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