinese Ambassador Zhang Jun stated that the selection process should set the norm for future candidates by outlining "guiding principles...carried out statutorily, (with) psychological and procedural preparations...fully made." (Del note: This caused some stir among delegations. Later, a Chinese delegate told Delrep that the "psychological" reference in their national statement was not about the candidates, but rather warning delegations that they should be mentally ready to consider other possibilities -- i.e., voting -- if consensus is not reached. End note.) ¶16. (U) The Iraqi national statement outlined Iraq's historical overview of its accession process, highlighting the assistance provided by the U.S., UK, Japan and the TS. Iraq maintained that the security situation would not prevent Iraq from destroying its CW but asked for assistance from its friends in this endeavor. The statement also noted how some Iraqi CW material had been looted during the conflicts, while others had been buried, creating environmental and safety concerns that will require international assistance. ¶17. (U) With regard to Iraq, the U.S. pointed to the need for forward-looking assistance to Iraq in both destroying its CW stockpile and implementing the rest of the Convention. India stressed the need to consider the unique circumstances in Iraq when deciding on a fair deadline for CW destruction. Iran focused considerably on Iraq and, while welcoming Iraq's accession, highlighted the aggression of the former Iraqi regime against the Iranian and Iraqi populations. Iran also noted that perpetrators should not enjoy impunity and that states whose nationals or companies were involved in the transfer of chemicals and equipment to Iraq's chemical weapons program should be brought to justice. Iran offered any requisite assistance to Iraq with implementing the Convention and destroying its CW stockpile. Serbia welcomed Qand destroying its CW stockpile. Serbia welcomed Iraq's presentations on its past program as well as the U.S. and UK explanations of activities in Iraq. ¶18. (U) The Pakistani and Russian national statements referred to the U.S. and UK statements at the destruction informals the day before concerning recovery of CW munitions in Iraq. Russian Ambassador Kiril Gevorgian stated that Russia would be "thoroughly examining all aspects of this matter" and reserved its right to return to it at a later stage. On Russia's own destruction efforts, Gevorgian contended that Russia faces an "extremely complex challenge" to complete the destruction of its entire stockpile in 2012. ¶19. (U) China drew attention to its most important issue: Japanese abandoned CW (ACW). Ambassador Zhang argued that ACW pose a grave security concern to the Chinese population. With the looming 2012 destruction deadline fast approaching, Zhang criticized Japan for failing to even begin their destruction efforts of ACW in China. Zhang also called for industry inspections to be "pursued in keeping with the principle of fairness and reasonableness." ¶20. (U) Of particular note on the destruction issue was Brazil's renewed call for the Council to address the feasibility of the 2012 deadline being met by possessor states sooner rather than later, and that a new specific item should be added to the EC agenda on this matter. ¶21. (U) Using even stronger language than they had at EC-55 in February, both the African Group and NAM again condemned Israel's use of white phosphorus in Gaza in January and called for international investigations into the matter. ¶22. (U) Brazil, India, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Serbia commented on Article X issues, noting the need to identify the resources to be placed at the disposal of the DG for emergency assistance and the removal of transfer restrictions on the provision of protective technology and equipment. Brazil noted that it would organize the first Assistance and Protection Course on Chemical Emergency Response for the GRULAC (Latin America and Caribbean Group) region. ¶23. (U) Echoing the NAM statement, India, Iran and Saudi Arabia all noted the lack of progress in full implementation of Article XI, and called for the lifting of transfer restrictions and development of an action plan. ¶24. (U) Concerning industry cluster issues, several countries recommended that the Council appoint facilitators for the remaining two open consultations. India maintained its view of concerns of distribution methodology and enhancement of OCPF declarations, while the United States cited the need for OCPF inspections to be focused on relevant sites. -------------- Debate on the DG Selection Process -------------- ¶25. (U) On April 22, EC Chairperson Tomova opened the plenary discussion on the appointment of the Director-General. She reported that she had carried out consultations