VZCZCXRO9448
PP RUEHAP RUEHFL RUEHLA RUEHMJ RUEHPB RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHTRO
DE RUEHC #5964/01 3041951
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 301938Z OCT 08
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO PROLIFERATION SECURITY INITIATIVE COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHKB/AMEMBASSY BAKU PRIORITY 7591
RUEHBD/AMEMBASSY BANDAR SERI BEGAWAN PRIORITY 7660
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 08 STATE 115964 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KNNP MNUC PARM PREL
SUBJECT: PSI: OPERATIONAL EXPERT GROUP MEETING IN PARIS, 
FRANCE (SEPTEMBER 25-26, 2008), PART 2 OF 2. 
 
REF: A. STATE 115935 
     ¶B. STATE 115948 
 
 SUMMARY 
¶1.  The seventeenth Proliferation Security Initiative 
(PSI) Operational Experts Group (OEG) meeting took 
place in Paris, France on September 25-26, 2008. 
Delegations from the 20 OEG countries participated. 
Information contained in this cable is provided for 
Posts' information and is not to be passed to host 
governments. 
 
OBJECTIVES AND ACTION REQUEST 
 
¶2. REFTEL A provides a non-paper to pass to host 
nation governments of all PSI-endorsing states to 
keep them abreast of developments in the PSI 
community. REFTEL B contains part 1 of 2 of 
OEG reporting cable. Posts are requested to 
provide assessments of what PSI outreach activities 
(including exercises, table top exercises emphasizing 
a national response plan for WMD-related 
interdiction, commodity identification training, 
etc.) might provide value-added capacity-building 
effects to the host country. Email replies to POC 
are acceptable, following delivery of REFTEL 
non-paper. 
 
¶3. Continuation of Chairman's Statement: PROLIFERATION 
SECURITY INITIATIVE OPERATIONAL EXPERTS GROUP MEETING 
PARIS, FRANCE September 25-26, 2008. PART 2 OF 2. 
 
Training - Outreach 
 
¶4. France presented the outreach event she organised in 
cooperation with the Djiboutian authorities in March 2008 
(Guistir). This event aimed to raise awareness in North 
African and Red Sea countries that are considered to be 
in strategic areas but not yet completely familiar with 
the PSI. OEG and local countries' interagency teams 
exchanged on the whole scope of PSI issues in a genuinely 
interactive manner. This seminar was followed by a live 
exercise at sea and in the harbour. The event showed how 
a country with considerable local knowledge but with 
limited means can effectively cooperate and act with an 
experienced country offering its expertise. 
 
¶5. New-Zealand outlined its week-old Maru exercise. Its 
objectives were to improve the capabilities and 
interoperability of regional PSI partners, improve the 
collective understanding within the PSI community of 
disposition and liability issues, and encourage a greater 
understanding of the PSI within the Asia-Pacific region. 
Eight OEG members participated and 20 countries - 
including six OEG members and 10 from non-endorsing 
countries - sent obervers. The exercise focused on post 
interdiction issues, including the response to legal 
challenges to justify a course of action, liability, 
ownership and disposition of the goods seized, 
prosecution and media strategy. 
 
¶6. Canada gave a presentation on the PSI inject into the 
"PANAMAX 08" exercise. This was a multinational exercise 
that brought together partner nations to address the 
security concerns and defence issues vital to the region. 
A PSI component was inserted: missile-related components 
transiting from a Middle-Eastern country, via France, 
through Canada, to a Latin American country. The 
exercise's impact was significant in terms of education, 
raising awareness, and outreach. The PSI inject into 
Panamax 08 was effectively leveraged and led to three main 
recommendations: 1. encourage inserting PSI components 
into general exercises, 2. leverage participation in 
appropriate exercises for PSI experience and 3. outreach 
opportunities. 
 
¶7. Portugal announced the release of the Portuguese 
version of the national response plan, available to all 
PSI-endorsing states. 
 
