VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHVEN #0067/01 0711739
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 111739Z MAR 08
FM USMISSION USOSCE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 5600
INFO RUCNCFE/CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUESDT/DTRA-OSES DARMSTADT GE PRIORITY
RHMFISS/CDR USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J5-DDPMA-IN/CAC/DDPMA-E// PRIORITY
RUEAHQA/HQ USAF WASHINGTON DC//XONP// PRIORITY
RUEASWA/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC//OSAE PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L USOSCE 000067 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR VCI/CCA, EUR/RPM 
NSC FOR DOWLEY 
JCS FOR J5 NORWOOD 
OSD FOR ISA (PERENYI) 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/17/2012 
TAGS: KCFE OSCE PARM PREL
SUBJECT: CFE: MARCH 11 JCG PLENARY; CANADA ANNOUNCES THE 
NEW ROLE PARLIAMENT PLAYS IN RATIFICATION 
 
 
Classified By: Chief Arms Control Delegate Hugh Neighbour, 
for reasons 1.4(b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (SBU)  SUMMARY.  At the March 11 JCG Plenary, the last 
before the spring break, Canada briefed on its new treaty 
ratification practice and procedure.  Russia rambled-on about 
numerous issues to include the "Parallel Actions Package," 
the NRC (ACE) meeting of 28 February, why Russia ratified the 
A/CFE Treaty in 2004, the "flank" issues, and providing a 
clean text for Parliaments to ratify.  The next JCG is 
scheduled for April 8, 2008.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  (SBU)  At the March 11 JCG Plenary Canadian rep Pierre 
Linteau briefed the JCG on the new practices and procedures 
Canada has implemented regarding signing and ratifying 
international treaties.  The new procedures give Parliament a 
role.  The House of Commons will now examine and review 
treaties for 21 days before the executive branch has the 
authority to ratify (like the UK system).  As it pertains to 
the A/CFE Treaty, it was noted although final concurrence 
from Ottawa has not been received that no new legislation 
will be required.  The government believes that these new 
rules and procedures by the Parliament will ensure that new 
treaties will serve the interests of all Canadians.  These 
new procedures should not change Canada's ability to meet 
international obligations. 
 
¶3.  (C)  Russia (Ulyanov) in opening his long, rambling 
remarks noted that the "parallel actions package" was under 
discussion on a bilateral basis and criticized the number of 
meetings held and the time it has taken to seriously engage 
the question of ratification without progress. 
 
 Additionally Ulyanov: 
 
-- recalled the presentations in November of three States 
Parties and the amount of time it would take them to ratify 
A/CFE. 
 
-- appealed to all States Parties to relate the approximate 
length of time it would take for their national ratification 
procedures and present those at the April 8 JCG Plenary. 
 
-- said he was under the impression that most delegations 
misunderstood the Russian position.  Ulyanov suggested that 
the Russian delegation will brief its position in the JCG 
after the break. 
 
-- explained why Russia ratified A/CFE in 2004,  called a 
moratorium in 2007, and labeled the CFE Treaty "outdated." 
Russia's suspension pertained to the CFE Treaty and if A/CFE 
entered into force, Russia would resume its Treaty 
obligations. 
 
-- said that since Russia ratified and deposited its 
instruments of ratification 2004, the environment had 
changed.  The U.S. had not talked about military presence in 
Romania and Bulgaria.  Russia had completed "all" of its 
Istanbul commitments  and by ratifying A/CFE.  Russia had 
hopes that others would soon follow suit. 
 
-- claimed that due to the extraordinary circumstances, 
Russia will respond with measures provided for by national 
and international law. 
 
-- noted that after 2004 (NOTE: Meaning the Kozak Agreement 
turned down by Moldova.   END NOTE), Russia's hopes were 
dashed for quick ratification by all States Parties.  He 
called the A/CFE Treaty outdated as well, and called for it 
to be adjusted. 
 
-- stated that flank problem became a problem only because 
A/CFE was not ratified earlier.  He rhetorically called the 
"flanks" discriminatory and claimed that Russia could not 
agree to retain the flank regime and it too needed 
adjustment.  He added again that there should be a political 
decision on removal (for Russia) of the flanks and then an 
amendment to A/CFE after its entry into force. 
 
 
-- concluded by calling for all the adjustments to A/CFE be 
made prior to parliament ratification procedures so 
parliaments could look at "clean" text. 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  The U.S. (Neighbour) responded to support the 
Canadian briefing on its changes to its Parliament's 
involvement in the ratification process with treaties, and to 
say it is another illustration that Allies are serious and 
prepared to deliver what they agree to, once the RF agrees to 
the "parallel actions package."  He also urged the Russian 
Federation to reverse its decision to "suspend" the CFE 
Treaty implementation and resume full implementation 
immediately. 
 
¶5.  (C)  Ulyanov again rhetorically asked the United States 
what it felt was more important: the political decisions 
related to the "so-called" Istanbul commitments; or the 
importance of the "cornerstone of European security" consists 
of? (COMMENT:  Most recognize this as a typical Russian 
tactic to push a divisive issue on the table for Allies to be 
anxious over.  END COMMENT).  The U.S. (Neighbour) quickly 
responded that Istanbul was a package as well as the 
"parallel actions package" and no part can be excluded. 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  Romania informed the JCG that at our next JCG 
Plenary meeting scheduled for April 8, it would summarize the 
activities of the NATO Summit held in Bucharest 2-4 April. 
This was a previously planned session of the "focused 
dialogue." 
 
¶7.  (U)  The JCG also bid farewell to Jean-Micheal Vidal 
(France) for his four years of efforts in the JCG.  Vidal did 
not give his farewell speech, holding it for the FSC 
tomorrow, but urged Russia to support the "parallel actions 
package" as a reasonable solution. 
 
 
SCOTT