VZCZCXYZ0020
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #0104/01 0191620
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 191620Z JAN 07
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7918
INFO RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 000104 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR ISN/CB, VCI/CCB, L/ACV, IO/S 
SECDEF FOR OSD/ISP 
JOINT STAFF FOR DD PMA-A FOR WTC 
COMMERCE FOR BIS (GOLDMAN) 
NSC FOR LEDDY 
WINPAC FOR WALTER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): U.S. PRIORITIES 
FOR 2007 
 
This is CWC-06-07. 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1.  (U) While 2006 was dominated by the extension of the U.S. 
100% destruction deadline, there will be a number of key 
issues of importance to the U.S. in 2007.  Article VII will 
remain a critical policy objective throughout the year, with 
the focus on practical steps to promote full implementation. 
Early in 2007, it will be necessary to ensure that Iran, 
currently the only member of the Asian Group angling for the 
position, does not become the Chair of the Executive Council. 
 Reaching agreement on an acceptable site selection 
methodology for Other Chemical Production Facilities remains 
an important goal.  It is likely that there will be a 
discussion of end-point of destruction before the Russian 20% 
intermediate deadline comes up in April; there is already a 
dispute as to the amount of its stockpile Russia claims has 
been "destroyed."  Delegation also urges Washington to assess 
early in the year whether the U.S. may not make its 45% 
destruction deadline in order to submit the subsequent 
request for extension before July 1, 2007. 
 
¶2.  (U) On budget matters, it will be important to make the 
case to the Director General on the benefits of submitting a 
zero nominal growth budget for 2008.  And preparations for 
that budget will include returning in the spring to a 
wide-ranging discussion on the appropriate number of OCPF 
inspections.  In connection with the celebrations marking the 
Tenth Anniversary of entry into force of the Convention, the 
del will continue to assist the Technical Secretariat in 
using the event to raise the profile of the OPCW.  In the 
second half of 2007, it will be necessary to focus more 
attention on the preparations for the Second Review 
Conference in April 2008.  And it will continue to be 
important to press the TS to improve its capabilities to 
conduct investigations of alleged use.  These and other 
issues are addressed below in roughly descending order of 
priority.  End Summary. 
 
----------- 
ARTICLE VII 
----------- 
 
¶3. (U) Full implementation of Article VII remains a key 
priority, but the focus of the work throughout 2007 will be 
somewhat different from past years.  Until the autumn, there 
should be few, if any, "policy" issues which need to be 
discussed in consultations.  Instead, the goal is to 
intensify concrete actions by the TS or individual States 
Parties toward countries that still fall short on Article 
VII.  The speech by Commerce A/S Padilla at the Conference of 
States Parties on Article VII with specific proposals ("20 in 
10") received a good response, and provides a solid 
foundation on which to build. 
 
¶4. (U) During a bilateral meeting with A/S Padilla, Amb. 
Maarten Lak (Netherlands) offered to help organize a small 
group of delegations that would be willing to reach out to 
those "20" in Technical Assistance Visits and in other ways. 
This would allow the workload to be well-organized and 
logically divided among those States Parties.  In A/S 
Padilla's other bilateral meetings, several other delegations 
pointed out their ongoing efforts and expressed their 
willingness to be part of this outreach effort -- notably, 
China, Japan, Australia, and Germany.  Del will work closely 
with this small group early in the year to organize our 
efforts, while coordinating with Washington on what efforts 
we can undertake. 
 
¶5.  (U) Del will continue working with the TS, particularly 
Legal Advisor Onate, on their schedule of activities and 
prompt them to reach out to other SPs to conduct or assist on 
Technical Assistance Visits and other concrete steps.  In 
addition, it will probably be advisable to convince 
facilitator Amb. Maarten Lak (Netherlands) to keep the number 
 
of consultations until the autumn to an absolute minimum, 
since consultations will only provide delegations such as 
Iran an opportunity to question and block specific TS 
actions.  Certainly by the September EC, it will be necessary 
to engage on the issue of an extension or follow-on Article 
VII action in 2008.  However, del sees no advantage to 
raising this issue until the fall. 
 
----------------------------------- 
AVOIDING AN IRANIAN EC CHAIRMANSHIP 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶6.  (SBU) The Chairmanship of the EC, currently held by South 
Africa, will fall next to the Asian Group.  Del has been 
informed by members of that group that only Iran has made a 
strong pitch to be EC Chair.  While Iran has been a 
Vice-Chair for a number of years, it is clear that serving as 
the EC Chair is not acceptable, particularly in view of the 
active role the EC Chair may take in 2007 in arranging visits 
to U.S. and Russian CW destruction facilities. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) As the new EC Chair will be installed in April, it 
will be necessary to begin work immediately to block an 
Iranian Chairmanship.  Informally, members of other 
delegations (such as the UK) have agreed that it would not be 
possible to accept an Iranian chairmanship.  And there is 
little reason to believe that the Iranian Ambassador would be 
surprised to hear of objections from the U.S. and other SPs. 
As for alternative candidates from the Asian Group, the 
larger delegations (Japan, China) have indicated they would 
not want the job.  One possibility is Malaysian Ambassador 
Dato Noor Farida Ariffin, who had previously served 
effectively as the CSP Chair.  However, it is not clear how 
much longer she will remain in The Hague.  The South Korean 
Ambassador is another possibility.  Del will keep Washington 
apprised of discussions with the various possible candidates 
to serve as EC Chair. 
 
