VZCZCXRO4965
PP RUEHAST RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHLA RUEHMRE RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSK RUEHSR
DE RUEHVEN #0134/01 1481248
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 281248Z MAY 09 ZDK
FM USMISSION USOSCE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6403
INFO RUCNOSC/ORG FOR SECURITY CO OP IN EUR COLLECTIVE
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 0761
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 1318
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 1256

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 06 USOSCE 000134 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR VCI/CCA, VCI/NRRC, EUR/RPM, EUR/PRA, EUR/CARC, 
SCA/CEN, SCA/RA, PM/WRA, ISN/CPI 
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 MO RS XG
SUBJECT: FSC MAY 27: U.S.-MOROCCO SEMINAR ON CONVENTIONAL 
ARMS AND REGIONAL SECURITY IN SECURITY DIALOGUE 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  The Security Dialogue included an account 
of the U.S.-Morocco hosted seminar on conventional arms and 
regional security in Rabat, April 14-15.  The U.S., Morocco, 
Spain, and France described the seminar, which sought 
coordinated regional responses to the proliferation of 
weapons from conflict zones into North and West Africa and 
the Sahel.  Delegations from nations in these regions as well 
as France and Spain attended.  Earlier, a Portuguese 
state-owned defense holding company described its ammunition 
demilitarization services. 
 
¶2. (SBU) In the working groups, despite low-grade sniping 
among some delegations, there was wide support for the draft 
list of political-military elements for the 2009 Annual 
Security Review Conference.  Russia acknowledged U.S. and 
Conflict Prevention Center comments on the British-Russian 
draft Best Practice Guide on Vienna Document contact visits. 
Support is growing for the German-authored draft guidelines 
for Vienna Document inspection briefings, although Russia 
still wants them to be mandatory.  The chair of the Informal 
Group of Friends of Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW) 
surveyed OSCE decisions and related developments in the field 
since 1999 and will soon introduce a draft agenda and 
modalities for the special meeting to review the OSCE 
Document on SALW. 
 
¶3. (SBU) The U.S. called for further support of the 
Food-for-Thought paper proposing measures by the FSC to 
support implementation of UNSCR 1540, introduced in March. 
Belgium, Canada, Croatia, France, and Poland now are willing 
to co-sponsor.  Italy, an original co-sponsor with Britain 
and the U.S., suggested drawing on FSC expertise by 
organizing an information exchange on participating States' 
implementation programs.  Canada noted it has, like the U.S., 
circulated a draft chapter for a Best Practices Guide on 1540 
and called for comments.  Russia noted it generally supports 
implementation of 1540 through the OSCE but added that the 
FFT "raises issues for us" as it was important to find the 
best modalities to support the resolution.  End summary. 
 
Rabat Seminar 
------------- 
 
¶4. (SBU) The U.S. (Silberberg) briefed the FSC on a joint 
U.S.-Morocco hosted seminar on conventional arms and regional 
security held in Rabat, Morocco, April 14-15, 2009.  During 
the October 2008 U.S.-organized MANPADs seminar for 
Mediterranean Partners in Vienna, the Moroccan delegation 
expressed concern over the flow of conventional weapons from 
conflict zones into the regions of North Africa, the Sahel, 
and West Africa.  Morocco noted the need for additional work 
and proposed the idea of a regional seminar as a useful tool. 
The U.S. and Morocco co-hosted the April 2009 seminar to open 
dialogue on conventional arms proliferation.  Participants 
from border control agencies in Burkina Faso, Chad, France, 
Libya, Mali, Morocco, Senegal, Spain, Tunisia, and the U.S. 
attended. 
 
