Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
10BRUSSELS66
2010-01-21 04:47:00
CONFIDENTIAL
USEU Brussels
Cable title:
EU SUPPORT FOR G-8 GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP AGAINST WMD
how-toVZCZCXRO3630 OO RUEHDH RUEHSL DE RUEHBS #0066/01 0210447 ZNY CCCCC ZZH O 210447Z JAN 10 FM USEU BRUSSELS TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE INFO RUEHYY/GENEVA CD COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RUEHII/VIENNA IAEA POSTS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RHMFISS/CDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY RHMFISS/CDR USSOCOM MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY RUEPVAA/COMJSOC FT BRAGG NC PRIORITY RUEAHQA/CSAF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY RUWFAFK/COMNAVSPECWARCOM CORONADO CA PRIORITY RUEADWD/HQ DEPT OF ARMY WASHDC PRIORITY RUFGSOC/COMSOCEUR VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY RHMFISS/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY RHEFHLC/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY RHMFISS/HQ USAFRICOM STUTTGART GE PRIORITY RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY RUENAAA/SECNAV WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY RHHMUNA/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI PRIORITY RHMFISS/USSTRATCOM OFFUTT AFB NE PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 000066
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/19/2020
TAGS: EMIN ENRG ETTC AORC EUN MNNC PARM TBIO KGIC
KNNP, KRAD, XA, XC, XF, G-8
SUBJECT: EU SUPPORT FOR G-8 GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP AGAINST WMD
Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Christopher R. Davis for re
ason 1.4 (b/d)
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 000066
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/19/2020
TAGS: EMIN ENRG ETTC AORC EUN MNNC PARM TBIO KGIC
KNNP, KRAD, XA, XC, XF, G-8
SUBJECT: EU SUPPORT FOR G-8 GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP AGAINST WMD
Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Christopher R. Davis for re
ason 1.4 (b/d)
1. (C) SUMMARY: During her January 11 meeting with EU
officials, Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins, Coordinator for Threat
Reduction Programs, sought EU support for extending and
expanding the mandate of the G-8 Global Partnership against
the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction and
ensuring that the Partnership be adequately resourced into
the future. Senior officials from the European Union Council
Secretariat and the European Commission agreed that the G-8
Global Partnership's mandate should be extended and that it
should take on work in new functional and geographic areas.
The European Commission's Richard Wright was confident that
EU would continue to provide significant financial support,
specifying that EU support to the Global Partnership was
locked in through 2013, when the next multi-year funding
program would be agreed. END SUMMARY
2. (SBU) Ambassador Jenkins was joined in Brussels by
Canada's Troy Lulashnyk, who will chair the Global
Partnership Working Group while Canada leads the G-8 in 2010.
Lulashnyk noted that the G-8 Global Partnership had been
largely successful, withtension of the G-8 Global
Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of
Mass Destruction. Details on how long to extend it and how
much funding the U.S. would devote to it would be taken soon.
5. (SBU) The EU's Annalisa Giannella, the High Rep's
Personal Representative on Non-Proliferation, said that while
some chemical weapons and plutonium disposition programs were
funded by the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy budget
and overseen by the EU Council Secretariat, most work was
being carried out through European Commission programs. The
EU was the major donor to the IAEA's nuclear security fund.
As for future non-proliferation priorities, she cited the
Balkans, North Africa, Central Asia, Caucasus, and South East
Asia as key areas. Biological security was a priority. She
said the EU would like to engage further on scientist
redirection and export controls. As for geographic scope,
Gianella agreed that it was time to expand the Global
Partnership's geographic scope beyond Russia and the Ukraine.
Shared Priorities
6. (SBU) The European Commission's Richard Wright affirmed
that the EU shared U.S. and Canadian priorities. He cited
nuclear safety; biological safety; and export controls as
areas that deserve an enhanced focus. He touched on the EU's
BRUSSELS 00000066 002 OF 003
plan to establish regional CBRN Centers of Excellence in
South East Asia, the Middle East, and Africa over the next
three to five years. He suggested that these Centers could
be used to support the Global Partnership. Jenkins and
Lulashnyk both agreed that the Centers of Excellence might be
able to play a needed capacity-building role.
EU Budget Cycle
7. (SBU) Wright was supportive of extending and expanding the
G-8 Global Partnership mandate. The existing multi-year
budget had seen 700 million Euros spent to support activities
linked to the G-8 Global Partnership, with an additional 200
million Euros to be spent by 2013. He acknowledged that High
Representative Catherine Ashton's approach to the issue was
not yet known, but opined that U.S. and Canadian priorities
seemed to fit well with the EC approach and its funding
mechanisms. He noted, however, that it would be difficult to
harmonize the Commission's budget cycle with the G-8 Global
Partnership's mandate. He was reluctant to predict how much
the EU would be able to spend after 2013 and doubted that
there could be any change in what was programmed through
2013.
