CWC: EC-56 DONORS MEETING AND DESTRUCTION INFORMALS

S E C R E T THE HAGUE 000296 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: DECL: 05/07/2019 TAGS: PARM PREL CWC SUBJECT: CWC: EC-56 DONORS MEETING AND DESTRUCTION INFORMALS Classified By: Janet E. Beik for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) (U) This is CWC-28-09 -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (SBU) On the day before the formal opening of the 56th session of the Executive Council (EC), U.S. Del participated in the Donor Coordination Meeting (hosted by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs) and the Destruction Informals (chaired by EC Chairperson Amb. Oksana Tomova). The Donors Meeting featured detailed presentations by Russia, the U.S., the UK and Germany. Russian rhetoric on the responsibility of donors for delays in Russia's program was relatively mild. The meeting was poorly attended, likely due in part to the fact that the contributions of many of the smaller EU donors have already been implemented. The Destruction Informals was Iraq's debut as a "possessor state" and included statements by the U.S. and the UK on recovery and destruction activities in Iraq. As expected, these statements elicited more comments than Iraq's presentation and will likely generate more discussion in the coming months. -------------- DONOR COORDINATION MEETING -------------- ¶2. (U) Dutch Ambassador to the OPCW Pieter de Savornin Lohman chaired the semi-annual Donor Coordination meeting on April 20 to discuss chemical weapons (CW) destruction assistance to the Russian Federation. As many assistance efforts are winding down, the usual tour-de-table of updates and progress reports from all were limited to more detailed statements from the U.S., Russia, the UK and Germany. Dr. Arthur Hopkins (Principal Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense Programs) gave a presentation on U.S. destruction assistance through the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program that summarized a series of completed projects and pending actions. The presentation covered efforts from the completion of the central CW destruction analytical laboratory (CAL) in early January 2001, to directing JSC Khimprom to submit contract closeout plans for Novocheboksarsk CWPF by the end of April 2009. Hopkins noted U.S. continued technical assistance and extended vendor support for foreign purchased equipment as future actions. The total amount of direct U.S. expenditures for chemical weapons elimination in Russia is $796 million with a total budget of $1.1 billion. ¶3. (U) The Russian delegation began with their usual plea to donors to follow through with pending financial and technical commitments and to ensure that such assistance is delivered on time as 2009- 2010 will be crucial for them as 2012 looms closer. Russian reps provided a general overview of the status of their destruction efforts as well as efforts by donors. The U.S. received high marks from Russian reps for Shchuchye, who cited efficiency and speed in facilitating the start up of the Shchuchye CWDF. However, Russian reps were critical of the lack of support from the UK side, citing delays in delivery of equipment, missing parts, and concerns over payment issues that have gone unresolved. Germany and Switzerland also received high marks for their efforts at Pochep, Qreceived high marks for their efforts at Pochep, with the Germans funding Building 11 and the Swiss responsible for the electrical parts. Russian reps also welcomed possible assistance from Italy at Shchuchye and Pochep. ¶4. (U) The German delegation provided a brief but detailed summary of their assistance efforts at Pochep and Kambarka. Construction at Building 11 (Pochep) is almost complete and all the equipment is being preassembled in Germany by Eisenmann and will be sent to the site for assembly work in May 2009 for a scheduled test run in Winter 2009. The expected start-up date for operations in Building 11 is 2010. Kambarka has completed its campaign. ¶5. (U) Despite criticism from the Russian delegation, UK representative James Harrison (Deputy Head of Counter-Proliferation for the Ministry of Defense) gave a very positive summary of UK efforts and projects coordinated with other donors that made significant contributions to the development of the Russian CWDF at Shchuchye. He summarized the UK program from the beginning, outlining the legal framework, contracting elements, oversight, early projects, and the current state of play. Currently, all donors' funds have been expended, except for the UK and Canadian funds which have been allocated for incomplete projects. Unfortunately, it was these same incomplete projects about which Russian reps were openly critical during the meeting. Currently, the following projects remain incomplete: electricity stations, minor lifting equipment items, pollution abatement system, motor control center for the metal parts furnace, and extractor fans. However, all these items are on contract and due to be completed in the next few months for installation in the second destruction building, which is due to start operations later in ¶2009. ¶6. (U) The Donors that have expended and/or completed their commitments include: Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway and Sweden. The EU funds that were donated also have been expended. ¶7. (U) In a final note of interest, the UK reminded delegations of the 12th Annual International Chemical Weapons Demilitarization Conference in Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire, United