VZCZCXYZ0005
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #1305/01 1901002
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 091002Z JUL 07
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 9763
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 001305 
 
SIPDIS 
 
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): WRAP-UP FOR THE 
WEEK ENDING JULY 6 
 
This is CWC-63-07. 
 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
REVCON WORKING GROUP - FINAL FIRST ROUND MEETING 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
 
¶1. (U) On July 3, Amb. Lyn Parker (UK), the RevCon Working 
Group Chair, convened a meeting to discuss: the list of 
potential NGOs to be invited to a meeting with States Parties 
on 19 November; the final CWC clauses (Articles XII to XXIV); 
the protection of confidential information; and the 
functioning of the OPCW. 
 
¶2. (U) In preparation for the NGO discussion, the most recent 
list of NGOs prepared by the UK delegation removed the ICRC 
and the Sunshine Project, at U.S. request.  The format of the 
document made it obvious that some NGOs had been removed. 
During the NGO discussion, the chair identified them at South 
Africa's request.  Although the list was notionally finalized 
during this meeting so that the Technical Secretariat can 
start its invitation work, South Africa reserved the right to 
revisit this in the future, after they had reaction from 
Pretoria on the deletions.  Amb. Parker also made it clear 
that additional NGOs could be considered for additional in 
the future, if identified.  Given that nearly all of the NGO 
papers submitted to date are from Western NGOs, Amb. Parker 
encouraged delegations to encourage their national NGOs to 
prepare documents for consideration.  (It should be noted 
that, following the meeting, Canada and Germany expressed 
their displeasure at the U.S. deletion of the ICRC privately 
to delrep.) 
 
¶3. (U) During the discussion of the final CWC clauses, del 
rep deployed guidance, including the announcement of a 
forthcoming national paper on the topics of the day.  There 
were no other interventions. 
 
¶4. (U) During the discussion of confidential information, del 
rep presented the relevant items from guidance.  Although 
generally happy with the TS handling of confidential 
information, India stressed the importance of these matters 
and pointed out that the classification of national 
information is often a matter of legislation and can only be 
decided by States Parties.  India called for reiterating the 
recommendations from the First RevCon, along with asking for 
more information from the TS about progress on electronic 
declarations and ISO 17799 standards.  Japan pointed to the 
still outstanding issue of long-term handling of confidential 
document, emphasizing the point that a large percentage of 
these documents are industry-related. 
 
¶5. (U) During the discussion of the functioning of the OPCW, 
the UK delegation pointed out three areas of focus: (1) 
inspection equipment (see UK paper), (2) timely circulation 
of documents to the policy-making organs, and (3) the 
effectiveness of the decision-making process by the 
policy-making organs.  Del deployed its relevant guidance. 
India expressed its concern that the list of outstanding 
issues remains virtually unchanged from the First RevCon, 
encouraged enhanced interaction between the Scientific 
Advisory Board and delegations, welcomed results-based 
budgeting and encouraged early involvement by delegations in 
the budgeting process, and encouraged input from the 
host-country working group into the RevCon process.  The 
Netherlands encouraged further public outreach about the OPCW 
and its work, and even suggested finding ways to use the 
presence of inspectors in far-flung communities as an 
opportunity to increase outreach. 
 
¶6.  (U) Japan encouraged reinforcing the non-proliferation 
effects of the CWC (within existing resource limitations), 
the need for prioritization and constant review, and closer 
cooperation with other international organizations to avoid 
duplication of efforts (e.g., 1540 Committee).  France 
encouraged evaluated staff policies (e.g., tenure) as a way 
to keep highly-qualified staff; they also emphasized links to 
prevention of terrorism, such as the work of other 
international organizations (e.g., 1540 Committee).  India 
was satisfied with implementation of the tenure policy and 
 
recognized the success of finalizing the financial rules; 
they also encouraged wider geographic representation within 
TS staff, including within the various divisions, something 
 
SIPDIS 
that was echoed by South Africa.  South Africa went on to 
encourage the working in of the tenure policy into staff 
contracts to allow them more confidence and planning ability; 
they also encouraged more use of electronic communication 
(e.g., dual system of e-communication and fax; allowing those 
States Parties that want to have e-mailboxes on the external 
server). 
 
¶7.  (U) China expressed satisfaction with results-based 
budgeting, encouraged interaction with other international 
organizations (especially those focused on the peaceful uses 
of chemistry, etc.), and encouraged equal recognition of all 
official UN languages.  Austria stressed that the quality of 
candidates take first priority over geographic distribution, 
marked the improvements stemming from RBB, and stressed the 
impact of non- and late-payment of assessments, pointing to 
repayment plans.  Germany encouraged timely reporting of 
advisory bodies to SPs, encouraged continual enhancement of 
the recruitment process (e.g., shorter vacancy times), 
encouraged increased training (particularly for inspectors 
and those dealing with confidentiality), and enhanced 
outreach efforts, particularly to the media. 
 
