GUIDANCE ON NATO SUPPORT FOR EUPOL-AFGHANISTAN

C O N F I D E N T I A L STATE 004074 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/14/2011 TAGS: EUN MARR NATO PGOV PINS PREL AF SUBJECT: GUIDANCE ON NATO SUPPORT FOR EUPOL-AFGHANISTAN REF: A. 09 USNATO 596 ¶B. 09 USEU 1127 ¶C. 09 USEU 1382 ¶D. 09 KABUL 3557 Classified By: Acting A/S Nancy McEldowney for reasons 1.4(b, d) ¶1. (C) In response to ref A, Washington warmly supports mission's pursuit of broader cooperation between ISAF and EUPOL in Afghanistan in order to advance the core goals of the Afghan police development mission as well as to foster wider NATO-EU cooperation. This guidance focuses on our interest in NATO and NATO-EU channels as described in ref A; any action on a U.S.-EU agreement would be subject to additional guidance. ¶2. (C) Washington would be open to approving any NATO-EU or ISAF-EUPOL agreement, formal or informal, that is acceptable to both sides and achieves practical benefits. We welcome and encourage further reporting on NATO, EU, and member nations' views and objectives as they relate to the complex Turkey-Greece/Cyprus and NATO-EU relationships. ¶3. (C) Washington would also welcome further reporting from USNATO, USEU, and Embassy Kabul on EUPOL's projected requirements for ISAF support, both specified and implied. Additionally, ISAF views on how the quality and quantity of Afghan police development would benefit from prospective EUPOL operations will be critical. Washington has encouraged the EU to expand EUPOL in size and in its reach outside of Kabul. The EU has indicated that it shares those goals, over time adding new personnel and striking technical agreements with several non-U.S. PRT host nations; however, a number of factors have limited EUPOL's readiness to work with recruits at the critical district level. In December, visiting EUPOL officials told Washington contacts that they have been considering a future "city project" focused in one or more urban population centers, predicated on a tighter ISAF cordon around the given city and improved security within it. ¶4. (C) In the case of EUPOL in Afghanistan, the most helpful outcome of any NATO-EU agreement or revision to the OPLAN will be speeding the accomplishment of measurable results in support of shared, core training goals for Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). The President's December 2009 declaration that the U.S. mission in Afghanistan will begin drawdown of combat forces in July 2011 places new pressure on the ANSF training mission that will continue afterwards - and crucially, on the resources dedicated to that effort and the timeline for fulfilling it. An ISAF-EUPOL support agreement, whether formal or informal, will have implications for U.S. as well as Allied resources at a critical juncture in the Afghan mission. An agreement at this stage of the mission should be commensurate with EUPOL's commitment to accelerate progress toward core goals through timely, measurable outputs. CLINTON