that included all geographic regions and written a report (EC-56/3 dated 16 April 2009) on those consultations. Because of the subject matter, many ambassadors participated, unusual for a Wednesday afternoon. ¶26. (U) Several states made interventions about the need for a regional rotation when selecting the new Director-General, and called for guidelines for the process (Pakistan, Malaysia, Libya, Iran and India). Others responded that having a regional rotation was in direct conflict with choosing the most qualified person for the position (UK, Qmost qualified person for the position (UK, Germany, Italy, Spain, France, Cuba, Chile, Ireland, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Sri Lanka, Japan, Colombia). As had happened at EC-55, the Latin American states came out forcefully in support of the Chairperson and the current open, step-by-step process, as did the EU and WEOG countries. There was general agreement on the importance of working by consensus on this issue. ¶27. (U) Pakistan, South Africa and Iran requested that the text of the Chairperson's report be changed; all three objected to paragraphs implying agreement by the regional groups. The delegates contended that the regional group coordinators were not acting on behalf of their groups when they met with the Chair and thus had no mandate for "agreements." Others countered that the Chairperson's report was her own, reflecting her consultations, and the report did not require the Council's concurrence. ¶28. (U) Most delegations agreed that the intersessional consultations were important, praising the Chairperson for her good work, and stating that the selection process should continue in an open and transparent manner. The Council agreed that consultations should continue under the new Chairperson (Mexican Ambassador Jorge Lomonaco) in May. Lomonaco intervened toward the end to state that he had taken careful note of all the views expressed, thanked Ambassador Tomova for her excellent start and considerable efforts in launching the process, and noted what a large job he would be filling. ¶29. (U) Tomova addressed the Council at the end of the debate, saying that it was important to hear all points of view and that the discussions need to continue. She then closed discuss by moving on to the next agenda item. ¶30. (SBU) On April 23, during formal discussion of the draft report for the Council session, South Africa, Pakistan, Iran and India objected to language that the Council had "received" the Chairperson's report on the appointment of the Director-General. After inconclusive discussion in the plenary, Tomova moved the discussion to a small room with interested parties. In a standing-room- only setting, the delegates from South Africa and Pakistan, with some support from Iran (surprisingly represented by only their new, junior delegate) and India, resisted language acknowledging the Chairperson's report and language that clearly invited all candidates for the DG position to come to EC-56. These delegations pushed for ongoing consultations to address the "modalities" for their appearance (how long they might speak, topics they might address, whether there would be an opportunity for questions, etc.). After long hours of circuitous arguments, the informal meeting came up with a convoluted sentence that all could (reluctantly) agree on. It called for continuing consultations but also noted that candidates would be invited to present themselves to the July session of the EC. -------------- Administrative and Financial Matters -------------- ¶31. (SBU) South African delegate Marthinus van Schalkwyk insisted that a number of administrative QSchalkwyk insisted that a number of administrative and financial documents be deferred for consideration to EC-57. Despite two consultations on the two Office of Internal Oversight (OIO) reports, van Schalkwyk used his absence from both meetings as an excuse for deferral. Additionally, he indicated that action should be postponed until the Advisory Body on Administrative and Financial Matters (ABAF) considered the reports and provided their substantive comments to the Council. (Del Comment: Van Schalkwyk was one of three new African nominees to the ABAF approved at EC-55. His increasingly pugnacious behavior does not bode well for the ABAF. End Comment.) -------------- SAB Report -------------- ¶32. (U) Despite having objected to noting the Scientific Advisory Board's (SAB) report during previous EC session, Iran remained quiet and let the report go through. However, after Chairperson Tomova's report on the meeting of governmental experts to consider the SAB report, Iran requested the EC-56 report include language taken directly from the Second Review Conference (RevCon) on the DG making best use of the SAB's expertise. Despite repeated comments by the DG that he