------------------------------- 
OCPF SITE SELECTION METHODOLOGY 
------------------------------- 
 
¶8.  (U) If Washington wishes to reach agreement on an 
acceptable OCPF site selection methodology, this will need to 
be accomplished by the June EC.  A number of delegates who 
are well-versed on this issue (particularly Betsy Sanders of 
the U.S. del) depart this summer.  It has been difficult 
enough for delegates to come to grips with this highly 
technical matter.  The arrival of new delegates in the 
autumn, and the ridiculously steep learning curve on this 
particular issue, ensures that no decision by June means no 
decision until 2008. 
 
¶9.  (SBU) Del will continue to work with Washington on an 
acceptable methodology which addresses U.S. concerns.  Once 
that is achieved, it will become necessary to then ensure 
that a new facilitator is installed.  Luis Garcia (Spain) has 
continued to make deliberations more complicated, and a 
number of delegations have voiced dissatisfaction. 
 
------------------------ 
END POINT OF DESTRUCTION 
------------------------ 
 
¶10.  (U) While it is not clear whether Russia will be able to 
claim to have met its revised 20% destruction deadline in 
April, it is pretty clear that there will likely be a debate 
about how much Russia has actually "destroyed."  Several 
members of the TS have predicted that Russia may draw 
parallels with U.S. operations in an attempt to strengthen 
its case.  Delegation understands Washington does not intend 
to redefine EPOD, and will likely need to reassure other 
delegations, particularly in the WEOG, that this is the case. 
 The UK and Germany have already indicated they will stand 
firm on their position that destruction credit should be 
given only after secondary treatment is complete, and that a 
difference in "accounting" could be a reason to visit Russian 
destruction facilities. 
 
 
----------------- 
U.S. 45% DEADLINE 
----------------- 
 
¶11.  (U) Delegation requests that Washington make a timely 
assessment of the prospects that the U.S. will make its 
revised 45% destruction deadline, as a subsequent extension 
request would need to be submitted no later than July 1, 
¶2007.  If that does appear likely, it would be prudent to 
begin planning for when and how to notify key individuals 
(such as the Director General), key delegations and all other 
SPs. 
 
----------- 
2008 BUDGET 
----------- 
 
¶12.  (U) It will be important to convey the early message to 
the DG that the U.S. was pleased with a zero nominal growth 
budget for 2007 and would like another ZNG budget for 2008. 
Barring unforeseen circumstances, there is no reason to 
believe that TS operations would be affected at all by 
another ZNG budget.  It will also be important to have 
Washington's specific "must have" items that should go into 
the 2008 proposed budget.  The inputs from Washington for the 
2007 budget were conveyed to the TS early in process while 
they were preparing that document, and had a significant 
impact in shaping that document.  Del urges Washington to 
provide the same kind of detailed inputs early in the year so 
that the U.S. can have the same impact on TS preparation of 
the proposed 2008 budget.  The other task which will need to 
be addressed in the first half of the year is the selection 
of a capable budget facilitator or co-facilitators. 
 
---------------- 
OCPF INSPECTIONS 
---------------- 
 
¶13.  (U) China, along with a number of NAM delegations, 
strongly objected to the DG's proposed increase in OCPF 
inspections in 2007.  Part of the outcome was an agreement to 
have discussions on this issue, which encompasses the larger 
topic of risk assessment.  The key task is to identify the 
delegate who would sit in the chair (not necessarily to serve 
as a facilitator) during these discussions.  There is no 
reason that this individual would have to be a budget 
(co)facilitator.  Del will consider various candidates and 
consult with Washington. 
 
¶14.  (U) In view of the importance of this topic, and the 
likelihood of continued skepticism on the part of China and 
NAM delegations, the Del will continue to support the TS in 
making the best possible presentation.  Based on past 
performance, that would indicate that Industry Inspection 
chief Bill Kane would be the best TS point-person for these 
discussions. 
 
---------------- 
10TH ANNIVERSARY 
---------------- 
 
¶15.  (U) TS preparations for the Tenth Anniversary of EIF of 
the Convention have been underwhelming.  Many other 
delegations have also expressed the view that the OPCW is not 
fully utilizing one of the few opportunities for the 
organization to profile itself.  Del has been working to 
assist the TS in its efforts.  Indeed, Ambassador Javits has 
initiated and expended considerable energy on an event to be 
held in New York.  Del will intensify efforts to help the TS 
promote the 10th anniversary, and prod other SPs to do the 
same. 
 
------------- 
SECOND REVCON 
------------- 
 
¶16.  (U) Amb. Parker (UK), the head of the working group 
 
preparing for the Second RevCon, has pursued work at a 
suitably modest pace.  The February 20 WG session certainly 
will be livelier, as one of the topics is CW destruction 
issues, but even the UK anticipates that the pace of work 
will not pick up until the autumn.  Based on the experience 
of the First RevCon, if Washington has proposals about the 
overall work schedule for the year, or specific topics such 
as the initiation of drafting, the UK would certainly welcome 
those inputs. 
 
