RUSSIA RAISES 1267 SANCTIONS-RELATED HUMANITARIAN

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000166 SIPDIS C O R R E C T E D C O P Y (ADDED TAGS) E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ETTC PREL UNSC POL RU SUBJECT: RUSSIA RAISES 1267 SANCTIONS-RELATED HUMANITARIAN EXEMPTION ISSUE IN THE COUNCIL 1.SUMMARY: (SBU) Russia unexpectedly raised in the Security Council objections to a recent UK decision to unilaterally grant humanitarian exemptions to the asset freeze imposed under resolution 1267 (al-Qaeda/Taliban sanctions) without first notifying the 1267 Committee. Russia claimed the UK is setting a bad precedent that undermines the work of the 1267 Committee and the decisions of the Security Council. The UK defended its decision by claiming it was based on legitimate domestic legal concerns. China and France noted their displeasure with the UK,s "unilateral" approach and deferred the issue back to the 1267 Committee for a solution. Japan (president of the Council) welcomed the willingness of the Austrian Perm Rep, who is chair of the 1267 Committee, to discuss the matter further in the Committee. END SUMMARY ¶2. (SBU) On February 20, Russian Perm Rep Churkin unexpectedly raised under &other matters8 in the Security Council, the United Kingdom,s (UK) 22 December letter to the 1267 Al-Qaeda/Taliban Sanctions Committee indicating that the UK intends to grant humanitarian exemptions to the asset freeze without notifying the 1267 Committee on a case-by-case basis of their decisions. (Note: Under UNSCR 1452, states may grant exemptions to the asset freeze for certain categories of expenses, such as rent or legal fees. Before unfreezing the assets, states are to notify the 1267 Committee; the Committee then has three days to review the notification and may decide to block the unfreezing. End Note.) Churkin informed the Council that Russia found the UK,s approach &unacceptable8 because the UK was undermining a set of unanimously adopted regulations by the 1267 Committee. Churkin believed that the UK,s decision to grant humanitarian exemptions was based on the European Court of Justice decision on Qadi, but that the UK,s position was &destructive8 because it was guided by the UK,s national legislation, rather than its obligations under the UNSCR ¶1452. Churkin asked how it could be guaranteed that the frozen assets wouldn,t end up in the hands of Al-Qaeda/Taliban. Russia, he said, believes that the UK is setting a bad precedent where other member states may follow the UK,s lead and not notify the 1267 Committees of exemptions. Churkin said such decisions would undermine the legitimacy of the Council. ¶3. (SBU) British Perm Rep John Sawyers noted his regret that Russia decided to bring this issue to the Council since he had spoken privately with Churkin on this issue. Sawyers noted that the UK supports the integrity of the 1267 Sanctions regime, but the UK, like other countries, needed to address its legitimate legal concerns regarding the humanitarian exemption. (NOTE: Sawyers mention of "other countries" was an oblique reference to the fact that six years ago the United States made a similar decision not to notify the Committee when humanitarian exemptions were granted. END NOTE). He also noted that the UK had great difficulty with the length of time required to clear such humanitarian exemptions through the Committee. Sawyers said he wanted to make it clear that the UK was not changing how it grants licenses for asset freezes. Sawyers also noted that he found it strange that the Russians would bring this issue up considering Russians actions that undermine the legitimacy of the 1267 Committee, specifically noting Russia,s refusal to delist dead people and its narrow interpretation of the scope of information to be included in the Committee's development of narrative summaries of reasons for listing. ¶4. (SBU) Austrian Perm Rep and Chair of the 1267 Sanctions Committee, Thomas Mayr-Harting, noted that the UK letter from 22 December 2008 was discussed in the 1267 Committee on 19 January and no resolution was found because two member states put a hold on the issue (NOTE: Russia and France. END NOTE). Mayr-Harting offered to help resolve this issue within the Committee if member states so desired. ¶5. (SBU) French Permanent Representative, Ambassador Ripert, expressed his sympathies with the UK,s difficulties, but noted that France is against &generic exemptions without safeguards8 and hopes that the humanitarian exemption issue will continue to be raised in the 1267 Sanctions Committee. China noted its doubts about granting automatic exemptions and said that China believes these exemption must be done on a case-by-case basis. China hoped the 1267 Committee would continue consultations and find a solution to this matter. ¶6. (SBU) Churkin noted again that Russia found the UK,s argument in the exemptions letter to be &unconvincing8 and said that Sawyers &completely, unacceptably criticized Russia8 as undermining the 1267 Committee. Churkin noted that if other member states see the UK,s unilateral approach toward humanitarian exemptions, based in its own legal justifications, than the &Security Council can just end its work,8 because it has lost legitimacy. ¶7. (SBU) The Japanese Security Council President, Yukio Takasu, ended the discussion by referring the issue back to the 1267 Committee, under the leadership of Austrian Perm Rep Mayr-Harting, to find a solution. ¶8. (SBU) COMMENT: The UK letter -- and the heated discussion it sparked -- point to broader problems in the granting of humanitarian exemptions. At a minimum, the UK letter is not in accordance with the 1267 Committee's Guidelines, which envision notifications on a case-by-case basis. USUN will consult with the UK mission on the best way to approach this discussion in the 1267 Committee. Ideally, we would develop ideas on reforming -- either in the Guidelines or in a future Security Council resolution -- these procedures in order to balance domestic legal requirements with an interest in transparency. END COMMENT. Rice