VZCZCXRO2624
PP RUEHAST RUEHFL RUEHLA RUEHMRE RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHVEN #0258/01 2971609
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 231609Z OCT 08
FM USMISSION USOSCE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5995
INFO RUCNOSC/ORG FOR SECURITY CO OP IN EUR COLLECTIVE
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 0615
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 1170
RHMFISS/CDR USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RHMFISS/CDRUSAREUR HEIDELBERG GE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHDLCNE/CINCUSNAVEUR LONDON UK
RUEKJCS/DIA WASHDC
RUEASWA/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC
RUESDT/DTRA-OSES DARMSTADT GE
RHMFIUU/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RUEKJCS/JCS WASHDC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 1110

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 06 USOSCE 000258 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR VCI/CCA, VCI/NRRC, EUR/RPM, EUR/PRA, EUR/CARC, 
SCA/CEN, SCA/RA, PM/WRA 
JCS FOR J-5 
OSD FOR ISA (PERENYI) 
NSC FOR HAYES 
USUN FOR LEGAL, POL 
EUCOM FOR J-5 
CENTCOM FOR J-5 
UNVIE FOR AC 
GENEVA FOR CD 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL KCFE OSCE RS XG
SUBJECT: OSCE/FSC OCTOBER 22: MELANGE ELIMINATION AND 
MONTREUX DOCUMENT 
 
¶1.  (SBU)  Summary:  At the 22 October FSC Plenary Georgia 
accused Russia of violating the six-point cease fire 
agreement by not completely withdrawing its forces out of 
Georgian territory.  Russia disagreed and countered that 
Georgia was increasing its military presence in the "buffer 
zone" area. OSCE Secretary General de Brichambaut presented 
an update of an OSCE project to help Ukraine eliminate liquid 
rocket fuel component ("melange").  The project received wide 
support from many delegations.  Ambassador Paul Seger of 
Switzerland gave an overview of the Montreux Document on 
pertinent international legal obligations and good practices 
for State related to operations of private military and 
security companies during armed conf\|?C#:o|{tates in this effort. 
 
¶2.  (SBU)  In the working groups, there was consensus to move 
the Estonian cyber security draft decision to next week's 
Plenary for adoption.  Russia opposed the U.S. proposed edits 
and fought with Georgia over the draft Ministerial Council 
decision on issues relevant to the FSC.  Turkey and Sweden 
disagreed over text that refers to women in the latest 
version of the draft decision on an update of the 
Questionnaire on the Code of Conduct.  Washington, please see 
paragraphs 13, 14, and 20.  End Summary 
 
Same Old Story...Getting Older 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶3. (SBU)  Georgia (Giorgadze) kicked off the 561st meeting of 
the Forum for Security Cooperation (FSC) by accusing Russia 
of violating the six-point cease fire agreement.  Giorgadze 
said that Russia was occupying villages outside of South 
Ossetia "proper" as well as the non-conflict territory of 
Abkhazia.  As a result, displaced personnel were not able to 
return to their homes.  He claimed that Russia was guilty of 
ethnic cleansing and had recently violated Georgian airspace. 
 Giorgadze cited recent Russian statements confirming that 
there were over 8000 Russia troops on Georgian soil.  The 
Georgian representative appealed to the OSCE to take urgent 
measures to stop Russian actions against his country. 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  Russia (Ulyanov) flatly denied Giorgadze's 
accusations.  Ulyanov said Russia had fulfilled all of its 
obligations under the cease fire agreement, some even ahead 
of schedule.  He revealed that Georgia was increasing its 
military presence in the "buffer zone" by building over 20 
new checkpoints.  The current situation worries Russia. 
Ulyanov hoped the EU's mission in Georgia would prevent the 
resurgence of hostilities. 
 