Kingdom on May 18-21, 2009. ¶8. (U) The next donors' meeting is scheduled for October 12, 2009. -------------- DESTRUCTION INFORMALS -------------- ¶9. (U) On April 20, EC Chairperson Amb. Oksana Tomova chaired the traditional Destruction Informals prior to the beginning of the formal EC session the following day. She outlined the standard agenda, which included briefings by Secretariat officials and States Parties. ¶10. (U) Horst Reeps, Director of the Verification Division, provided an overview of verification activities since the last EC. He noted that 43.42% of Category 1 CW, and 52% of Category 2 CW, had been destroyed as of April 20. Five CW destruction facilities (CWDFs) were currently operational: two in the United States and three in Russia (TOCDF, PBCDF, Maradykovsky, Leonidovka and Shchuchye). India completed CW destruction in April before its April 29, 2009 deadline. On April 20, Libya completed reloading operations for pinacolyl alcohol, iso-propanol and sulfur mustard agent at its Ruwagha reloading facility. Libya will continue with the reloading of other declared Category 2 Qwith the reloading of other declared Category 2 precursors later this year. Inspection totals between February 16 and April 19 included one former CW Production Facility (CWPF),five CW Storage Facilities, one Old Chemical Weapons, three Schedule 1, six Schedule 2, nine Schedule 3, and 25 OCPF. The majority of inspections were in the Asia and WEOG regions. There were no uncertainties or issues requiring further attention. ¶11. (U) Reeps noted that Iraq became a State Party on February 12 and submitted its initial declaration on March 12. Thirteen States Parties had initial declarations overdue, three since 2003; two States Parties lacked Article VI declarations; and one State Party lacked an Article III declaration. More Annual Declarations of Past Activities (ADPA) for 2008 and Annual Declarations of Anticipated Activities (ADAA) for 2009 were submitted on time this year than in previous years. ¶12. (U) Stephen Wade, Head of Declarations Branch (DEB),said that between February 17 and April 17 DEB had received 10,962 pages of documentation, including: - Iraq's initial declaration (CW munitions in two bunkers; five former CWPFs; two former facilities for CW development testing or evaluation; receipts of CW related chemicals and equipment since 1946 and four OCPF plant sites); - Russia's 2009 Annual Destruction Plan; - U.S. Annual Report for the Destruction of CW; - 90-day reports from Libya, China, and Japan (received April 17); - An amendment for the Libyan Ruwagha Reloading System; - Notification of completion of destruction at India's Borkhedi site as of March 11; - Notification of completion of Russian destruction operations at Kambarka; - Other information relating to CWDFs in Russia and the United States; - Facility Agreements (8 CWSF, 4 CWDF and 2 Schedule 2); - UK and U.S. information on the recovery and destruction of pre-1991 CW Munitions in Iraq; - Annual reports for converted CWPFs, OCW destruction in France, Germany, Italy and the UK. ¶13. (U) Dominique Anelli, Head of the Chemical Demilitarization Branch, provided an overview of CW destruction as of March 31, 2009. 88.6% of declared CWPFs have been destroyed or converted. Inspection teams confirmed the completion of destruction of the last Indian CWPF which had been temporarily converted for CW destruction purposes. Russian efforts to convert the former CW production facility at Novocheboksarsk continue to be complicated by residual Vx contamination. Anelli outlined the verification status of converted CWPFs. He then outlined the status of Category 1 destruction at the CWDFs: Tooele, 44%; Anniston, 7.4%; Umatilla, 13.7%; Pine Bluff, 13.1%; Newport, 100%; Kambarka, 100%; Maradykovsky, 17.2%; Leonidovka, 17.2%; Shchuchye, 13.6%; Borkhedi, 100%. Only 15 of 37 originally declared CWSFs are under systematic inspection (in four States Parties). Since entry into force, 13 States Parties have declared Old Chemical Weapons (OCW). Currently seven OCW sites in seven States Parties are subject to inspection. Three States Parties have declared ACW: China, Italy and Panama. The TS observed trial excavations at the Haerbaling site in China. ¶14. (U) Dr. al Sharaa, Director-General of the Iraqi National Monitoring Directorate (INMD) and QIraqi National Monitoring Directorate (INMD) and head of Iraq's National Authority, provided an overview of the Iraqi CW program history, Iraq's initial declaration and challenges Iraq faces in destroying remaining CW. He began with a historical review, noting that CW activities began in 1971 and ended in 1988. He then outlined the effects of two wars on CW-related facilities, highlighting that most are partially or completely destroyed, even if not to CWC standard. Al Sharaa showed photos of the physical appearance of Al- Muthanna and Fallujah I, II and III. He indicated that Iraq would report recovered CW munitions in accordance with the CWC. He then presented an outline of Iraq's initial declaration. ¶15. (U) Al Sharaa finished by emphasizing that the Iraqi situation is unique. There are a large number of scattered CW "remnants" and contaminated buildings remain. The inventory and physical state of CW precursors and weapons stored in Al-Muthanna bunkers is unknown and the Iraqis, while intending to meet treaty obligations, will have to assess support of OPCW verification efforts on a case by case basis due to security considerations. ¶16. (U) The U.S. and the UK then presented information