¶5. (SBU) The Rabat seminar focused on illicit proliferation 
of conventional armaments from conflict zones into North 
Africa, the Sahel, and West Africa. Attendees identified 
regional threats and evaluated regional security 
capabilities. Most attendees viewed socioeconomic factors as 
 
USOSCE 00000134  002 OF 006 
 
 
central to proliferation - as arms trading provides a source 
of income for impoverished tribes and families ) and noted 
that increased regulation would likely exacerbate poverty in 
the region, which in turn could increase extremism and the 
proliferation of "gray areas."  Discussion of these factors, 
as well as other threats, steered the group toward 
identifying several common security goals for the region. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Spanish, French, and U.S. experts provided technical 
information and spoke about available programs to improve 
existing or future regional security capabilities to combat 
proliferation.  Attendees discussed and identified 
counter-proliferation and preventative security measures to 
address these goals, including interagency coordination, 
specialized training and sharing of best practices, 
strengthened export controls, and multilateral cooperation. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Morocco (Laaouaouda) added that recently dismantled 
terrorist networks were supported by conventional weapons 
proliferation, noting linkages between terrorist cells in 
Afghanistan and the Sahel region.  Laaouaouda suggested that 
regional inter-governmental coordination should also target 
crime, money laundering, trafficking, and other criminal 
activities, which often are associated with conventional arms 
proliferation.  He said that lack of intergovernmental 
communication undercuts these efforts. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Sweden (Byren) questioned whether the Economic 
Community of West African States (ECOWAS) moratorium on 
import, export, and manufacture of light weapons had been 
effective in curbing conventional proliferation.  Morocco 
noted that the moratorium is not respected, but argued that 
local production, which does not fall under the aegis of the 
moratorium, was a contributing factor as well.  France 
(Simonet) supports the two-pronged approach taken at the 
seminar: (1) a regional focus, and (2) an 
inter-administrative focus including police, civil aviation, 
and other sectors within countries.  Spain (Anson) also 
supported the seminar. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Russia (Ulyanov) noted its support for regional 
nonproliferation efforts but pointed out that despite the 
plethora of multilateral agreements halting the spread of 
conventional arms created in the 1980s and 1990s, the OSCE 
recently had come to a "stand still" and that "not everything 
is as good as it seems to be."  Belgium (Kenes) asked about 
the possibility of expanding participation in future 
seminars.  The U.S. (Silberberg) noted that it was planning 
additional events like the Rabat seminar that would increase 
outreach to other regions. 
 
Portuguese Demilitarization Capacity 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶10. (SBU) Major General (retired) Jose Cordeiro gave an 
overview of governmental and private sector actors in 
Portugal's defense manufacturing and demilitarization 
industries, and provided a more detailed briefing on 
Portugal's demilitarization process for obsolete conventional 
ammunition.  Both functions are carried out under the aegis 
of EMPORDEF, a holding company of Portuguese defense 
industries with the government as its sole shareholder. 
 
 
USOSCE 00000134  003 OF 006 
 
 
¶11. (SBU) EMPORDEF provides manufacturing, maintenance and 
support, and demilitarization to the Portugal defense 
establishment across a number of areas, including naval, 
industrial, and technological sectors.  EMPORDEF also 
actively pursues national and international partnerships; 
more than two-thirds (71 percent) of EMPORDEF activity is 
targeted to international markets, through which the company 
provides technical knowledge to other companies within 
Europe. 
 
¶12. (SBU) Manufacturing and destruction of armed forces and 
security corps ammunition is contracted through the Industry 
of Defense Demilitarization (IDD), an EMPORDEF subsidiary. 
IDD was created to facilitate the implementation of the 
Ottawa Convention, but has since undertaken the destruction 
and recycling of obsolete conventional ammunition as well. 
 
¶13. (SBU) France (Simonet) asked whether the OSCE could play 
a role in IDD's efforts.  Cordeiro noted IDD's willingness to 
partner with participating States (pS) on demilitarization 
and offered IDD as a model of a "small, profitable" company 
capable of effectively demilitarizing obsolete ammunition 
stockpiles at low-cost.  Finland (Kangaste) and the CPC 
(Kalashnyk) were interested in the types of cooperation 
EMPORDEF and IDD had pursued with international partners. 
Cordeiro noted that EMPORDEF had worked with NATO's NAMSA and 
companies in Spain, Italy, and France. Cordeiro further noted 
that, in cases of international cooperation on destruction, 
Portugal preferred on-site destruction of materials due to 
the dangers in transporting obsolete ammunition. 
 
