VZCZCXRO9543
OO RUEHSK
DE RUEHVEN #0137/01 1541454
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 031454Z JUN 09
FM USMISSION USOSCE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6412
INFO RUCNCFE/CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE PRIORITY
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 1734
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/DIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUESDT/DTRA-OSES DARMSTADT GE PRIORITY
RHMFISS/CDR USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J5-DDPMA-IN/CAC/DDPMA-E// PRIORITY
RUEAHQA/HQ USAF WASHINGTON DC//XONP// PRIORITY
RUEADWD/DA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEASWA/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC//OSAE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 USOSCE 000137 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR VCI/CCA, EUR/RPM 
NSC FOR NILSSON, HAYDEN 
JCS FOR J5 NORWOOD, COL SMITH 
OSD FOR ISA (PERENYI) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KCFE OSCE PARM PREL
SUBJECT: CFE/JCG:  JUNE 2:  RUSSIA ACCUSES WESTERN STATES 
OF "GROSSLY VIOLATING" CFE 
 
¶1.  (SBU)  Summary:  At the June 2 JCG plenary, Russia 
inquired whether delegations wished to comment on the Russian 
Aide-Memoire, "Restoring the Viability of the CFE Treaty:  A 
Way Forward," distributed to the JCG on May 5.  The U.S. 
noted that the Aide-Memoire was not up for negotiation in the 
JCG, but would be discussed in the June 3 bilateral meeting. 
Italy, with support from eight other delegations, criticized 
Russia for refusing Italy's request for inspection on May 25. 
 Russia responded by accusing NATO Allies of being in "gross 
violation" of TLE collective ceilings. 
 
¶2. (SBU)  The last plenary meeting of this JCG session will 
be on July 21.  The first plenary of the next JCG session 
will convene on September 8.  No JCG plenaries will take 
place on June 9 (due to the meeting in Berlin) or on June 23 
(due to the Annual Security Review Conference). End summary. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Russia Seeks Reaction to Aide-Memoire; Receives None 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶3.  (SBU)  The Joint Consultative Group (JCG) met on June 2 
under the Chairmanship of Armenia (Papikyan).  Russian Head 
of Arms Control delegation Ulyanov solicited comments from 
delegations regarding its Aide-Memoire, "Restoring the 
Viability of the CFE Treaty:  A Way Forward," which contained 
Russian views on how to restore CFE, distributed to the JCG 
on May 5.  Ulyanov suggested sufficient time had passed for 
review. 
 
¶4. (SBU) The U.S. (Neighbour) noted appreciation for the 
Russian paper, and assured Ulyanov that it has been studied 
very closely; however, the U.S. remains of the view that the 
contents of the Aide-Memoire are not subject to negotiation 
at the JCG.  Substantive U.S. comments on the Aide-Memoire 
would be provided to Russia on June 3 in Geneva during the 
meeting between Assistant Secretary Gottemoeller and Russian 
MFA Director Antonov. 
 
¶5.  (SBU)  Belarus (Krayushkin) recalled that it provided 
views on the Russian Aide-Memoire immediately upon 
distribution of the document.  Krayushkin reminded the JCG 
that Belarus "completely supported" the basic ideas of the 
Aide-Memoire and its views had not changed. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Germany (Schweizer) said it was "more or less in 
line" with the U.S. statement, and noted that the 
Aide-Memoire was still under review in Berlin.  Schweizer 
recognized that some ideas in the memorandum were not new and 
were an attempt to respond to the March 28 NAC statement. 
However, Schweizer noted that this was the first time we had 
seen these ideas in writing.  Germany pointed out that this 
Russian response "has taken time" and, therefore, asked 
Russia for its understanding that review of the Aide-Memoire 
would also require considerable time. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Allies Criticize Most Recent Russian Noncompliance 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶7.  (SBU)  Italy (Negro) criticized Russia for refusal to 
accept an inspection Italy had planned to begin on May 25. 
Italy underscored concern that CFE, which "ensures 
transparency in the OSCE area" could be eroded by only one 
State Party.  Germany, Turkey, France, Romania, Portugal, the 
U.S., the Czech Republic, and the UK supported the Italian 
statement.  Germany (Schweizer) regretted Russia's denial of 
the Italian request and stressed that verification was a 
substantive part of CFE, which all States Parties (except 
one) continue to carry out.  Germany urged Russia to 
"contribute substantively to confidence" in the OSCE region. 
 