Melange Anyone? 
- - - - - - - - 
 
¶5.  (SBU)  The OSCE Secretary General (de Brichambaut) 
presented an update on the OSCE-Ukraine project "Assisting 
the Government of Ukraine in Eliminating Melange (Liquid 
Rocket Fuel Component) Stocks."  The SYG submitted the 
project plan to the FSC "for information, and, if appropriate 
for endorsement" (in line with procedures outlined in the 
OSCE Document on Stockpiles of Conventional Ammunitions). 
The details of the project and de Brichambaut's brief can be 
found in FSC.GAL/126/08.   Some highlights from the Secretary 
 
USOSCE 00000258  002 OF 006 
 
 
General's presentation included: 
      -the goal of the project - the largest being organized 
under OSCE auspices - is ultimately to eliminate up to 16,300 
tons of Melange at 6 locations from 2009-2013; the project 
plan presented to the FSC focuses on disposal of an initial 
tranche of 3,000 tons. 
      -the OSCE and Ukraine negotiators have agreed to three 
MOUs on the legal framework for implementers, technical Terms 
of Reference, and draft tri-partite contract for tenders. 
      -the project is the most difficult due to the amount of 
Melange to be destroyed, liability issues, safety concerns 
with transporting Melange for elimination, regulations on 
handling hazardous material, OSCE responsibilities for 
implementing the project's technical standards, and the need 
to establish privileges/immunities for project personnel. 
      -donors have pledged 3,197,079.11 Euros to the project 
which is estimated to be sufficient to dispose of the initial 
3,000 tons of Melange. 
      -Under the OSCE procurement principles, tender of the 
project will be announced by 15 December 2008 and work will 
began nine months later. 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  There was broad support for this OSCE-Ukrainian 
project.  Demark (Petersen) noted the importance of Melange 
destruction to reduce health and environmental risks. 
Petersen supported the SYG's plan and announced a donation of 
900,000 Euros to the project.  Sweden informed the FSC that 
it had set aside 1,000,000 Euros and 500,000 Euros for this 
effort in 2008 and 2009 respectively.  Germany, Spain, the 
Czech Republic, Greece, Poland, and Ukraine all voiced their 
support of the Secretariat and SYG's work and urged moving 
the project forward as quickly as possible.  Looking ahead at 
the tender process, the Polish representative shared with the 
Plenary that a Polish-U.S. consortium had recently completed 
an on-site destruction of 215 tons of Melange in Ukraine and 
that this consortium's on-site elimination method was safe 
and effective.  Ukraine's Ambassador Yelchenko indicated that 
there was flexibility on the issues of privileges/immunities 
for those involved in the project. He asked the Secretariat 
for the list of personnel and promised that Ukraine would 
take the list into consideration. 
 
¶7.  (SBU)  Secretary General de Brichambaut thanked all for 
their support.  He reminded the FSC that the tender process 
will be fair and in the interests of the OSCE as well as the 
bidders.  De Brichambaut said he will move ahead with the 
Melange destruction project. 
 
Montreux Document 
- - - - - - - - - 
 
¶8.  (SBU)  Under Security Dialogue, Swiss Ambassador Paul 
Seger gave a presentation on the Montreux Document on 
pertinent international legal obligations and good practices 
for States related to operations of Private Military and 
Security Companies (PMSCs) during armed conflict 
(FSC.DEL/166/08).  Seger provided some background behind the 
development of the Document.  He told the Plenary that the 
ambition of the 17 States (10, including the U.S. are OSCE 
members) involved in the process was to produce a simple, 
easy to understand, specific and operational paper.  The goal 
was not to condemn or legitimize the contracting and 
activities of the PMSCs, but to "face up" to the growing use 
 
USOSCE 00000258  003 OF 006 
 
 
of PMSCs in conflict situations.  Seger noted that the first 
part of the Montreux Document recapitulates the existing 
rules of relevant international laws such as the Geneva 
Conventions while the second part contains a set of good 
practices designed to assist States in complying with the 
relevant laws through administrative, legislative or other 
measures. 
 
