VZCZCXRO3115
PP RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHUNV #0460/01 2311447
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 181447Z AUG 08
FM USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8323
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY 0150
RUEHAM/AMEMBASSY AMMAN PRIORITY 0078
RUEHEG/AMEMBASSY CAIRO PRIORITY 0185
RUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV PRIORITY 0214

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 UNVIE VIENNA 000460 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR ISN/MNSA, ISN/RA AND IO/T 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/13/2018 
TAGS: MNUC PARM KNPP IS EG
SUBJECT: IAEA/GC: EGYPT AND ISRAEL AT LEAST TALKING ABOUT 
MIDDLE EAST RESOLUTION 
 
REF: REF A) VIENNA 343 B) PAPPAS-DANIEL/VON BEHEREN 
     EMAIL 7/10 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Gregory L. Schulte for reasons 1.4 b and d 
 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1. (C) Israeli and Egyptian Ambassadors made at least a first 
attempt to discuss the Egyptian draft Middle East Safeguards 
(MES) resolution in bi-lateral consultations in Vienna. 
Neither had a "mandate" to negotiate, and they did not get 
very far, Israeli Ambassador Michaeli reported to Ambassador 
Schulte on August 12.  The Egyptians still insist on no 
linkage to the Arab League Israeli Nuclear Capabilities (INC) 
resolution.  Separately, Israel has consulted with Jordan, 
which does not believe the Arab League resolution will 
succeed.  Israel has also responded to an IAEA request for 
comments on the Middle East Forum, stating that its position 
is unchanged but Michaeli sees little prospect for the Forum 
to serve as a bridge to consensus in the General Conference. 
However, Israel is considering breaking ranks with India and 
Pakistan and changing its traditional "No" vote to an 
abstention on NPT universality language in the omnibus 
Safeguards resolution. 
 
¶2. (C) Incoming GC President, Italian Ambassador Ghisi is 
willing to play a mediating role on the MES resolution and 
sees a Presidential Statement as the only reasonable outcome 
for the INC agenda item.  Michaeli has since received a 
mandate to negotiate and Ghisi intends to encourage the 
Egyptian Ambassador to also seek such a mandate. 
Consultations will continue in early September.  Separately, 
French CDA assured Msnoff of France's position on linkage of 
the two Middle East agenda items.  France also did not find 
the revised Egyptian text to be persuasive or much of a 
change from last year.  The EU is only beginning 
consultations on the Middle East agenda items in the next 
week.  As the Israeli Ambassador has consistently pointed 
out, the EU position will be key and he remains concerned 
about "wobbliness" among some Europeans.  End Summary. 
 
Courting Egypt 
--------------- 
 
¶3. (C) Israeli Ambassador Michaeli updated Ambassador Schulte 
August 12 on recent consultations with his Egyptian 
counterpart regarding the draft GC Middle East Safeguards 
(MES) resolution.  Neither Michaeli nor Egyptian Ambassador 
Fawzi had a "mandate" to negotiate at that juncture, though 
Michaeli has since received such a mandate.  Italian 
Ambassador Ghisi, the incoming GC President, will also 
encourage Fawzi to do the same, which would be a significant 
improvement over last year's GC when neither side had such a 
mandate.  Fawzi and Michaeli agreed to follow up in early 
September.  Michaeli would also meet with Moroccan Ambassador 
Zniber in his national capacity, though not as Dean of the 
Arab League to discuss the Israeli Nuclear Capabilities (INC) 
resolution. 
 
¶4. (C) In their initial consultations, Fawzi continued to 
deny any linkage between the Egyptian draft MES resolution 
and the Arab League INC resolution while Israel continues to 
insist on a package.  Nevertheless, Michaeli and Fawzi 
engaged informally on the text of the Egyptian draft. 
Michaeli outlined three main elements for the GOI, which he 
has shared previously with Mission: deletion of para 4 which 
"Further calls upon all States in the region, pending the 
establishment of the zone, not to develop, produce, test or 
otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, or to pursue actions that 
would undermine the goal of establishing such a zone"; 
second, restoration of a para on the Middle East peace 
process; and lastly, insertion of a reference to "compliance" 
with the NPT (Note: Full text of resolution in ref a. End 
note.) Speaking in a personal capacity, Fawzi noted that 
inclusion of the latter would require the addition of a 
reference to the "universality" of the NPT.  Fawzi also asked 
whether Israel could accept par 
a 4 if a reference to the Middle East Peace Process were 
added.  Israel still took objection to para 4 as "out of 
balance" and importing "political" text from the UNGA First 
Committee resolution on Middle East Safeguards. 
 