Prospective Break-Out Group Reports 
 
Future of OEG Meetings Break-Out Session 
 
¶8. Under New-Zealand chairmanship, participants 
 
STATE 00115964  002 OF 008 
 
 
considered several issues and made proposals to strengthen 
the initiative's efficiency. With regards to the pace 
of OEGs, delegations said they would be comfortable with 
an annual global OEG meeting, and having at the same time 
more frequent regional OEGs with flexible formats and 
agendas. A number of countries stressed the need to ensure 
substantial discussion especially at regional OEGs. 
 
Membership 
 
-- There was general support to maintain the OEG's 
composition in its current format, while leaving open the 
possibility to enlarge participation on a case-by-case 
basis. The possibilities of inviting "special guests" to 
"20 members"-OEG, if needed, will also be kept under 
review. It was generally agreed that there could be more 
flexibility regarding membership or attendees in regional 
OEG meetings (including invitations to non-PSI endorsees). 
 
Continuity 
 
-- Regarding the issue of ensuring a better continuity 
between the meetings, the idea of a troika (past, current 
and upcoming chairmanship) for OEG meetings was discussed, 
as well as that of having a permanent chairmanship or 
co-chairing arrangements for the break-out groups. The 
United Kingdom, France and the United States, who compose 
the current troika, pointed out the relevance of such a 
mechanism and agreed to work on that format. Participants 
are invited to provide the current troika with ideas on 
how that mechanism should be implemented. New Zealand and 
Denmark volunteered to provide a first paper, the 
mechanism will be reviewed at the next OEG meeting. 
 
Communication 
 
-- The need for more effective communication among the 
OEG members was stressed, as was the need for better 
communication with non OEG PSI supporters. New Zealand 
offered to publish a PSI newsletter with contributions 
from partners. 
 
Outreach-Exercises Session 
 
¶9. Under United States Chairmanship, discussions 
mainly focused on the ways and means to conduct outreach 
activities and the way to better coordinate them with 
exercises or bilateral events. In particular, partners 
examined the way to develop a tailored approach in 
outreach activities, the way and means to promote PSI 
activities for non-member states, the way to improve 
the tools (the master events list or a lessons identified 
databases), and the importance of interagency dimension. 
Partners identified key proposals the plenary should 
consider: 
-- Outreach - Exercises Breakout Group be continued 
   at next OEG; 
-- Consider Lessons Identified database when planning 
   future activities; 
-- Master Events List (MEL) to be historical record 
   & future planning tool. 
 
Outreach to Industry Break-Out Session 
 
¶10. Under British Chairmanship, the following delegations 
made presentations: 
-- France (sea carrier group) on the concrete needs and 
   expectations of cargo industry regarding PSI, 
-- Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark on their 
   national perspective, 
-- USA on air cargo specific issues. 
 
¶11. All the participants underlined that involving 
industry and the business sector was essential to 
achieving success for the PSI. The main targets of the 
outreach for PSI are the export and transport industries 
(sea carrier groups and air cargo companies). Apart from 
PSI outreach, it was reminded that the export industry 
already obtains some information through outreach 
activities related to dual-use items export controls. 
 
¶12. Certain countries have already involved the industry 
in PSI by organising regular meetings with the authorities 
involved in dual-use items controls and the concerned 
industries. Well-identified points of contact are 
considered to be key elements of a good cooperation 
between industry and authorities. This aspect should be 
integrated into the national response plans, which can not 
avoid examining the question of outreach to industry. 
 
 
STATE 00115964  003 OF 008 
 
 
¶13. It has to be a "win-win" cooperation: it is crucial 
that the government explains to the industrials what they 
have to gain from this cooperation: 
--  minimising the costs and financial impacts to preserve 
    company interests, 
--  optimising reaction time of the export or transport 
    industries, 
--  improving the flow of information from industry to 
authorities and vice-versa. 
The group concluded there is a need to bring existing 
documents and practices into concrete and detailed 
recommendations. This is a long-term effort but a 
necessary step at this stage of the PSI,s activities. 
 
Break-Out Group Reports 
 
Exercise Planning 
 
¶14. Discussions in the Exercise Breakout group centred on 
the forthcoming events, useful tools for future planning 
and the lessons learned. Presentations were also given on 
the exercises to take place in 2009. 
 
