Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09USOSCE118
2009-05-06 14:58:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Mission USOSCE
Cable title:  

CFE/JCG: MAY 5 PLENARY - RUSSIA TRIES TO TURN

Tags:  KCFE OSCE PARM PREL 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO7912
PP RUEHSK
DE RUEHVEN #0118/01 1261458
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 061458Z MAY 09
FM USMISSION USOSCE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6362
INFO RUCNCFE/CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/DIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEASWA/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC//OSAE
RUESDT/DTRA-OSES DARMSTADT GE
RHMFISS/CDR USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J5-DDPMA-IN/CAC/DDPMA-E//
RUEAHQA/HQ USAF WASHINGTON DC//XONP//
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 USOSCE 000118 

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR VCI/CCA, EUR/RPM
NSC FOR NILSSON, HAYDEN
JCS FOR J5 NORWOOD, COL SMITH
OSD FOR ISA (PERENYI)

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KCFE OSCE PARM PREL
SUBJECT: CFE/JCG: MAY 5 PLENARY - RUSSIA TRIES TO TURN
TABLES; ALLIES FOCUS ON NON-COMPLIANCE; MOLDOVA IMPLIES 2+1
NOT EQUAL TO CONSENT

REF: STATE 43053

Sensitive but Unclassified; please protect accordingly. Not
for Internet.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 USOSCE 000118

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR VCI/CCA, EUR/RPM
NSC FOR NILSSON, HAYDEN
JCS FOR J5 NORWOOD, COL SMITH
OSD FOR ISA (PERENYI)

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KCFE OSCE PARM PREL
SUBJECT: CFE/JCG: MAY 5 PLENARY - RUSSIA TRIES TO TURN
TABLES; ALLIES FOCUS ON NON-COMPLIANCE; MOLDOVA IMPLIES 2+1
NOT EQUAL TO CONSENT

REF: STATE 43053

Sensitive but Unclassified; please protect accordingly. Not
for Internet.


1. (SBU) Summary. During the U.S.-chaired May 5 JCG Plenary,
Russia repeated MFA criticisms of the CFE text of the NATO
Summit declaration and presented its Aide-Memoire to all CFE
States Parties as Russia's official position on how to
restore the viability of the CFE regime on the basis of the
U.S.-Russian draft Parallel Actions Package. Russia detailed
the necessary elements for striking balance in the package
and turned NATO's appeal to Russia around, stressing it is
Russia that is urging NATO States Parties to work with Russia
as well as all other States Parties to preserve CFE. Belarus
expressed support for Russia's ideas while the U.S. stressed
the importance of the senior-level bilateral channel for
achieving agreement, and noted that the package cannot be
disaggregated.


2. (SBU) On compliance issues, ten States Parties (even
Iceland) with Turkey in the lead registered concerns with
Russia's failure to meet its obligation to provide additional
information on Kushchevskaya as of April 1, 2009.
Additionally, Portugal, Turkey and the U.S. (supported by
eight Allies) raised the issue of Russia's latest inspection
refusals and called on Russia to resume its implementation of
the CFE Treaty or risk continued degradation of its long-term
viability. Russian delegate Ulyanov remarked that Russia
hoped to never have to provide flank information again. He
claimed that Russia is equally concerned about the state of
affairs of CFE and stands ready to engage in all formats on
the basis of the package, while alleging the U.S. and NATO
remain frozen by "inertia" and would not engage in talks at a
reasonable pace.


3. (SBU) On other issues - in an unexpected intervention -
the Moldovan Ambassador reiterated for the record that
Moldova's position on the 1999 Istanbul commitments had not
changed, implying that the 2 1 Joint Declaration of March 18
did not satisfy host nation consent for the presence of
foreign forces. Hungary reported on the entry into service

of two new look-alike vehicles. At the JCG-T the day prior
to the JCG Plenary, Allies debated new formats for the T and
the TOI Chair noted that the deadline for submitting
corrections to the Consolidated Matrix would be extended by a
week. End Summary.


