CORFU PROCESS SESSION IV: THINK GLOBALLY, ACT

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 USOSCE 000223 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/13/2019 TAGS: PREL OSCE RU SUBJECT: CORFU PROCESS SESSION IV: THINK GLOBALLY, ACT REGIONALLY Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Carol Fuller for reasons 4.(b)&(d) Summary ¶1. (SBU) On October 13 the Corfu Process tackled new, globalized threats and met with a high degree of consensus on OSCE strengths and direction. Topics covered included terrorism, cybersecurity, border security and Afghanistan, WMD nonproliferation, and arms reduction. Besides a minor verbal scuffle among Caucasus countries over ungoverned spaces, most delegations pushed for a greater OSCE role in confronting these transnational threats. A draft Ministerial decision (emailed to RPM) submitted to the Security Committee October 12 seeks to start a structural enhancement in this area. The Corfu Process, stimulated by Russian concerns over European security, has become an open-ended dialogue which delegates hope will revitalize the work of the OSCE and encourage more cross-dimensional approaches. Although the Russian tone has changed to a positive, &constructive8 one, It is not yet clear if Russia is very serious about the dialogue or will simply try to shift its discussion of hard security to the NATO-Russia Caucus. End summary. ¶2. (SBU) The fourth session of the Corfu Process dialogue commenced, after a two-week hiatus for the Human Dimension Implementation meeting, with a presentation by UNODC's Dr. Walter Kemp (and former OSCE senior adviser) entitled "Finding Common Ground to Address Common Threats." Referring to the OSCE's 2003 Maastricht Strategy on threats to security and stability in the 21st Century, Kemp focused on organized crime, terrorism and inter- and intra-state conflicts. He discussed the global nature of these threats, reviewed OSCE activity in these areas and cited the continuing pressing need for greater cooperation. ¶3. (SBU) In response, PermReps from participating States commented on a wide range of characteristics of these new threats that were not factors in the founding documents of the OSCE and its predecessor. Canada noted how all countries are affected by these threats, but some more so than others, while Romania commented that many of these threats emanate from areas adjacent to the OSCE. Hungary noted that the threats were inherently cross-dimensional in nature and the OSCE needed to continue adapting to that reality. EU Presidency Sweden called for enhanced multilateral efforts. ¶4. (SBU) Afghanistan featured in many interventions, both as a source of many of these new threats (the Russians cited organized crime and drug trafficking in particular) and, as a result, an area where the OSCE needs to try and step up its efforts. A number of PermReps called upon the OSCE to fulfill its goal laid out nearly two years ago in a Ministerial Council decision to step up the organization's efforts to assist Afghanistan's, especially in border management and security. Several, including Denmark, went a step further and urged the OSCE undertake work inside Afghanistan, citing organized crime and narcotrafficking as particular concerns. ¶5. (SBU) Most delegations noted the growing threat posed to national and international cybersecurity. Many referenced the OSCE's March workshop on cybersecurity and proposed further activities, with some focusing on the importance of combating terrorist and organized crime,s use of the Internet. The Netherlands thought OSCE had demonstrated an added value niche on the topic. Russia criticized once again the Council of Europe,s Cyber Crime Convention, calling for a new instrument, and cited a recent statement by the SCO as an indicator to how the OSCE could proceed. Many urged the OSCE Executive structures to consider how they could build up some expertise in this area as a way to contribute to ongoing work in counterterrorism and fighting organized crime. ¶6. (SBU) The OSCE's accomplishments in fighting terrorism were referenced by many delegations. The Netherlands said the OSCE's track record demonstrated the importance of greater international cooperation. Russia cited the important role the OSCE plays in assisting in the implementation of UN counterterrorism commitments, including holding high-level conferences to draw continued attention to the issue. Belarus appreciated the leadership the OSCE has displayed in developing a regional consensus on the importance of protecting critical energy infrastructure. Hungary, whose PermRep is also Chair of the Security Committee, said the discussion reinforced the importance of a pending draft Ministerial decision on further measures to support and promote the international legal framework against terrorism. ¶7. (SBU) Many PermReps cited the valuable supporting role OSCE can play in global efforts to stem the proliferation of WMD, noting in particular efforts to support UNSCRs 1540 and ¶1810. The Netherlands termed a substantial nonproliferation program "a cornerstone" of security in the OSCE area. Russia USOSCE 00000223 002 OF 002 called for an integrated strategy with a demonstrated value-added niche reserved for the OSCE. The Russian representative repeated Russian concerns that OSCE work on 1540 reflect actual OSCE capacity and be completely in line with the goals and directives of the UN's 1540 Committee. Again, many stressed that a truly effective regional nonproliferation regime requires a multidimensional response. Several delegations also highlighted the OSCE's record of accomplishment in reducing and eliminating stockpiles of ammunition and small arms and light weapons. These important confidence building measures diminish the potential for transnational threats such as terrorism and organized crime. ¶8. (SBU) A verbal sparring match broke out among the Caucasus countries responding to a point Dr. Kemp raised about the impact of "ungoverned spaces" on transnational crime and terrorism. Azerbaijan said that the protracted nature of conflicts creates &grey zones8 beyond the control of authorities and that the international community turns a blind eye to this. Dismissing the link, Armenia stated that in some instances, the conflict zones are more stable than nearby territories and that an overwhelming number of transnational crimes occur within secured borders. Agreeing with Azerbaijan, Georgia stated that areas of instability are magnets for terrorism and organized crime and said that there should not be inaccessible places in the OSCE area. ¶9. (C) Comment: The Corfu Process discussions are increasingly reflecting more proactive thinking on the part of delegations and a growing interest in revitalizing areas of the OSCE work. Most see this as an open-ended dialogue that should continue throughout 2010 and beyond. "Cross dimensional" has become a term of art, and delegations are starting to consider ways in which work in one dimension could have an impact on another. This bodes well for the desire expressed to the US Mission by the Secretary General to eventually reorganize the secretariat staff to deal with transnational threats in a more coordinated way. The Russian Federation continues to "play nice" and engage "constructively" (another new term of art in the OSCE) in the CP dialogue, though ambassador Azimov is clearly not serious. When he argued yet again to the Charge during a subsequent lunch that there is too much emphasis on the third dimension and that there is "nothing" in the first, she chided him for having walked out of the room in the middle of her presentation on the new threats the OSCE must address in the first dimension and on which the US and Russia agree. All delegations are trying hard to listen to Russia,s concerns about European security, but it is not clear that the Russian delegation is listening to, or even cares about, the OSCE dialogue stimulated by their concerns or will simply pursue a separate course in the NATO-Russia Caucus after the Athens Ministerial in Decemer. A critical point in the Corfu Process will take place during the Ambassadors, retreat October 30-31. USDEL is actively participating with like-minded countries in the NATO Caucus, the EU, and a now-expanded "Quad" meeting (France, Germany, UK, US) which included the Swedish EU Coordinator. End Comment. Fuller