8. (SBU) Lulashnyk underlined that Canada was focused on the
same regions. Jenkins noted that the U.S. has
non-proliferation programs in over 100 countries. Numerous
projects were needed to make a difference given the size of
the challenge. Giannella interjected that there was no need
to convince the EU of the importance of this effort. The
question would be how much money the EU would be able to
devote to the issue, which relied upon a political decision
on EU priorities. Wright added that EU external action
programs were pre-coordinated with all 27 EU member states in
management committees. Given the scarcity of resources, it
was critical to plan in synergy, she said, but putting money
in trust funds and creating new structures often only
complicated matters. We should enhance coordination and
cooperation, as was done on CWC, without centralizing all
cooperation.
9. (SBU) Lulashnyk agreed that flexibility was important but
noted that for small countries, it was often easier to
contribute money to a central pool. He noted that the IAEA
nuclear security fund allowed them to contribute to action in
situations when bilateral action was impossible for them. He
acknowledged that multilateral funds often failed to be
responsive and effective, as demonstrated by the Chernobyl
Containment project.
Russia's Role
10. (SBU) Turning to Russia, Richard Wright asked how Russia
could move from being the G-8 Global Partnership's major
beneficiary to playing a role as a contributor. Russia could
do more on scientist engagement, addressing trans-regional
threats such as smuggling without duplicating the work now
being done by the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear
Terrorism. On the issue of scientist engagement, Wright
expressed interest in the future of the International Science
and Technology Center (ISTC),raising the possibility of
shifting its focus in some way, while still keeping a
non-proliferation element to its work, which is a requirement
for EU funding; all parties agreed to continue discussing
this issue. Lulashnyk agreed that Russia had been the major
beneficiary of programs on chemical weapons, submarines and
nuclear security and now had a new list of priorities, such
as dealing with waste and fuel for their navy. Before the
crisis, Russia had expressed interest in playing a role as a
donor and has put between 7-8 Billion dollars in to the G-8
Global Partnership. Jenkins added that Russia had continued
to express the desire to move from recipient to partner.
Summit Goals and Prospects
11. (C) Lulashnyk said that Canada's Summit goals for the
G-8 Global Partnership were likely to center on extending the
Partnership, expanding the Partnership's activities into new
regions and functions and securing future funding. There
BRUSSELS 00000066 003 OF 003
had been expressions of support for extension from London,
Paris, Berlin, Rome and Tokyo, he said. Giannella commented
that Russia seemed to be "reluctant" about geographic
expansion. Lulashnyk explained the perception of Russian
opposition might stem from Moscow's feeling that it had been
assured funding from France and Italy that had not
materialized. In Canada-Russia bilateral meetings, however,
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov had not opposed expansion of
the partnership, as long as Russia continued to benefit from
the partnership's future activity. Jenkins said that the
U.S. had gotten a similar message from Russia: expansion was
acceptable as long as existing commitments were met,
including the chemical issue.
12. (U) This cable was cleared by Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins,
Coordinator for Threat Reduction Programs.
KENNARD
.
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/19/2020
TAGS: EMIN ENRG ETTC AORC EUN MNNC PARM TBIO KGIC
KNNP, KRAD, XA, XC, XF, G-8
SUBJECT: EU SUPPORT FOR G-8 GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP AGAINST WMD
Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Christopher R. Davis for re
ason 1.4 (b/d)
1. (C) SUMMARY: During her January 11 meeting with EU
officials, Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins, Coordinator for Threat
Reduction Programs, sought EU support for extending and
expanding the mandate of the G-8 Global Partnership against
the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction and
ensuring that the Partnership be adequately resourced into
the future. Senior officials from the European Union Council
Secretariat and the European Commission agreed that the G-8
Global Partnership's mandate should be extended and that it
should take on work in new functional and geographic areas.
The European Commission's Richard Wright was confident that
EU would continue to provide significant financial support,
specifying that EU support to the Global Partnership was
locked in through 2013, when the next multi-year funding
program would be agreed. END SUMMARY
2. (SBU) Ambassador Jenkins was joined in Brussels by
Canada's Troy Lulashnyk, who will chair the Global
Partnership Working Group while Canada leads the G-8 in 2010.
Lulashnyk noted that the G-8 Global Partnership had been
largely successful, withtension of the G-8 Global
Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of
Mass Destruction. Details on how long to extend it and how
much funding the U.S. would devote to it would be taken soon.
5. (SBU) The EU's Annalisa Giannella, the High Rep's
Personal Representative on Non-Proliferation, said that while
some chemical weapons and plutonium disposition programs were
funded by the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy budget
and overseen by the EU Council Secretariat, most work was
being carried out through European Commission programs. The
EU was the major donor to the IAEA's nuclear security fund.