JCG PLENARY

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"IRRITATED" BY NATO APPEAL ) RUSSIA TOUTS AIDE MEMOIRE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


4. (SBU) Germany (Schweizer) kicked off the U.S.-chaired
(Neighbour) May 5 JCG Plenary by delivering a joint
German-French statement on the April 3-4 Strasbourg-Kehl NATO
Summit relating the CFE text of the Summit declaration.
Noting that the statement was very familiar ) as in verbatim
) and that the Russian MFA had already responded, Russian
Chief Arms Control Delegate Ulyanov confined his reaction to
two allegations:

-- NATO enlargement was the clear priority for NATO with arms
control ranking near the bottom. Ulyanov suggested this was
evidenced by the fact that the protocols for Albania and
Croatia to join NATO took less than 9 months to approve while
NATO CFE States Parties have stated it could take up to 2
years for ratification of the adapted Treaty.

-- The statement's "ironic, sarcastic and irritating" appeal
to Russia to cooperate with NATO and others on the basis of
the Parallel Actions Package to save CFE was clearly
misdirected. Ulyanov claimed that Russia had appealed to
NATO two years ago; the lack of response forced Russia to

USOSCE 00000118 002 OF 005


"suspend" CFE. He noted talks did not begin until October
2007 (have not been substantive since late November 2007) and
have been infrequent. The NATO-Russia Council has been "held
up," and JCG work has been "stymied." It appears both sides
are talking past each other and NATO remains engaged in a
Public Relations exercise.


5. (SBU) Ulyanov verbally presented an Aide-Memoire to the
JCG as Russia's official position on how to restore the
viability of the CFE regime, noting it would be annexed to
the Journal of the Day (JCG/JOUR/693) along with Russia's
statement. He remarked it was in part a response to many
delegations' voiced wishes for an official reaction, but also
intended to serve as a catalyst to current talks. Stressing
that Russia still thinks there is time to save the Treaty and
it would be "unforgiveable" to let the opportunity pass,
Ulyanov stated the basis "could very well be" the U.S.-Russia
package as long as there were substantial improvements.
(Note: Ulyanov clarified later that this paper was the same
one (reftel) that MFA Director Antonov presented to A/S
Gottemoeller in Rome on the margins of April 24 START
discussions.)


6. (SBU) Ulyanov reiterated many of the standard Russian
complaints about "Russian actions for vague NATO promises"
and rattled off a list of "musts" to ensure balance in the
package (maximum assurances for ratification, provisional
application, reduced equipment ceilings for NATO SPs,
conditions for accession for new NATO members including
Croatia and Albania, and a definition of substantial combat
forces.) He then highlighted aspects which he noted were of
concern to many delegations and would require progress to
move forward:

-- Flanks: First and foremost, the flanks must be abolished
for the Russian Federation. There should be "no illusions" -
descriminatory territorial subceilings (legal restrictions)
must be eliminated for Russia. At the same time, Russia is
ready to study reasonable, bilateral CSBMs on a reciprocal
basis if any partners feel the need to negotiate such
measures. (Note. Ulyanov has repeatedly made clear on the
margins that this is not/not a negotiating tactic. The
flanks must go. End note.)

-- Regional level: Russia is prepared to consider some
measures of transparency with respect to both Moldova and the
South Caucasus taking into account the "real" situation in
those regions, and providing that the package is truly
balanced.

-- Resuming implementation: Russia will resume CFE
implementation upon entry into force of A/CFE or its
provisional application. Once the package is agreed )
depending on its contents ) Russia would consider some
reciprocal, bilateral transparency measures prior to
provisional application as a good will gesture.

-- Modalities for future talks: Russia is ready to step up
efforts in bilateral talks with representatives from capitals
as well as in the day-to-day work of delegations in Vienna, a
must he said if we genuinely want progress. Ulyanov called
for "democratic principles" to be incorporated into the
process by including all CFE States Parties. (He claimed that
progress was achieved when U.S.-Russia talks were more
intensive adding that this had not been the case since
November 29, 2007 in Madrid and noting the package had not
changed since December 2007.)

-- Extraordinary Conference ) could serve as mechanism for
approving the revised draft package.

