VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHLO #2884/01 3571339
ZNY EEEEE ZZH
R 231339Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY LONDON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4507
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 1275
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 3040
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 3553
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 0637
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 1526
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1306
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 0408
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS

UNCLAS E F T O LONDON 002884 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL PTER AORC UNSC KPAO RS CH FR UK
SUBJECT: P3 DISCUSS UNSCR 1540 WAY AHEAD 
 
REF: A. STATE 122725 
     ¶B. STATE 127434 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: On December 15, representatives of the P3 
(France, the UK, and the U.S.) who handle UNSCR 1540 
implementation met in London for an agreed update on the 
Comprehensive Review outcome, the USG proposal for a 1540 
Voluntary Fund, and to identify objectives for the 2010 
Program of Work (POW).  Each side agreed to review and pass 
along understandings to delegations in New York so that when 
the Committee renewed its work in 2010, there was a clear 
agreement - at least among the P3 - on priorities.  France 
expressed clear political (but not yet financial) support for 
the proposed 1540 Voluntary Fund, while the UK has not yet 
determined its willingness either to commit funds or to 
support a dedicated funding mechanism to better resource the 
Committee activities in New York.  There was, however, broad 
agreement that the ideas identified in the USG proposal were 
in line with the way ahead for 2010 to better align Committee 
activities with individual country needs.  The EU was seen as 
a better source of sustained funding than either France or 
the UK.  1540 Coordinator Wuchte and Poloff emphasized USG 
redlines for the Comprehensive Review outcome document and 
suggested that in 2010 the P3 format be expanded to the P5, 
as both Russia (in particular) and China have areas where 
they can practically support overall implementation efforts. 
End Summary. 
 
¶2. (U) Background: United Nations Security Council Resolution 
(UNSCR) 1540 was adopted in April 2004 and has served as an 
important new international standard for all states regarding 
the establishment of controls on chemical, biological, and 
nuclear weapons; related materials; and their means of 
delivery.  The P3 have met periodically to organize much of 
the initial effort of the Security Council's 1540 Committee 
to focus on organizational objectives, e.g., agreeing on 
rules of procedure, selecting its eight independent experts, 
and agreeing on how it should carry out its mandate.  Since 
then, the P3 have spent much of their focus on encouraging 
states to submit country reports detailing the steps they 
have taken or intend to take to implement the myriad 
provisions of UNSCR 1540. 
 
¶3. (U) UNSCR 1810 extended the 1540 Committee's mandate to 
2011, through P3 cooperation.  To date, the United States, 
European Union, and Norway are the primary states that have 
offered to donate funds to resource 1540 Committee 
activities, whereas the P3 have provided the initiatives to 
organize the Committee.  Aside from dedicated resources, the 
Committee is now well-positioned to fulfill its mandate more 
quickly in 2010.  The P3 meeting focused on the Comprehensive 
Review outcomes as a way to address the fact that although 
many states have requested assistance to enable them to 
implement (and report on) Resolution 1540, and many other 
states and international organizations have come forward to 
offer such assistance, the overall response has been slow in 
meeting the capacity-building needs identified through 
contributions and outreach.  The main points addressed below 
were agreed to ensure the Committee, with a new chairman in 
2010, can quickly address the next steps.  End Background. 
 
¶4. (SBU) The P3 meeting: 
 
-- Stressed that the agreed to Program of Work (POW) should 
be a technical rollover, stated support for the work group, 
and stressed work groups do not need a chair to meet - in 
fact, this is an advantage to the work groups.  The UK said 
that it was happy to once again lead the work groups. 
 
-- Underscored the need to support a voluntary funding 
mechanism, noting that not everyone could make a financial 
contribution but that the Committee needed a robust mechanism 
that served a multi-donor process. 
 
-- Suggested members of the P3 send their common positions to 
New York in the same way that kept unity on renewal in 2008, 
as this Comprehensive Review outcome and work program will 
likely be the basis for the next renewal discussion. 
-- On experts, asked France to consider reintroducing a 
non-paper that provides direct guidance on the 
responsibilities of the experts group, with tasks for the 
eight experts.  France indicated that experts could be 
encouraged to take more initiative if the Committee gave more 
guidance to them and explicitly welcomed such initiative. 
 
-- Supported keeping interested countries in the loop with 
more participation by capitals and non-UNSC members.  The 
U.S. indicated that it would recirculate to the P3 the 
Norwegian proposal to establish an informal group of friends 
as an idea worth pursuing. 
 
-- Underscored that the experts should not be tackling "broad 
policy" questions but should focus on areas of their 
expertise, and noted that it was delegation representatives 
who needed to resolve broad policy issues.  To best address 
policy issues, the U.S. suggested that France consider 
hosting a next meeting that included Russia at a minimum and 
possibly China.  The U.S. noted that it was encouraging 
greater China involvement at a bilateral dialogue this same 
week in Beijing. 
 
-- Noted that clear instructions were sent to resolve the 
problems regarding responding to assistance requests and 
posting of matrices. 
 
-- Agreed to work closely with France who have the lead on 
assistance, with the UK taking the POW. 
 
-- Stressed a P3 division of labor for intergovernmental 
organizations: France to seek guidance and raise the issue 
with BWC Implementation Support Unit; the UK to approach 
OPCW; and the United States to work with Vienna-based IAEA. 
In 2010 we would seek formal agreements among all three 
groups. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Privately with the UK, the U.S. stressed concerns 
about the proposed establishment of a regional position in 
the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe 
(OSCE) dedicated to 1540 implementation.  The OSCE continues 
actively to address the issue of enhancing 1540 
implementation, and we are working with the current Forum for 
Security Cooperation (FSC) Chair (UK) to fund a 1540 
technical assistance/coordinator position in the OSCE 
Secretariat - to which State's Bureau of European and 
Eurasian Affairs has allocated $100k.  The project was all 
but finalized in late October, but the job announcement has 
not moved through the UK to the OSCE Secretariat in the 
Conflict Prevention Center (CPC).  UK interlocutor Phil 
Richards acknowledged little movement and noted that there 
were position changes in his delegation and budget office. 
He noted that the follow-on funding could be in jeopardy if 
not introduced this fiscal year.  1540 Coordinator Wuchte 
reiterated our view that the project was superbly put 
together by the UK and that we should not lose this 
opportunity.  He asked for the UK Foreign and Commonwealth 
Office (FCO) to ensure that a clear path was understood 
before the OSCE started its winter break. 
 
¶6. (U) This cable was cleared with 1540 Coordinator Tom 
Wuchte.  Post appreciates Washington support. 
Visit London's Classified Website: 
http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/Portal:Unit edKingdom 
 
Susman