CWC: MISSING THE 2012 CONVENTION DEADLINE:

C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 000312 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: 05/22/2019 TAGS: PARM PREL CWC SUBJECT: CWC: MISSING THE 2012 CONVENTION DEADLINE: DEMARCHE ON U.S. CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION FACILITIES AHEAD OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL VISIT REF: STATE 051992 Classified By: Janet E. Beik, Deputy U.S. Representative to the OPCW, for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) This is CWC-29-09. -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (SBU) On May 22, Delreps Beik and Robinson delivered reftel demarche on projected U.S. destruction dates beyond the 2012 extended Convention deadline to the Director General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW),Ambassador Rogelio Pfirter, and the new Chairman of the Executive Council, Ambassador Jorge Lomonaco Tonda (Mexico). Both questioned why the U.S. will be conveying detailed projected dates beyond 2012 to the Executive Council at this time, with the Director General particularly concerned about its implications for the Convention and potential reactions from other countries. -------------- MEETING WITH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL -------------- ¶2. (SBU) Delreps opened by informing the Director General and Chief of Cabinet Richard Ekwall that the U.S. has just made a partial payment of its assessed 2009 contribution (c. 4 Million Euro). Pfirter expressed appreciation, and noted how important it would be to pay the remaining amount as quickly as possible. ¶3. (SBU) Drawing upon points in reftel, Delreps informed Pfirter of the current schedule for the U.S. chemical weapons destruction facilities in Pueblo, Colorado and Blue Grass, Kentucky. Delreps emphasized U.S. commitment to complete destruction, and to full transparency, and noted that the U.S. continues to explore ways to accelerate its destruction program. ¶4. (C) Pfirter thanked Delreps for providing the new schedule information, and expressed "enormous regret" at the fact that the U.S. was unable to complete destruction sooner. He indicated that he knew of the report to Congress, and noted that program officials at the UK chemical weapons demilitarization conference being held this week were already sharing U.S. chemical demilitarization program dates beyond 2012 as official information. Pfirter stated that he recognized the efforts being made by the United States, and believes it will be important to highlight the fact that 90% of the stockpile will be destroyed in 2012. He also recommended that the U.S. emphasize more clearly the fact that ensuring safety of workers and the environment is an obligation under the Chemical Weapons Convention. He expressed hope that representatives on the Executive Council visit would gain an understanding of the complexity of the construction and systemization at Pueblo, and make reference to this in the report of the visit. ¶5. (C) Pfirter stated that it will be both important and challenging to manage this issue over the next three years, in order to avoid overly politicizing the subject and hindering constructive work in other areas of the Organization. He acknowledged that this could easily influence even the presentations of the DG candidates during EC-57, as many delegations will now have even more reason to ask candidates how they intend to handle destruction deadlines in 2012. Pfirter offered his personal opinion that Qdeadlines in 2012. Pfirter offered his personal opinion that it will not serve the Convention or the Organization to view this as a failure when the U.S. clearly continues to act in the spirit of the Convention, and given the fact that there are likely to be others faced with destruction of chemical weapons after 2012. However, he also acknowledged that the situation will require careful legal management, as there is no provision in the Convention for further extension of the deadline. Pfirter emphasized that the absence of a U.S. Ambassador to the OPCW will send mixed signals about U.S. commitment to the CWC and to CW destruction. ¶6. (SBU) In closing, Delreps provided invitations to Pfirter and Ekwall for the May 31 reception in Washington, as well as the personal letter from Assistant to the Secretary of Defense Fred Celec to the Director General. Pfirter noted that he will be in Washington the week of June 15 and would like to meet with senior U.S. officials while there. -------------- MEETING WITH EC CHAIR LOMONACO -------------- ¶7. (C) Drawing upon points in Reftel, Delreps informed Amb. Lomonaco of the current schedule for the U.S. chemical weapons destruction facilities in Pueblo, Colorado and Blue Grass, Kentucky. Lomonaco expressed appreciation for the advance notice, and assured Delreps he would keep this information in confidence. He also noted that this did not come as a surprise, as the U.S. has been transparent for several years about its inability to meet 2012. He did, however, state that the U.S. has obviously known about this schedule for some time, and asked whether it was a decision of the new administration to choose this particular point in time for full transparency on the remaining schedule. Delreps indicated that the timing was based on the recent submission of the information to Congress, on which briefings to the visiting EC representatives will be based. ¶8. (C) Lomonaco raised the question of whether/how the search for a new Director General would be affected by this, and also expressed his concern that the politics of the DG search could impact all other substantive decisions in the Council (or vice versa). He indicated that he will need to get a sense of the current political climate before determining whether a separate meeting to discuss the EC Visit report would be appropriate prior to EC-57. ¶9. (SBU) Turning to other Council issues, Lomonaco expressed his hope that EC-57 could efficiently adopt the 2008 Verification Implementation Report (VIR) and other documents on the agenda. Consultations on the VIR will be held at the end of June. He added that he will make an appeal to WEOG next week to support him in making it difficult for troublesome delegations to defer documents without a clear reason. Lomonaco also noted that the new South African Ambassador intends to be active in OPCW affairs, and confirmed that the Costa Rican Ambassador is willing to facilitate this year,s budget consultations. -------------- DEL COMMENT -------------- ¶10. (C) The Director General asked whether the U.S. was informing him "formally or informally" of inability to meet the treaty deadline (i.e. non-compliance with the treaty). He was clearly concerned about the reactions of other delegations and the broader legal implications for the Chemical Weapons Convention and other international treaties. Lomonaco contrasted U.S. and Russian differences in disclosing information on inability to meet the deadline, but he also recognized the impact the announcement of U.S. dates Qhe also recognized the impact the announcement of U.S. dates beyond 2012 will have on the Executive Council's conduct of business. As the DG noted, this issue will likely have significant repercussions for the Organization and will require the attention and careful management of senior U.S. and Technical Secretariat officials in the months ahead. ¶11. (U) BEIK SENDS. GALLAGHER