-- Lastly, it is Russia that urges the NATO States Parties to
work with Russia as well as all other States Parties on the
basis of the U.S.-Russia draft package in the interest of
preserving the CFE regime.


USOSCE 00000118 003 OF 005



7. (SBU) Belarus and the U.S. were the only delegations to
respond. Belarus (Krayushkin) characterized Russia's ideas as
constructive especially regarding ratification of A/CFE,
provisional application, and conditions for accession of new
NATO members. Krayushkin added that the moratorium was not
the cause of the current problem, rather the result, and
stressed that the JCG should not be sidelined. He called for
the U.S. and Russia to provide regular updates to enable all
CFE States Parties to consider important developments.


8. (SBU) The U.S. (Silberberg) undertook to report to
Washington on a paper that appeared very similar to one
Russia had presented bilaterally on April 24 while noting the
U.S. position of not disaggregating the package remained the
same. He also stressed the importance of the high-level
bilateral channel for achieving agreement on the basis of the
package (especially in light of MFA Director Antonov's
expressed interest to intensify this channel) and took issue
with Ulyanov's claim that our recent efforts lacked substance
and intensity.


9. (SBU) Ulyanov took the floor again to clarify the paper
was word-for-word the same; Russia had provided it in advance
to its "lead partner." He was pleased the U.S. was open to
intensifying bilateral efforts, but still could not
comprehend why Vienna did not have a role, one that would
entail working out details of the whole package to support
higher level talk, and not disaggregating it.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
MOLDOVA IMPLIES 2 1 NOT EQUAL TO HOST NATION CONSENT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


10. (SBU) The Moldovan Ambassador (Postolachi) noted that
Moldova has presented its position on issues related to the
CFE Treaty on many occasions - including the Third CFE Review
Conference and the June 2007 Extraordinary Conference. He
reiterated for the record that the well-known Moldovan
position "with regard to the package of commitments
undertaken at the OSCE Istanbul Summit, including the
withdrawal of foreign forces - has not changed." A somewhat
heated Russia-Moldova exchange ensued. Russia sought
clarification on what Moldova meant by withdrawal of foreign
forces and by the 2 1 statement issued on March 18 by three
"Heads of State." Moldova stressed that withdrawal of
foreign forces meant just that and took offense at the
implication that Russia did not respect its territorial
integrity, reminding Russia that Transnistria is not a
republic but a part of Moldova.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
EVEN ICELAND BLASTS RUSSIA FOR NON-COMPLIANCE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


11. (SBU) KUSHCHEVSKAYA DATA: As coordinated by the U.S.,
Turkey (Begec) led the charge which included (U.S., Norway,
the UK, Romania, Moldova, Bulgaria, France, Georgia, Germany
and even Iceland (Bjarnadottin) - to Ulyanov's apparent
amusement) to register for the record Russia's failure to
provide additional information on Kushchevskaya, as of April
1, 2009. The main message expressed was the importance of
transparency and the special importance of the flanks as well
as concern with Russia's continued non-compliance which would
lead to further degradation of the CFE regime thereby
undermining its long-term viability. Turkey (Begec) was
strongest on the flank, clarifying for Russia that he had "no
illusions" about the reality of the flank geography recalling
the August 2008 "wake up call" of Russia's aggression in
Georgia. Begec was clear: stability in the Caucasus is far
more important than the political concerns of one of our
Treaty partners.


12. (SBU) Ulyanov felt compelled to use the opportunity to
comment on flank limitations, recalling for all that the CFE
Treaty says nothing on Kushchevskaya. He characterized the
quarterly information requirement as part of a

USOSCE 00000118 004 OF 005


"discriminatory package" of additional measures for Russia
and repeated standard Russian arguments about NATO's
continued violation of flank limits as a result of NATO
enlargement. He hoped that the Parallel Actions Package
would address this issue by achieving a balanced approach and
that Russia would never be asked again for such information.


