VZCZCXRO2713
PP RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDA RUEHDBU RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA
RUEHLN RUEHLZ RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHVB #0184/01 0520616
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 210616Z FEB 07
FM AMEMBASSY ZAGREB
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 7324
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA PRIORITY 0288
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO PRIORITY 0085
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEHPS/USOFFICE PRISTINA PRIORITY 0573

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ZAGREB 000184 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL ECON EAID SR HR EUN MI RO BU GR BK MW YI TU
UNMIK 
SUBJECT: STABILITY PACT TRANSITION ENGAGES THE SEECP 
 
REF: BRUSSELS 00373 
 
¶1.  (U) Summary:  The February 14-15 meeting of the Stability Pact 
transition Institutions Working Group (IWG) in Zagreb successfully 
resolved most fundamental issues related to the creation of the 
Regional Cooperation Council (RCC) as the successor regional 
structure to replace the Stability Pact by early in 2008.  The 
meeting, which followed a lengthy but inconclusive session of the 
South East European Cooperation Process (SEECP) political directors, 
reached agreement on the principles for establishing the nomination 
procedure and mandate of the proposed Secretary General of the RCC, 
set out procedures and requirements for selecting the location for 
the regional headquarters of the RCC secretariat, and agreed on most 
elements of the RCC charter.  Discussions on all issues were lively 
and generally constructive.  IWG participants will be reviewing the 
outcome of the meeting with capitals; prospects are good for drawing 
the preparatory process to a close on February 26, with the agreed 
documents then to be reviewed by SEECP FMs and incorporated into the 
updated SEECP charter on March 2.  The process of creating the RCC 
structure should proceed to final approval by SEECP Prime Ministers 
on May 11 with implementation beginning in the summer and continuing 
through the end of the year.  Ensuring effective coordination with 
SEECP PolDirs on the final language remains a challenge and depends 
on the Croatian SEECP CiO.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.   (U) Representatives of SEECP countries, UNMIK/Kosovo, and key 
donor governments met in Zagreb to continue the work of the 
Stability Pact transition Institutional Working Group (reftel). 
Preceded by an active exchange of views in the two weeks following 
the initial IWG session on January 24, the sub-working groups met on 
February 14 to work through specific concerns and reservations on 
how best to create the RCC as a successor structure to the Stability 
Pact. The discussion of the requirement for the seat agreement of 
the RCC secretariat was straight-forward; in contrast, the debate on 
the nomination and mandate of the Secretary General of the RCC was 
more difficult, due in part to strong interventions of an apparently 
poorly informed Turkish representative, whose misreading of the 
draft texts caused much frustration and consternation among the 
other participants. 
 
¶3.  (U) RCC Secretariat Seat Agreement:  The critical issue involved 
finding the right legal status for the RCC and/or the RCC 
Secretariat in order to establish headquarters in the region, allow 
 
SIPDIS 
it to enter into effective legal agreements with the government 
(tbd) hosting the RCC secretariat, and thereafter, create the 
Brussels liaison office under Belgium law and regulation. 
Alternatives under consideration involve the possibility of a 
ratified international agreement to make the RCC an international 
organization in its own right (likely to be rejected as being 
unachievable) or a slimmed down version by which the RCC secretariat 
would be established on the basis of a seat agreement between the 
host government and the SEECP member governments signing 
individually.  The legal issues continue to require study. 
 
¶4. (U) Secretary General Nomination Process:  Considerable wrangling 
produced a political agreement positing a six step procedure: 
 
--SEECP governments propose suitable candidates 
 
--SEECP, through its CiO, consults with RCC Board members (the 
Stability Pact Regional Table in the case of the first SecGen) 
members on the candidates. 
 
--SEECP PolDirs make a consolidated nomination proposal 
 
--The nomination is forwarded to the RCC Board (the Stability Pact 
Regional Table in this initial case) for consideration and 
endorsement 
 
--the RCC Secretary General is appointed by SEECP Foreign Ministers 
 
--The SEECP Prime Ministers confirm the appointment 
 
The six step procedure will be compressed into the early March-early 
May period for the inaugural selection, with a more deliberate 
timetable for future nominations.  As noted, given that the RCC will 
not be legally constituted prior to the naming of its first SecGen, 
the Stability Pact's Regional Table will perform the initial 
consultative function.  In the future, the consultative process will 
be handled by the RCC's Board.  For their part, UNMIK/Kosovo and 
PISG representatives pushed for a more equal role for Kosovo in the 
nomination process, given that it is not a member of the SEECP, but 
the issue was left with Kosovo's say on the SecGen nomination coming 
initially as part of the RCC (or Regional Table) review of 
candidates and endorsement of the final nomination. 
 
ZAGREB 00000184  002 OF 003 
 
 
 
 
 
¶5.   (U) The RCC Board: The RCC Board will be made up of the SEECP 
governments, the EU, and key donors who are providing notable 
financial support to the RCC secretariat or are conducting 
assistance programs in the region above a threshold amount (still to 
be determined).  This latter alternative is intended to allow a 
voice to such key donors as the U.K. (but perhaps not to France 
given its lower level of active assistance) and the international 
financial institutions, whose lending programs are substantial. 
 
