This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 03 THE HAGUE 002766 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR AC/CB, P/CBM. VC/CCB, L/ACV, IO/S 
SECDEF FOR OSD/ISP 
JOINT STAFF FOR DD PMA-A FOR WTC 
COMMERCE FOR BIS (GOLDMAN) 
NSC FOR CHUPA 
WINPAC LIEPMAN 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/04/2013 
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC):  WRAP-UP FOR 
WEEK ENDING 31 OCT 2003 
 
 
Classified By: Ambassador to the OPCW Eric M. Javits.  Reasons: 1.5 (B, 
 D) 
 
 This is CWC-116-03. 
 
¶1.  (SBU)  Summary:  On Oct. 30, U.S. delegation members met 
with OPCW officials to discuss the status of upcoming ILO 
Administrative Tribunal actions stemming from the OPCW tenure 
policy.  Additional points on side-bar discussions at the 
Eighth Conference of States Parties are also provided for the 
record, covering FRG Schedule 2A transfers, DOC/PSF site 
selection, Finnish destruction assistance to Russia, the 
Working Capital Fund, and Swiss comments on electronic 
declarations. 
 
------------------------------- 
Meeting with OPCW Legal Experts 
------------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU)  U.S. Delegation members met October 30 with OPCW 
Deputy Director-General Brian Hawtin, Human Resources Branch 
Head Eva Murray, acting Legal Adviser Isaac Minta and Legal 
Counsel Jonathan Kusi to discuss upcoming ILO Administrative 
Tribunal actions concerning the OPCW.  We asked whether 
lawsuits disputing the OPCW tenure policy were on the ILO AT 
docket for its winter term, and if so, whether the OPCW had 
obtained copies of the complaints.  We stressed that as the 
largest contributor to the OPCW budget, the U.S. has a strong 
interest in these cases, and proposed that the OPCW and U.S. 
identify points of contact to coordinate strategy and follow 
developments at the ILO AT. 
 
¶3.  (SBU)  Minta said that no suits against implementation of 
the tenure policy had yet been filed with the ILO.  He 
anticipated that this would be done at the Tribunal's next 
session, scheduled for November 3-21.  He recalled that the 
tenure decision had been made in April 2003.  The OPCW's 
internal Appeals Council had recommended suspending 
implementation of the new tenure policy, but the Conference 
of States Parties had given clear instructions to Director 
General Pfirter to proceed.  Therefore, Minta said, the DG 
would formally decline the Appeals Council's recommendation 
in the coming days, press ahead with implementation, and the 
first staff members would leave their positions on November 
¶15.  Minta said that these inspectors could not file claims 
until they had left their positions. 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  Once the ILO AT takes up the tenure cases, Minta 
said the process will take the better part of a year, as the 
OPCW has the opportunity to reply to the complaints, the 
complainants then submit a rejoinder, and finally the OPCW 
may make a surrejoinder - with extendable 30-day time periods 
between each step in the process.  Therefore, he said, the 
Tribunal will continue to consider these cases at its 
April-May 2004 session.  He judged that the earliest feasible 
decision would be in July.  He dismissed as "wishful 
thinking" OPCW Staff Council expectations that this could be 
done by February 2004 
 
¶5.  (SBU)  Besides the tenure issues, Kusi and Minta noted 
that two older cases involving the OPCW were presently on the 
agenda of the ILOAT winter session.  One was the complaint of 
Ruth Mohlenkamp, a former D-1 who had been moved into a P-5 
position.  The other involved 27 staff members classified as 
P-3's appealing for their positions to be re-designated as 
P-4s and grieving the designation process.  Minta voiced 
confidence that the worst case scenario in the latter case 
would be an ILOAT mandate to once again run the process of 
designating positions P-3, as opposed to P-4, but that there 
would be no financial judgment against the OPCW. 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  We reiterated our desire to keep in close touch 
with the Organization's legal team, noting that it was just a 
question of time before the ILOAT took up tenure suits 
against the OPCW.  Hawtin and the others welcomed this 
proposal and expressed appreciation for U.S. interest.  Minta 
suggested the U.S. may want to consider filing its own amicus 
curiae brief. 
 
--------------------------- 
SCHEDULE 2A TRANSFERS - FRG 
--------------------------- 
 
¶7.  (S)  On the margins of CSP-8, Manfred Ruck of the German 
delegation informed the U.S. Del that the FRG had managed to 
resolve the two discrepancies in which it was involved -- 
cases where Morocco and Tunisia, respectively, had declared 
significant imports of Schedule 2A chemicals from Germany but 
where Germany had declared no corresponding export.  In both 
cases, the source of the discrepancy was reporting error by 
the importing state party; i.e., that the transactions did 
not take place.  This probably means that a transfer of some, 
presumably more anodyne chemical, did take place, and the 
wrong CAS number was reported.  FRG Ambassador Olbrich held 
this up as an example of why the Executive Council should not 
get involved in clarification of such discrepancies, arguing 
that if the effort to secure action at the September EC had 
succeeded, it would have been embarrassing for all considered 
and harmed the credibility of the OPCW.  The U.S. disagreed 
with Olbrich's assessment. 
 
