VZCZCXRO3002
PP RUEHAG RUEHBC RUEHDE RUEHKUK RUEHROV
DE RUEHLB #0932/01 1771717
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 251717Z JUN 08
FM AMEMBASSY BEIRUT
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2329
INFO RUEHEE/ARAB LEAGUE COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN PRIORITY 0176
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS PRIORITY 0391
RHEHNSC/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 2540
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 2837
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY
RHMFISS/USCENTCOM SPECIAL HANDLING MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHAAA/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BEIRUT 000932 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NSC FOR ABRAMS/SINGH/YERGER/GAVITO 
INL FOR JOHNSON/BLOOMQUIST/STUART 
DEPT FOR NEA/FO, NEA/ELA 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/25/2028 
TAGS: EAID PBTS EC GE IS LE SY
SUBJECT: LEBANON: EC HIGHLY CRITICAL OF GERMAN-LED LEBANON 
BORDER PILOT PROJECT 
 
REF: BEIRUT 00812 AND PREVIOUS 
 
Classified By: CDA Michele J. Sison for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 
 
SUMMARY 
-------- 
 
¶1.  (C) On June 25, a UK Embassy contact in Beirut provided 
emboff with information on European Commission (EC) 
Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner's planned statements that day to 
German Foreign Minister Steinmeier concerning the German-led 
Northern Border Pilot Project (NBPP) in Lebanon (refs). 
Waldner's statements express the EC's doubt about future EC 
funding of the project and concern over the German leadership 
of the project.  These are similar to views expressed by the 
EC Mission, British and Danish Chief of Missions in Beirut 
visiting German MFA officials last week.  Because of this 
dissatisfaction with the German-led project, many EU 
countries may opt to pursue bilateral projects with the GOL 
on border security.  End Summary. 
 
EC OPPOSES FUTURE FUNDING 
OF GERMAN NBPP 
------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (C) The EC Commissioner in charge of External Relations 
and European Neighborhood Policy, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, and 
German FM Frank-Walter Steinmeier are to meet June 25 in 
Berlin to discuss EC concerns about the German-led NBPP, 
according to UK EmbOff.  The NBPP is dependent in large part 
on funding from the EC.  According to UK EmbOff, 
Ferrero-Waldner's brief to Steinmeier states, strongly, the 
clear message that EC funding may not be able to support the 
German project if the concerns of the Commission and other EU 
donors were not adequately addressed in planning for the next 
phase of the project.  EU Chief of Mission Beirut Patrick 
Laurent has conveyed the same message to Charge d'Affaires. 
The EC does not support the recommendations of the 
German-drafted evaluation report, including a proposal to 
create a Lebanese National Border Police Force. 
 
EC DOES NOT SUPPORT 
CURRENT GERMAN LEADERSHIP 
------------------------ 
 
¶3.  (C) The EC is also concerned wth the lack of Lebanese 
ownership of the project (as are other donors).  Secondly, 
the EC is concerned about the current German leadership on 
the project.  The EC may accept continued German leadership, 
provided others - including the Lebanese themselves - had 
more of a say in the process, according to our UK contact. 
The EC recommended forming a Lebanese steering committee 
composed of the leadership of all GOL security agencies (to 
include the Prime Minister's office and Ministry of Justice 
officials).  However, German officials oppose any structured 
hierarchy that does not have Germany in charge, our UK 
contact said. 
 
EC OPPOSES GERMAN RECOMMENDATIONS 
FOR CONTINUED FUNDING OF NBPP 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶4.  (C) Lastly, the EC opposes the specific German 
recommendation for further EC funding through the twinning 
process (twinning funding is given to EU Member States to 
partner with an EU candidate country to help the candidate 
harmonize their government institutions to EU standards). 
The EC believes it is unwise to fund such a project while GOL 
agencies continue to disagree amongst themselves, thereby 
limiting the scope for broad political buy-in that is 
necessary for the project's success. 
 
POLITICS MAY KEEP 
GERMAN NBPP ALIVE 
----------------- 
 
 
BEIRUT 00000932  002 OF 003 
 
 
¶5.  (C) Our UK contact emphasized that while the EC's 
concerns were of a practical nature, the issue was very much 
a political one, too.  While the EC message as drafted is 
strong, our UK contact said he could not discount 
Ferrero-Waldner softening it following sustained, high-level 
German lobbying, especially as Germany is the largest single 
contributor to the EC's budget.  If the EC decides to 
continue financial support to the German NBPP, the UK contact 
speculated that a further $3 million could be made available 
in 2009. 
 