¶8. (U) Parker pointed out that this ended the "first round" 
of meetings and that meetings would resume in September, with 
six working group meetings in the second half of the year. 
There was some discussion about the timing and length of 
meetings - South Africa suggested more time between ECs and 
working meetings to allow better preparation, Australia 
suggested having meetings closer to ECs to allow more 
participation from capitals, and India suggested the 
possibility of two-day meetings to allow follow-on thoughts 
and more incentive for experts from capital to participate. 
The chair committed to none of these but said they would be 
considered to the extent possible, particularly in light of 
an already very busy fall calendar. 
 
-------------------- 
BUDGET CONSULTATIONS 
-------------------- 
 
¶9.  (U) The key points of the first budget consultation, held 
on July 4 were: 
-- All delegations are happy about a zero nominal growth 
budget. 
-- WEOG plus some others want more OCPF inspections; the PRC 
and Iran object. 
-- The PRC and Iran are trying to argue that the risk 
assessment discussions drive the OCPF numbers; WEOG and 
others strongly disagree. 
-- Canada and a few other delegations are questioning the 
request for two additional permanent positions. 
 
¶10.  (U) The budget co-facilitators (Donggy Lee of South 
Korea and Diana Gosens of the Netherlands) opened the meeting 
by laying out their proposed time-table for budget 
consultations: 
Wednesday, August 29 - Verification 
Wednesday, September 5 - Inspections 
Wednesday, September 12 - ICA 
Friday, September 14 - Wrap-Up 
Wednesday, September 19 - PMO, ERD, Executive Management and 
Administration 
Friday, September 21 - Wrap-Up 
 
¶11.  (U) In the first round of commentary: 
-- DDG Freeman began the discussion by quickly reviewing the 
highlights of the DG's comments when presenting the budget. 
He noted that the estimate for the cost of the RevCon was 
772,000 Euros. 
-- Del rep noted that the U.S. would be providing detailed 
comments to the co-facilitators and the TS.  The U.S. 
welcomed the increase in inspector training funds, would like 
to see the SAB funded for two meetings and temporary working 
groups in 2008, and wanted more OCPF inspections.  Del rep 
asked the TS to provide an assessment of what would be 
 
involved if, staying within a ZNG budget, the overall ceiling 
of industry inspections were increased slightly beyond 200. 
-- Belgium came in to support more OCPF inspections. 
-- The UK chimed in on that point, and specifically said that 
there was little utility in maintaining the same level of 
Schedule 1 inspections. 
-- Canada asked about the impact of the stronger Euro on TS 
expenses.  It also expressed support for an increase in OCPF 
inspections.  There is no need for a big increase, but the 
number of OCPF inspections is still nowhere near where it 
should be.  It also expressed support for increased inspector 
training, and said that more work needed to be done to 
fine-tune use of Results-Based Budgeting.  Canada then came 
down hard asking about two additional permanent fixed-term 
positions, noting that when the planning for the OPCW 
building was under way, there was no/no conceivable way the 
TS would have more than 500 permanent staff.  Canada hoped 
 
SIPDIS 
the TS could meet its needs by redeploying staff, rather than 
adding staff. 
 
¶12.  (U) The DDG expressed thanks on support for increased 
inspector training.  On the number of OCPF inspections, 
Freeman reiterated the DG's points about why he thought it 
best to keep the industry inspection levels the same in 2008; 
namely that he had just issued the note on the revisions to 
the OCPF site selection procedure.  The DDG promised to 
provide a detailed justification for the two new permanent 
positions.  The TS then added that the exchange rate has had 
minimal impact on salaries, and only a slight impact on 
pensions. 
 
¶13.  (U) In the next set of comments: 
-- Germany emphasized the need for timely payments of 
assessed contributions and Article IV/V bills.  It also said 
the proposed budget has a good balance between Chapters 1 and 
¶2.  It then said that it understood there was a large change 
in inspector days for industry inspections (not the total 
number of inspections) and asked the TS for a clarification. 
-- Japan chimed in on the need for more OCPF inspections and 
requested a re-allocation of inspections within the 200 
inspection ceiling.  It then asked about the incremental cost 
of making two Temporary Assistance Contract positions 
full-time. 
-- France also supported more OCPF inspections and seconded 
Germany's question about inspector days. 
-- South Africa began by welcoming the increase in ICA.  It 
also expressed satisfaction with the number and allocation of 
industry inspections, particularly due to the DG's change on 
site selection.  It emphasized that due to the substantial 
increase in the number of OCPF facilities, increases of 
inspection numbers alone will not address concerns of States 
Parties.  There needs to be a better way to target and focus 
OCPF inspections. 
 