¶9.  (SBU)  Seger believed the OSCE could play a decisive role 
in promoting the Montreux Document by expressing its 
political support, by getting OSCE participating States to 
utilize the Document and by organizing a workshop to discuss 
the content of the Document in greater details.  Seger 
promised that Switzerland will continue to be involved in the 
promotion and dissemination (the Document will be translated 
into the six official languages of the United Nations and 
will be disseminated to all UN Member States) of this 
Document and offered to assist any States wishing to do the 
same. 
 
¶10.  (SBU)  Austria, the U.K., Germany, and Switzerland 
voiced their support for the Montreux Document and Ambassador 
Seger's work.  Austria and Switzerland offered to work with 
other delegations to push the Document in the OSCE.  The U.K. 
informed the Plenary that London had incorporated some of the 
Document's concept into its contractual agreements with 
PMSCs.  Germany commented that the OSCE Code of Conduct of 
Politico-Military Aspects of Security may possibly be linked 
to the Montreux Document and that discussion on this may be 
helpful. 
 
¶11.  (SBU)  The U.S. (Neighbour), drawing from talking points 
used by Department's Legal Advisor John B. Bellinger at the 
recent Montreux Document meeting, highlighted the U.S. 
involvement in the development of the Document and repeated 
Washington's support for accountability of PMSC, their 
personnel and the application of professional standard to 
their operations.  Neighbour said that the Document will 
provide helpful and practical guidance to States that 
contract with private military and security companies, States 
on whose soil they operate, and States in which they are 
based or incorporated. 
 
¶12.  (SBU)  Ambassador Seger welcomed the support and 
reminded the FSC of the need to acquaint others with the 
Document.  Seger said that although he is always looking for 
way to improve the Document, the immediate goal is to 
implement the current version before making any changes. 
 
Cyber Security 
- - - - - - - - 
 
¶13.  (SBU)   Turkey and Russia had received guidance from 
their capitals to support the Estonian proposal for an OSCE 
workshop on enhancing cyber security(FSC.DEL/125/08/Rev.4). 
Russia said that although it supported the decision, it will 
have comments on some aspects of the agenda.  The draft 
decision will be moved to the Plenary for adoption at the 
next FSC meeting.  USDEL believes that the current text 
satisfies U.S. criteria and will join consensus unless 
otherwise directed. 
 
MC.DD on SALW 
 
USOSCE 00000258  004 OF 006 
 
 
- - - - - - - 
 
¶14.  (SBU)  The current version of the draft Ministerial 
Council decision on Small Arms and Light Weapons and 
Stockpiles of Conventional Ammunition (MC.DD/7/08/Rev.1) 
remains on the working group agenda because Turkey had not 
received instructions from capital.  Request Washington 
provides guidance to USDEL on this draft decision. 
 
MC.DD on FSC Issues 
- - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶15.  (SBU)  Georgia and Russia argued, using similar 
arguments from last week's meeting, over the text in the OP1 
tic two of the draft decision.  Both delegations rejected the 
latest version (MC.DD/6/08/Rev.1). Georgia wanted the draft 
text to reflect that there was a conflict between Georgia and 
Russia.  Russia, which is waiting for guidance from Moscow on 
the current version, commented that Georgian proposal was 
inaccurate. 
 
¶16.  (SBU)  USDEL informed the working group that the U.S. 
would prefer the "or" version of OP3.  USDEL noted that last 
year's tasking for reports was not a precedent, that in 
previous year the chair simply reported on the work 
accomplished by the FSC, and that the chair's hands should 
not be tied and be told what to report a year in advance.  If 
the "or" version was not acceptable to delegations, USDEL 
suggested replacing "submit" with "report," deleting 
"progress report" after the word "chairperson," and inserting 
"its work, including, as appropriate," after "2009."  As with 
the last weeks' working group, Russia rejected the U.S. 
proposal.  Russia (Ulyanov) thought the current version, that 
mentioned specific reports, was a step forward and reverting 
to the previous format (an "unspecified" report by the chair 
intended to address all pertinent FSC activities) was a step 
backward.  Ulyanov wanted to know what would be the 
consequence of the current text in OP3 and what report the 
Ministerial Council would received under the U.S. changes. 
Ulyanov would rather have the "original" form of OP3. 
 