concerning CW munitions recovered and destroyed in Iraq. As expected, these presentations elicited comments and questions. Pakistan expressed surprise at the U.S. and UK statements and asked whether the TS would provide State Parties with the information submitted to the Secretariat. The Director-General (DG) said the information was not new and in any case it would be provided to States Parties. The Russian delegation said that Russia will study the information and provide comment at a later date. South Africa asked about the time frames that the U.S. and UK declarations were made. The DG said that they were made "contemporarily" with the Iraqi declaration in the 30 day window between EIF and the due date for the Iraqi declaration. ¶17. (C) Russia reviewed its efforts to meet the 2012 CW destruction deadline, noting that by April 1, it had destroyed 30.32% of its category 1 CW (12,120 MT). The Russian delegation noted that Russia currently had three operational CWDFs and that Kambarka had recently completed operations. At Maradykovsky, 23,473 CW items had been destroyed including 4,547 MT of Vx. About 3,000 MT of reaction mass had been incinerated and 12,000 metal CW items had been thermally processed. The second line at Maradykovsky is under construction, and may begin operating in June. At Leonidovka 32,755 CW items have been processed, a number that equates to 4415 MT of Vx. Facility personnel are draining the reaction mass from the aerial bomb casings and will soon begin processing the drained metal munition casings. Incineration of the reaction mass has started. ¶18. (C) At Leonidovka, an experiment is underway to use decontamination agent RD4M to neutralize drained Vx from munitions. At Shchuchye, the first line is operating and has destroyed 90 MT of Sarin from 30,000 projectiles. Work is progressing on the second line. Construction of Pochep is in progress, and it is hoped the first line will be up and running by the end of 2009. The first line at Kizner is under construction. The Russians acknowledged the financial help for Shchuchye, Kizner and Pochep from "abroad". ¶19. (C) Dr. Arthur Hopkins spoke for the United QStates on it demilitarization program. He reiterated the destruction progress already presented by the TS, but emphasized this was done at facilities that took years to build and start up safely. He noted that this scenario of a lengthy period of construction, systemization, and start-up will play out at Blue Grass, KY, and Pueblo, CO, which he projected would be operating after 2012. Hopkins predicted that before 2012 the United E States would destroy over 90% of its declared stockpile. He added that the United States was seeking ways to accelerate the construction and startup effort. His presentation drew no questions or comments from delegations. ¶20. (S) India presented the history of its successful completion of its CW stockpile. The Indian rep noted that India had developed patented technology to handle sulfur mustard "heels" in containers and had developed personal protective gear that achieved a zero defects track record during destruction operations. India offered to share its technologies with other States Parties. ¶21. (U) Libya presented no information on the status the Rabta CWDF and focused instead on the conversion efforts at Rabta and reloading operations at the Ruwagha storage facility. To date, 26 of 30 buildings at Rabta have been converted (21 converted and verified by the TS, 5 converted but not yet verified by the TS). Validation and operation of the pharmaceutical plant is expected to be completed before December 31, 2009. ¶22. (U) The reloading operations at Ruwagha have been conducted at night due to excessive day-time temperatures. The Libyans have reloaded all of the mustard and some of the precursors into 2500-liter mobile containers; 100% of the sulfur mustard CW and the precursors pinacolyl alcohol and isopropanol have been reloaded. 1091 20-liter and 3546 1-liter mustard containers were drained into the 2500-liter tanks. 382 of the 1091 20-liter mustard containers were fond to have some heel; container weights were documented. 24,871 1-liter pinacolyl alcohol and 7498 1 liter isopropanol containers were drained. The operations have been under the TS supervision and seals have been applied to the mobile containers. ¶23. (U) China indicated its disappointment at the pace of Japanese destruction of its abandoned CW (JACW). The Chinese representative said that Japan had not followed up on the excavations at Haerbaling and that China hoped that Japan would conduct additional excavations during the short NE China summer. China noted not a single JACW had been destroyed yet. China acknowledged the contract Japan has with Kobe Steel to manufacture mobile destruction facilities (MDFs) but noted that the first unit is not scheduled to be available until 2010, only two years from the 2012 CW destruction deadline. ¶24. (U) Japan followed by reviewing the excavations conducted at Haerbaling in Pit Number 2 and stated that Japan intends to excavate in Pit Number One this year. The Japanese rep said that Japan intends to set up a small scale destruction facility before the Mobile Destruction Facilities (MDFs) are available. Japan then showed a picture of a controlled explosive destruction chamber, which presumably is the technology they plan to use in the MDFs. Japan added that some recoveries of JACW had been made at three sites in the Guandong area and three munitions had been over-packed for later destruction. ¶25. (U) BEIK SENDS. GALLAGHER