Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09USNATO202
2009-05-20 15:53:00
CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN
Mission USNATO
Cable title:
RFG: U.S. CONTRIBUTIONS TO NATO COUNTER-PIRACY
how-toVZCZCXYZ0003 OO RUEHWEB DE RUEHNO #0202 1401553 ZNY CCCCC ZZH O 201553Z MAY 09 FM USMISSION USNATO TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 2988 INFO RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC PRIORITY RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY RHEHNSC/WHITE HOUSE NSC WASHDC PRIORITY RHMFISS/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY RHFMISS/HQ USAFRICOM STUTTGART GE PRIORITY RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY RUEHNO/USDELMC BRUSSELS BE PRIORITY RUEHBS/USNMR BRUSSELS BE PRIORITY RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 0905
C O N F I D E N T I A L USNATO 000202
NOFORN
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/20/2019
TAGS: PREL NATO MOPS EWWT ZR SO XA
SUBJECT: RFG: U.S. CONTRIBUTIONS TO NATO COUNTER-PIRACY
EFFORTS
Classified By: Ambassador Ivo Daalder. Reasons: 1.4 (b) and (d).
C O N F I D E N T I A L USNATO 000202
NOFORN
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/20/2019
TAGS: PREL NATO MOPS EWWT ZR SO XA
SUBJECT: RFG: U.S. CONTRIBUTIONS TO NATO COUNTER-PIRACY
EFFORTS
Classified By: Ambassador Ivo Daalder. Reasons: 1.4 (b) and (d).
1. (C/NF) This is a request for guidance. See para 6.
2. (C/NF) SUMMARY: While the U.S. has been pressing hard for
a long-term NATO role in counter-piracy, we have thus far
been unable to answer Allied questions about what the U.S.
commitment/contribution to such a mission would be. Without
a clear U.S. commitment, a NATO mission can not succeed. We
request Washington guidance on this issue, including more
clarity on what a U.S. contribution might be, in time for a
May 22 force sensing conference. END SUMMARY
Pushing a NATO Mission...
--------------
3. (C/NF) At a policy level, the United States has been
pressing hard for a long-term NATO role in international
counter-piracy efforts. On May 13, for example, the
Department issued a fact sheet which stated that "we actively
support the expansion of NATO and European Union counter
piracy missions." Indeed, the U.S. has even suggested that
counter-piracy might be an area for practical NATO-Russia
cooperation, once military-to-military engagement is
re-established within the framework of the NATO-Russia
Council.
Requires a U.S. Commitment...
--------------
4. (C/NF) While most Allies have seemed willing to agree to
the establishment of a long-term NATO counter-piracy effort,
many of European Allies have also asked what "value-added" a
NATO mission would bring when compared to the EU's Atalanta
counter-piracy mission. This is their coded way of asking
what the U.S. would bring to the table, especially since many
of them have also made clear that their first priority would
be force generation for the EU mission. Belgium and
Portugal, among others, have openly stated that force
generation for a NATO mission should not come at the expense
of the EU mission. Since NATO is an Alliance tying together
the U.S. and Canada with Europe, a NATO operation--almost by
definition--can not succeed without a clear U.S.
contribution. We can use a U.S. contribution to leverage
European contributions for such a mission. Europeans will
have little appetite, however, for a NATO mission that the
U.S. pushes for, but is unwilling to contribute to.
Time is Running Out
--------------
5. (C/NF) Our ability to avoid this apparent disconnect is
quickly disappearing. On Friday, May 22, NATO will host a
force sensing conference. While perhaps less formal than an
official force generation conference, this conference will
nevertheless be critical to our efforts to move forward with
a NATO mission. If the U.S. representative is not able to
put forward a coherent U.S. position, including a "sense" of
what an eventual U.S. contribution to the mission might be,
Allies will likely ask very pointed questions about why we
are pushing so hard for a mission that the U.S., in the end,
does seem willing to commit to join.
6. (C/NF) Request for Guidance: We request Washington
guidance on this issue NLT than COB Washington time on
Thursday, May 21, including information which could be used
during the May 22 conference to give Allies a clear "sense"
of what a U.S. contribution to a NATO counter-piracy mission
might entail. At the very least, the U.S. should be in a
position to make clear that it has an intent to contribute.
DAALDER
NOFORN
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/20/2019
TAGS: PREL NATO MOPS EWWT ZR SO XA
SUBJECT: RFG: U.S. CONTRIBUTIONS TO NATO COUNTER-PIRACY
EFFORTS
Classified By: Ambassador Ivo Daalder. Reasons: 1.4 (b) and (d).
1. (C/NF) This is a request for guidance. See para 6.
2. (C/NF) SUMMARY: While the U.S. has been pressing hard for
a long-term NATO role in counter-piracy, we have thus far
been unable to answer Allied questions about what the U.S.
commitment/contribution to such a mission would be. Without
a clear U.S. commitment, a NATO mission can not succeed. We
request Washington guidance on this issue, including more
clarity on what a U.S. contribution might be, in time for a
May 22 force sensing conference. END SUMMARY
Pushing a NATO Mission...
--------------
3. (C/NF) At a policy level, the United States has been
pressing hard for a long-term NATO role in international
counter-piracy efforts. On May 13, for example, the
Department issued a fact sheet which stated that "we actively
support the expansion of NATO and European Union counter
piracy missions." Indeed, the U.S. has even suggested that
counter-piracy might be an area for practical NATO-Russia
cooperation, once military-to-military engagement is
re-established within the framework of the NATO-Russia
Council.
Requires a U.S. Commitment...
--------------
4. (C/NF) While most Allies have seemed willing to agree to
the establishment of a long-term NATO counter-piracy effort,
many of European Allies have also asked what "value-added" a
NATO mission would bring when compared to the EU's Atalanta
counter-piracy mission. This is their coded way of asking
what the U.S. would bring to the table, especially since many
of them have also made clear that their first priority would
be force generation for the EU mission. Belgium and
Portugal, among others, have openly stated that force
generation for a NATO mission should not come at the expense
of the EU mission. Since NATO is an Alliance tying together
the U.S. and Canada with Europe, a NATO operation--almost by
definition--can not succeed without a clear U.S.
contribution. We can use a U.S. contribution to leverage
European contributions for such a mission. Europeans will
have little appetite, however, for a NATO mission that the
U.S. pushes for, but is unwilling to contribute to.
Time is Running Out
--------------
5. (C/NF) Our ability to avoid this apparent disconnect is
quickly disappearing. On Friday, May 22, NATO will host a
force sensing conference. While perhaps less formal than an
official force generation conference, this conference will
nevertheless be critical to our efforts to move forward with
a NATO mission. If the U.S. representative is not able to
put forward a coherent U.S. position, including a "sense" of
what an eventual U.S. contribution to the mission might be,
Allies will likely ask very pointed questions about why we
are pushing so hard for a mission that the U.S., in the end,
does seem willing to commit to join.
6. (C/NF) Request for Guidance: We request Washington
guidance on this issue NLT than COB Washington time on
Thursday, May 21, including information which could be used
during the May 22 conference to give Allies a clear "sense"
of what a U.S. contribution to a NATO counter-piracy mission
might entail. At the very least, the U.S. should be in a
position to make clear that it has an intent to contribute.
DAALDER