VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0127/01 0441535
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 131535Z FEB 07
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1333
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN IMMEDIATE 0786
RUEHNY/AMEMBASSY OSLO IMMEDIATE 0711

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000127 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FOR IO/PSC:JSANDAGE, IO/UNP:EBROWN, AND ISN/CPI:TWUCHTE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL AORC PTER UNSC KNNP
SUBJECT: 1540 COMMITTEE DISCUSSES MIDDLE EAST OUTREACH, 
EXPERTS 
 
REF: A. KONZET/SANDAGE/BROWN EMAILS (02/05/07 & 02/06/07) 
     ¶B. STATE 12967 
     ¶C. BROWN/WILCOX EMAIL (02/08/07) 
     ¶D. WILCOX/SANDAGE/BROWN EMAIL (02/08/07) 
     ¶E. USUN 19 
     ¶F. WILCOX/SANDAGE/BROWN EMAIL (02/06/07) 
     ¶G. STATE 6792 
 
¶1.  (SBU) BEGIN SUMMARY:  At an informal meeting February 7, 
the 1540 Committee discussed outreach activities; a proposed 
roadmap for implementing its program of work; and proposals 
for coordination among the Committee's experts, the 
Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) and 
the 1267 Monitoring Team, as well as the three committees 
(ref A).  The Committee also debated its process for seeking 
new nominations for the three slots on the Committee's 
experts' panels that Rocque Monteleone-Neto, Gunterio 
Heineken, and Berhanykun Andemical will fill until their 
two-year anniversaries as UN consultants expire.  END SUMMARY. 
 
Middle East Workshop 
--------------------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) After Chairman Burian expressed gratitude for 
Jordan's letter, offering to host a regional meeting in the 
Middle East on implementation of resolution 1540, several 
Committee members expressed concern, stressing the need to 
clarify Jordan's intentions concerning participation.  (Note: 
 Per ref B, USUN previously had advised Chairman Burian and 
the Jordanian Mission of the U.S. desire for Jordan to host a 
regional workshop for the Middle East on implementation of 
resolution 1540 before the end of this summer, as well as 
U.S. willingness to fund such an event.  USUN had stressed 
the U.S. desire for an initial meeting with broad 
participation, along the lines of the 2006 regional seminars 
in Beijing, Accra, and Lima, to be followed by narrower 
sub-regional events involving the Arab League or other 
groups.  After Jordan submitted its offer to host the event, 
USUN advised Italy, France, and the UK of our view that 
Jordan would be an excellent host and requested their 
support.) 
 
¶3.  (SBU) While indicating that it still needed instructions, 
France asked whether Israel or the North African states would 
participate, noting the sensitivities that have arisen in the 
General Assembly First Committee concerning Israeli 
participation in non-proliferation-related events.  Italy 
praised Jordan's contributions to several aspects of 
nonproliferation and disarmament, but stressed that it would 
not welcome any initiative that would risk becoming overly 
politicized, rather than focusing on action-oriented 
approaches to fostering implementation of resolution 1540. 
Per ref B, USUN welcomed Jordan's offer and supported a broad 
Middle East outreach event.  After Chairman Burian suggested 
proposing that the Jordanian Mission convene the meeting for 
members of the League of Arab States, USUN, per ref B, 
reiterated the view that the meeting should be a regional 
event, with follow-on work that could occur in the Arab 
League or other venues.  The Chairman concluded by proposing 
to contact the Jordanian Mission for clarification.  (Per 
USUN's subsequent consultations with Department and ref C, 
USUN will follow up again with the Jordanian Mission to 
clarify that the United States believes the seminar should be 
an event with broad participation from Arab countries only. 
End comment.) 
 
Implementation of Program of Work 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶4.  (U) The Committee briefly discussed the experts' paper 
listing the specific elements of the Committee's 12-month 
work program and the tasks the Committee and its experts will 
carry out to fulfill those elements.  Summing up the 
discussion, Chairman Burian suggested the Committee use the 
experts' paper as a practical tool, treating it as a living 
document rather than approving it formally, which might lead 
to lengthy, unproductive drafting negotiations. 
 
Assistance 
---------- 
 
¶5.  (U) U.S. expert Richard Cupitt introduced a paper 
presenting four proposals for the Committee to pursue in 
facilitating the delivery of technical assistance (ref D). 
First, the Committee's experts could develop a database of 
individuals managing non-proliferation-related assistance 
programs in states, international organizations, and 
non-governmental organizations.  Second, the Committee's 
 