¶6.  (C) In addition, the EC had not yet looked at what other 
funding might be available for complementary work in this 
area, should they withdraw support for the NBPP.  Another 
compromise option for the EC is funding to provide experts to 
assist the GOL in coordinating a joint position.  However, 
the Germans will not be keen on this idea because it would 
add to existing pressure on them to allow greater GOL 
ownership, according to the UK contact.  (Note:  Our UK 
contact added that the GOL may prefer bilateral German 
assistance because the Germans seem "not to mind giving 
equipment and materials to the GOL without holding GOL 
officials accountable for project performance."  End Note.) 
 
EC HAS NOT 
GIVEN UP HOPE 
------------- 
 
¶7.  (C) Our UK contact said the EC COMs have not given up 
hope of persuading the Germans to come around to the EC view, 
however.  The EC COMs recognize that by ceasing EC funding 
they could lose influence in an important area of work.  But 
ultimately if this were to happen, the EC COMs would explore 
other options, including the possibility of acting as a 
"coordinator" for activity in this field, he said. 
 
UK WANTS TO PULL OUT 
FROM UNDER GERMAN LEAD 
---------------------- 
 
¶8.  (C) Our UK Embassy contact believed the EC will 
compromise on a solution that allows for a German lead, along 
with a steering committee.  Germany will most likely create 
the steering committee, but it will have no authority and 
will ultimately waste the $3 million of EC money, he 
complained.  He added that the UK Embassy has recommended to 
London  that the UK pull out of the NBPP and move forward 
bilaterally with the GOL on future border security projects 
(reftel).  He expected an answer from London by July 1. 
 
GERMAN HOSTED LUNCH 
HIGHLIGHTS EC'S CONCERNS 
------------------------ 
 
¶9. (C) Many of the EC's concerns were highlighted in a lunch 
the German Ambassador hosted for Charge and other NBPP donor 
Chief of Missions in Beirut on June 17 to meet with Peter 
Wittig, Director General for Global and UN Affairs of the 
German MFA (and a former Ambassador in Beirut).  The Germans 
hosted the lunch to discuss the German evaluation report's 
findings and recommendations concerning the NBPP (Note:  The 
evaluation report that the Germans handed over to Prime 
Minister-designate Siniora was not the previously agreed upon 
version that the EC put together.  The Germans had agreed to 
submit the EC's evaluation report; however, Germany changed 
its mind at the last minute and decided to move ahead with 
its own version.  End Note.) 
 
¶10. (C) The UK Ambassador expressed her country's view that 
it may have to reconsider its support for the German-led NBPP 
if the Germans handed over their version of the report.  The 
EU Head of Delegation also expressed his strong belief that 
Wittig not hand over the German report to the PM designate's 
office.  Laurent said that the EC did not agree with the 
recommendations and finding of the German report and that 
some facts in the report were incorrect.  He was referring to 
 
BEIRUT 00000932  003 OF 003 
 
 
statements that the report was written with the full 
cooperation and consultation of all donor countries, and that 
the Common Border Force was operational and all NBPP 
facilities and outposts were fully powered.  The Germans 
tried, but failed, to find some common ground with their EU 
colleagues at the tense lunch and submitted their report the 
next day, June 17, to PM-designate Siniora 
 
¶11. (C) EU COMs met again after the lunch on June 17 to 
further express their concerns to Wittig.  EU COMs believed 
that the German report is light on findings and heavy on 
recommendations.  The Germans will undoubtedly reject the 
idea (again) of a GOL led steering committee.  The German 
delegation said privately that they will not accept any 
international border security coordination group that did not 
have a German lead.  The German delegation also stated that 
the MOU signed between the Merkel/Siniora governments in 2006 
gives Germany full oversight over all border security 
donations/projects from the international donor community. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶12. (C) The Northern Border Pilot Project has been plagued 
from the start by poor German leadership.  In addition, the 
idea that the GOL is ready to establish a fifth security 
agency responsible for border control is naive on the German 
part given current GOL budgetary and manpower constraints. 
 
¶13. (C) We assess that the UK and other EC member governments 
will continue their support to Lebanon on border issues in a 
bilateral manner, sans Germany.  UK and EC officials have 
also indicated their willingness to coordinate with the U.S. 
on future bilateral border projects.  End Comment. 
SISON