---------------------------- 
INVESTIGATION OF ALLEGED USE 
---------------------------- 
 
¶17. (U) The TS continues to work on improving its 
capabilities in this area.  Most important, it does so in a 
manner which does not require any policy issues that would 
need to be raised in a consultation.  Similarly, while there 
have been EC discussions on "noting" or "receiving" 
Scientific Advisory Board documents on biomedical sampling, 
that has not hindered the progress the TS has continued to 
make in developing capabilities in this area.  Del will 
continue to assist the TS in bolstering these capabilities 
and fending off efforts by delegations to politicize this 
operational issue. 
 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
OTHER ITEMS OF CONTINUING CONCERN: AMCIT HIRING 
--------------------------------------------- - 
 
¶18.  (U) Dl will continue to press for more Amcit hiring bythe TS.  In particular, the del is working to idenify 
suitable U.S. candidates for the P3 and P4 ispector 
positions, the particular pay grade at wich Amcit 
representation is most deficient. 
 
--------- 
ARTICLE XI 
---------- 
 
¶19. (U) Whilethere was a flurry of NAM activity at the 
Decembr CSP, there ultimately was no mention of an actio 
plan for Article XI.  Instead, all delegations greed that 
the first step is to identify a faciltator to handle this 
issue.  While Riva Das (Indi) initially was identified as 
the Article XI faclitator, she has repeatedly said she does 
not wat that role, and there is no indication that any oher 
delegate is ready to accept it.  Should somene come forward 
and consultations begin, the longstanding U.S. objection to 
anything which touche on export controls (and the Australia 
Group) cotinues to be supported by numerous other AG 
deleations. 
 
----------------------- 
INDUSTRY-RELAED ISSUES 
----------------------- 
 
¶20.  (U) Thee are a number of issues on which it would be 
god to reach a resolution this year.  On late declartions, 
it would be worthwhile to get a decision n "nil" 
declarations.  The del will also work wih the TS to prepare 
for sampling and analysis durng a Schedule 2 subsequent 
inspection in the U.S  And the del will be working to 
finalize the Scedule 2 facility agreement as requested by 
that ite. 
 
¶21.  (U) It also will be necessary to re-asess how industry 
issues are being handled, both n process and substance.  The 
industry week arragement is becoming increasingly obsolete. 
It doe not seem an appropriate use of resources to gathe 
 
experts for the few remaining issues (with the xception of 
OCPF site selection).  On issues thatare truly important 
(such as the appropriate numer of OCPF inspections), no 
delegation would want that limited to industry week.  It also 
is necessary to consider whether consultations are the 
optimum way to proceed with key issues.  It may be more 
valuable (and much easier) to engage the TS on an issue such 
as inspector training, and press the TS to take action. 
 
 
---- 
IRAQ 
---- 
 
¶22.  (U) There seems to be general TS satisfaction that the 
outcome of the December workshop in Jordan has left the 
Iraqis close to being able to complete an acceptable initial 
declaration whenever the Iraqi Parliament decides to act on 
accession.  There is every reason to expect that many 
delegations (Iran in particular) will scrutinize that 
declaration quite closely.  In addition, the del notes that 
there may be several questions put to the U.S. regarding Iraq 
as a result of various press items concerning periodic U.S. 
recovery and handling of Iraqi CW munitions. 
 
----------------------- 
RESULTS-BASED BUDGETING 
----------------------- 
 
¶23. (U) The TS is continuing to refine its implementation of 
RBB.  The del will prod the TS (Deputy DG Freeman in 
particular) to sharpen the focus of the performance 
indicators and expand the use of RBB by more TS divisions. 
 
------------- 
AFRICA OFFICE 
------------- 
 
¶24. (U) Facilitator Andres Rugeles (Colombia) has moved this 
issue along prudently and kept the focus on information 
gathering and assessment of various options.  Delegation will 
continue to assist Rugeles in fending off moves by some 
members of the African Group for a decision that would lock 
in any type of permanent office. 
 
--------------------- 
CHALLENGE INSPECTIONS 
--------------------- 
 
¶25.  (U) There is still no facilitator for this issue, and no 
indication that any delegate is interested in taking the job. 
 Should the consultation be resuscitated, there is no reason 
to expect any change in the position of delegations, and 
therefore no reason to expect any progress.  Some WEOG 
delegations have expressed interest in a challenge Inspection 
exercise that would involve the EC, but in the absence of 
consultations are unlikely to pursue such an initiative. 
However, what is most important is that the TS is continuing 
to move along with the practical steps needed to prepare for 
a challenge inspection.  The del will continue to assist the 
TS in that nuts-and-bolts process. 
 
SIPDIS 
 
--------------- 
CONFIDENTIALITY 
 
SIPDIS 
--------------- 
 
¶26.  (U) As Betsy Sanders (U.S.) will be departing this 
summer, a new facilitator will have to be identified. 
 
¶27.  (U) Javits sends. 
ARNALL