CWC: MEETINGS ON THE MARGINS OF THE CONFERENCE OF

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 000757 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, DENYER AND CRISTOFARO) NSC FOR LUTES WINPAC FOR WALTER E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PARM PREL CWC SUBJECT: CWC: MEETINGS ON THE MARGINS OF THE CONFERENCE OF THE STATES PARTIES (CSP 14) REF: A. THE HAGUE 746 ¶B. THE HAGUE 738 ¶C. THE HAGUE 755 ¶D. STATE 116290 This is CWC-76-09 ¶1. (U) This contains an action request: see para 13. ¶2. (SBU) SUMMARY: On the margins of the 14th Conference of the States Parties (CSP) (ref A),the U.S. Delegation met bilaterally with the observer Israeli delegation, with the Indian delegation to discuss industry issues, and with the Algerian delegation to discuss the proposed conference on chemical safety and security in Algiers. Delreps also participated in a meeting with interested parties on a proposal for continued verification of converted chemical weapons production facilities (CWPFs) ten years after their conversion. Other meetings with the Iraqi and Libyan delegations, as well as the Technical Secretariat (TS),were reported in Refs B and C. END SUMMARY. -------------- ISRAEL: JUST CHECKING IN -------------- ¶3. (SBU) On December 1, Head of Delegation Mikulak and Delreps met with the observer Israeli delegation consisting of Tamar Rahamimoff-Honig (Deputy Director, Arms Control Department, MFA), Tali Messika (CBRN Policy and International Cooperation, MOD) and Yair Even (DCM, Israeli Embassy in The Hague). As during previous bilateral meetings, discussion was general in scope, covering major issues at the OPCW and before the CSP. Throughout the meeting, Rahamimoff-Honig stated that Israel is adopting a "wait-and-see" approach to incoming Director-General (DG) Ahmet Uzumcu. She expressed her hope that Israel could maintain the good relationship enjoyed with the TS under current DG Rogelio Pfirter. Rahamimoff-Honig explicitly noted that the Israeli position regarding ratification of the Convention has not changed and is unlikely to do so anytime soon. ¶4. (SBU) Rahmimoff-Honig asked several questions about the 2012 deadline for destruction of chemical weapons (CW) stockpiles, specifically inquiring how the Organization will manage the possibility of missing the deadline. Mikulak gave an update on the status of destruction and conversations within ;the Organization, and he stated that any accommodation beyond 2012 likely would involve a political compromise rather than amendments to the Convention. -------------- -------------- INDIA: CONTINUING THE CONVERSATION ON INDUSTRY ISSUES -------------- -------------- ¶5. (SBU) Delreps Clagett, Prather and Weekman met with Prajapati Trivedi (Head of the Indian National Authority) and Bijoy Chatterjee (a senior official in the Indian Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals) to continue previous bilateral discussions on industry-related issues. Weekman focused on chemical safety and security, highlighting three areas where member states could address the issue: posting data about chemical safety to the OPCW website, the proposed international chemical terrorism conference in Algeria, and a chemical safety meeting in the context of Article XI (economic and technological development). The Indian delegation was very receptive to Weekman's ideas and indicated a Qreceptive to Weekman's ideas and indicated a willingness to host an Article XI-related workshop on chemical safety and security. ¶6. (SBU) When Clagett shared U.S. views on including degradation mass spectra data in the OPCW Central Analytical Database (OCAD),the Indian delegation responded that degradation products must point to scheduled chemicals. Clagett also talked about a chart he has developed to assess TS inspectors during industry inspections in the U.S.; the Indian delegation requested a copy of the chart for their use in evaluating the quality of TS inspectors. The Indian delegation also stated their intention to conduct experimental sequential inspections with the TS and thanked the U.S. for the previously-provided non-paper on sequential inspections. -------------- -------------- ALGERIA: STILL PLANNING THE CHEMICAL SAFETY WORKSHOP -------------- -------------- ¶7. (SBU) On December 3, Delreps Smith and Weekman met with Algerian delegates Sid Ali Branci, Charg d'Affaires in The Hague, and Missoum Ramla from the National Authority in Algiers, to discuss the status of preparations for the proposed chemical terrorism conference in Algiers. Weekman provided Branci, who arrived in The Hague over the summer, with a brief history of the proposal and the recent cable with proposed conference details (ref D). Branci stated that he had no new information or guidance from Algiers on the proposal. ¶8. (SBU) Concerning costs, Weekman maintained as previously agreed that Algiers should cover most of the administrative costs with the U.S. funding the travel and per diem for around fifty participants through ISN/CTR's Chemical Security Engagement Program. Branci expressed an interest in also obtaining funding from the European Union. Branci agreed to follow up with Algiers to confirm Algerian support for the conference and to request the Algerian government coordinate with the African Center for the Study and Research Against Terrorism (CAERT) to host the conference and propose dates in the June 2010 timeframe. Once these confirmations are made and there is a date to work against, detailed planning can begin. -------------- VERIFICATION OF CONVERTERED CWPFS -------------- ¶9. (U) Delreps Weekman and Prather attended a short-notice discussion on the United Kingdom's draft proposal on continued verification measures at converted chemical weapons production facilities ten years after conversion. The meeting was chaired by Dutch Ambassador Lohman in his capacity as Vice-Chairperson for Destruction issues and attended by the representatives of the UK, Russia, South Korea, Germany, the TS, and the U.S. The UK began the discussion by giving an overview of their "scorecard" approach to converted facilities inspections taking into account plant production. ¶10. (U) Russia outlined problems with the proposal and stated they would not support a separate inspection mechanism for converted facilities. Russia further stated that a converted facility should be treated as a normal industrial facility Qshould be treated as a normal industrial facility under Article VI. South Korea also stated they would not accept the UK proposal and will not accept a "separate mechanism." ¶11. (U) Weekman stated that the U.S. was developing its position and still needed to assess the proposal. Weekman stated that there was much history to this issue and that the Council would need to carefully consider, among other things, which facilities were of most concern. This process would require some education of Council members. Weekman opined that a risk-based approach made sense, and that issues such as the past history of the converted facility, its location and configuration within the existing plant site, and its capabilities all needed to be carefully considered in addition to its current production. ¶12. (U) In response to a question on costs, the TS stated that increased expenses due to the additional converted facility inspections would be low to the OPCW. The meeting concluded with the TS agreeing to work with Ambassador Lohman on a new draft proposal and then to sharing it with interested parties. Consultations are expected to resume after the holiday period and prior to the February Executive Council meeting. ¶13. (U) Action Request: Del requests guidance on the UK proposal and, more broadly, a position on the verification and inspection regime for converted CWPFs ten years after their conversion. ¶14. (U) BEIK SENDS. LEVIN