VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHC #8617 1080215
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 180157Z APR 09
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUEHTC/AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEHGB/AMEMBASSY BAGHDAD IMMEDIATE 0000

UNCLAS STATE 038617 
 
SIPDIS - THE HAGUE FOR CWC DELEGATION 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC IZ
SUBJECT: CWC: U.S. RESPONSE TO OPCW LEGAL ADVISER ON 
U.S. SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION ON IRAQ 
 
REF: THE HAGUE 245 (CWC: URGENT LEGAL QUESTIONS ON U.S. 
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION ON IRAQ) 
 
¶1. (U) This is an action request for all addressees on 
Monday, April 20, 2009, see paras 4-6. 
 
¶2. (U) Background:  On April 14, U.S. delreps to the 
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons 
(OPCW) met with OPCW Technical Secretariat (TS) Legal 
Adviser Santiago Onate and other OPCW TS representatives 
to discuss the legal sufficiency of the U.S. 
Supplemental Declaration on chemical weapons recovered 
in Iraq.  Onate's legal view is that a U.S. decision to 
submit this information via an official declaration form 
might cause the TS to raise a number of potentially 
difficult technical and verification questions, most 
importantly why the U.S. did not declare these weapons 
at time of recovery and invite the TS to verify 
destruction.  Onate suggested that the U.S. might 
consider appending the information on recovered rounds 
to Iraq's initial declaration, perhaps in the same 
category as other narrative descriptions of past 
activities. The United States would need agreement from 
Iraq on this informal submission and coordinate this 
decision with the UK.  (NOTE:  The UK is submitting an 
informal letter to the OPCW on CW rounds that it 
recovered in Iraq. End note.). 
 
¶3. (U) A subsequent telephone conversation between Onate 
and L/NPV (M.Brown) and DoD/OGC (J.Wager) on 16 April 
2009 revealed that, in Onate's opinion, the CWC, under 
these particular conditions, does not require a formal 
declaration (CW Form 1.0) to report the results of the 
recovery and destruction of the Iraqi chemical 
munitions.  He explained his rationale was based on his 
assessment that the purpose of that form was to permit 
verification of destruction, which, in this case, had 
already occurred.  As a result, an informal letter from 
the United States to the TS, for transparency purposes, 
that provides information on the recovered CW is the 
preferred approach.  A written Memorandum for the Record 
(MFR) on the 16 April 2009 telephone conversation with 
Onate has been prepared, along with an MFR of the events 
leading up to the interagency decision on how to provide 
the information to the TS.  In light of the phone 
conversation and subsequent decisions, Washington will: 
 
1) prepare a letter from the United States to the TS to 
request the withdrawal of the U.S. supplemental 
declaration; and 
 
2) prepare a letter from the United States to the 
Director-General of the OPCW that outlines, for 
transparency purposes, the CW recoveries by U.S. forces 
in Iraq. 
 
¶4. (U) Action Request: CWC Delegation The Hague. 
 
¶A. Using the letter provided by Washington, Del should 
seek return of the U.S. supplemental declaration and 
cover letter, and inform the appropriate TS officials 
that, instead of the supplemental declaration, the 
United States now plans to submit a letter from the U.S. 
National Authority to inform the TS of the rounds 
recovered in Iraq.  We do not believe it appropriate, 
however, to append this letter as an annex to the Iraqi 
declaration, although we recognize that the TS may want 
to file them together, or to number them in a similar 
manner, for administrative reasons.  The U.S. letter 
will refer to the 2007 letter from the United States and 
UK foreign ministers, which was cited in and annexed to 
UNSCR 1762 (29 June 2007).  That letter informed the 
Security Council that "all appropriate steps have been 
taken to secure, remove, disable, render harmless, 
eliminate or destroy (a) all of Iraq's known weapons of 
mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range of 
greater than 150 kilometers and (b) all known elements 
of Iraq's programs established to research, develop, 
design, manufacture, produce, support, assemble and 
employ such weapons and delivery systems, subsystems and 
components thereof." 
 
¶B. Del should inform the Iraqi delegation of this 
planned approach and seek any comments. 
 
¶C. Del should brief the UK del on this matter. 
 
¶D. Absent any strong objections from the TS or the Iraq 
or UK delegations, the interagency cleared letter 
transmitting this information will arrive separately and 
should be signed by Dr. Robert Mikulak and delivered to 
the Director-General. 
 
¶5. (U) Action Request: Embassy Baghdad. Post should draw 
on the above background to inform appropriate Iraqi 
officials. 
 
¶6. (U) Action Request: Embassy London. Post should draw 
on the above information to update appropriate UK 
officials. 
CLINTON