VZCZCXYZ0035
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHNO #0609/01 2891609
ZNY SSSSS ZZH
P 161609Z OCT 06
FM USMISSION USNATO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0113
INFO RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

S E C R E T USNATO 000609 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NOFORN 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/16/2016 
TAGS: NATO PREL PGOV PINR GG
SUBJECT: NATO ALLIES GIVE GEORGIA CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM IN 
HANDLING OF RUSSIAN SPY CASE 
 
REF: A. TBILISI 2626 
 
     ¶B. TBILISI 2601 
     ¶C. MOSCOW 1489 AND PREVIOUS 
 
Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Richard G. Olson 
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (C)  SUMMARY.  NATO Allies expressed support for 
Georgia's territorial integrity during an October 13 briefing 
by Deputy Foreign Minister Kutelia on the arrest and 
expulsion of alleged Russian spies, but most also expressed 
disappointment in Georgia's handling of the case.  Allies 
advised Georgia to act more responsibly now that it has 
obtained Intensified Dialogue (ID) and show greater restraint 
and predictability in the face of Russian provocations.  In 
his briefing, Kutelia said the public arrest and expulsion of 
the Russian officers were not linked to NATO's decision to 
grant ID and had been conducted publicly in order to create a 
"psychological deterrent" to Georgians from cooperating with 
Russian intelligence.  The U.S. affirmed its hope that 
Georgia would continue to move closer to NATO and continue 
its democratic reforms, but noted that ID brings with it 
greater responsibility and need for transparency with NATO 
Allies.  END SUMMARY 
 
GEORGIA: PUBLIC ARRESTS NECESSARY TO PREVENT ATTACKS, DETER 
FURTHER SPYING 
 
¶2.  (C)  Georgian Deputy Foreign Minister Batu Kutelia 
briefed NATO's Political Committee on October 13, providing a 
broad history of Georgia's relations with Russia, which he 
said deteriorated long before the spying arrests as Georgia 
moved closer to the West and successfully implemented 
reforms.  He said that the September 27 arrests had no 
connection to NATO's September 18 decision to grant ID to 
Georgia, but rather the timing was determined by information 
that the spy ring was planning attacks to undermine the 
October 5 local elections in Georgia.  The arrests, legal 
proceedings, and expulsion were conducted publicly because 
Georgia wanted to create a "psychological deterrent" to 
prevent Georgians from cooperating with Russian intelligence 
agencies and to prevent future Russian operations. 
 
¶3.  (C)  Kutelia said the spying incident reinforced the 
Georgian government's impression that Russian peacekeepers in 
Abkhazia and South Ossetia could not be impartial since some 
Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia were working with the 
spy ring (as were some Russians located in Armenia connected 
with ongoing CFE compliance operations).  He stressed Georgia 
had been restrained in the face of numerous Russian 
provocations, including economic embargoes and attacks on 
Georgian helicopters by South Ossetians from areas under the 
control of Russian peacekeepers. 
 
¶4.  (S/NF)  The Georgians earlier in the day briefed Allied 
counter-intelligence experts on the evidence they collected 
against the arrested Russians and the methods employed by the 
Russians and did not repeat that information in the briefing 
to the Political Committee. 
 
ALLIES COUNSEL RESTRAINT, TRANSPARENCY 
 
¶5.  (C)  In response, the U.S. affirmed its hopes Georgia 
would continue to move closer to NATO and continue its 
democratic reforms, but noted that ID brings with it greater 
responsibility and the need for transparency with NATO 
Allies.  Comments from other Allies were unified in praising 
Georgia's reform progress and reaffirming support for 
Georgia's territorial integrity.  Almost all criticized 
Russia's heavy handed response, but expressed disappointment 
in Georgia's handling of the spy case and advised it not 
allow itself to be drawn by Russian provocations.  Most 
stressed that ID comes with responsibilities to act calmly 
and transparently. 
 
¶6.  (C)  In a comment that typified many, Czech Deputy Chief 
of Mission Jan Michal said he understood Georgian anger at 
Russian actions, but did not approve of Georgia's response. 
While Georgia had been right to arrest the officers, it had 
been wrong to detain them and begin public legal proceeding 
against them.  He advised Georgia not to respond to Russian 
provocations, but show restraint.  The Dutch and Spanish 
representatives went further in their criticism of Georgia 
and suggested Georgia had violated an understanding reached 
with NATO before the granting of ID that it would act 
responsibly and not inflame tensions in its region. 
 
¶7.  (C)   Poland, Latvia, and Romania supported Georgian 
actions and were critical of Russia.  France stressed NATO 
was not a party to this conflict between Georgia and Russia 
and that ID entails a commitment to peaceful resolution of 
conflicts.  Germany noted that Chancellor Merkel had 
discussed Georgia extensively during her October 10 meeting 
with Russian President Putin (nfi) and that EU troika 
Ambassadors had delivered a demarche in Moscow on October 13 
calling for a de-escalation of tensions with Georgia and the 
lifting of economic sanctions. 
OLSON