NATO-RUSSIA: ALLIED VIEWS ON RUSSIA'S NRC TREATY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 USNATO 000049

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/03/2019
TAGS: PGOV PREL NATO RS
SUBJECT: NATO-RUSSIA: ALLIED VIEWS ON RUSSIA'S NRC TREATY

REF: 09 USNATO 585

Classified By: Political Advisor Kelly Degnan for reasons 1.4 (b/d).


1. (C) Summary: Allies remain united in rejecting Russia's
proposed binding treaty with NATO, although differences exist
over whether NATO should discuss with Russia certain elements
of the draft text presented by Foreign Minister Lavrov during
the December NATO-Russia Council Ministerial. Russia-skeptic
eastern Allies question the need to discuss the Russian
initiative, arguing that Moscow could perceive doing so as
openness to exploring a proposed treaty that would give
Russia a veto over NATO decision making and limit the
sovereignty of NATO's newer members. In contrast, several
western Allies are willing to discuss elements of the draft
treaty in order to appear sensitive to Russian concerns.
They see an opportunity for a dialogue with Russia on
security, transparency, and defense planning, although there
is currently no unity on which multilateral forum should be
the location for this discussion. These Allies recognize
that the challenge will be to use the Russian initiative to
launch a dialogue without exacerbating divisions within the
Alliance. End summary.

Allies Remain United and Divided
--------------


2. (C) Recent discussions with Allies indicate predictable
divisions over the draft treaty delivered by Russian FM
Lavrov during the December 4 NRC Ministerial. While Allies
agree that the Russian proposal for a binding treaty with
NATO is a non-starter, western Allies are open to discussing
elements of the draft treaty with Russia and eastern Allies
remain concerned about giving any sort of positive response
to Moscow (reftel).


3. (C) Diplomats from Poland, the Czech Republic, Estonia,
Latvia, Lithuania, and Romania have stated that they see the
draft NRC Treaty as an unfriendly gesture by Moscow that
attempts to limit their sovereignty by placing restrictions
on the basing of forces on their territory. These Allies
also view the Russian concept of one party not enhancing its
security at the expense of the other as allowing Russia undue
influence in NATO decision making. Finally, they are not
convinced that the NRC Treaty is a serious effort by Moscow
to redefine European security architecture, considering it an
attempt to create complications for the West and sow division
among NATO Allies. They fear that discussion of the draft
treaty in the NRC will achieve this objective for Moscow.
Such views have led the eastern Allies to deem the NRC Treaty
"outrageous," making potentially poisonous attempts to spin
off some aspect of the treaty for discussion in the NRC or
OSCE. These Allies were skeptical that rejecting outright
the NRC Treaty would strengthen conservative elements in
Moscow.


4. (C) The Germans, French, Italians, British, Canadians,
Turks, and Norwegians generally share the view that NATO
cannot say yes, but it cannot simply say no to the NRC
Treaty. The French characterized their approach as "open to
contact but closed on the form," as there is an interest in
talking with Russia but none in the Russian treaty proposal.
There are differences in opinion on how to respond to Moscow:
The Germans see this as an opportunity to focus on and
strengthen the CFE, which they consider the appropriate
context to respond to Russia's desire to define "substantial
combat forces." They view the Russian proposal in Article 2
of the draft treaty to use the NRC to discuss imminent
security issues as an appropriate use of the NRC as an "early
warning system" to address brewing problems. The UK
Delegation advised London that the similarities between the
draft NRC and EST treaties argue for their being considered
"holistically" for the time being. The UK suggested using
the existing CFE structure or convening a special HLTF to
tackle defining "substantial combat forces." The French,
Italians, Turks, Norwegians, and Canadians do not yet have a
definitive idea how to respond, but favor using a discussion
of ideas presented in the draft NRC Treaty to address issues
of interest to NATO. Ottawa is presently seeking input from
its embassies in NATO capitals to inform its policy
development.


USNATO 00000049 002 OF 002


A United Response to Moscow
--------------


5. (C) Comment: Any response to Moscow's proposed NRC Treaty
must be particularly sensitive to differences within the
Alliance regarding Russia. Allies are looking to the U.S.
for leadership and will need to perceive any U.S. approach as
advancing Allied interests and maintaining unity. Given
Allies' general rejection of the proposed NRC Treaty as
unacceptable at best and outrageous at worst, it is not
advisable to use the Russian text as the starting point for
discussion. But, the Russian proposal offers some elements
for a dialogue that the U.S. and certain Allies are open to
having with Russia. An intra-Alliance discussion will be a
prerequisite in order to reach consensus within NATO on how
to make the most of this opportunity. End Comment.
DAALDER