As for future non-proliferation priorities, she cited the
Balkans, North Africa, Central Asia, Caucasus, and South East
Asia as key areas. Biological security was a priority. She
said the EU would like to engage further on scientist
redirection and export controls. As for geographic scope,
Gianella agreed that it was time to expand the Global
Partnership's geographic scope beyond Russia and the Ukraine.
Shared Priorities
6. (SBU) The European Commission's Richard Wright affirmed
that the EU shared U.S. and Canadian priorities. He cited
nuclear safety; biological safety; and export controls as
areas that deserve an enhanced focus. He touched on the EU's
BRUSSELS 00000066 002 OF 003
plan to establish regional CBRN Centers of Excellence in
South East Asia, the Middle East, and Africa over the next
three to five years. He suggested that these Centers could
be used to support the Global Partnership. Jenkins and
Lulashnyk both agreed that the Centers of Excellence might be
able to play a needed capacity-building role.
EU Budget Cycle
7. (SBU) Wright was supportive of extending and expanding the
G-8 Global Partnership mandate. The existing multi-year
budget had seen 700 million Euros spent to support activities
linked to the G-8 Global Partnership, with an additional 200
million Euros to be spent by 2013. He acknowledged that High
Representative Catherine Ashton's approach to the issue was
not yet known, but opined that U.S. and Canadian priorities
seemed to fit well with the EC approach and its funding
mechanisms. He noted, however, that it would be difficult to
harmonize the Commission's budget cycle with the G-8 Global
Partnership's mandate. He was reluctant to predict how much
the EU would be able to spend after 2013 and doubted that
there could be any change in what was programmed through
2013.
8. (SBU) Lulashnyk underlined that Canada was focused on the
same regions. Jenkins noted that the U.S. has
non-proliferation programs in over 100 countries. Numerous
projects were needed to make a difference given the size of
the challenge. Giannella interjected that there was no need
to convince the EU of the importance of this effort. The
question would be how much money the EU would be able to
devote to the issue, which relied upon a political decision
on EU priorities. Wright added that EU external action
programs were pre-coordinated with all 27 EU member states in
management committees. Given the scarcity of resources, it
was critical to plan in synergy, she said, but putting money
in trust funds and creating new structures often only
complicated matters. We should enhance coordination and
cooperation, as was done on CWC, without centralizing all
cooperation.
9. (SBU) Lulashnyk agreed that flexibility was important but
noted that for small countries, it was often easier to
contribute money to a central pool. He noted that the IAEA
nuclear security fund allowed them to contribute to action in
situations when bilateral action was impossible for them. He
acknowledged that multilateral funds often failed to be
responsive and effective, as demonstrated by the Chernobyl
Containment project.
Russia's Role
10. (SBU) Turning to Russia, Richard Wright asked how Russia
could move from being the G-8 Global Partnership's major
beneficiary to playing a role as a contributor. Russia could
do more on scientist engagement, addressing trans-regional
threats such as smuggling without duplicating the work now
being done by the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear
Terrorism. On the issue of scientist engagement, Wright
expressed interest in the future of the International Science
and Technology Center (ISTC),raising the possibility of
shifting its focus in some way, while still keeping a
non-proliferation element to its work, which is a requirement
for EU funding; all parties agreed to continue discussing
this issue. Lulashnyk agreed that Russia had been the major
beneficiary of programs on chemical weapons, submarines and
nuclear security and now had a new list of priorities, such
as dealing with waste and fuel for their navy. Before the
crisis, Russia had expressed interest in playing a role as a
donor and has put between 7-8 Billion dollars in to the G-8
Global Partnership. Jenkins added that Russia had continued
to express the desire to move from recipient to partner.
Summit Goals and Prospects
11. (C) Lulashnyk said that Canada's Summit goals for the
G-8 Global Partnership were likely to center on extending the
Partnership, expanding the Partnership's activities into new
regions and functions and securing future funding. There
BRUSSELS 00000066 003 OF 003
had been expressions of support for extension from London,
Paris, Berlin, Rome and Tokyo, he said. Giannella commented
that Russia seemed to be "reluctant" about geographic
expansion. Lulashnyk explained the perception of Russian
opposition might stem from Moscow's feeling that it had been
assured funding from France and Italy that had not
materialized. In Canada-Russia bilateral meetings, however,
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov had not opposed expansion of
the partnership, as long as Russia continued to benefit from
the partnership's future activity. Jenkins said that the
U.S. had gotten a similar message from Russia: expansion was
acceptable as long as existing commitments were met,
including the chemical issue.
12. (U) This cable was cleared by Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins,
Coordinator for Threat Reduction Programs.
KENNARD
.