DPRK: RUSSIA/CHINA LACK FULL INSTRUCTIONS ON

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000412 E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/21/2019 TAGS: KN PHUM ETTC MCAP SUBJECT: DPRK: RUSSIA/CHINA LACK FULL INSTRUCTIONS ON DESIGNATIONS REF: USUN 407 Classified By: Amb. Alex Wolff for Reasons 1.4 (B),(D) ¶1. (C) SUMMARY: On April 21, the UN Security Council's DPRK Sanctions Committee was largely unable to discuss proposals for new designations because some key delegations (namely, Russia and China) lacked complete instructions from their capitals. The Russian delegate supported one element of the U.S. proposal (updating a technical annex) and suggested that the Committee call for vigilance on -- as opposed to a ban of -- the U.S. proposed technical goods as an interim measure; he said had no guidance on the entities. The Chinese delegate said he lacked any instructions. Libya, Vietnam, Uganda and Austria also said they were without instructions and could not agree to the proposals. Mexico and Costa Rica said they "agreed in principle", but that their final position might be contingent on further Committee deliberations. Other Committee members (France, UK, Croatia, Burkina Faso, Turkey and Japan) all indicated support for the proposals. The Committee will meet again at 11:30 a.m. on Wednesday April 22. END SUMMARY. ¶2. (C) On April 21, the UN Security Council's DPRK Sanctions Committee ("1718 Committee") met to review proposals for the designation of new goods and entities. (NOTE: In response to the DPRK's recent missile launch, the Security Council adopted Presidential Statement on April 13 directing the Committee to make such designations by April 24. Per UNSCR 1718, the DPRK Sanctions Committee has a mandate to designate entities linked to the DPRK's proscribed WMD and missile program, which will then be subject to an asset freeze. The Committee also may identify specific technical goods that States will be prohibited from transfer to or from the DPRK. END NOTE). Turkish Perm Rep Ilkin, Committee chair, focused the Committee's attention on a U.S. proposal (designate seven technical items, update the Missile Technology Control Regime annex in UNSCR 1718, designate eleven entities),a UK proposal (designate a certain kind of tungsten),and a Japanese proposal (designate three entities). ¶3. (C) The Russian delegate said he had incomplete instructions from capital. He reaffirmed, however, that Moscow supported updating the MTCR Annex. On the U.S./UK proposals for designating new technical items, he suggested that perhaps the Committee could as an interim measure issue a "call for vigilance" (as oppose to a ban) on these items, while the Committee continued its discussions on these items after April 24. The Chinese delegate explained that he did not yet have instructions from capital, but believed he would receive such instructions soon. ¶4. (C) Delegates from Libya, Vietnam, Uganda and Austria also said they did not have instructions and could not at this stage agree to the proposals. The delegates from Mexico and Costa Rica said their capitals "agreed in principle" with the proposals, but that their final position might be contingent on further Committee deliberations. The other Committee members (France, UK, Croatia, Burkina Faso, Turkey and Japan) indicated that they could support the proposals on the table. ¶5. (C) Noting the looming April 24 deadline, the chair urged all Committee members to press for full instructions from their capitals as soon as possible. The Chair proposed reconvening at 11:30 a.m. on Wednesday April 22 to continue discussions. After the meeting, the U.S., UK, French and Japanese delegates reminded their Russian and Chinese counterparts of the urgent need to start a substantive discussion on the proposals at the next meeting. Rice NNNN End Cable Text