DPRK: 1718 COMMITTEE FOCUSES ON DESIGNATIONS,

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000650 C O R R E C T E D C O P Y (CH CLASS PARA 10) SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL ETTC MCAP PGOV PHUM KN UNSC SUBJECT: DPRK: 1718 COMMITTEE FOCUSES ON DESIGNATIONS, PANEL OF EXPERTS, AND PROGRAM OF WORK ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: The DPRK Sanctions Committee ("1718 Committee") discussed key tasks to implement resolution 1874, including sanctions designations, a draft Program of Work for the Committee and the composition of a Panel of Experts to assist the Committee in monitoring and improving the implementation of sanctions. China and Russia said they had received no guidance from their capitals about the joint US/France/UK/Japan designations list;Vietnam requested more information justifying the names on the joint US/France/UK/Japan designations proposal. Libya, Costa Rica and Mexico pointedly stressed the importance of equitable geographic distribution on the Panel of Experts, while France and Japan urged the Committee to move fast and be flexible in establishing this group. In a separate meeting with USUN, the Chinese representative asked the United States to prioritize its designations list so Beijing could review only the "important" ones. END SUMMARY. DESIGNATIONS -------------- ¶2. (SBU) On July 1, the DPRK Sanctions Committee ("1718 Committee") considered three tasks called for in resolution 1874: 1) new sanctions designations by July 12, 2) approving a draft Program of Work for the Committee by July 15, and 3) establishing a Panel of Experts to help the Committee monitor and improve sanctions implementation. Turkish non-proliferation expert Ismail Cobanoglu chaired the meeting in the absence of Turkish Perm Rep Baki Ilkin, who is preparing to depart New York. (NOTE: Turkey will continue to chair the committee after Ilkin's departure. END NOTE). ¶3. (SBU) The acting chair noted the joint US/UK/France/Japan designations proposal on the table and encouraged Committee members to forward any feedback or questions they receive from capitals. The Russian and Chinese representatives explained that their capitals were "intensely considering" the proposals, but had not given any guidance. The Chinese representative anticipated that he would receive guidance by next week. The Vietnamese representative requested from the package's co-sponsors further explanation and background information about the fifteen individuals proposed for designation. The USUN Sanctions Unit chief said his government and the other co-sponsors would seek to assemble and share additional information about the designated individuals. (NOTE: USUN understands that Washington may provide additional information in the coming days. The circulation of such information to the Committee will buy goodwill. END NOTE). COMMITTEE PROGRAM OF WORK -------------- ¶4. (SBU) The Secretariat circulated for the Committee's consideration a draft Program of Work (e-mailed to the Department of International Organizations) for the Committee's endeavors in the coming year. The Program outlined an ambitious agenda of Committee activities to support the full implementation of resolution 1874. ¶5. The Vietnamese and Mexican representatives asked some clarifying questions about the Program, including explanations about some of these new elements that had not appeared in resolution 1874. The chair replied that the Secretariat had sought to include elements from the activities of other UN sanctions committees (e.g., provisions for the chair and members of the Committee to travel to countries to discuss sanctions implementation). The Russian representative questioned a proposal to have the Committee specify the definition of "small arms and light weapons," which are exempt from resolution 1874's ban on arms transfers to the DPRK. He questioned whether the Committee had the capacity to specify such a definition, adding that papers already exist to clarify the definition of small arms. PANEL OF EXPERTS -------------- ¶6. (SBU) The acting chair explained that conversations were continuing on how best to establish the UN Panel of Experts (POE) for the DPRK, which would be responsible for monitoring and making recommendations to improve sanctions implementation. The Libyan, Mexican, and Costa Rican representatives all pointedly stressed the importance of equitable geographic distribution on the POE. The Libyan representative favored the idea of sending a Note Verbale to all Member States to solicit possible candidates. He said this would be the best way to achieve a diverse and competent group of experts. The Libyan representative further stated that the process should be transparent and that a more open PANEL OF EXPERTS, AND PROGRAM OF WORK nomination process could lead to final approval of candidates "within a week." The Mexican representative stated that equitable geographic distribution, along with multi-lingualism, was an essential principle of the United Nations. The Costa Rican representative acknowledged that this process should be expeditious, but stressed the importance of geographic, gender and language diversity. ¶7. (SBU) The French representative recommended that the Committee move quickly and remain flexible. He pointed to an open nominating process in the 1540 Committee that resulted in many months of delay. The French representative added that not all panels had "perfect equitable geographic distribution" and stated that Libya's idea to send a Note Verbale and conclude a nomination process within a week was unrealistic. The Japanese representative explained the Committee should be more focused on the competence of the experts and reminded the Committee that resolution 1874 had requested a first report from the POE within ninety days of the resolution's adoption (i.e., by September 12). ¶8. (SBU) Loraine Rickard-Martin, the senior Secretariat official in charge of supporting the Committee, stated that some Member States had already spontaneously expressed an interest in submitting candidates. These candidates, she explained would be added to the Secretariat's roster of experts. Rickard-Martin emphasized that the Secretariat welcomed the submission of candidates by any delegation. The acting chair explained that he would "intensify his consultations" with the Secretariat to look at past Committee experiences so as to decide which steps should follow. ¶9. (SBU) The Committee will next meet on Monday July 6 to discuss the next steps on the POW, POE and the designations list. CHINA ON DESIGNATIONS, PROGRAM OF WORK -------------- ¶10. (SBU) Immediately after the Committee meeting, the Chinese representative requested to meet with USUN privately to discuss next steps on designations. He claimed that Beijing would not be able to review all of the individuals, entities and goods in the joint designations package in time for the deadline. Therefore, the Chinese representative said China would like the United States to prioritize its designations list so that Beijing could consider only the "important" proposals. USUN said that all of the proposed targets were important to the United States and requested that Beijing identify as soon as possible any names on the list that may be problematic. The Chinese representative also predicted that Beijing would have problems with the Program of Work, which he said was ambitious. RICE