COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN TREATY: EXECUTIVE

UNCLAS UNVIE VIENNA 000114

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PARM KTBT SA
SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN TREATY: EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY PRESSES FOR TIMELY US FUNDING AND SUPPORT

REF: UNVIE 48


1. (SBU) At the conclusion of Working Group B of Preparatory
Commission of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization
(CTBTO),Ambassador met with Provisional Technical
Secretariat (PTS) Executive Secretary Tibor Toth to review
the results of the three weeks of meetings. Toth welcomed
signs of change in US policy, noting that movement toward
entry into force of the Treaty could have positive effects on
the 2010 NPT Review Conference and on various IAEA
initiatives. Unfortunately, he added, some the G77 were in a
state of denial about the change in US policy and prospects
for entry into force. The G77 was still calling for a stop
to station building in the International Monitoring System
(IMS),saw no need to consider changing the rules on
provisional operation, and were demanding the 2010 budget
stay at zero real growth. Mexico was even demanding a 2010
budget reflecting zero nominal growth. This resistance would
continue, Toth strongly opined, unless the U.S. pays its 2009
assessment on time and in full. He also urged the necessity
of the U.S. being fully prepared by the May WGB meetings to
take the lead on on-site inspection matters. If the U.S.
missed this opportunity to put its stamp on OSI planning,
irreversible decisions would already be made.


2. (SBU) Toth also asked for US assistance with Saudi Arabia.
Although Saudi Arabia has neither signed nor ratified the
Treaty, the PTS had set up the equipment for a a seismic
station on Saudi territory. The station has never
functioned, and now the Saudis are requesting that the PTS
come remove the seismic equipment from their territory. Toth
urged the US to intervene with the Saudis, stressing that it
would send exactly the wrong message to have a country reject
and dismantle an existent station just when prospects for
entry into force were otherwise improving. Mission believes
Washington should consider a demarche along the lines
suggested by Toth.


3. (SBU) In an informal meeting after with missionoff, a
South African representative, one of the most active and
influential G77 members in Vienna, expressed opinions
illustrating the truth of Toth's concerns. The G77,
according to the South African, welcomed the Obama
administration's apparent plan to work for ratification of
the Treaty. The Group realized this would take time, so the
Group was willing to "keep the heat down" in future CTBT
meetings while waiting for U.S. action. In particular, the
group had told Iran that it would no longer support
protracted discussion of the issue of Palestinian
observership in the Preparatory Commission. Iran could make
its points, but it would then have to allow the meeting to
continue and not be dominated by this single issue. In
exchange, the Group would only want a positive statement from
the U.S. at the June meeting of the Preparatory Commission,
participation in Article XIV (i.e., ratification) activities,
agreement to "keep the budget under control," and finally and
most importantly evidence of "a clear path to ratification in
advance of the NPT Review Conference."


4. (U) In a March 11 meeting with representatives of the EU
trio (France, Czech Republic, and Sweden),as well as Germany
and the UK, there was further discussion about methods to
encourage support for the Treaty in the G77. We agreed that
a like-minded group would meet with representatives of the
G77 prior to the drafting of the G77 statement for the May
meetings of Working Groups A and B. The EU expressed
interest in a possible meeting of technical experts in the
on-site inspection area prior to the May meetings, possibly
on Friday, May 8, and pushed for a cooperative effort between
the EU and the US on maintenance of the auxiliary seismic
system. Finally, the two sides agreed to share their
respective suggestions on the proposed work plans for Working
Groups A and B.


5. (SBU) Comment. Toth is correct that, in the opinion of
most CTBT Signatory States, the only "proof" of U.S.
commitment to the CTBT will be the payment of U.S.
assessments in full and on time. The U.S. paid its 2008
arrears in February but has yet to pay anything toward its
2009 assessment. With the construction of new stations in
the International Monitoring System slowly coming to a halt
from lack of funds, U.S. funding will be the key to ensuring
forward movement in this key element of the verification
regime. The expectations on US re-engagement with the Treaty
are extremely high, with not only the EU, but also states
like Russia and China, hoping that the participation of US
experts will bring immediate results in such problem areas
such as on-site inspections. At this point, we understand,

the FY09 allocation for CTBT was largely exhausted by the
February arrears payment, so we will be back under the budget
microscope at the June Preparatory Commission meeting, with
no sign of the US paying its 2009 dues. An early FY10 budget
could avoid a loss of US voting rights, but the Department
may also wish to explore the possibility of attaching CTBTO
funding to one of the supplementals going forward before the
end of this fiscal year.
SCHULTE