 
experts could develop networks of experts in different 
regions for each of the types of prohibitions and controls in 
the resolution who could support requests for assistance. 
Third, the Committee could encourage states to contribute 
government-sponsored experts or participants in assistance 
programs; the Committee would maintain a database of these 
contributions.  Fourth, the Committee's experts could 
identify or, where necessary, help develop sets of national 
practices, together with multilateral institutions, 
professional bodies, and expert networks.  Because no 
Committee members had seen the paper previously, the 
Committee did not react.  (Comment:  To have the broadest 
impact, USUN believes that the databases the experts have 
proposed should be posted on the Committee's website.  End 
comment.) 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Chairman Burian also advised that Norway and 
Germany would provide the Committee with details on their 
plans for a 1540 donors' workshop in New York on March 27. 
USUN reiterated the United States' desire, as a significant 
donor of assistance relating to implementation of resolution 
1540, to participate actively in the workshop and to 
contribute to its planning (ref E).  Burian encouraged 
delegations to provide their input bilaterally with Germany 
and Norway even before the Committee's discussion.   (Note: 
Per ref F, USUN has consulted with the German and Norwegian 
Missions to convey the U.S. interest in contributing to the 
planning process and participating actively in the workshop. 
Both Missions encouraged the United States to provide 
specific input to Berlin and Oslo, where planning is 
occurring in Oslo and Berlin.  Contact points are "Section 
Referat 240" at the Germany Ministry of Foreign Affairs and 
Kare Aaf, Director General of the Department for Security 
Policy at the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  The 
Norwegian Mission has advised that the meeting will take 
place at the Millenium Hotel (across from the United Nations) 
and that 10-12 donors are expected to participate.) 
 
Coordination among the 1540 Experts, CTED, the 
the 1267 Monitoring Team, and Their Three Committees 
--------------------------------------------- ------- 
 
¶7.  (U) The Committee discussed the experts' proposals for 
pursuing a common strategy for non- and late-reporting states 
with CTED and the 1267 Monitoring Team and agreed to revisit 
the issue at its next meeting.  The experts recommended that 
they pursue their collaboration with CTED and the Monitoring 
Team only insofar as those efforts supplement and help to 
achieve the Committee's primary objectives and activities. 
The experts said that the experts' groups do not think it 
would be feasible to send a common questionnaire to non- and 
late-reporting states or to request combined reports, not 
only due to differing mandates but also because the 1267 
Committee and 1540 Committee are still seeking first reports 
from some states while the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) 
has made more reporting requests.  Doing so could confuse 
states and even discourage them from responding.  Instead, 
the experts suggested approaching non- and late-reporting 
states through sub-regional workshops the three groups would 
conduct.  As a pilot, the three groups intend to pursue 
workshops for states in Africa that have not reported or are 
late in reporting to the three committees.  Those workshops 
would supplement the 1540 Committee's other outreach 
activities in Africa.  France and UKUN stressed the need to 
focus on specific results and to pursue only those approaches 
that can yield concrete improvements in states' reporting. 
 
¶8.  (U) The Chairman proposed that he, together with the 
Chairmen of the CTC and the 1267 Committee, should brief the 
Council twice annually rather than quarterly.  Several 
delegations supported Chairman Burian's proposal as a way to 
make the briefings more efficient and focused.  Chairman 
Burian said he would consult with the two other Chairmen. 
 
Experts 
-------- 
 
¶9.  (SBU) After the experts left at the Chairman's request, 
the Committee discussed how to fill the three spaces on the 
experts' panel that will open up after Rocque 
Monteleone-Neto, Gunterio Heineken, and Berhanykun Andemical 
reach their two-year anniversaries as UN consultants.  The 
Committee's deliberations followed on its February 6 decision 
to adopt the Chairman's proposal to extend the contracts of 
Monteleone-Neto, Heineken, and Andemicael through their 
two-year anniversaries, while renewing the contracts of 
Victor Slipchenko and Richard Cupitt through December 31, 
2007 (ref G).  Before the experts left, Monteleone-Neto asked 
 
 
the Committee to reconsider its February 6 decision, saying 
that the affected experts would not stay through their 
two-year anniversaries unless the Committee instead agreed to 
extend their contracts through December 31, 2007. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) Panama, South Africa, and Peru stressed that, 
while the Committee should not revisit its decision, the 
process for reaching that decision had been flawed.  Several 
argued that the Committee should not rule out the possibility 
of extending the contracts of Monteleone-Neto, Heineken, and 
Andemicael through the end of 2007.  Some complained that 
they had not fully understood the Chairman's proposal when 
they accepted it. 
 
¶11.  (SBU) In response, Chairman Burian stressed that all 
Committee members had had repeated opportunities to raise 
questions and concerns before the Committee reached its 
February 6 decision, and that the Committee's decision 
reflected the views of all members.  He also said there must 
be a clear division of responsibility among the experts to 
ensure that they are fulfilling the tasks for which they have 
been hired.  He noted that Monteleone-Neto, as coordinator, 
had refused the Chairman's repeated requests (on behalf of 
the Committee) for the coordinator to provide terms of 
reference for the experts' work.  He stressed that 
Monteleone-Neto's refusal does not justify a decision not to 
retain him, but added that he had not experienced comparable 
problems with the previous coordinator.  He then proposed to 
circulate a draft note verbale shortly for the Committee's 
consideration.  That note verbale would invite states to 
nominate candidates for three spots on the experts' panel. 
Eritrea, Argentina, and Brazil could re-nominate their 
nationals on the panel (Andemicael, Heineken, and 
Monteleone-Neto), and other states could make new 
nominations.  Chairman Burian stressed that the decision to 
retain Andemicael, Heineken, or Monteleone-Neto through the 
end of 2007 ultimately rests with the Committee. 
WOLFF