VZCZCXRO6595
OO RUEHTRO
DE RUCNDT #0093/01 0312310
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 312310Z JAN 08
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3643
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC IMMEDIATE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 USUN NEW YORK 000093 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL AORC KPAO UNSC OAS KNNP UK FR
SUBJECT: UNSCR 1540:  DEMARCHES ON MANDATE RENEWAL 
DELIVERED TO UK AND FRANCE 
 
REF: STATE 08246 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Begin Summary:  Per reftel, Mission delivered the 
demarche providing U.S. objectives for the renewal of the 
1540 Committee's mandate to the UK and French representatives 
to the Committee.  While emphasizing that they did not have 
reactions from Paris or London, both welcomed the U.S. 
initiative and thought a five-year extension would be useful 
but raised questions and concerns about aspects of the U.S. 
proposals.  Separately, South Africa's representative to the 
1540 Committee advised USUN that South Africa would oppose 
any effort to change the obligations set forth in resolution 
1540 or to strengthen the Committee's mandate by defining 
standards for states' implementation of the resolution.  End 
Summary. 
 
Five-Year Renewal 
----------------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Both the UKUN and French experts supported a 
five-year renewal, but cautioned against closing down the 
Committee at the end of that five-year period, stressing the 
Committee's importance in ensuring that states implement 
their 1540 obligations.  They also questioned whether any 
other UN entity would have the teeth to play an effective 
monitoring role.  France also argued that it is premature to 
make decisions about the 1540 Committee's ultimate future 
since the proliferation threat is evolving. 
 
Action Plans 
------------ 
 
¶3.  (SBU) UKUN's expert welcomed the proposal to mandate 
states to prepare action plans focusing on implementing 
resolution 1540.  UKUN said it would be useful to emphasize 
that the plans would serve as a substitute for the submission 
of reports and matrices to the Committee. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) The French expert favored a more focused approach 
that did not seek new paperwork from all states.  Developing 
states would see a call for action plans as another 
burdensome paper exercise, he said.  He also doubted that the 
political pledges the members of the Organization for 
American States (OAS), the Organization for Security and 
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and ASEAN Regional Forum have 
made to prepare 1540-related action plans would significantly 
change states' skepticism.  Since many states lack the 
ability to assess their technical assistance needs 
effectively, he thought it would be unrealistic to think that 
they could prepare action plans that the Committee could use 
to facilitate the delivery of technical assistance. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Instead, the French expert thought the Committee 
should target its outreach to states in areas of 
proliferation risk and work with them individually, including 
through focused country visits, to identify technical 
assistance needs.  He admitted that it could be politically 
difficult for the Committee to develop a risk-based outreach 
strategy but suggested the P-3 or the P-5, through work 
outside the Committee, might find ways for the Committee to 
accomplish that objective in a less direct way. 
 
Regional Organizations 
---------------------- 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Both UKUN and France's experts welcomed the 
proposal to strengthen ties to relevant regional 
organizations.  UKUN suggested calling for the Committee to 
strengthen its ties to the International Atomic Energy Agency 
(IAEA) and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical 
Weapons (OPCW) so these organizations can provide technical 
assistance  to promote states' implementation of resolution 
¶1540. 
 
FATF 
---- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) While welcoming the concept of having the 
resolution take note of the Financial Action Task Force's 
work, UKUN and France's experts thought the concept could 
prove controversial within the Council. 
 
Specific Financial Measures and Controls 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶8.  (SBU) UKUN and France's experts both said it would be 
difficult to achieve consensus on resolution language listing 
specific financial measures and controls that states could 
elect to adopt to implement resolution 1540.  UKUN expressed 
concern that any language other Council members could accept 
 
USUN NEW Y 00000093  002 OF 002 
 
 
would fall well below the FATF standards.  France expressed 
caution about trying to prescribe ways in which states should 
implement their obligations, but supported a general call for 
the Committee to disseminate "good" practices that states 
could follow as appropriate. 
 
Voluntary Fund 
--------------- 
 
¶9.  (SBU) France welcomed the proposal to establish a 
voluntary fund for Committee use in supporting 
implementation, but UKUN expressed concern.  Among other 
things, UKUN expressed doubt that the Security Council has 
the authority to establish such a trust fund and questioned 
whether the Committee and its experts would have the capacity 
to oversee the use of such a fund.  Per reftel, USUN 
responded that the United States would provide details in a 
supplementary paper.  Comment:  The UK's concerns about the 
Security Council's authority appear to be technical ones. 
End Comment. 
 
Comprehensive Review/Caucus Meetings 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶10.  (SBU) UKUN asked for details on the proposal for the 
Security Council to conduct a comprehensive review of the 
status of implementation of resolution 1540.  Would the 
United States want the Committee to prepare a detailed report 
to the Council in connection with that review, along the 
lines of the Committee's April 2006 report to the Council and 
the report the Committee will submit this April?  To prepare 
such a report, UKUN thought the Committee would need to 
solicit, review, and analyze additional reports from states. 
 
 
South Africa Raises Concerns 
----------------------------- 
 
¶11.  (SBU) Although reftel instructed USUN to raise the 1540 
Committee's mandate renewal with the UK and France, in an 
unplanned encounter at the UN on January 30, South Africa's 
representative to the 1540 Committee raised the mandate 
renewal issue and expressed interest in U.S. views.  USUN 
responded that Washington had begun to consider options and 
recommended that the United States and South Africa remain in 
contact as thinking evolved.  South Africa's expert advised 
USUN that South Africa favors a simple technical rollover of 
the 1540 Committee's current mandate but did not elaborate on 
the duration of such an extension.  South Africa would oppose 
efforts to strengthen the Committee's mandate, either by 
mandating the Committee to apply specific standards for 
measuring states' implementation of resolution 1540 or by 
expanding or making more specific the underlying obligations 
in resolution 1540, he said. 
KHALILZAD