¶8.  (SBU)  Turkey (Begec) said Russia's "ongoing suspension 
continues to be a matter of disappointment."  France 
(Simonet) regretted that Russian actions had "rendered 
 
USOSCE 00000137  002 OF 003 
 
 
inoperable some of the most important CFE provisions."  The 
U.S. (Neighbour) noted the importance for all States Parties 
to observe all rights and responsibilities under CFE, 
including raising at the JCG questions related to compliance. 
 Neighbour noted that Russian non-compliance with the Treaty 
makes resolving the CFE impasse and moving forward on A/CFE 
"all the more difficult" (JCG.JOUR/696/Annex 2). 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Russia Accuses (Again) Allies of "Gross Violation" 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶9.  (SBU)  Russia (Ulyanov) said it would abstain from 
reiterating its "well-known position" on CFE inspections and 
instead revisited a heard-before, argument (confusing to most 
delegates in the room) accusing  NATO Allies of exceeding 
TLE.  "Who was in noncompliance," Ulyanov asked?  Not Russia 
for implementing a "legally-based moratorium."  Ulyanov 
questioned how the U.S. and UK delegations, in particular, 
which regularly call for all States Parties to comply with 
all CFE provisions, could point the finger at Russia when, he 
asserted, the "Western group" was in serious violation of 
exceeding flank limits.  (Comment:  It was not immediately 
clear whether Ulyanov meant "Old NATO," or included the 
newest NATO members when he referred to "Western States in 
violation."  End comment.) 
 
¶10.  (SBU)  The U.S. (Neighbour) replied that there is no 
provision for suspension within the CFE Treaty or under 
applicable customary international law, and therefore, 
Russia's "suspension" was not in compliance with the Treaty. 
Russia said it was "well aware of the U.S. legal position," 
but repeated its question:  "Would members of the Western 
group set aside their gross violation of the Treaty and 
comply with Treaty limits?" 
 
¶11.  (SBU)  Turkey (Begec) stressed that Russia was in 
noncompliance not the Allies.  NATO as such does not have a 
"legal personality" in the current CFE Treaty.  Russia 
(Ulyanov) disagreed; the Treaty "clearly refers to the 
Western group."  Germany Schweizer said the JCG was no place 
to discuss "group implementation."  This debate already had 
given rise to Adapted CFE, which provides for national 
ceilings instead of group limitations and addresses Russia's 
concerns.  Germany thought it unreasonable to discuss "past 
rules," and noted the principle of transparency had carried 
through all the revisions of CFE and was at stake.  Schweizer 
emphasized the importance of CFE information exchanges, which 
Russia was not carrying out. 
 
¶12.  (SBU) Russia (Ulyanov) insisted that CFE was about 
quantity, not transparency:  "we have Vienna Document for 
that."  Ulyanov said there were only two possible ways for 
Allies to get out of this situation.  Either put an end to 
their "gross violation" by reducing or limiting holdings, or 
ratify A/CFE.  Citing examples, the U.S. (Neighbour) replied 
that there was a "tremendous amount of headroom" with regard 
to holdings since all States Parties were below permitted 
TLE.  He said he could not understand how Russia could 
complain about holdings by the U.S. or the Allies.  As for 
ratification, Neighbour reaffirmed that the current situation 
made the ability to ratify A/CFE all the more difficult. 
Georgia (Giorgadze) echoed the U.S. statement and added that 
Russian presence at the Gudauta military base and on occupied 
Georgian territory complicated Georgia's ability to ratify 
A/CFE. 
 
¶13.  (SBU)  Russia (Ulyanov) stressed that the Russian 
moratorium was a "consequence" not a cause of the current CFE 
impasse.  Ulyanov believed that some States have sought to 
use arms control or have "sacrificed it" for political 
interests which have nothing to do with CFE. 
 
¶14. (SBU) Comment:  The U.S. and German delegations believe 
Ulyanov was complaining that many Eastern Group of States 
 
USOSCE 00000137  003 OF 003 
 
 
Parties countries have joined NATO without Western Group of 
States Parties numbers being reduced.  Russia's accusations 
were poorly formulated and not placed in the JCG Journal. 
End comment. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Duration of Present JCG Session Set 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶15.  (SBU)  The Chair (Pipykan) noted no objections to 
setting the last plenary meeting of the current session for 
July 21 and the first plenary meeting of the fall session for 
September 8 (JCG.DEC/1/09).  The Chair reminded delegations 
that next week's plenary was cancelled in light of the June 
10 Berlin meeting.  He said that in the absence of 
objections, the June 23 JCG was also cancelled due to the 
Annual Security Review Conference (June 23-24).  The JCG 
indicative schedule of plenary meetings was re-issued to 
reflect schedule changes (JCG/INF/37.08/Rev.4). 
 
- - - - - - - - 
Debut of NATO-T 
- - - - - - - - 
 
¶16.  (SBU)  The first "NATO-T" which replaces the "JCG-T" and 
the "NATO mini-caucus" met prior to the plenary under U.S. 
chairmanship.  Inter alia, the Netherlands (Kleinjan) 
provided a readout of the HLTF "Away Day" held at 
Oberammergau, May 26-28. 
 
- - - - - - - 
Next Meeting 
- - - - - - - 
 
¶17.  (U)  The next JCG Plenary will be on June 16 and chaired 
by Azerbaijan.  The NATO-T, which will continue under U.S. 
chairmanship for the entire month of June, will take place on 
June 15. 
Scott