plans to issue a paper on improving the functioning of the SAB, Iran insisted on inserting a lengthy quotation which included a reference to the use of governmental experts. After informal consultations between Tomova and the Iranian delegation, Iran finally agreed to simply refer to their desired RevCon passage rather than inserting it verbatim. -------------- Any Other Business -- UK Report -------------- ¶33. (U) Under AOB, the United Kingdom gave an update on an issue raised in the informal session before EC-44 (March 2006) on a Schedule 2 facility that had raised uncertainty during an inspection. The UK recognized a problem and conducted a criminal investigation which brought charges against two directors of the company and resulted in the first prosecution under the UK's Chemical Weapons Act of 1996. Both directors were convicted and fined. The UK National Authority reviewed its implementation regime following this case and has developed a number of lessons learned. (A copy of the UK statement has been sent to ISN/CB). -------------- Items Approved -------------- ¶34. (U) The following items were approved: EC-56/DEC.3 Facility agreement with the United States regarding on-site inspections at a Schedule 1 facility. EC-56/DEC.4 Amendments to the facility agreement with Iran for a Schedule 1 protective purposes facility. (Del Note: The two associated TS notes are listed below under "Items Noted." End Note.) EC-56/DEC.1 and EC-56/DG.2 Lists of new validated data for the OPCW Central Analytical Database (OCAD). EC-56/DEC.2 Agreement between the OPCW and the UAE on privileges and immunities. Appointment to ABAF of Xiong Shuilong (China),vice Gao Huijun, and Andrei Vitalievitch Kovalenko (Russia),vice Vladimir A. Iossifov. (Del Note: Curricula vitae for both nominees were submitted to the Council and are listed below under "Items Noted." End Note.) Following informal consultations, the Council also requested ABAF to report on its progress in reviewing its work and procedures to EC-57. -------------- Items Deferred -------------- ¶35. (U) The following documents were deferred: EC-56/S/3* General guidelines on the nature of continued verification measures at converted CWPFs ten years after certification of conversion. EC-53/S/1, EC-53/S/1 (Corr. 1) and EC-53/DEC/CRP.1 Recommendations regarding continued verification measures at the converted CWPF at CRP Portreath. EC-55/DG.13 Status of implementation of Article XI. The Council emphasized the importance of early appointment of a facilitator for Article XI. EC-53/S/5 and EC-53/DG.11 Enhancing information on the characteristics of plant sites in OCPF declarations and enhancement of OCPF declarations. EC-55/DG.8 Performance of the modified OCPF site selection methodology. The Council emphasized the importance of early appointment of a facilitator on the issue. The Council also asked the DG to provide a further progress report at the end of the second year of implementation of the modified methodology. EC-56/S/1 Evaluation of the program for implementation support. The facilitator for Article VII announced his intention to hold consultations on the report prior to EC-57. EC-56/DG.5 Implementation in 2008 of recommendations contained in the 2007 OIO annual report. EC-56/DG.6 (also C-14/DG.3) 2008 OIO annual report. EC-56/DG.3 Reclassification of posts. -------------- Items Noted -------------- ¶36. (U) The Council noted the following documents: EC-56/DG.1 Notification by Russia of changes at the former CWPF Kaprolaktam Plant, Dzerzinsk. EC-56/DG.9 Progress made in meeting revised destruction deadlines. EC-56/DG.7 Adjustments to the schedule for submission of 90-day reports on destruction activities. EC-55/DG.5 Status of implementation of Article X. (Del Note: The Iranian delegation was unsuccessful in its attempts to include language on assistance for victims in the EC-56 report. End Note.) EC-55/S/2 (including corrigenda 1 and 2) Evaluation of the effectiveness of Article X programs. The Council requested the evaluation be integrated into future reports on the status of implementation. EC-54/S/7 and EC-55/S/1 Amendments and modifications to the facility agreement with Iran for a Schedule 1 protective purposes facility. EC-56/DG.8 Income and expenditure for the financial year to 31 March 2009. EC-56/DG.4 Alignment of travel related entitlements with those in the UN. EC-55/S/6 Status of implementation in 2008 of the recommendations of the External Auditor. EC-56/S/2 Curricula vitae of ABAF nominees. SAB-12/1 Report of the Twelfth Session of the SAB. EC-55/DG.4 Response of the DG to the SAB report. The Council also received the Chairperson's report on the meeting of governmental experts to review the SAB report to the RevCon (EC-56/2/Rev.1). ¶37. (U) EC Representative Mikulak cleared this report. ¶38. (U) BEIK SENDS. GALLAGHER