¶14.  (U) The DDG came in to respond to the FRG by noting that 
it did not seem reasonable to have (as is the case for one 
individual) a person stay as a TAC for some 7-8 years.  In 
response to Japan, he said that there is a small increase in 
cost on turning a TAC into a fixed-term position.  On South 
Africa's point about OCPF inspections, the DDG said that the 
DG had emphasized that this would be a good time for a 
"pause." 
 
¶15.  (U) In the next round: 
-- India limited itself to just saying it would be willing to 
discuss industry inspections. 
-- Iran said it appreciated the increased funding for ICA, 
and linked it to universality efforts.  On industry 
inspections, Iran said the big increase in OCPF inspections 
for 2007 was an exceptional measure and tied to the 
discussions on risk assessment chaired by CSP Chair Dastis 
(Spain).  As there had been no conclusion with regard to risk 
assessment, there was no reason the OCPF inspection numbers 
should go up.  Further, a better explanation would be needed 
on the impact of the DG's decision on site selection.  Iran 
concluded by asking how the Article VII-related increases are 
to be utilized. 
-- China expressed support for a ZNG budget and increased 
inspector training.  On OCPFs, China also said it accepted 
 
2007 numbers on the understanding that there would be a 
clarification in consultations.  Those have not yet reached a 
conclusion or consensus.  And with the DG's new site 
selection decision, it is not acceptable to increase OCPF 
inspections. 
-- The Netherlands asked the TS for an overview of voluntary 
contributions.  On Article VII, it supported the proposed 
expenditures.  On OCPF, it said that this number might be 
acceptable if/if SPs were given information that would allow 
for proper consideration of which OCPF sites warranted 
greater concern. 
-- Tunisia welcomed the increase in ICA.  On the permanent 
positions, it also asked for a clarification, adding, 
however, that there should not be inflexibility on a staff 
ceiling.  It also supported the increase in funding for the 
SAB in 2008. 
-- Australia said it wants an increase in OCPF inspections 
and would want to see more information on how the increase in 
ICA would be utilized. 
-- Italy said that the RBB performance report is important. 
(South Africa came in later to support Italy on that point.) 
It also supports more OCPF inspections and also wants an 
explanation of the ICA increase. 
 
¶16.  (U) Responding to the Netherlands, the DDG said that 
voluntary contributions are noted in the various TS 
documents.  With regard to more detailed information, that 
would involve getting approval from the contributors before 
disseminating that information.  Finally, the DDG emphasized 
that the inspection numbers are decided in the budget, and 
not in any other forum. 
 
------------ 
UNIVERSALITY 
------------ 
 
¶17.  (U) Facilitator Said Moussi (Algeria) convened a meeting 
on July 5 to simply go over past activities and discuss 
future activities. 
 
-- External Relations Division director Liu Zhixian gave a 
recap of the Algiers workshop.  He then went on to recount 
various meetings in Brussels with embassies of non-SPs as 
well as the office of the African Union.  There had been 
discussions directly with non-SP capitals.  Liu also said 
that there would be another regional meeting covering the 
Middle East, but the venue and timing were still to be 
determined.  The TS would also be working to get invitations 
for visits to non-SPs (he highlighted Myanmar, Angola, 
Guinea-Bissau). 
-- Chief of cabinet Rafael Grossi recounted the DG's talks 
with the Israelis (in The Hague) and Egypt (in Cairo).  He 
also expressed appreciation to various delegations, 
specifically citing the U.S., that had provided assistance in 
the field (highlighting meetings in central Africa). 
-- On the Algiers workshop, the Netherlands said it was a 
good program, and the Comoros, Burkina Fasso and Liberia 
seemed particularly engaged.  The Dutch suggested contacts 
with Parliamentarians in these and other cases to try to 
further non-SP interest. 
-- Belgium called for more SPs to contribute to the 
universality effort. 
-- Switzerland seconded that motion calling on SPs to make 
their pitch directly to non-SPs. 
 
¶18.  (U) In response to various questions, Liu said that 
non-SPs have attended the CSP in the past and funding has 
been set aside if there are requests from non-SPs for this 
year's CSP.  On a question about the UN-OPCW high-level 
meeting in September, Liu said the DG always schedules 
bilateral meetings with non-SPs as part of his trips to New 
York.  After Moussi asked delegations to give more thought on 
how to proceed on universality before the CSP as well as pre- 
and post- RevCon, Iran said that the TS should prepare 
recommendations on a program of activities to guide 
delegations.  Malik Ellahi of ERD responded on behalf of the 
TS stating that the TS has a report it is mandated to 
 
SIPDIS 
produce.  And it is certainly incumbent on the TS to keep 
delegations informed.  However, it is up to SPs to decide on 
 
political issues, such as how to proceed on universality in 
the run-up to, and after, the RevCon. 
 
¶19. (U) Ito sends. 
GALLAGHER