¶15. Forthcoming events 
 
The schedule was updated for 2009: 
-- OEG with regional participation in the United States 
   (May) 
--  regional OEG in Poland (June) 
--  exercise organized by the US (October) 
--  exercise organized by Singapore (November) 
Italy enquired about inserting into the master events list 
the possibility of a tentative PSI activity in spring 2009 
(April, TBC). 
 
As to 2010: 
-- the US will reiterate PSI inject in Panamax exercise 
   (August); 
-- Australia is considering organizing a regional event 
(details to be confirmed). 
 
-- Australia gave a short presentation of the PSI Master 
Events List (MEL). This tool, to be posted on the PSI 
website hosted by Germany, will be coordinated by 
Australia until 2010. Participants were requested to 
update the list of point of contact and events to be 
included in the MEL. 
 
Future exercises 
 
¶16. The group pointed out the need for OEG members to 
identify special targets to focus on. But it was also 
agreed that this process should be achieved on a flexible 
basis, depending on the objectives chosen. Participants 
were encouraged to further work on this specific issue, 
by determining each OEG country preferred area of 
influence. 
 
Lessons learned 
 
¶17. Dealing with the matrix of lessons learned, 
participants agreed that it would be very useful to post 
it on the website in the future. In the while, this would 
only be the case for the ten lessons that had been 
identified in previous OEG meetings as priorities, 
switched into recommendations for future exercise 
planning. 
 
Exercises 
 
¶18. Poland gave a presentation on a PSI simulating game 
system called "Hamster" intended to develop the idea of 
table top exercises. This training system would not 
require specific computers on participant side and would 
allow partners to work together without requiring them to 
be in the same location. Poland would be ready to provide 
the OEG with a demonstration of the application during 
the US OEG in May 2009. 
 
¶19. Singapore gave a presentation on its forthcoming 
exercise to take place in November 2009. This exercise 
could consist of a table top exercise, a maritime 
interdiction phase and port search phase. It is intended 
to allow sharing knowledge and capacity building with 
PSI partners and outreach to non-PSI partners. OEG 
members participation was encouraged. 
 
¶20. The US made an introduction to its exercise "Leading 
Edge 2010" scheduled for October 2009. With a table top 
exercise and a maritime exercise, "Leading edge 2010" 
 
STATE 00115964  004 OF 008 
 
 
will explore integration of Customs, Law Enforcement, 
military actions and assets in interdicting shipments of 
WMD proliferation concern. US objective are to maintain 
"international flavour" and involve all relevant agencies. 
It will take place in the Gulf region. 
 
21.Although the UK had to cancel its exercise previously 
planned for April 2009, it was in a position to share 
interesting views on key objectives for next exercises: 
multi-agency, outreach different levels, industry 
involvement (airline, airport, transports by land, etc.). 
 
Intelligence Break-Out Session 
 
¶22. The Intelligence group had a discussion on various 
topics and came up with concrete proposals. 
 
-- First cluster of topics relates to understanding the 
nature of the threat. A presentation on the outcome of 
the Red Teaming exercise in London shed light on all 
procurement and shipping methods that may be used by 
proliferators. They consist of: 
 
--  security means to protect and hide procurement 
    operations 
--  growing complexity of procurement networks 
--  growing sophistication of the delivery chain to 
    avoid detection and interception 
--  diversification of sea and air transportation methods. 
 
-- The group valued this type of exercice as a way to help 
us open our minds, focus on new areas and feed the 
intelligence collection process. This enables us to 
identify ways and means on how proliferators operate, 
hence to direct our intelligence collection and analytical 
work. 
 
-- In the course of the discussion, the group had an 
exchange of views on the growing importance of the trade 
between countries of concern and emerging economies' 
trade. Developed countries are losing part of their 
monopoly on the production of goods, material and 
technology used and purchased by proliferators. 
This trend has to be taken into account in identifying 
new sources of proliferation. 
 
-- The group touched upon the possibility for non state 
actors to become not only providers of CBRN material and 
technologies, but also end-users (eg, terrorist groups). 
Though the intent exists, very few actual and significant 
attempts have been uncovered. The group recognised the 
difficulty to make CP and CT people work together and 
combine their respective approaches and knowledge and 
the need to improve this. 
 