5.(C) Fawzi told Michaeli that Cairo did not believe Israel 
wanted consensus, to which Michaeli responded "try us," 
noting that Israel could see consensus on the basis of these 
elements or the 2005 text.  Fawzi claimed that Egypt had 
 
UNVIE VIEN 00000460  002 OF 004 
 
 
already intended a change in para 5 as a step toward Israel, 
which Michaeli dismissed as insignificant, i.e. change from 
"invites" to "further calls upon" the parties to take 
confidence building measures aimed at a NWFZ.  For his part, 
Michaeli saw no hint that Egypt sought consensus at this 
point but believed that the Egyptians could change tactics 
and be willing to negotiate if they saw the possibility of a 
repeat of last years' vote.  He doubted Egypt would agree to 
return to the 2005 consensus text.  The EU position would be 
essential, he assessed.  Michaeli had also spoken with 
Ireland, the only EU member to vote in favor of the Egyptian 
resolution in the 2007 GC.  Irish Ambassador Cogan noted that 
the text was "better" than last year and saw no reason for 
Ireland to change 
its vote though he listened carefully to Israel's position. 
 
Outreach to Jordan 
------------------ 
 
¶6. (C) Michaeli also reported that Amman had asked for 
Israel's position on the twin MES and INC resolutions. 
Jordan did not believe the Arab League INC resolution would 
"fly" but felt compelled to go along out of Arab solidarity. 
The Jordanians would like to be helpful but have limited 
influence.  Israel cited the title as the most problematic 
aspect of the Arab League text and provided the non-paper on 
Israel's position in para 13 to Amman. 
 
 
Middle East Forum 
----------------- 
 
¶7. (C) Israel had replied to a July letter from the IAEA EXPO 
Director soliciting comments on the Middle East Forum. 
Although Michaeli admits that the GOI is "lukewarm" about the 
Forum, the response states that Israel's position is 
unchanged and supports a Forum based on the August 2004 terms 
of reference.  Fawzi insisted to Michaeli that Egypt wanted 
to change the Forum agenda.  Israel could be flexible on the 
agenda if the terms of reference remained the same, Michaeli 
advised.  That said, Michaeli discounted all this discussion 
of the Forum as a "storm in a glass of water" and believed 
that Egypt would ultimately oppose the Forum. 
 
Abstention Possible on NPT 
-------------------------- 
 
¶8. (C) In what may be a significant development, Michaeli 
shared that Israel is considering abstaining on the paragraph 
vote in the omnibus Safeguards resolution regarding 
universality of the NPT.  Traditionally, Israel, India and 
Pakistan vote against this paragraph in every General 
Conference.  In part, Israel is considering this step out of 
"gratitude" for last year's mass abstention on the Egyptian 
MES resolution.  On a deeper level, there is some 
appreciation in Israel of the utility of the NPT in dealing 
with Iran and Syria.  Israel would advise India of its 
decision in advance.  Michaeli believed that Egypt would 
again push for Middle East language in the omnibus Safeguards 
resolution but was not sure Egypt would call for a vote on 
that resolution given that it could not marshal support among 
even all the Arab states last year. 
 
GC President 
------------ 
 
¶9. (C) In a separate meeting on August 13 Italian Ambassador 
Ghisi, the incoming GC President told Ambassador Schulte that 
he expected to start consultations on Middle East GC issues 
the first week of September.  Ghisi sees Egypt as key and 
would encourage them to show flexibility and lead by example. 
 He is considering presenting Israel and Egypt with a package 
of proposed changes to the MES draft resolution backed by an 
Italian demarche in capitals. Ghisi shared that his only 
guidance from Rome was to seek Middle East peace process 
language in the MES resolution and to work closely with other 
EU and Western states.   Ambassador Schulte advised that it 
would be necessary to engage Egyptian FM Aboul Gheit 
directly.  As to the Israeli Nuclear Capabilities agenda 
item, Ghisi believed that the only possible outcome would be 
a Presidential Statement to avoid another "extreme" outcome 
such as the 2006 no-action motion.  Michaeli was also open to 
using the "services" of the GC President to negotiate a PRST. 
 (Comme 
nt: To satisfy the Arab group, a PRST would have to include 
some "substance" agreeable to Israel.  End Comment.) 
 
