VZCZCXRO7601
PP RUEHDBU RUEHSL
DE RUEHNO #0077/01 0500923
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 190923Z FEB 10
FM USMISSION USNATO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 3878
INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE
RUEHXD/MOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RHMFISS/USNMR SHAPE BE
RUEHNO/USDELMC BRUSSELS BE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 USNATO 000077 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/18/2019 
TAGS: PGOV PREL NATO RS
SUBJECT: NATO-RUSSIA COUNCIL DISCUSSES TERRORISM, RUSSIAN 
MILITARY DOCTRINE, AND MISSILE DEFENSE 
 
Classified By: Political Advisor Kelly Degnan for reasons 1.4 (b/d). 
 
¶1. (C) Summary:  The NATO-Russia Council (NRC) continued its 
Joint Review of security challenges with a February 12 
discussion on terrorism.  NRC members proposed examining a 
wide range of topics, leading some to caution against casting 
too wide a net for this initiative.  The U.S. proposed 
focusing on areas of practical cooperation such as combined 
counter-terrorism exercises and Russian involvement in NATO's 
Operation Active Endeavor.  Russia complained that some 
Allies refused to extradite suspected terrorists to Russia, 
and asked for assistance in preparing security for the Sochi 
Olympics.  Russian Ambassador Rogozin agreed to Ambassador 
Daalder's request that Russia provide the NRC a briefing on 
its new Military Doctrine, but asked that the U.S. provide a 
briefing on its doctrine in return.  Rogozin also asked for 
more information on the threats the proposed U.S. Missile 
Defense system was intended to address, leading Ambassador 
Daalder to point out that the U.S. and Russia were presently 
engaged in a Joint Threat Assessment that looked at this 
precise issue.  End Summary. 
 
Joint Review Discussion on Terrorism 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶2. (C) NATO Secretary General Rasmussen continued the NRC's 
Joint Review of 21st Century Common Security Challenges with 
a February 12 Ambassadorial discussion on terrorism.  The 
SecGen proposed that the NRC examine several topics: 
terrorist propaganda, radicalization and recruitment, safe 
havens and governance issues, terrorist tactics, resources 
and equipment, lessons learned from operations, improved 
international cooperation, and threats to critical 
infrastructure.  Allies mentioned a host of other topics to 
explore, including terrorist recruitment, the socio-economic 
background of terrorists, preventing terrorists from 
obtaining WMD, terrorists' use of the internet, how 
terrorists adapt to counter-terrorism efforts, and 
terrorists' links with organized crime. 
 
¶3. (C) Several Allies cautioned against widening the scope of 
the discussion too far and noted a need to avoid duplicating 
the efforts of other international fora.  The Dutch and 
French PermReps thought that the Joint Review should be more 
structured and focus on analyzing terrorists threats before 
moving on to methods to tackle these threats.  Italy noted 
that counter-terrorism cooperation required sharing 
intelligence, which was problematic in the NRC.  Poland 
called for enhancing the NRC's Cooperative Airspace 
Initiative by expanding this air-security project to 
neighboring countries such as Finland and Ukraine. 
 
¶4. (C) Ambassador Daalder stressed the need to focus on 
issues that could lead to practical NATO-Russia cooperation. 
He suggested that the NRC Joint Review provided an 
opportunity to explore holding combined Special Forces 
counter-terrorism exercises and examine previous Russian 
participation in NATO's Operation Active Endeavor (OAE) with 
the aim of a future Russian role.  This proposal received 
strong Allied support, and Russian Ambassador Rogozin said 
that Russia did not object in principle to future 
participation in OAE. 
 
¶5. (C) Rogozin gave a long, unfocused overview of Russian 
views on terrorism and proposed that the NRC examine many of 
the same issues mentioned by the SecGen and Allies.  He 
raised Russian concern with Afghan narcotics, the spread of 
extremism from Afghanistan to Central Asia, and reiterated 
Russian interest in retaining UNSCR 1267 sanctions on the 
Taliban and Al-Qaeda.  Rogozin noted the different views 
Russia and some Allies had regarding terrorism in the North 
Caucasus and complained that Allies failed to extradite 
suspected terrorists to Russia.  He said Russia was 
interested in learning from Canada about its security 
preparations for the Vancouver Olympics in advance of the 
2014 Olympics in Sochi.  The Canadian PermRep responded that 
he expected Canada would provide this information to Russia. 
 
¶6. (C) The SecGen concluded the discussion by tasking the NRC 
Counter-Terrorism Working Group to examine the proposed 
topics more thoroughly. 
 
USNATO 00000077  002 OF 002 
 
 
 
Russian Military Doctrine 
------------------------- 
 
¶7. (C) Ambassador Daalder asked that Russia provide the NRC a 
briefing on its new Military Doctrine at a future meeting. 
He noted that Russia did not consult with the NRC before 
releasing this document on February 5, just days before 
former Secretary Albright arrived in Moscow for a discussions 
on NATO's Strategic Concept.  The SecGen agreed with the 
Ambassador on the value of a briefing, adding that he had 
raised his concerns about the Russian document with Foreign 
Minister Lavrov during the Munich Security Conference. 
Allies supported the U.S. proposal for a briefing. 
 
¶8. (C) Rogozin said Russia was not opposed to providing a 
briefing, which would help counter misinformation in the 
media.  In return, he asked that Russia receive a briefing on 
U.S. military doctrine.  The SecGen scheduled the Russian 
briefing for March 24. 
 
Missile Defense 
--------------- 
 
¶9. (C) The Romanian PermRep addressed the recent announcement 
that Romania would be the site of elements of the U.S. 
Missile Defense system, adding that Romania hoped this would 
become part of a NATO system and was open to cooperating with 
Russia on MD.  He noted that Rogozin had commented previously 
that a MD system intended to counter Iranian missiles was 
better suited to Southeastern Europe than to Central Europe. 
 
¶10. (C) Rogozin responded that deploying a MD system should 
be a last resort to countering Iran.  He proposed a 
comprehensive review of missile threats, questioned the logic 
of the U.S. plans for MD, and asked for more information on 
the threats it was intended to address.  Ambassador Daalder 
responded that the U.S. and Russia were already engaged in 
intensive discussions on this issue as part of their Joint 
Threat Assessment.  He looked forward to the next Joint 
Review discussion that would include missile threats, and 
hoped this would lead to NATO-Russia cooperation on MD. 
HEFFERN