-- The second cluster of topics relates to what we have 
to do to counter proliferation A presentation was made on 
the analytical work that is the indispensable underpinning 
of any action. This work should be made at a global level 
in order to have the best understanding of WMD programmes 
and procurement networks and methods. This enables us to 
detect and assess specific cases likely to trigger 
interceptions. Recent experiences on real cases have 
shown the value of this dialectic. 
 
-- The group heard a presentation on the issue of 
managing the risk of intangible technology transfer. 
Australia shared its compilation of OEG responses to the 
CP ITT Matrix and thanked members for their contributions, 
encouraging further responses. 
 
-- Finally, the group came up with two proposals and two 
recommendations. Referring to the value of the Red Teaming 
exercise, the group welcomes the organisation of a 
similar exercise at the next OEG meeting. It raises the 
issue of the usefulness of associating people from 
shipping/transportation sectors. This would contribute to 
help us understand how they operate and what it means for 
our work. 
 
-- Given that much of the goods and materials sold by 
North Korea have been shipped by sea, a proposal was made 
to share information on North Korean owned or operated 
vessels. This information would be passively collected 
and shared on a voluntary basis. The group supports this 
proposal. Practically, information would be exchanged 
within the intelligence group at each OEG meeting. In 
the light of how the initiative develops, the group 
could reflect on other ways and means to exchange that 
information on a more on-going basis. The group is of 
 
STATE 00115964  005 OF 008 
 
 
the view this is a concrete through modest step towards 
fostering the sharing of information. 
 
-- The intelligence group values the existence of and 
the work by a group dedicated solely to intelligence - a 
domain that is key to CP in general and PSI in 
particular, and has its specificities and areas of 
competence. 
 
-- Finally the intelligence group supports the 
recommendation that each group would have a co-chair. 
 
Combined Legal and Law Enforcement Break-Out Session 
 
¶23. Partners discussed in length the added-value of the 
2005 SUA instrument to the PSI objectives. Partners noted 
that SUA is a tool for state cooperation that could help 
in countering proliferation by sea. It is the first 
multilateral instrument dealing with criminalizing 
the proliferation of any WMD and their means of 
delivery, as well as the related dual-use items. 
The options offered by the SUA Protocol with regard to 
boarding in high sea were reminded. 
 
-- A point was made on status of its ratification: among 
the six states, Spain is the first PSI partner having 
ratified the SUA amended instrument in July 2008. In doing 
so, Spain did not meet any specific domestic difficulties 
in the ratification process. Besides the enactment of a 
recent act on proliferation issues, the Spanish penal code 
covers all the new SUA offences in a material way. A 
number of other PSI partners are in the same process now. 
 
¶24. Partners noted the specific added value of the 
presentation made by the US delegation which provided a 
survey of the nine bilateral shipboarding agreements, 
which are in compliance with the implementation of UNSCR 
1540, PSI objectives and the provisions of the SUA 
Protocol. SUA encourages states parties to conclude such 
agreements to facilitate law enforcement operations 
(art 8 bis 13), which is of particular interest to meet 
the PSI objectives. These bilateral agreements facilitate 
the shipboarding among states which want to counter 
proliferation shipments. PSI members had the opportunity 
during the break-out session to take the measure of the 
benefits of such agreements, which will be very helpful 
for the development of internal procedures to deal with 
boarding operations. The US delegation circulated models 
of boarding forms that are used to request the 
authorisation of the flag state to board and, if 
evidence is found, to request information for 
disposition. 
 
¶25. Delegations discussed a number of legal issues 
related to boarding operations in  high sea under the 
2005 Protocol, including the boarding regime itself and 
law enforcement procedures, the nature of these standards 
for this boarding operations (domestic, international 
with regards to human rights). They also discussed the 
identification of the competent jurisdiction. The UK 
delegation stressed that many of these issues are already 
addressed in the Vienna Convention against drug 
trafficking (art 17), while recognizing that 
proliferation issues posed specific challenges. 
 
¶26. As a conclusion, the need to keep discussing in PSI 
framework the legal issues related to the implementation 
of the 2005 SUA Protocol was highlighted, in order to 
help PSI partners finding efficient and operational 
solutions. A number of delegations expressed their 
interest in having increased exchanges of experience 
about real cases to progress in the implementation of 
the Protocol. It was also mentioned that the provisions 
of the SUA Protocol should serve as a basis for the 
discussion under the ICAO to introduce new offences to 
counter proliferation by air. PSI partners were 
encouraged, while respecting the sovereignty of any 
PSI States, to engage and/or accelerate the 
ratification process of the 2005 SUA Protocol. 
 
