PDAS MCELDOWNEY'S MEETING WITH RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L USNATO 000081 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/23/2020 TAGS: PGOV PREL NATO RS SUBJECT: PDAS MCELDOWNEY'S MEETING WITH RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR ROGOZIN Classified By: Charge d'affaires John Heffern for reasons 1.4 (b/d). ¶1. (C) Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary (PDAS) for Europe and Eurasia Nancy McEldowney told Russian Ambassador to NATO Dmitri Rogozin on February 17 that the U.S. was sincerely interested in enhanced practical cooperation in the NATO-Russia Council (NRC),which would help build confidence between Allies and Russia. She stressed that the U.S. was particularly interested in cooperation on missile defense. Rogozin agreed upon the need for practical cooperation, but expressed frustration with what he described as inaction in the NRC, calling upon the U.S. and Russia to capitalize on their improved bilateral ties and lead the organization. PDAS McEldowney agreed that an enhanced bilateral relationship would have a positive impact on NATO-Russia ties, although the U.S. and Russia could not dictate to the NRC. ¶2. (C) Rogozin encouraged the U.S. to lead a transparent exchange of ideas on members' strategic doctrines in the NRC, and reiterated his request that Russia receive briefings on U.S. and NATO strategy regarding Afghanistan. PDAS McEldowney responded that the U.S. was transparent about its plans in Afghanistan, and reminded Rogozin (whose DCM recently proclaimed that transparency was for the weak) that transparency derived from strength and helped build mutual confidence. She agreed that the NRC was a forum for strategic discussions but said that the U.S. also hoped for more practical cooperation, such as had been accomplished with the Afghan transit agreements. Rogozin agreed that practical cooperation and confidence building measures went hand-in-hand. He suggested that the NRC could assist Russian efforts to modernize, and proposed cooperation on military medicine. PDAS McEldowney responded to Rogozin's question about the possibility of 2010 NRC Summit by suggesting that any summit would necessitate leaders looking back at what the NRC had accomplished. ¶3. (C) Comment: Rogozin's failure to offer anything substantive in the way of practical cooperation in the NRC is consistent with our understanding that the GOR has given him little to work with. We were particularly disappointed that despite repeated prodding, Rogozin offered nothing on NRC missile defense cooperation. End Comment. ¶4. (U) PDAS McEldowney has cleared this cable. HEFFERN