VZCZCXRO0804
PP RUEHPOD
DE RUEHPOD #0231/01 2411510
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 281510Z AUG 08
FM AMEMBASSY PODGORICA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0938
INFO RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 0074
RUEHBW/AMEMBASSY BELGRADE PRIORITY 0422
RUEHSQ/AMEMBASSY SKOPJE PRIORITY 0036
RUEHVJ/AMEMBASSY SARAJEVO PRIORITY 0113
RUEHVB/AMEMBASSY ZAGREB PRIORITY 0190
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEHTI/AMEMBASSY TIRANA PRIORITY 0156
RUEHPOD/AMEMBASSY PODGORICA 1025

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PODGORICA 000231 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL MARR MOPS MW SR
SUBJECT: ESTABLISHING A NATO OFFICE IN MONTENEGRO 
 
REF: A) STATE 83586; B) PODGORICA 094 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY:  Because the GOM's pro-NATO orientation has 
potential benefits for the wider region (including Serbia and 
Bosnia), it is in U.S. interest to encourage Montenegro to 
accelerate its vigorous push for closer ties with the Alliance. 
Yet, despite the GOM's strong pro-NATO orientation, Montenegro 
is the only NATO aspirant in the region (excluding invitee 
Croatia) with no NATO presence on the ground. We therefore 
strongly advocate the establishment of a small (3-person) NATO 
office in Podgorica that would provide both technical assistance 
and public outreach support.  This is a low-cost, high-benefit 
initiative that would directly support an important USG policy 
priority in the Balkans.  It could also be set up at a minimal 
cost, since the GoM has offered space and other support, and 
since the positions to staff the NATO presence could probably be 
easily shifted from other NATO offices in the region. See action 
request in Paragraph Eight.  END SUMMARY. 
 
 
 
Montenegro's Ambitious NATO Goals 
 
--------------------------------- 
 
 
 
¶2. (SBU) The GoM, which received an offer of Intensified 
Dialogue (ID) at Bucharest, is firmly committed to achieving 
NATO membership and pressing ahead with an ambitious integration 
timetable.  It is in our strategic interest to assist Montenegro 
achieve its goals, as the drive toward NATO will solidify 
Montenegro's reform process, enhance regional security and 
cooperation, and provide a positive model for neighboring 
states.  Recognizing this, Ref A outlined a set of priority 
goals, the achievement of which are critical to helping the GoM 
make a stronger case for advancement to the next stage in its 
relationship with NATO. 
 
 
 
¶3. (SBU) Topping the priority list will be fulfilling the two 
dozen partnership goals identified in NATO's Planning and Review 
Process (PARP) and the several dozen more in the recently agreed 
upon Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP).  Another key 
priority will be increasing public support for NATO membership, 
an uphill battle where a majority of citizens remain skeptical. 
There are good prospects for success, but achieving these goals 
will test the GoM's limited institutional and human capacity. 
 
 
 
NATO Office:  An Enormous Impact... 
 
----------------------------------- 
 
 
 
¶4. (SBU) Thus far, the GoM has a positive track record of 
defense and security reforms and has demonstrated the political 
will to succeed.  This post already provides informal support, 
and we expect that other allies, in particular the new NATO 
Contact Point Embassy, will pitch in to help.  But our small 
Embassy has its own capacity issues, and other NATO embassies 
are even smaller - some just an Ambassador and a deputy -- and 
lack the depth to offer significant assistance. There are a 
total of 3 NATO defense attaches in Montenegro. 
 
 
 
¶5. (SBU) Therefore, we believe a NATO Contact Office in 
Podgorica, which the GoM officially requested in March, is a key 
missing piece that can provide critical and timely technical 
assistance.  The office would not need to be large.  Several 
(three or so) NATO staff based full-time in Montenegro could 
have an enormous positive impact and exponentially improve the 
GoM's ability to meet its NATO goals.  Establishment of such an 
office would complement our bilateral efforts (ref A) to move 
Montenegro toward closer ties with the Alliance. 
 
 
 
¶6. (SBU) We propose that a NATO Contact Office focus on the 
following key priorities (which track with our own priority 
goals outlined in Ref A): 
 
PODGORICA 00000231  002 OF 002 
 
 
 
 
 
-- helping the GoM fulfill its PARP and IPAP commitments; 
 
-- helping the GOM implement its security agreement with NATO; 
 
-- assisting the GoM with NATO documentation; 
 
-- aiding the GoM with its Communications Strategy to increase 
public support for NATO; and 
 
-- engaging the Montenegrin public on the benefits for 
Montenegro of membership; 
 
-- selecting and preparing Montenegrin personnel for 
participation in the ISAF; 
 
-- maintaining the ground lines of communication, established 
under the NATO Transit Agreement (in December 2007). 
 
 
 
 
 
...At Minimal Cost 
 
------------------ 
 
 
 
¶7. (SBU) The optimal solution would be for NATO to simply 
approve three new billets to establish an office in Podgorica, 
as this would be a relatively low-cost initiative that directly 
supports Alliance objectives here. We understand that NATO's 
budget is tight, however, and such a straightforward solution 
may be problematic.  In this case, we believe that there is a 
way to establish such an Office in Podgorica at minimal cost in 
terms of both budget and staffing: 
 
 
 
-- First, the GoM is strongly supportive of the establishment of 
such an Office and has assured us that it will provide space at 
no charge to NATO staff.  We expect that the GOM would also be 
willing to consider other forms of support (translators and 
technical support). 
 
 
 
-- Second, NATO could consider transferring a few positions from 
the four other NATO offices in the region.  NATO would not have 
to close those offices, but merely to downsize them slightly to 
enable a small, new presence in Montenegro.  Given the GOM's 
enthusiasm for NATO, the small NATO presence here should have an 
outsized influence and effect. 
 
 
 
-- If NATO cannot come up with 3 new positions for Montenegro, 
one possible avenue would be for the Alliance to consider 
transferring a few positions from the 10-person Belgrade NATO 
Military Liaison Office, an office that we understand has been 
essentially moribund since its establishment almost two years 
ago.  We understand that the Belgrade office hopes for greater 
engagement with the GOS in the near future following the signing 
of a security agreement with NATO. However, the Alliance should 
weigh whether signing of that agreement (an agreement that 
Montenegro has already concluded with NATO) warrants maintaining 
10 or more billets in Serbia and zero in Montenegro, a country 
with a more favorable pro-NATO climate.  This is particularly 
true given that the Belgrade office was originally established 
in December 2006 in part to support implementation of the July 
2005 ground lines of communication (GLOC) agreement between NATO 
and the then-State Union -- i.e., an agreement that then covered 
both Montenegro and Serbia. 
 
 
 
¶8. (SBU) Action Request:  We request that the USG work with 
Allies in identifying the resources to establish a NATO Contact 
Office in Podgorica as quickly as possible. 
MOORE