Media Strategy Break-Out Session 
 
¶27. The break-out group chairman outlined the potential 
components and objectives of a media strategy. This 
included examining whether it was necessary to 
communicate on the PSI, and if so, what form the 
communication should take to rally all national and 
international actors to stop proliferation flows. 
 
¶28. All participants felt concerned by the issue of PSI 
 
STATE 00115964  006 OF 008 
 
 
media strategy. Discussions established the necessity of 
bearing in mind and addressing regional specificities and 
concerns. France indicated that there are concerns in 
Europe about the PSI being a secretive group lacking 
transparency. When addressing these issues, participants 
emphasised the necessity of elaborating different media 
strategies targeting specific actors. Thus, any 
communication strategy ought to be tailored to regional, 
country, and actor specificities. There was a consensus 
in acknowledging that the main target is not public 
opinion - this is usually already dealt with at national 
level - but rather policy makers in non-PSI countries 
and key private actors. 
 
¶29. Participants further underlined the difference 
between communicating on PSI exercises or meetings, and 
PSI real interdictions. The first is useful for outreach 
and media strategies already exist - in fact, they have 
been quite successful. The second is more delicate 
because of the sensitivity of the information involved. 
 
¶30. All participants agreed on the usefulness of creating 
a pool of information (for example, a databank, guidelines 
on responses to media enquiries) on which to draw. 
Different target audiences exist: the first, official, 
for general access; the second, restricted, for PSI member 
states; the third as an external source of information 
(perhaps a commonly elaborated Wikipedia page). 
Ultimately, participants noted relevant targets for a 
communication strategy: a media strategy is relevant in 
that it influences foreign public opinion and decision 
makers; a communication strategy also helps in general 
outreach activities. Although the two are distinct, a 
link exists - a communication strategy aimed at foreign 
decision makers in less active PSI member states or states 
that are not members of the PSI could rest on elements 
also useful to a media strategy. 
 
¶31. It was agreed that Questions and Answers (Q&A) would 
be a useful tool on which partners could work. Australia 
suggested to build on its own set of legal frequently asked 
questions (FAQs), which France will circulate and work with 
the US and the UK to integrate OEG member states' comments. 
Break-out group participants agreed to experiment with 
the troika format for its work. 
 
Legal and Law Enforcement Issues 
 
¶32. Turkey presented the review of its export control 
legislation, starting with the working group of export 
control experts who in particular examined best practises 
in order to transpose them in new pieces of legislation 
(for example, the consolidated national control list took 
the EU list as a model). As a result, the draft law on 
strengthening the export controls of dual use and 
sensitive goods was submitted to the Turkish Grand 
National Assembly in June 2008. 
 
¶33. Australia spoke of the progress by ICAO on existing 
legal framework (updating the Montreal and Hague 
Conventions). Following the previous Australian 
presentation at the London OEG, this one pointed out key 
issues on models of transport of materials offences. In 
next months, there is an opportunity for improvement in 
the international legal framework to build on mechanisms 
for international cooperation. Australia requested OEG 
states to consider the draft and provide comments. 
Australia also emphasised the necessity of liaising with 
industry and, in terms of the way forward, Australia 
stressed especially the need to explain the proposal 
and engage broader range of states. 
 
¶34. The US examined disposition and liability with a focus 
on the question of goods abandoned or unclaimed. It 
suggested creating a folder in the PSI legal library on 
the website dedicated to potential solutions for difficult 
legal issues. The US presented its legal framework 
relevant to dealing with abandoned or unclaimed 
merchandise suspected to be linked to WMD. The 
presentation outlined customs abandonment statutes, 
issues related to the disposition of abandoned or 
unclaimed merchandise, and liability. The US concluded 
that abandonment to the US government is an option where 
the goods are not subject to seizure. 
 
