VZCZCXYZ0019
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHMO #1935 1891408
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 071408Z JUL 08
FM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 8924

UNCLAS MOSCOW 001935 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR OES/ENV/HODAYA FINMAN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV AORC EAGR ETRD RS
SUBJECT: RUSSIA FAVORS FLEXIBLE APPROACH ON MERCURY 
 
REF: A. STATE 63943 
 ¶B. MOSCOW 1816 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED.  PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY. 
 
¶1. (SBU) On July 3, we discussed the October 2008 UNEP-hosted 
Mercury Working Group Meeting with Vladimir Lenev, Counselor in the 
Global Environment and Health Section of the MFA's International 
Organizations Department.  Lenev confirmed, as discussed in Ref B, 
that a consensus had not yet emerged on the best way to address 
mercury in the international arena during GOR interagency 
discussions between the MFA and the Ministry of Natural Resources 
and Ecology.  Lenev noted that the GOR's approach to mercury was 
flexible and had been evolving over time.  At the February 2005 UNEP 
Governing Council meeting in Nairobi, Russia initially favored the 
USG view of a non-binding international partnership on mercury, but 
at the February 2007 UNEP meeting, Russia was more in favor of the 
EU position in support of a binding international agreement. 
 
¶2. (SBU) Lenev thought that the best approach was to move forward on 
parallel tracks.  Interested nations could participate immediately 
in a voluntary agreement or partnership on mercury, while they also 
continued discussing, possibly for years, the merits of a binding 
agreement.  Lenev also said that Russia was ultimately looking for a 
cost-effective and inexpensive resolution of all heavy metals in one 
package, including mercury, lead and cadmium, as that would make for 
a more efficient international process than addressing each of the 
heavy metals individually.  Lenev noted that some voices within the 
GOR wanted to develop the government's environmental protection 
authority, but because of the slow bureaucratic pace of adopting 
domestic legislation, they were hoping for a binding international 
agreement to spur this development.  In terms of international 
agreements, Lenev opined that Russia would favor addressing mercury 
through an amendment to an existing international agreement, such as 
the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, because 
it would be easier to gain Russian ratification of an amendment to 
an existing agreement than to go through the lengthy governmental 
approval process for a new international agreement. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Lenev noted that about one million tons of mercury waste 
had accumulated on Russian territory before the collapse of the 
Soviet Union.  Lenev said that the GOR would be interested in deeper 
international cooperation on questions of mercury disposal, joint 
scientific studies on the environmental and health effects of 
mercury waste, development of alternative technologies to the use of 
mercury, and cooperation on mercury in arctic fora, given that 
mercury pollution was particularly acute in Russia's northern 
regions. 
 
BEYRLE