CWC: LIBYA DESTRUCTION DEADLINE EXTENSION

S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 03 THE HAGUE 000578

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, DENYER AND CRISTOFARO)
NSC FOR LUTES
WINPAC FOR WALTER

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/23/2019
TAGS: LY PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CWC: LIBYA DESTRUCTION DEADLINE EXTENSION
REQUEST-- ARE THE LIBYANS BACKTRACKING?

REF: A. SECSTATE 59827

B. THE HAGUE 526

C. E-MAIL FERGUSON-SMITH/BAKER SEPTEMBER 9 2009
(RESPONSE TO LIBYA PAPERS)

D. EC-58/NAT.5 (LIBYAN EXTENSION REQUEST)

Classified By: Janet E. Beik for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D)

This is CWC-55-09


1. (U) This is an action request -- see para 4.

--------------
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUEST
--------------


2. (S) Libya formally submitted its national
paper to the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons on August 24 requesting an
extension to its Chemical Weapons destruction
deadline (ref D),before giving the U.S. Delegation
a draft on August 27 as promised during the July
Executive Council (EC). The reasons presented in
the Libyan paper for the extension request
(complaints by citizens groups and environmental
concerns) appear to be lifted from U.S.
explanations for delays in our own destruction
program. However, senior officials at OPCW and
members of other delegations are skeptical of the
Libyan explanations for the extension. The
Director-General himself told Delrep privately that
the Libyans' extension request is a "work of pure
fiction."


3. (S) The Libyan government has been less than
transparent in recent reports to the EC and has
been less than truthful in its delegation's series
of consultations with the U.S. and UK. While it
would be awkward for the U.S. to publicly challenge
Libya's extension request, due to its similarity to
our own, Del believes that the U.S. should be
directly confronting Libya privately with questions
about its commitment to total CW destruction and
its real timeline. Other delegations may wish to
raise questions in the Executive Council, as they
have in the past.


4. (S) Action requested: Del requests the inter-
agency's and Embassy Tripoli's views on the
legitimacy of Libya's justification for its
extension request and whether the Government of
Libya is walking back from its commitments to the
Chemical Weapons Convention and the complete
destruction of its CW stockpile. Del would
appreciate talking points for use with the Libyan
delegation, and for use with other national
delegations, on the U.S. evaluation of Libya's
extension request in the run-up to Executive
Council 58 (October 13-16) when a decision will
need to be made on that request.

--------------
BACKGROUND
--------------


5. (SBU) On August 27, Delrep received a copy of
two Libyan papers in Arabic: (1) Notice of
Amendments to the General and Detailed Plans for
Converting the Former Chemical Weapons Producing
Facilities "al-Rabta I" and al-Rabta II" and (2)
National Paper of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Regarding the Request to Extend the Intermediate
and Final Deadlines for Destroying the Chemical
Weapons Arsenal. The papers were provided by Libya
Delegate, Mohadeb Gheton and were provided only in
Arabic. Gheton asserted that these were in draft
form, requested USG comments, and stated Libya's

THE HAGUE 00000578 002 OF 003


intention to submit these formally to the OPCW
after receiving USG comments. He stated a desire
to submit both documents within thirty days of the
upcoming Executive Council session. Gheton also
asked that should the U.S. translation of the
documents be completed in advance of their own,
that the U.S. Delegation pass the copies to the UK
Delegation for consideration as well.


6. (SBU) Both documents were translated into
English at the State Department and returned to the
Delegation on September 4. Delrep provided copies
to the Libyan and UK delegations on September 5. On
September 9, the USG response to the Libyan papers
was provided via email (ref C).


7. (SBU) Meanwhile, other European delegations were
reporting to Delreps that the Libyan government had
demarched their embassies in Tripoli, requesting
support the extension request but without providing
the document.


8. (C) Delrep met with UK Delegate Karen
Wolstenholme on September 15 to review U.S. and UK
comments in advance of a scheduled trilateral
discussion on September 16. Also on September 15,
the Technical Secretariat released "The Socialist
People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Request for
Extension of the Intermediate and Final Deadlines
for the Destruction of its Category 1 Chemical
Weapons" (EC-58/NAT.5) (Del note: The TS document
shows the date of submission as August 24, three
days before the Libyan delegation gave us the
"draft" in Arabic.")


9. (SBU) On September 16, Delrep met with UK
Delegate Wolstenholme and Libya Delegate Ahmed
Hassan Walid to discuss the status of both papers.

-------------- --------------
LIBYA'S DESTRUCTION DEADLINE EXTENSION REQUEST
-------------- --------------


10. (SBU) Walid informed Delrep and Wolstenholme
that the deadline extension request paper was
submitted in final form for consideration by
Executive Council Session 58 (EC-58). Delrep
expressed disappointment in the coordination of the
document and stated that it had clearly been
described as a draft which would be submitted
following substantive discussion of the comments
received from Washington and London. Wolstenholme
inquired how the Libya delegation intends to handle
the comments received from both delegations. Walid
stated that he would prefer to receive the comments
in the form of a non-paper which he will then pass
to the National Authority in Tripoli. He stated
that the comments could be further discussed with
the technical team from Libya that will travel to
The Hague to attend EC-58.


11. (SBU) Delrep verbally communicated the USG
response (ref C) and provided a copy of the
"Excerpts from the June 2009 Non Paper" while
indicating that she would share the request for a
non-paper with Washington. Walid had copies of
previous USG non-papers with him and stated that
the technical group had considered these in the
drafting of their papers and would continue to do
so in preparation for EC-58.


12. (SBU) Wolstenholme stated that she would
request a non-paper from London as well, and
Qrequest a non-paper from London as well, and
provided the UK response to the extension request
verbally. Both Delrep and Wolstenholme emphasized
the desire for detailed communication of the
destruction progress to include interim benchmarks

THE HAGUE 00000578 003 OF 003


for tracking progress, and highlighting that
additional transparency into destruction operations
and activity would likely foster greater support
from States Parties for their extension request.
Wolstenholme stated that the UK generally supports
Libya's position on the extension request.

13.(SBU) Delrep, Wolstenholme and Walid tentatively
scheduled a meeting with the Libya delegation, to
include the technical group responsible or drafting
these requests, on October 11 in advance of EC-58.

--------------
REQUEST TO RETAIN SANDBAG WALL
--------------


14. (SBU) Walid stated that the Libyan paper
regarding the retention of the sandbag wall was
also submitted to the Technical Secretariat in
final form along with the "Notification of Changes
to the General and Detailed Plans for Conversion of
the CWPFs. Rabta Pharmaceutical Factory - 1, Rabta
Pharmaceutical Factory - 2, (Phase II)" and
provided a copy of the latter. (Delnote: Document
was passed electronically to ISN-CB on September
16, but has still not been officially released by
the TS.)


15. (SBU) Per Ref C guidance, Delrep communicated
that the U.S. is agreeable to supporting the
proposed amendments if the Government of Libya
provides a firm commitment to meet the
transparency level stipulated in our June non-paper
on "General Considerations for the Rabta
Conversion." Wolstenholme stated that the UK
generally supports the Libya position on this paper
as well, and added that inclusion of a description
on the original function of the sandbag wall would
be preferred.



16. (U) BEIK SENDS.
LEVIN