VZCZCXRO3790
PP RUEHGA RUEHHA RUEHQU RUEHVC
DE RUEHOT #0272 0402127
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 092127Z FEB 07
FM AMEMBASSY OTTAWA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4980
INFO RUCNCAN/ALL CANADIAN POSTS COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS OTTAWA 000272 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WMDT, WHA/CAN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KTIA PTER TBIO CA
SUBJECT: WMD Foreign Consequence Management MoU 
 
Ref: (A) State 12882 
 
¶1. Summary:  The Embassy believes that the suggested MoU between 
DFAIT and State is not necessary because existing arrangements 
already address its intent.  These include a 1986 treaty-level 
all-hazards mutual assistance agreement; the 1999 Canada-U.S. 
"Guidelines Concerning Cooperation on Chemical, Biological, 
Radiological and Nuclear Counterterrorism"; and several regional 
MoUs between individual states and provinces.  In addition, under 
the aegis of these and other agreements, the GoC and USG are working 
within the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) involving 
Canada, the United States, and Mexico, to develop in-depth protocols 
for responding to disasters and terrorist attacks, including CBRN 
incidents.   End summary. 
 
¶2. The Embassy believes that the proposed MoU between the Department 
of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) and the State 
Department is not necessary because existing agreements between 
Canada and the United States provide the framework for cooperative 
efforts as envisioned by the proposed MoU.  We consulted the 
Ministry of Public Safety, which would take the lead in coordinating 
the Canadian response to a disaster, and  the Department of Foreign 
Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT).  Both organizations 
concluded that the agreements we have in place now exceed the level 
of cooperation being proposed by the new MoU. 
 
¶3.  For example, Canada and the United States have signed the 1986 
"Canada-U.S. Agreement on Cooperation in Comprehensive Civil 
Emergency Planning and Management."  This agreement covers all 
hazards, up to, and including, all-out nuclear war.  In 1999, Canada 
and the United States agreed to the "Guidelines Concerning 
Cooperation on Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear 
Counterterrorism," which covers the same ground as the proposed MoU. 
 Regional groupings of provinces and states (in the Pacific 
Northwest and in the New England/Atlantic provinces areas) have also 
signed agreements on cross-border assistance that could be 
implemented in a CBRN incident.  (These state/province arrangements, 
however, have not been ratified by the U.S. Congress). 
 
¶4. Finally, to further obviate the requirement for the proposed 
non-binding MoU, the GoC and USG are  working within the trilateral 
Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) to develop in-depth 
protocols for responding to disasters and terrorist attacks, 
including CBRN incidents.  Working groups of Canadian, American, and 
Mexican officials are undertaking actions to strengthen the response 
capability to incidents involving any of the three nations.  SPP 
Action themes include: "Develop and implement a North American 
Bioprotection Strategy to Assess, Prevent, Protect, Detect, and 
Respond to Intentional As Well As Applicable Naturally Occurring 
Threats to Public Health and the Food and Agriculture System" (see 
page 21 of the 2006 Security Annex) and "Develop and Implement a 
Common Approach to Critical Infrastructure Protection and Response 
to Cross-Border Terrorist Incidents And, As Applicable, Natural 
Disasters" (see page 25 of the 2006 Security Annex).  The SPP 
documents are available at www.spp.gov 
 
Wilkins