 
UNVIE VIEN 00000460  003 OF 004 
 
 
EU to Begin Consultations 
-------------------------- 
 
¶10. (C) French CDA Gross advised Msnoff on August 12 that the 
EU would only begin consultations on the Middle East GC 
agenda items the next week.  The EU has not formulated a 
position but Gross presumed that the starting point for any 
EU position on the Egyptian text would be based on the 
coordinated response to Egyptian FM Aboul Gheit's letter last 
October, which had taken EU members to task for their massive 
abstentions on the MES resolution in the 2007 General 
Conference.  The EU response had stressed that it was 
inappropriate to import UNGA language into a technical forum 
such as the IAEA, he recalled. 
 
¶11. (C) For its part, France stood firm on the linkage 
between the MES and INC agenda items. French experts that had 
reviewed the revised Egyptian text were not satisfied, and 
sought inclusion of language on compliance and a reference to 
the Additional Protocol.  It was still more or less the same 
text as last year, Gross assessed, the only changes being 
deletion of references to nuclear weapons states.  He was 
surprised that the Irish would see that as "progress" as 
Michaeli had reported.  Gross was already considering 
possible tactics.  He noted that the UNGA counterpart 
resolution on the INC (which the EU supports in the UNGA) is 
entitled "The Risk of Proliferation in the Middle East." The 
EU could insist on this title, and deletion of references to 
Israel in the text, something which the Arab states would 
never agree to, so as to pave the way for a PRST.  He also 
did not rule out an agenda fight in the General Committee, 
though he acknowledged this would infuriate the Arab group 
which could introduce the 
INC resolution under the MES agenda item. (Note: Michaeli had 
expressed similar caution about a General Committee agenda 
fight which would go to the Plenary for a vote. End note.) 
 
¶12. (C) Comment:  The French position is more reassuring than 
Michaeli's informal assessments of EU member positioning. 
Michaeli had early on expressed concern about "wobbliness" 
among European Missions and divided the EU into two camps - 
those that would stand by their abstention last year and 
those who might be more receptive to Egypt's "positive step" 
in their direction and the Arab League's "flexibility."  An 
unnamed friendly EU country had cautioned Michaeli that 
Israel cannot appear inflexible.  End comment. 
 
 
Israel Non-Paper to Jordan 
--------------------------- 
 
¶13. (C) Begin text of non-paper: 
 
Israel is committed to the vision of the Middle East 
developing into a zone free of chemical, biological and 
nuclear weapons, as well as ballistic missiles.  Mutual 
recognition, diplomatic relations and good neighborliness 
should be a first step in this direction to be complimented 
by conventional and non-conventional arms control measures. 
These steps could eventually lead to a more ambitious goal 
such as the establishment of a mutually verifiable Nuclear 
Weapons Free Zone. 
 
Israel therefore attaches great importance to a possible 
consensus around the concept of a WMD Free Zone in the Middle 
East, in the IAEA GC as well as in other multilateral fora. 
 
In a period of regional instability caused by dangerous 
developments in the area of nuclear proliferation in our 
region, consensus on a Middle East "package" could have a 
positive impact.  Countries of the region have a 
responsibility to do their utmost in this regard. 
 
Consensus in the IAEA GC around the resolution entitled 
"Application of IAEA safeguards in the Middle East" was in 
place as part of a Middle East "package" for 14 years until 
¶2006.  Consensus was lost when the sponsors of the resolution 
decided to introduce new elements into the text of the 
resolution while refusing to negotiate. 
 
Israel urges member states directly involved not to further 
politicize the General Conference of the IAEA, to reconsider 
their position and to reinstate a "package" on the Middle 
East. 
 
Elements of such a "package": 
 
 
UNVIE VIEN 00000460  004 OF 004 
 
 
-- Agreement on the text of the resolution titled 
"Application of IAEA safeguards in the Middle East" is to be 
negotiated among all directly concerned parties. 
 
-- No resolution which singles out the State of Israel. 
 
The support of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to this 
approach would be highly appreciated. 
 
 
 
 
SCHULTE