VZCZCXRO8216
RR RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHLI #1974 2131514
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 011514Z AUG 07
FM AMEMBASSY LISBON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6106
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE

C O N F I D E N T I A L LISBON 001974 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/01/2017 
TAGS: PREL EUN ZL PO
SUBJECT: BELLINGER REVIEWS KOSOVO WITH PORTUGUESE 
 
Classified By: POL CHIEF TROY FITRELL, REASONS 1.4 (B,D) 
 
¶1. (U) Department Legal Adviser John Bellinger, in Lisbon 
July 26-28 to continue a counterterrorism dialogue with the 
EU, also discussed the situation in Kosovo with senior 
Foreign Ministry Officials. 
 
¶2. (C) During Bellinger's initial call to the Foreign 
Ministry, Bellinger emphasized the USG's support for Kosovo 
independence, our position that a new UNSCR is not legally 
required to achieve this, and the importance of achieving our 
goals within the ongoing 120-day transition period because of 
limits on Kosovar patience. Foreign Minister Amado noted that 
Portugal's EU presidency role required it to seek consensus 
among EU members. He said he would try to bring the EU into 
alignment with the US through the development of an EU common 
position that would allow individual EU states to recognize 
Kosovar independence.  Amado was uncertain that the current 
120-day period would be enough time to achieve a broad 
consensus, but agreed with Bellinger's point that the 
Kosovars may not agree to any further extension. 
 
¶3. (C) At a later event at a think-tank, Foreign Ministry 
Political Director Ambassador Vasco Bramao Ramos opined that 
UNSC 1244 ruled out independence as a legal matter and that a 
new UNSC resolution would be legally required.  Bramao Ramos 
continued that there was nothing specific about the current 
120-day period that required action, terming it, "only the 
current round."  Bellinger vigorously disputed both points. 
He noted that the provisions of UNSC 1244 ) the Ahtisaari 
plan, establishment of legal 
institutions, etc. ) have been met and that UNSCR 1244 would 
not legally prevent Kosovo from achieving independence.  He 
also noted that while a new UNSCR might be desirable for 
policy purposes, it is not necessary and would not be 
realistic in light of Russian opposition. He also noted that 
no one (including the USG) would be able to persuade the 
Kosovars to be patient indefinitely and that any course which 
extends beyond the existing 120-day period is likely to test 
the limits of their patience. 
 
¶4. (C) Following the event, Bramao Ramos sought to clarify 
his remarks on timing, noting that his government would 
endeavor to achieve a solution to the issue within the 
120-day period.  If they fail to do so in that time frame but 
a solution was in sight, he hoped the U.S. would help 
convince the Kosovars to give another 30 days or so. 
 
Comment 
------- 
¶5. (C) Bramao Ramos's comments neither reflected the 
understanding expressed by his Minister nor by Bramao Ramos 
himself in recent meetings with A/S Fried.  Minister Amado 
and other senior GOP officials have been steadfast in their 
support for the Ahtisaari plan, but Bramao Ramos's initial 
remarks reflect a concern about the consequences of 
proceeding without a UNSC resolution.  Bramao Ramos realized 
quickly that his initial comments were not consistent with 
his government's position on Kosovo, and he clearly felt the 
need to backpedal when he approached Bellinger after the 
event.  MFA Legal Adviser Luis Tavares, who was present at 
each of these meetings, did not contest our interpretation of 
UNSCR 1244. 
 
Hoffman