¶35. France outlined its national legal process relevant to 
PSI. In particular, France commented on its proliferation 
response plan, on the global objectives, initial 
assessment, proposals for improvements and other 
improvements worth considering in reinforcing its 
 
STATE 00115964  007 OF 008 
 
 
relevant legislation (especially penal procedure, 
penal laws and customs laws). It concluded by underlining 
achievements over the last 18 months: a national response 
plan related to WMD proliferation and associated SOPs, a 
draft law to reinforce French legislation, new dual-use 
goods export control mechanisms, and a draft PM directive 
calling all institutions to take into account WMD counter 
proliferation. 
 
¶36. The US gave a presentation on law enforcement issues. 
Dealing with the enforcement operations (information 
acquisition, analysis and targeting, engaging industry, 
supply chain security and capacity building), the 
presentation showed the way ahead: maintain the law 
enforcement break-out group, adopt a regional approach 
in capacity building and develop a law enforcement 
guidelines document. The US hopes to have elaborated this 
document by the next OEG meeting in May. The document's 
objective would be to identify law enforcement 
capabilities towards interdiction, ensure the right law 
enforcement experts are part of the full national team, 
and identify areas that need to be addressed as part of 
capacity building. 
 
¶37. France on the role of customs in control of dual use 
goods and technology, starting from licensing procedure to 
offences and penalties. It outlined the basic principles 
of customs control of dual-use goods: it is based mainly 
on EU Regulation 1334/2000, which covers products 
controlled under various international non-proliferation 
regimes. This Community Regulation set up a community 
regime for the control of dual-use items and technology 
exports. The presentation showed that this regulation is 
fully and directly applicable in French law and that it 
will be clarified by French customs. France further listed 
the different licence types used in France, the licensing 
procedure, the role of French customs in controlling 
dual-use exports, and the relevant offences and penalties. 
It concluded by mentioning the French customs intelligence 
and investigation service in charge of dual-use goods. 
 
¶38. ANNEX: SUMMARY OF OEG ACTION ITEMS 
 
-- Delegations will review the current content of the PSI 
website and notify the German government of any recommended 
changes or deletions. Delegations will further discuss the 
content of the PSI website hosted by Germany, the different 
levels of access and the use of this tool. 
 
-- New Zealand will publish a PSI newsletter. 
 
-- Delegations will prepare for a new real case debriefing 
   session at the next OEG. 
 
-- Delegations agreed that reporting on FATF activity and 
   ICAO process should continue. 
 
-- Delegations agreed on further web-based exchanges on 
   possible solutions to legal issues, including further 
   work on disposition and liability issues. 
 
-- Delegations agreed on the need to further work on media 
   strategy issues. France will circulate the Australian 
   legal FAQs and work with the US and the UK to integrate 
   the OEG member states comments. 
 
-- Delegations agreed to implement a troika process, 
   including the last, the current and the future OEG host 
   nations. UK, France and US agreed to initiate such a 
   process. New Zealand and Denmark will prepare a paper 
   to be circulated to partners on that mechanism. That 
   mechanism will be reviewed at the next OEG meeting. 
 
-- Delegations discussed the possibility of having again 
   two separate legal issues and law enforcement 
   break-out sessions. 
 
-- Delegations agreed to give further consideration to 
   industry outreach, in particular to bring existing 
   documents and practices together in concrete and 
   detailed recommendations. 
 
-- As far as the intelligence working group is concerned, 
   delegates agreed: 
     - To pursue the exchange of information on North 
       Korean vessels on a voluntary basis; 
     - To consider co-chairmanship of this working 
       group. 
 
-- Poland will host a European regional meeting in 
 
STATE 00115964  008 OF 008 
 
 
   June 2009. 
 
-- United States will host an OEG with regional participation 
in Miami in 12th-14th May 2009. 
 
END OF PSI OEG CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT 
 
POINTS OF CONTACT 
 
¶37.   Please slug responses for OSD GSA (Beth Flores) and 
State/ISN/CPI (Carlos Guzman). USG POC for PSI 
Operational Experts Group issues is Beth Flores, 
OSD/GSA (beth.flores@osd.mil). USG POC for PSI policy 
issues is Carlos Guzman, State/ISN/CPI 
(GuzmanCS@state.gov). 
RICE