SALW to Georgia 
- - - - - - - - 
 
¶17.  (SBU)  Russia opened the discussion with a video/picture 
presentation on the dangers of arming Georgia.  The film, set 
to melancholy music, was about 15 minutes long.  It attempted 
to indict all of the countries that had provided arms, 
equipment, and other assistance to Georgia.  Russia (Ulyanov) 
announced that Russia's military action to "save" South 
Ossetia allowed them to find the evidence in the film. The 
key points to the video include: 
      - arming Georgia has turned the region into a 
"powder-box." 
      - 14 countries are guilty of providing Georgia with 
tanks, UAVs, and SALW/CA. 
      - Georgia had increased its armament prior to the 
August conflict (Battle Tanks from 98 to 183, ACVs from 83 to 
134, Artillery from 96 to 238, combat aircraft from 7 to 9, 
and number of helicopters from 3 to 9). 
 
¶18.  (SBU)  Ulyanov said that "it was a pleasure" to show the 
film and evidence to the working group.  He commented that no 
 
USOSCE 00000258  005 OF 006 
 
 
delegation had provided any compelling reason to refute the 
need for a FSC draft decision on supplies of CA, and light 
weapons to Georgia. 
 
¶19.  (SBU)  Georgia and the U.K. recalled and reaffirmed 
their support to the EU statement made in support of Georgia 
at the 15 October meeting.  Furthermore, the U.K., referring 
to the futility of the proposal, reminded Russia that the no 
decision can go forward if there was no consensus.  After the 
working group, Finland informed USDEL that Russia's proposal 
will not be on the agenda for next week's working group. 
 
SALW by Air 
- - - - - - 
 
¶20.  (SBU)  With the exception of Belarus and the U.S., there 
was consensus on sending the draft decision 
(FSC.DD/10/08/Rev.1) to the Plenary for adoption.  USDEL 
believes that the current text satisfies U.S. criteria and 
will join consensus in both the working group and the Plenary 
unless otherwise directed. 
 
SALW and SCA 
- - - - - - - 
 
¶21.  (SBU)  Germany, coordinator for SALW, and Denmark, 
coordinator for SCA, informed the working group that their 
status report for the December Ministerial Council is being 
prepared will be promulgated.  Although the report is not a 
consensus document, inputs from interested delegations are 
welcome. 
 
Code of Conduct 
- - - - - - - - 
 
¶22.  (SBU)  Turkey wanted to delete the 6th paragraph in the 
preamble (reference to UNSCR 1325) and item II.4.3 of the 
draft Code of Conduct (CoC) questionnaire because it believes 
the "gender" issue was not a part of the original CoC and as 
a result there is not a mandate to update the questionnaire 
with this issue.  Sweden, Norway, and Canada opposed the 
Turkish deletion suggestions.  When questioned by USDEL about 
document to support States in replying to the questionnaire 
referenced in the OP tic three, the coordinator (Austria, 
Eischer) informed all that the plan is to produce the 
referenced document before the decision is approved.  Citing 
the lack of added value, USDEL proposed deleting section I.3 
(questions concerning implementation of commitments in arms 
control, disarmament, and confidence-and-security building 
measures).  Turkey agreed and Russia agreed in principle, but 
needed guidance from Moscow.  USDEL suggested using the 
original CoC text in a question format for section II.2.3 to 
make the item clearer.  The new text would read "what are the 
roles and missions of military, paramilitary and security 
forces, as well as controls to ensure they act solely within 
the constitutional framework?"  Eischer promised to continue 
to work with delegations to reach a compromised on all the 
issues. 
 
Next Meeting 
- - - - - - - 
 
¶23.  (U)  The next FSC meeting will be a joint FSC-PC meeting 
 
USOSCE 00000258  006 OF 006 
 
 
on 29 October.  The agenda is in FSC-PC.GAL/6/08/Rev.1.  The 
working groups will meet immediately afterwards. 
FINLEY