VZCZCXRO2113
OO RUEHTRO
DE RUEHC #7394/01 0561357
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O P 251340Z FEB 09
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK IMMEDIATE 5020
INFO RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA PRIORITY 7292
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING PRIORITY 6031
RUEHHI/AMEMBASSY HANOI PRIORITY 8709
RUEHKM/AMEMBASSY KAMPALA PRIORITY 5332
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 2391
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO PRIORITY 8913
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY 7986
RUEHOU/AMEMBASSY OUAGADOUGOU PRIORITY 8202
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS PRIORITY 3065
RUEHSJ/AMEMBASSY SAN JOSE PRIORITY 0172
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO PRIORITY 7871
RUEHVI/AMEMBASSY VIENNA PRIORITY 7457
RUEHVB/AMEMBASSY ZAGREB PRIORITY 2243
RUEHTRO/AMEMBASSY TRIPOLI PRIORITY 5800
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE PRIORITY 7947
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 4620
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA PRIORITY 4564

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 STATE 017394 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL AORC KPAO PTER UNSC
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE TO SECURITY COUNCIL ON UNSCR 1540 -- 
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW 
 
REF: A. STATE 8246 (08) 
     ¶B. BRUSSELS 248 (08) 
     ¶C. CONCEPT PAPER WITH USG REVISIONS 
     ¶D. NOTIONAL WORK PLAN 
     ¶E. NOTIONAL BUDGET OVERVIEW 
     ¶F. NOTIONAL AGENDA 
     ¶G. COMMON STRATEGY IOS 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED -- PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY 
 
¶1.  (U) This is an action request for USUN, see para 3.  USUN 
may  also leave para 6 points as a non-paper.  Other Posts as 
info only. 
 
¶2.  (U) Background:  New Security Council member Mexico, in 
its capacity as Vice Chairman on the 1540 Committee, is 
leading a UN Working Group focused on conducting a 
comprehensive review of UNSCR 1540 by the end of this year ) 
a major USG objective from 2008 connected to the extension of 
the 1540 Committee's mandate, see REFs A and B.  The Working 
Group seeks to report to the Committee on the results of its 
consideration and the way ahead by February 28, 2009.  We 
have long sought to conduct an open review to promote 
transparency and for states to determine whether additional 
approaches are needed on 1540 implementation.  End background. 
 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
OBJECTIVES FOR ENGAGING SECURITY COUNCIL MEMBERS 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Regarding consultations on this issue, Washington 
requests USUN to: 
 
-- Note our continued adherence to our original objectives 
for a comprehensive review meeting as provided during initial 
discussions regarding the Committee's renewal (i.e., a 
multi-day conference, open to all States, 
Committee-recognized IGOs and regional organizations, and 
select NGOs).  (USUN should underscore proposed additional 
edits to the Mexican-penned non-paper on this subject in Ref 
C.) 
 
-- Provide informally more detailed ideas on a possible 
agenda and modalities that can be passed by Mexico to the 
Committee's 8 Experts to facilitate their development, in 
coordination with the UN Office of Disarmament Affairs (ODA), 
of a paper on a way forward for the comprehensive review. 
See Refs D-F. 
 
-- Indicate that, as a next step, the experts and UN ODA 
should be tasked to develop a paper on the administrative and 
logistic costs of various conference options, including a 
multi-day conference with attendance from capitals.  (Note: 
We do not believe that a sufficiently detailed cost analysis 
has been provided and do not support the use of informal 
consultations to establish costs or limit meeting options. 
End note.)   This will require an extension of the working 
group's end of February deadline. 
 
-- Coordinate with P3/P5 as needed, as well as natural allies 
such as Austria, to share the burden for developing 
modalities for an options paper along with Mexico -- as 
Washington understands the Committee has leaned toward the 
USG to provide further details. 
 
-- Inform France that their suggestion to hold a conference 
in proximity to the UNGA 1st Committee meetings has merit and 
should be included as part of an option paper.  Experience 
from 2007 and 2008 has revealed that many of the experts from 
 
STATE 00017394  002 OF 003 
 
 
capitals familiar with UNSCR 1540 are in New York during this 
timeframe. 
 