¶14. (SBU) The U.S. (Silberberg) asked whether EMPORDEF 
weighed relative costs between demilitarization (including 
recycling ammunition) and complete destruction, and whether 
IDD had considered the resale of recovered ammunition to 
offset destruction costs.  Cordeiro stated that EMPORDEF was 
quite competitive in the world market, noting that it 
compared favorably with larger defense manufacturing 
companies, including U.S. companies. 
 
List of Pol-Mil Elements 
------------------------ 
 
¶15. (SBU) In the working groups, there appears to be wide if 
tacit support for the draft "list of politico-military 
elements for the 2009 Annual Security Review Conference" 
(FSC.DEL/115/09/Rev.1), although Azerbaijan returned to its 
earlier complaint over the "opacity of the process" by which 
the list had been assembled, and criticized the FSC chef de 
file for the ASRC (Simonet, France) for lack of impartiality 
and transparency.  Russia (Ulyanov) noted that the list was 
not a consensus document and did not reflect the preferences 
of all 56 Forum delegations.  Ulyanov suggested the title of 
the list be amended to reflect that the elements were 
"suggested by FSC delegations." 
 
¶16. (SBU) Ulyanov then objected to the chair's proposal to 
forward the list to the June 3 plenary for "endorsement" as 
this connoted a "positive reaction" by all delegations and 
was too similar to what the FSC did when it "approved" a 
decision.  He suggested "take note of" as less judgmental. 
Armenia urged forbearance and self-restraint by delegations 
when making proposals for the list while Greece and the UK 
 
USOSCE 00000134  004 OF 006 
 
 
praised the list and urged the chair to forward it to the 
CiO.  The list will be reviewed again by the FSC Troika and 
may appear on the June 3 plenary agenda along with the 
chair's transmittal letter. 
 
Vienna Document 
--------------- 
 
¶17. (SBU) Turkey (Begec) introduced a Food-for-Thought paper 
that would allow use without advance approval of digital 
camera and global positioning systems during Vienna Document 
inspections and evaluations (FSC.DEL/124/09).  Begec noted 
the frequent use of these devices in Vienna Document 
verification activities and the need for clear rules on their 
use. 
 
¶18. (SBU) The U.S. reminded delegations of the invitation 
extended by Italy for Chapter IV airfield and military 
facility visits June 8-12 to U.S. units at Aviano Air Base 
and Caserma Ederle in Vicenza.  A written reminder was also 
circulated (FSC.NOT/10/09). 
 
HOV Meeting 
----------- 
 
¶19. (SBU) Ukraine announced support for the draft decision to 
hold a meeting of heads of verification agencies on December 
14 in conjunction with the Annual Exchange of Military 
Information (FSC.DD/3/09/Corr.1  Turkey said it lacked 
instructions, most likely for administrative reasons.  The 
draft will remain on the working group agenda for the June 3 
meeting. 
 
VD99 Briefing Guidelines 
------------------------ 
 
¶20. (SBU) Turkey, Spain, Ukraine, and Poland joined the 
supporters of the German-proposed guidelines for Vienna 
Document inspection and evaluation briefings 
(FSC.DEL/103/09).  Finland (Kangaste) reported that the paper 
was being reviewed in capital where  there was concern that 
it might be better couched as a chair's paper or a Best 
Practices Guide (which do not require consensus at 56 and are 
not mandatory).  Germany (Schweizer), in response to 
Kangaste, noted the draft decision included the "adopts and 
endorses for publication" language also used to approve BPGs. 
 Russia (Ulyanov), while still awaiting instructions that are 
"likely to be substantial," said the status of the paper was 
a matter of principle.  Chair's statements do not improve the 
implementation of the Vienna Document: "they don't work." 
Instead, a "serious," mandatory decision was needed. 
Schweizer will prepare a revised version as a chair's draft 
decision for the June 10 working group. 
 
