VZCZCXRO3475
OO RUEHPW
DE RUEHNO #0239/01 1920737
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 100737Z JUL 08
FM USMISSION USNATO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 2056
INFO RUCNAFG/AFGHANISTAN COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHBW/AMEMBASSY BELGRADE PRIORITY
RUEHBUL/AMEMBASSY KABUL PRIORITY 0961
RUEHKV/AMEMBASSY KYIV PRIORITY 0124
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY 6001
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 0720
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/WHITE HOUSE NSC WASHDC PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 USNATO 000239 
 
NOFORN 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/09/2018 
TAGS: NATO PREL PGOV MOPS AADP RS AF KV UP
SUBJECT: RUSSIA OFFERS PESSIMISTIC VIEWS OF AFGHANISTAN AND 
KOSOVO AT JUNE 25 NRC 
 
Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Richard G. Olson, Jr.  Reasons: 1.4 (b 
) and (d). 
 
¶1. (C) SUMMARY: Russian Ambassador to Afghanistan Zamir 
Kabulov informed the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) during its 
June 25 meeting that although Afghanistan is a more civil 
place than in 2001, the mission in Afghanistan was failing 
and that much more needed to be done in the areas of 
counter-narcotics, government reform, economic development, 
and military strategy.  Several Allies challenged and 
rebuffed his dire predictions and his assertions that Afghans 
wanted ISAF to leave.  Turning to Kosovo, Russian Ambassador 
Rogozin argued that NATO and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon 
were "improvising" on UNSCR 1244 and especially criticized 
NATO for taking on "new responsibilities" in Kosovo.  Some 
Allies argued that the new tasks were necessary for improving 
Kosovo. At the end of the meeting, Rogozin asked the SYG for 
his views on the NAC,s trip to Kyiv, characterizing the trip 
as NATO "agitating" for Ukrainian NATO accession while also 
expressing concern over Ukraine,s movement towards NATO. 
The SYG ended the discussion by refuting these assertions, 
arguing that the NAC went to Kyiv to listen to Ukrainians. 
 
¶2. (SBU) Deputy Commander Submarines North Captain David 
Dittmer briefed the Council on the successful completion of 
the joint NATO-Russia submarine training exercise Operation 
Bold Monarch.  Charge Olson thanked members of the Council 
for sending representatives to the U.S.-hosted peacekeeping 
training session in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. END SUMMARY. 
 
-------------------------------------- 
RUSSIA'S IMPRESSIONS OF ISAF'S MISSION 
-------------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (C) During the June 25 meeting of the NATO-Russia Council, 
visiting Russian Ambassador to Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov 
acknowledged that Afghanistan is a more humane place than it 
was in 2001.  He added that he appreciated the opportunity 
for an open dialogue between Russia and NATO, noting that 
both share common concerns over Afghanistan,s stability. 
After offering these few positive comments, Kabulov began his 
critique of the current situation in Afghanistan by arguing 
that the number of unstable provinces susceptible to Taliban 
influence has risen in direct correlation with the increase 
of ISAF units in Afghanistan since 2005.  At first he 
declared that there was a military solution.  However, 
Kabulov later added that NATO needed to emphasize improving 
economic conditions for all Afghans. In his view, this 
approach, rather than the "American ideas of aerial 
spraying," would help decrease the opium trade. 
Additionally, he stressed that ISAF had failed to establish 
an open dialogue with Afghans and instead talked to them 
"down the barrel of a gun," resulting in increased sympathy 
for Taliban.  Finally, turning his attention to 
Afghanistan,s political environment, Kabulov argued that 
Western-style democracy can not work unless it takes into 
account Afghanistan,s history and culture. Asserting that 
Karzai's NATO-backed government was weak, Kabulov speculated 
that if NATO left Afghanistan the government would fall in a 
month.  Kabulov said that by engaging in the aforementioned 
practices, NATO was repeating Soviet mistakes and assessing 
the "cold practical realities of Afghanistan" incorrectly. 
After this critical assessment, Kabulov claimed that Russia 
wanted to be a partner with NATO on Afghanistan. However, 
during his intervention Kabulov only suggested that Russia 
supply the ANA with Russian-made weapons, such as AK-47s 
(while criticizing NATO for purposefully having the ANA adopt 
the M-16).  Finally, Kabulov argued that NATO needed to 
encourage clerics and other groups to work to build a more 
unified and religiously moderate Afghanistan. 
 
¶4. (C) Many Allies thanked Kabulov for his remarks, but some 
(Bulgaria and the Netherlands) challenged his assertions that 
democracy would not work in Afghanistan and that ISAF was 
unpopular and unwanted.  While thanking Russia for forgiving 
Afghan debt and providing financial assistance to 
Afghanistan, Charge Olson pointed out that Kabulov's 
characterization of aerial drug eradication as potentially 
causing adverse health effects was incorrect.  He explained 
 
USNATO 00000239  002 OF 003 
 
 
that the U.S. was not employing aerial spraying against 
poppies and that all US government counternarcotics efforts 
were done in accordance with GOA policy.  Hungary asked 
whether Russia had considered non-military assistance to 
Afghanistan, such as repairing or further developing Soviet 
occupation-era infrastructure (e.g. dams), a question which 
Kabulov did not answer.  Finally, several Allies asked 
whether Kabulov believed there were viable political 
alternatives to Karzai; he responded that he did not see any 
at present. 
 
