UZBEK CHARGE AT OSCE MEETS WITH USOSCE CHARGE

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 USOSCE 000281 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/15/2019 TAGS: PREL PGOV UZ SUBJECT: UZBEK CHARGE AT OSCE MEETS WITH USOSCE CHARGE USOSCE 00000281 001.2 OF 002 Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Carol S. Fuller for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (C) In a December 14 meeting, Charge d'Affaires (CDA) Ravshanbek Duschanov of the Uzbek Mission to the OSCE, said the small size of his delegation meant Uzbek diplomats could not always engage on some OSCE matters. He defended Uzbekistan's role as spoiler of the Media Freedom decision at the Athens OSCE Ministerial two weeks earlier by saying his mission had never received the last version of the draft decision and had felt its views were not given adequate consideration. On an OSCE Summit in 2010, Duschanov said Uzbekistan expressed its reservations to Kazakhstan in a pre-Athens exchange of letters making clear Uzbekistan's belief there is no need for a Summit. Like the U.S., he said Uzbekistan will wait to see if sufficient substance develops for a summit. He said Kazakhstan's goals for its year as the OSCE Chair in Office (CiO) are too ambitious and unrealistic. Duschanov said Uzbekistan is deeply concerned about Afghanistan, and wanted to help, but opposed plans for the OSCE to work inside the country. Duschanov also raised ongoing energy disputes between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, noting Uzbekistan's objection to the construction of a hydro-electric plant by Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. He said Uzbekistan opposed the CSTO plan to create a Rapid Reaction Force in Central Asia, and opposed Russian aims to build a military base in the Ferghana Valley. He said Uzbekistan actively wants to "diversify its interests" in Central Asia so as not to be singularly aligned with either China or Russia as they compete for interest in the region. End summary. UZBEKISTAN: SPOILER IN ATHENS -------------- ¶2. (C) In their first private meeting (arranged at the initial request of the Uzbeks),Duschanov told USOSCE CDA Carol Fuller that the small size of the Uzbek mission (3 diplomatic and several technical staff),coupled with responsibility for bilateral relations with Austria, Hungary and Slovakia as well as the United Nations in Vienna and "any other international organizations," frequently prevented Uzbek diplomats from fully engaging on some OSCE matters. When asked about Uzbekistan's role as the lone dissenter on the Media Freedom decision at the Athens OSCE Ministerial Conference December 1-2, Duschanov defended his country's position, saying Uzbekistan had never received the latest version of the draft text. He said, in Athens, Uzbekistan was still working on the first version of the media freedom decision (which he called unacceptable) while the rest of the participating States were working from the fifth or sixth version. He also added that Uzbekistan felt like its views were not given adequate consideration. He said, however, this did not mean his country opposed media freedom. (Comment: Most delegations believed there was more to this story, including friction with the Russian ambassador who was trying to "deliver" consensus on the decision to demonstrate its "constructive engagement" in the OSCE. End Comment) SUMMIT IN 2010? -------------- ¶3. (C) (C) On an OSCE Summit in 2010, Duschanov said Uzbek Foreign Minister Norov had responded to a letter from Kazakhstani Foreign Minister Saudabayev pressing all Central Asian countries to support at the Athens Ministerial the proposal for a summit in Astana in 2010, making clear Uzbekistan's belief that there was no need for a Summit. Duschanov pointed to the difficulty that the OSCE had to reach consensus at the Ministerial level as a clear factor weighing against having a Summit. He said Uzbekistan, like the U.S., would wait to see if sufficient substance for a summit develops. When asked his views on Kazakhstan's goals for its year as CiO, Duschanov said they were too ambitious and unrealistic. AFGHANISTAN -------------- ¶4. (C) On Afghanistan, Duschanov said Uzbekistan is deeply concerned. He said his country is providing bilateral assistance, but opposed any plans for the OSCE to work inside the country. He said the OSCE had no expertise in doing any of the things needed inside Afghanistan. CDA Fuller gently USOSCE 00000281 002 OF 002 disagreed - pointing to the OSCE's proven expertise in border security training and the desire for them to do such in Afghanistan. She pointed out that efforts to train Afghans outside of the country were not working for a variety of reasons, including visa problems such as the denial by Tajikistan of 10 Afghans who were to attend an OSCE/ATU travel document security course in Dushanbe during the week of December 7-11. In response to her inquiry whether Uzbekistan would be interested in bringing Afghans to his country for OSCE training. Duschanov said he was unsure. ONGOING BATTLE OVER REGIONAL ENERGY ISSUES -------------- ¶5. (C) Duschanov also raised ongoing energy disputes between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, noting Uzbekistan's objection to the proposed construction of a hydro-electric plant by Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. He called for a UN-led international investigation into the environmental impact of the plant and an analysis of the dangers presented by constructing such a plant in a region with high seismic activity. On Uzbekistan's withdrawal from the Central Asian Common Power Grid, Duschanov said Tajikistan had been taking energy from Uzbekistan for a long time without sanctions. He said on November 9, an accident in Tajikistan completely halted the flow of any electricity into Afghanistan. He said Uzbekistan now contributes electricity for Kabul 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Uzbekistan is willing to negotiate, but there should be sanctions for bad behavior. He said Uzbekistan was not willing to risk its national security "due to the irresponsible actions of our neighbors." PRESERVING UZBEK INDEPENDENCE -------------- ¶6. (C) Duschanov said Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan met bilaterally to discuss the approaching Kazkhstani CiO. He said the two countries would meet weekly as Kazakhstan sought to develop consensus first within Central Asian countries and within CSTO countries before the wider OSCE community. However, he reiterated Uzbekistan's desire to forge its own way. For example, he said, Uzbekistan opposes the CSTO plan to create a Rapid Reaction Force in Central Asia, and opposes Russian aims to build a military base in the Ferghana Valley. He said Uzbekistan actively wanted to "diversify its interests" in Central Asia so as not to be singularly aligned with either China or Russia as they compete for interest in the region. ¶7. (SBU) Duschanov said Uzbek President Karimov will visit Austria and Slovakia next year, at which time he hoped there would be an Uzbek Ambassador in place. Duschanov, who arrived in Vienna in September, is married with young children. He said his previous work on cultural exchanges at the MFA in Tashkent "had nothing to do with the OSCE." Prior to the MFA, he was at the Uzbek Embassy in Paris. COMMENT -------------- ¶8. (C) The small size of the Uzbek delegation clearly makes it difficult for it to cover all bilateral and multilateral obligations at the OSCE, the UN, and other offices. Nonetheless, this was a convenient excuse for allegedly not having seen the most updated version of the media freedom draft decision in Athens - which had been made available electronically and in hard copy to all delegations. The delegation participated in virtually none of the weeks of pre-Athens drafting sessions and then simply killed the decision at the last minute after all other countries reached consensus. It was the sole voice refusing to assent to the language Kazakhstan wanted in a decision on its plans for an OSCE Summit. Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan were the only countries that opposed (and therefore killed) a decision in favor of the Rule of Law. We see the willingness of the new Uzbek CDA to visit the U.S. Mission as a positive step forward. We will look for creative ways to engage him and his delegation going forward, but are aware that the likelihood of progress is dubious at best. FULLER