VZCZCXYZ0004
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #0455/01 2081345
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 271345Z JUL 09
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3109
INFO RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHMFIUU/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC//OSAC PRIORITY

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 000455 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR ISN/CB, VCI/CCA, L/NPV, IO/MPR 
SECDEF FOR OSD/GSA/CN,CP> 
JOINT STAFF FOR DD PMA-A FOR WTC 
COMMERCE FOR BIS (BROWN, DENYER AND CRISTOFARO) 
NSC FOR LUTES 
WINPAC FOR WALTER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CWC: MEETINGS ON THE MARGINS OF THE OPCW 
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL SESSION, JULY 14-17, 2009 (EC-57) 
 
REF: A. THE HAGUE 437 
     ¶B. THE HAGUE 436 
     ¶C. THE HAGUE 452 
     ¶D. THE HAGUE 422 
 
(U) This is CWC-46-09 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) During the Executive Council, July 14-17, 
the U.S. delegation met bilaterally with the 
Chinese, Libyan, Japanese and French delegations to 
discuss a variety of issues.  The Indian delegation 
convened a meeting of interested delegations to 
present its views on industry issues, and U.S. 
Commerce Rep Cristofaro gave a presentation to 
members of the Technical Secretariat (TS) on plant 
site delineation that was well received.  Delreps 
also met with the TS Director for Special Projects, 
the outgoing facilitator for the Open Ended Working 
Group (OEWG) on Terrorism, and the Algerian 
delegation to discuss future activities related to 
terrorism and chemical security. 
 
¶2. (SBU) On July 20, the Western European and 
Others Group (WEOG) met for the final time before 
the summer break to discuss the results of the EC. 
The next WEOG meeting will be in mid-September. 
 
-------------------------------------- 
BILATERAL WITH THE CHINESE DELEGATION 
-------------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (U) At the request of the Chinese delegation, a 
bilateral meeting was held on July 13 to discuss 
issues of mutual concern.  The Chinese delegation 
was led by Xiaoning Wang, Counselor, Arms Control 
and Disarmament Department, Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs, Beijing (former Senior Policy Officer in 
the TS 1996-2003). ISN/CB Director Robert Mikulak 
led the U.S. delegation. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Wang expressed concern about the U.S. 
chemical weapons (CW) destruction schedule that 
projects activity beyond the 2012 extension 
deadline.  He feared a precedent lessening pressure 
for Japan to destroy its abandoned CW in China by 
¶2012.  Mikulak said that the United States 
understands the Chinese concern, but that China 
should recognize that 90% of the U.S. stockpile 
will be destroyed by 2012, that the U.S. is 
committed to trying to accelerate its destruction 
program, and that the U.S. will continue to be 
transparent about its efforts and progress. Wang 
thanked the United States for demonstrating its 
"good will" in relation to the issue. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Wang noted that China had not yet decided 
which candidate to back for Director-General and 
looked forward to the presentations by all the 
candidates later in the week.  Mikulak agreed and 
said the U.S. also had not yet made a choice.  Both 
agreed to continue consultations as the selection 
process progresses. 
 
¶6. (SBU) The Chinese delegation turned to the TS 
proposal for improving Other Chemical Production 
Facilities (OCPF) site selection methodology by 
adding to the A-14 algorithm for information 
available to the TS an R factor based on plant site 
characteristics. (Del note: This data would involve 
declaration of information not specified by the 
Convention.)  While China wants the OCPF selection 
methodology to be improved, it does not want to see 
its declaration burden increased.  Mikulak said 
 
that the United States was also interested in 
improved OCPF selection methodology, but was 
skeptical about the added value of the R factor. 
The United States would want to see evidence that 
the R factor would provide substantial improvement 
before it could consider supporting R factor 
introduction. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Wang said that China was not happy with 
the way the TS was selecting OCPFs for inspection. 
(Del note: The TS introduced in 2008 a geographic 
distribution selection methodology wherein the 
probability of an OCPF plant site being selected 
for inspection is based on a quadratic relationship 
to the number of inspectable OCPF plant sites 
declared by a State Party. China has declared over 
50% of OCPF plant sites declared to the TS. End 
note.) Wang said that China had received 19 of the 
annual maximum of 20 combined Schedule 3 and OCPF 
inspections during 2008.  These inspections were 
not distributed throughout China, but were 
concentrated in a few provinces creating political 
issues, he said.  Mikulak acknowledged that the new 
selection methodology would be expected to result 
in increases in numbers of OCPF inspections in 
those States Parties with the greatest number of 
OCPFs, e.g., the United States and China. 
 