¶5. (C) After Kabulov,s presentation, the SYG and Allies 
thanked Rogozin for Russia,s unilateral offer to allow 
certain ISAF-related cargo to transit Russia via several 
ground routes. When Rogozin complained that no one was making 
use of the offer, the SYG pointed out that complementary 
transit agreements with Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan 
plus Ukraine were being discussed. 
 
¶6. (C) Rogozin ended his intervention by advocating for more 
NATO-Russia counter-narcotics training at the Moscow 
facility.  The SYG answered this request by explaining that 
Afghan bureaucracies did not consider this out of country 
training a priority (in part because it is not 
cost-efficient), but noted that the NATO staff would continue 
to encourage Afghan contacts to attend future NRC training. 
(Note: this is now on track for a future training session. 
End Note.) 
 
-------------- 
KFOR,S MANDATE 
-------------- 
 
¶7. (C) Rogozin criticized ongoing NATO activities in Kosovo. 
He stated that UNSCR 1244 is the only source of authority in 
Kosovo because Kosovo,s Constitution is "irrelevant" and its 
Ahtisaari plan roots lack any international legitimacy. 
Rogozin said that UNSYG Ban Ki-moon,s letters to Belgrade 
and Pristina and NATO,s new tasks were "improvising" on 
UNSCR 1244 something that neither have the authority to do. 
He contended that only the UNSC could amend or modify 1244 
and it had not done so.  Additionally, Rogozin said NATO was 
acting in an irresponsible and de-stabilizing fashion by 
ignoring its safe and secure environment mandate and 
embarking on these new tasks.  Rogozin claimed (without 
offering specific evidence) that Serb monasteries were being 
robbed, that there was a broad trend of ethnically targeted 
Serb property seizures, and that there were indiscriminate 
robberies in Kosovo. He also said that KFOR had ended its 
impartiality toward Kosovo,s internal politics when it 
decided not to recognize local Serb municipal elections in 
Mitrovica.  However, after making this assertion, Rogozin 
referred to balloting elsewhere in Kosovo as legitimate. The 
Czech Republic responded to Rogozin,s claims by arguing that 
KFOR,s new tasks were in the international community,s 
interest because they focused on maintaining a modest force 
and channeling existing Kosovo armed elements into a small 
professional security force. Finally Rogozin criticized the 
U.S. for "arming the Kosovars" and questioned whether U.S. 
public statements of "sending aviation gas" to Pristina are 
really legitimate.  Charge Olson rebutted Rogozin by stating 
that our Excess Defense Articles (EDA) agreement is a routine 
international agreement we have concluded with many, indeed 
most, countries, including Serbia. 
 
----------------------------------- 
OPERATION BOLD MONARCH/PEACEKEEPING 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶8. (SBU) US Navy Captain David Dittmer, in his role as Deputy 
Commander Submarines North, briefed the Council on Operation 
Bold Monarch.  Dittmer informed the Council that this 
successful operation included the first mating of a Russian 
rescue vehicle with a NATO submarine.  Parties broadly 
expressed great satisfaction with the level of cooperation 
achieved and look forward to the next Bold Monarch exercise 
in 2011. 
 
¶9. (SBU) The SYG noted that cooperation in the NRC 
 
USNATO 00000239  003 OF 003 
 
 
Peacekeeping Working Group has intensified and has been 
characterized by an exchange of views on stability 
operations; the organization of visits to centers; and past 
and future tabletop exercises.  Also, Charge Olson thanked 
Council members for sending representatives to the two-day 
peacekeeping and security operations lessons learned 
conference at the U.S. Army,s Carlisle Military Barracks in 
Pennsylvania. 
 
------------------- 
NAC TRIP TO UKRAINE 
------------------- 
 
¶10. (C) Rogozin raised the NAC,s June trip to Kyiv, asking 
the SYG about his impressions from the trip while arguing 
that Ukraine,s movement toward NATO was an "acutely 
sensitive topic in Russia" that could destabilize Russia,s 
bordering areas.  He stressed that the NAC visit was 
unwelcome in Russian eyes because NATO was "agitating for 
Ukraine to become a member state."  The SYG rebutted the 
Rogozin portrayal by stating that no "agitation" had taken 
place, describing the visit as an information exchange 
between NATO representatives and Ukrainian politicians and 
citizens. The Czech Republic told Rogozin that it hoped 
Russia would look favorably upon the upcoming similar NAC 
trip to Georgia. 
 
¶11. (C) To end the meeting, Rogozin announced that Russian 
MILREP ADM Kuznetsov would depart in July and would be 
replaced by General of the Army, former Russian Ground Forces 
Commander, Maslov. 
OLSON