U.S. INAUGURATES WORKING GROUP OF THE UNSC 1540

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000546 SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/01/2019 TAGS: PREL PARM UNSC SUBJECT: U.S. INAUGURATES WORKING GROUP OF THE UNSC 1540 COMMITTEE Classified By: Classified By Ambassador Susan E. Rice, reason 1.4 (b) a nd (d). ¶1. (C) Summary. The U.S. delegation on May 27 chaired the first meeting of the 1540 Committee working group on transparency and media outreach. The meeting represented the implementation of the working-group structure promoted by the USG as part of the Committee's eighth Program of Work to streamline the Committee's structure and improve accountability. During the informal meeting, the U.S. offered practical ideas to publicize the work of the Committee and increase transparency; most delegations expressed preliminary support or quietly acquiesced to U.S. recommendations without formally adopting them. The initiative likely encouraged other working-group chairs (Austria, France and Mexico) to move forward the agendas for their working groups. Given the newness of the working-group structure and questions arising from the first meeting, the U.S. will seek clarification from the UN Secretariat and the Chair of the 1540 Committee on decision-making procedures and organizational hierarchy. End summary. ¶2. (C) The U.S. delegation on May 27 chaired the first meeting of the 1540 Committee working group on transparency and outreach. (Note: The 1540 Committee, as part of its eighth Program of Work covering the period from February 1, 2009 to January 31, 2010, put in place the following four working groups to enhance the work of the Committee and facilitate implementation: monitoring and national implementation; assistance; cooperation with international organizations; and transparency and media outreach. Subsequently, the Chair of the 1540 Committee selected Mexico, France, Austria and the U.S. as the chairs of the respective four working groups. End note.) The U.S. chaired the meeting and offered practical ideas to publicize the work of the 1540 Committee, such as publicly posting on the Committee's website a calendar of outreach events and workshops (the distribution of which is currently limited), placing the reports and presentations of the Committee's experts on the website, organizing a press event (in particular during the lead-up to the comprehensive review), and expanding outreach to industry and advocacy groups. Regarding the final point, the U.S. appealed to the experts of the 1540 Committee to consolidate a list of relevant industry and advocacy groups with which the Committee could coordinate. ¶3. (C) Most delegations expressed preliminary support for the U.S. recommendations or quietly acquiesced without formally adopting them. The Libyan delegate said Libya "fully supports" transparency in the Committee and the publication of all reports. The Russian delegate offered surprisingly supportive words for the U.S. initiative and most of the proposals. Regarding the publication of the Committee experts' reports and presentations, however, he advised that publication be on a case-by-case basis since, according to him, many of the experts' presentations at conferences do not directly relate to 1540 issues and therefore should not be endorsed by the Committee. Mexico, as chair of the monitoring and national implementation workshop, said his delegation was already preparing the calendar and related media for the 1540 comprehensive review, the convening of which is scheduled for the UN General Assembly in autumn ¶2009. Austria, as chair of the cooperation working group, said his delegation would soon convene a meeting of its working group without committing to a timeframe. ¶4. (C) Following the meeting of the working group, UN Secretariat officials on the margins recommended that the Chair of the 1540 Committee, the coordinators of the four working groups, and UN Department of Disarmament Affairs meet to discuss how best to structure the working groups and manage decision-making roles. Although one Secretariat official praised the U.S. delegation for "doing more in one day than has been done in two years," he said the inaugural meeting revealed some procedural questions that need resolving. One such issue, among other procedural questions, is the level of authority a working group has compared with the authority of an official Committee meeting to make final decisions. RICE