-- In determining the span of IGOs or others who are actively 
working on UNSCR 1540 implementation, USUN should ask that 
the paper in Ref G be re-distributed and addressed in 
parallel by the working group on International Organizations. 
 This paper has yet to be agreed to by the Committee and we 
need it agreed to effectively invite as many IGOs to the 
meeting as possible.  This paper is titled, &Common Strategy 
IOs.8 
 
¶4.  (U) Reporting deadline.  Post is requested to deliver the 
above points during the informal working group meeting on 
February 25 and report results NLT March 2, 2009. 
 
------------------------------- 
BACKGROUND POINTS FOR POST ONLY 
------------------------------- 
 
¶5.  Washington's support for a comprehensive review stresses 
the following: 
 
-- The need to make operational the original intent of 
Resolution 1810, specifically operative paragraph 8.  The 
Mexican-chaired working group should produce papers that 
outline both:  1) a meeting that serves as a vehicle for a 
comprehensive review; and 2) what the objectives for a 
comprehensive review of 1540 would be for the Committee. 
 
-- That a mid-point review by all states, to include also the 
IGOs/regional organizations contacted by the Committee, would 
help to ensure that reporting and 
implementation matrices are used in planning for further 
implementation. 
 
-- That there has been no extended discussion by states since 
2004 and that an extended meeting will help to determine 
tasks for 2010 and the preparation of the 2011 
report. 
 
-- That announcing and setting of a date for a broad review 
by all interested states would help to determine whether 
additional approaches are needed on funding and 
implementation. 
 
-- Our consistent intention to conduct an open review as a 
way to increase transparency.  The meeting would involve all 
states and be of sufficient length to address issues 
over a multi-day period. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
TEXT OF PAPER FOR USUN TO USE IN EXPLAINING REVIEW 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
 
¶6.  Begin non-paper: 
 
The results of outreach and initiatives since the adoption of 
UNSCR 1540 have demonstrated international commitment to the 
non-proliferation goals of resolution 1540, and the U.S. is 
committed to developing ideas for the elements of the 
Comprehensive Review.  We looked at several studies as well 
as the remarks by outgoing Chairman Ambassador Burian, our 
current Chairman, as well as the 2008 report by the 
Committee.  Our ideas aim to build capacity and encourage 
further implementation of resolution 1540 -- while 
recognizing a "one size fits all" approach is not suitable 
for the various requirements unique to each 
state. 
 
We hope we can develop a review process that will better 
equip the Committee to pursue practical, concrete measures to 
enhance Member States's ability to implement the resolution, 
while recognizing that the pace of implementation will 
 
STATE 00017394  003 OF 003 
 
 
require a longer strategic timeline 
than originally envisioned following 1540,s adoption in 
¶2004.  We should work to support more than just a technical 
review of the Committee.  An effective review, approximately 
five years into the life of the resolution should recognize 
that both the UN Security Council and the many regional, 
intergovernmental, and nongovernmental  organizations working 
to promote implementation of resolution 1540 need a longer 
timeframe in which to 
promote implementation of resolution 1540. 
 
A mid-point review while working under the extension of UNSCR 
1810 by all states would help to ensure that reporting and 
implementation matrices are used in planning for further 
implementation.  There has been no extended discussion by 
states since 2004 and this will help to determine tasks for 
2010 and the preparation of the 2011 report.  Announcing and 
setting a date for a broad review by all interested states 
would help to determine whether 
additional approaches are needed on funding and 
implementation.  It has always been our intention to conduct 
an open review as a way for transparency.  The meeting would 
involve all states and be of sufficient length to address 
issues over a multi-day period. 
 
End non-paper. 
 
¶7.  Further questions or information on UNSCR 1540 can be 
directed to Tom Wuchte, U.S. 1540 Coordinator.  Basic 
background can be found on http://www.un.org/sc/1540. 
Washington appreciates Post's assistance. 
CLINTON