¶6.  (U) Secretary General Mandate:  There was a quick consensus 
around the concept of having a strong regionally active political 
figure -- with the ability to deal directly with the highest levels 
of regional and donor governments -- to serve as SecGen.  As noted 
above, getting to a reserved consensus was hindered by strong 
resistance by the Turkish representative who was wary of committing 
to a formula that would seemingly compel an open door to the 
"highest level" (eg. Turkish Prime Minister or President), and who 
was also apparently satisfied with an ambassador-level choice of 
candidates.  Concerted intervention by DSC Mozur and USEU rep Manso 
had its effect in softening his position, and opening the 
possibility having the Turkish reserve lifted by February 26. 
Further debate focused more on the Sec Gen's role vis-`-vis senior 
SEECP meetings and the requirement that the SecGen present an annual 
report on the state of regional cooperation to the RCC and to the 
SEECP foreign ministers, and a strategic presentation to SEECP prime 
ministers at the SEECP Summit.  Not yet decided is the term of the 
SecGen with the majority pressing for an initial three year term 
with a one-year renewal, while the Croatians and the Albanians 
attempt to hold to a two year-two year renewal scenario. 
 
¶7.  (U) RCC Charter:  The heart of the process -- the discussion on 
the overall charter -- proved manageable as SEECP participants 
debated the proper relationship of the RCC and SecGen with the 
ongoing SEECP activities and the donor community.  Persuasive 
interventions by the Swedish Stability Pact National coordinator and 
by DSC Mozur emphasizing the new partnership between the donor 
community and the SEECP beneficiary countries set the tone.   The 
Charter would incorporate agreed language from the seat agreement 
and SecGen mandate and form an annex to the updated SEECP charter, 
which is being prepared by the SEECP PolDirs, who met on February 
13-14 in Zagreb and will reconvene on March 1 prior to the March 2 
Foreign Ministers meeting. 
 
¶8.  (U) Size of Secretariat and Staffing:  Although this issue came 
up it was deferred pending the nomination of the SecGen to allow for 
the new SecGen to state a vision for the secretariat operation. 
However, Stability Pact representatives outlined the general 
parameters, which would be supported by the overall funding 
commitments made to date (close to three million euros) from the 
SEECP countries, the European Commission, and other donors (Austria, 
Switzerland, Sweden, Germany, the U.S. and  others).  As agreed, the 
secretariat would be located in the region, would likely be less 
 
SIPDIS 
than half the size of the Stability Pact operation, encompassing a 
small executive office around the SecGen (possibly to include a 
formal Deputy SG position), an expert staff of perhaps six to ten 
persons, an admin support staff of five or six, plus a small liaison 
office in Brussels of perhaps three of four, for an overall total of 
between 20 and 25 people. 
 
¶9.  (U) Atmospherics:  The meeting went smoothly and discussion 
stayed focused, apparently in contrast to a drawn out exercise 
involving the SEECP PolDirs, which took place the day before and 
earlier in the morning of the 14th just before the IWG session. 
Many of the SEECP reps had participated in the PolDirs meeting, 
which saw the Croatian CiO present drafts on the same issues before 
the IWG with no resulting agreement.  For his part, IWG Co-Chair 
Grigic played a somewhat subdued role despite Stability Pact efforts 
to push him to do otherwise.  The Albanian representative took 
special pains during the concluding plenary session to highlight the 
importance of facilitating the free movement of peoples (a position 
strongly supported by UNMIK/KOSOVO), noting that Albanians only 
enjoy visa free status with Montenegro and Macedonia in the region. 
Reaction to the Albanian plea included a strong statement by the 
European Commission representative on the course of active efforts 
by the Commission to discuss visa facilitation with governments in 
the region and recognition that the SEECP JHA Ministerial in early 
April would provide an ideal venue for addressing the issue yet 
again. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) Comment:  So far, so good sums up progress achieved. 
There remains somewhat of a disconnect within the SEECP governments 
on the Stability Pact transition process, where the Croatian CiO 
 
ZAGREB 00000184  003 OF 003 
 
 
could do more to bring the two tracks together.  Stability Pact 
representatives pressed IWG co-Chair Grigic hard to adopt the agreed 
IWG texts as the basis for the SEECP Charter amendments and will be 
watchful on this score in the run up to the March 2 Ministerial. 
Stability Pact participation in the March 1 PolDirs meeting should 
help to achieve the necessary coordination. 
 
¶11.  (SBU) There was no substantive discussion of location sites or 
potential SecGen nominees at the IWG session.  Sarajevo remains the 
likely choice for the location of the RCC secretariat.  The sole 
visible and preliminary candidate for the SecGen position, Goran 
Svilanovic, former Serbian Foreign Minister and Chairman of the 
Stability Pact's Working Table I (on democratization) continues to 
be hopeful that he will be able to win support from Belgrade to 
allow his name to be put in play at the March 2 meeting by the 
Serbian representative (FM Vuk Draskovic may be attending) in the 
absence of a new government in office in Belgrade.  End Comment. 
 
BRADTKE