13. (SBU) AUGUST 2008 DETOUR: Ulyanov also took issue with
Turkey's remarks regarding the events of August 2008 noting
it was Russia that had to repel aggression against its
peacekeepers as well as civilians in South Ossetia. He drew
quite a different conclusion than Begec: these events proved
just how debilitating the flanks are for Russia. Georgia
(Giorgadze) immediately countered with its perspective of the
conflict. Several rounds of accusations between Russia and
Georgia followed ranging from "who started it?" to differing
interpretations of how Chechnya applied. In the last round,
Ulyanov noted that the independence of South Ossetia and
Abkhazia was a reality all needed to face; Georgia countered
that that was an "unacceptable" new reality and hoped no
other delegation would support that view.


14. (SBU) INSPECTION REFUSALS. Portugal (Teixeira),Turkey
(Begec) and the U.S. (Silberberg) each noted Russia's refusal
of respective CFE inspection notifications for April, calling
for Russia's full compliance and expressing concern with the
ongoing impasse over CFE. Also as coordinated by the U.S.
del -- Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Romania, Italy, the
UK, Belgium, and the Czech Republic spoke in support of the
refused parties, echoing concerns with Russia's continued
inspection refusals and urging Russia to return to active
participation.


15. (SBU) Russia broke with its recent practice of not
responding to the "slew" of inspection refusal complaints in
order to emphasize concern with the current predicament of
all. Ulyanov noted the statements reflected genuine concern
about the Treaty, a concern Moscow shares. He called upon
all States Parties to "cease the inertia" and "heed Russia's
appeal" to cooperate on the basis of the draft package so
that inspections could resume as soon as possible.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
HUNGARY NOTIFIES ENTRY INTO SERVICE OF NEW EQUIP
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


16. (SBU) Hungary (Haupt) reported on its recent notification
(CFE/HU/09/7/F13/O) of the entry into service of two new
Armored Personnel Carrier look-alikes. One is a maintenance
and recovery vehicle and the other is an NBC reconnaissance
vehicle; both are on BTR-80 chassis. Hungary informed all
that hard copy photographs had been submitted to the
Secretariat and that there would be a demonstration on May 27.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TWO PLENARIES LIKELY TO BE CANCELED
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


17. (SBU) The Chair (Neighbour) noted that there were
out-of-town meetings scheduled in late May and early June on
important CFE matters and suggested canceling JCG meetings on
May 27 and June 9. This proposal will likely be approved at
the next JCG meeting as there are no known objections.


18. (SBU) Regarding administrative information on the June
10 Berlin seminar, Germany (Schweizer) noted invitations had
gone out to all capitals (including CFE States Parties/NATO
Allies as well as all who could accede to CFE.) The program
of events should be distributed via Note Verbale this week )
delegations will include HOD 3; registration will be
available on line; and information will be sent to capitals.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
JCG-T PLUS 4 ) ENGAGES IN ADVANCED MATH
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


USOSCE 00000118 005 OF 005



19. (SBU) The JCG-T plus 4, chaired by Canada (Linteau),met
on May 4 for a read out of the April 28 HLTF meeting and to
coordinate plans on Allied interventions for the May 5 JCG
plenary and discuss intentions of the Russian delegation.
The TOI Chair noted that the deadline for corrections to the
Consolidated Matrix would be extended by a week.


20. (SBU) Additionally, the JCG-T inconclusively considered
whether the JCG-T plus 4 in adding Albania and Croatia to the
mix should now be a JCG-T plus 6; JCG-T plus 4 plus 2 (those
that have expressed readiness to join A/CFE and those who
have not); or a Mini-Caucus that covers the full range of
issues. The German proposal that the JCG-T align its
chairman rotation with the NATO Caucus monthly rotation also
fed into the discussion. Most favored this pragmatic
approach, but Greece was the most hesitant mainly due to
concerns with inconsistencies that could arise if the JCG-T
was chaired by a non-CFE State Party. Croatia and Latvia
expressed appreciation for being included in discussions, but
neither seemed to jump at the opportunity to chair meetings.
Allies agreed with a UK proposal to reflect further on the
issue and return to the discussion at a subsequent meeting.


21. (U) The next JCG Plenary will take place on May 12, under
U.S. chairmanship, and will be preceded by the JCG-T on May
11, under Danish chairmanship.
SCOTT