---------------------------------- 
DOC/PSF SITE SELECTION - PRC VIEWS 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶8.  (U) During the Conference, U.S. Del members had a lengthy 
discussion with two members of the Chinese delegation on the 
topic of site selection.  The Chinese conceptual 
understanding of the U.S. approach was fairly weak, and Del 
members worked to explain it thoroughly.  PRC concerns seemed 
to boil down to two issues: 1) the possibility of collusion 
and/or purely political targeting of inspections by other 
States Parties, and 2) (possibly an even bigger worry) 
holding down the number of inspections they have to host -- 
currently running about 10 per year.  The U.S. noted the 
inherent limitations on collusion and the measures worked out 
with the Swiss to guard against it.  However, it did not 
appear that Chinese fears were fully assuaged.  The U.S. 
offered to try to arrange for a team to visit Beijing and 
brief the proposal, but the Chinese response was equivocal. 
(Note:  The concern about the number of inspections China may 
face seems to have been stimulated or exacerbated by a TS 
presentation during the National Authorities weekend, which 
documented trends in global chemical industry over the last 
ten or twenty years, noting significant migration of activity 
from Europe to the Pacific Rim, projecting it forward for 
some period of time, and translating this into numbers of 
inspections.  End Note.) 
 
------------------------------------------ 
DOC/PSF SITE SELECTION - NEW ZEALAND VIEWS 
------------------------------------------ 
 
¶9.  (U)  On the same topic, Simon Rae (New Zealand) noted 
that, given the numbers of DOC/PSF facilities in China and 
the U.S., it may not be possible to get a credible inspection 
intensity in either of those countries.  As a result, 
suggested Rae, it might make more sense to pacify the Chinese 
by moving to a different exponent to "discount" numbers of 
inspectable facilities in the formula.  Rae suggested using 
0.6 vice the current 0.3.   He noted that the countries of 
greatest interest tend to have about 20-40 DOC/PSF 
facilities, and that, while the change in exponent would 
substantially reduce impact on China, it would not have too 
much effect on these middle countries, and very little at all 
on the smallest. 
 
---------------------------------------- 
FINNISH DESTRUCTION ASSISTANCE TO RUSSIA 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶10.  (U) The Finnish Ambassador informed us during the 
Conference that the Finns have been in discussions with the 
Russians about providing assistance.  They had grown 
concerned about the Russian Munitions Agency's ability to 
coordinate and handle assistance, and learned that the RMA is 
in fact an extremely small group of people, arguably 
overburdened.  The Finns offered to provide support to help 
them with planning and coordination, but were turned down. 
 
------------------------ 
THE WORKING CAPITAL FUND 
------------------------ 
 
¶11.  (U)  During the budget discussions at CSP-8, the issue 
arose of once again seeking a provision allowing repayment of 
any borrowing from the Working Capital Fund be made at the 
end of the following year, rather than at the end of the year 
in which the borrowing occurred.  Special Advisor for budget 
issues Ali Asghar announced that this 12-month extension had 
not helped the TS, that the WCF was still essentially 
useless, and that the TS needed at least 36 months to repay 
any borrowings to make the WCF a useful tool.  Ashgar's 
explanation behind the 36-month interval basically ties in 
with the historical payment pattern for Article IV/V income, 
in which very little comes in the year in which the activity 
takes place, the bulk of the money comes in the following 
year, and about a quarter comes in the year after that. 
Director of Administration Herb Schulz made a pitch for 
doubling the size of the WCF, and getting a 36-month 
repayment window.  Even without the Program Stabilization 
Fund, Schulz thought that the funding problems for the OPCW 
then could be adequately addressed. 
 
-------------------------------- 
SWISS ON ELECTRONIC DECLARATIONS 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶12.  (U)  The Swiss Delegation informed the U.S. Del at CSP-8 
that Switzerland had experimented with one of the beta 
versions of the U.S. CTFS Read-Write tool, and was 
disappointed.  They noted that it may read and write CTFS, 
but they did not find it suitable for most of the things they 
wanted to do with their declarations.  As a result, the Swiss 
have developed a Microsoft Access application for their own 
use that allows them to input declaration data (manually), 
print out forms, run queries, and export the data 
electronically, although it is not clear whether this 
includes at present the ability to spit out an ASCII-format, 
CTFS-compatible file. 
 
¶13.  (U)  The Swiss are pleased with their product, and 
believe that it may be just the thing for many smaller 
countries that might find the U.S. CTFS tool daunting.   They 
want to make it available to other states parties, though 
they are wary of crossing our bow, since they perceive CTFS 
to be an American pet project.  They are inclined to perceive 
their database as complementary to CTFS, but are clearly a 
little apprehensive that the U.S. will see it as unwanted 
competition.  They are also considering adding full CTFS 
read/write functionality.  The problem, however, is that this 
would require a more serious programming effort, and periodic 
patches or updates as the file structure evolves.  The Swiss 
do not have the in-house capacity for this, and might have 
difficulty financing it unless they charged a fee for copies 
of the program.  The U.S. Del requested a copy of the program 
to share with colleagues in Washington for evaluation, and 
was told that the Swiss del would bring two copies on CD to 
the November industry consultations for our use. 
 
¶14.  (U)  Javits sends. 
SOBEL