SALW Review 
----------- 
 
¶21. (SBU) The chair of the Informal Group of Friends of Small 
Arms and Light Weapons (Schweizer, Germany) circulated a 
prioritized list of FSC SALW-related decisions for the review 
tasked by Ministerial decision 11/08.  Schweizer gave a brief 
overview of the history of SALW work at the OSCE: 
 
 
USOSCE 00000134  005 OF 006 
 
 
- 1999: FSC started to discuss SALW, two years before the UN 
launched its own Program of Action on SALW.  FSC decision 
6/99 recognized that the spread of SALW contributed to armed 
conflicts. 
- 2000: OSCE Document on SALW in 2000 
- 2000-2002: workshops to develop plans for implementation of 
the Document, culminating in FSC decision 15/02 that provided 
expert advice on implementation via projects 
- 2003: Best Practices Guides on SALW 
- 2003-2004: decisions on MANPADS 
- 2004: decisions on end-use certificates and brokering 
- 2006: MANPADS annex to the BPG 
- 2006: illicit air trafficking of SALW decision 
- 2007 Madrid ministerial decision 
- 2007-2009: NGO presentations at FSC 
- 2007-2009: information exchanges on end-use certificates 
and brokering  - 2008: Ministerial decision 11/08 to review 
the OSCE Document on SALW and supplementing decisions 
 
¶22. (SBU) Schweizer said he had drafted an agenda with 
modalities for the special meeting on the SALW review, 
tentatively scheduled for September 22-23.  He was forwarding 
the draft to the FSC Troika and hoped it could be introduced 
at the June 3 FSC with substantive discussion to follow at 
the June 10 meeting.  A decision on the agenda would need to 
be made before the summer recess at the end of July to allow 
enough time for inviting speakers and other arrangements. 
 
 
UNSCR 1540 
---------- 
 
¶23. (SBU) The U.S. (Silberberg) provided an update on further 
work on UNSCR 1540.  The Food-for-Thought paper (FFT) on an 
OSCE 1540 strategy, initially co-sponsored by the U.S., the 
UK, and Italy, now includes Canada and Belgium as additional 
co-sponsors (FSC.DEL/25/09/Corr.2).  Silberberg observed that 
UNSCR 1540 is a global effort, and that the most recent UN 
report on the resolution, published late 2008, called for 
further measures.  The UN 1540 Committee works with several 
regional organizations such as the OAS and OSCE as well as 
others to provide resources.  The OSCE, the regional 
organization most supportive of 1540 objectives, continues to 
work on producing a Best Practices Guide.  Chapters on export 
controls and physical security have been drafted by the U.S. 
and Canada, respectively.  The FFT recommends a regional 
database to facilitate matching pS needs with technical 
assistance programs available in other OSCE countries. 
 
¶24. (SBU) Canada, Italy, Croatia, Ukraine, and Poland 
supported the idea of the OSCE 1540 strategy paper and 
thanked the U.S. for its lead in the effort.  Croatia and 
Poland also expressed their desire to join the list of 
co-sponsors.  France (Simonet) later informed the U.S. that 
it too wants to co-sponsor.  Italy (Negro) noted that 
delegations have had "plenty of time" to study the paper 
since its distribution in March.  It was important for the 
Forum to identify the added value that a regional 
organization can provide to implementation.  He suggested 
that well-tried OSCE instruments be used to further 
implementation, such as transparency mechanisms like 
information exchanges. 
 
 
USOSCE 00000134  006 OF 006 
 
 
¶25. (SBU) While Turkey and Germany offered general support 
for the proposed 1540 strategy, both also noted concerns. 
Turkey (Begec) pointed out the strategy foresees field 
missions hosting regional events and wanted assurances that 
the Secretariat would provide guidance to the field.  Turkey 
offered to work with the U.S. on appropriate language. 
Germany (Schweizer) noted that the FFT proposes OSCE activity 
in anti-terrorism and border controls, which would require 
"proper expertise."  Schweizer later told the U.S. that it 
might be better to keep 1540 work in the FSC. 
 
¶26. (SBU) Russia (Ulyanov) noted that it favored use of the 
OSCE in furthering work on 1540, but it was important to 
"find the most effective and best modalities."  Ulyanov noted 
that the strategy paper raises" a number of issues," and said 
he would hold consultations with the U.S. this week to 
discuss them. 
 
Next Meeting 
------------ 
 
¶27. (SBU) The next FSC meeting will be on June 3 and feature 
a Security Dialogue presentation by Finland on the 
"multinational experiment process."  In the working group, 
Russia plans to return to its proposals for naval CSBMs. 
VanDreal