¶8. (SBU) The U.S. delegation recalled the recent 
Chinese/Japanese visit to U.S destruction 
facilities where they observed the U.S emphasis on 
safe operational procedures and offered to help 
develop safe operating procedures for ACW 
destruction in China.  Wang said China wanted to 
follow up on the offer. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Mikulak concluded by recalling the Chinese 
invitation for consultations on implementation and 
compliance issues in Beijing. He said that the 
issue was being worked in Washington and that a 
positive response would be forthcoming soon. 
 
------- 
LIBYA 
------- 
 
¶10. (U) At the request of the U.S. delegation, a 
bilateral meeting was held on July 17.  Mohadeb 
Gheton represented the Libyan delegation.  Delreps 
Weekman and Smith represented the U.S. 
 
¶11. (SBU) Gheton explained that his government is 
preparing a national paper, which will likely 
include information on the sandbag wall, and may 
include a request to extend their destruction 
deadline.  He was not certain if the issues would 
be covered in one national paper or two separate 
documents.  He indicated that the TS visited Libya 
earlier in July and is working with the Libyan 
delegation to complete the paper.  Gheton said the 
national paper would be the main topic of 
discussion for an upcoming visit to The Hague 
within the next few weeks.  Gheton agreed to 
coordinate with the U.S. Del during the visit and 
to share the document(s) as they are drafted. 
 
------------------ 
INDIA ON INDUSTRY 
------------------ 
 
¶12. (SBU) Following the EC session on July 16, the 
Indian delegation hosted an open briefing on four 
different industry-related issues: sequential 
inspections, enhancement of declarations for other 
chemical production facilities (OCPFs), the OPCW 
Analytical Database (OCAD) and the Technical 
Secretariat's recent paper on Schedule 3 
 
inspections.  As a light filler, they also made a 
brief presentation on the methodology that they had 
developed to compare the seven candidates, though 
they refrained from putting names into the 
presented results. (Del Note: All presentations 
were sent by email to ISN/CB, VCI/CCA and Commerce. 
End Note.) 
 
¶13. (SBU) Although India's motivation for convening 
the meeting was not clear, it was part of a marked 
new focus on industry issues, which also featured 
prominently in India's national statement during 
the General Debate.  While the Indian delegation 
had billed the meeting as a chance to discuss 
issues, they clearly were only interested in 
presenting their views ) most of which they had 
shared previously ) without engaging in any real 
dialogue. Even so, many delegations appreciated the 
gesture and suggested holding similar open sessions 
during future Industry Cluster meetings or on the 
margins of future EC sessions to encourage free 
discussion of views and to facilitate resolution of 
outstanding industry issues. 
 
-------------------------------------------- 
U.S. PRESENTATION ON PLANT SITE DELINEATION 
-------------------------------------------- 
 
¶14. (U) On July 13, Commerce Rep Cristofaro gave a 
presentation to ten TS staff members from the 
Industry Verification (IVB) and Policy Review (PRB) 
branches ) including IVB Head Bill Kane and PRB 
Head Stian Holen ) on U.S. views and methodology 
regarding industrial plant site delineation. 
Following the comprehensive presentation, Kane and 
others noted that the U.S. approach is much more 
complex than that of most member states; while 
there were many questions for Cristofaro, TS 
attendees appreciated the thorough explanation of 
the U.S. approach. Delrep later heard from TS staff 
that they plan to invite other member states with 
different delineation approaches also to make 
similar presentation and even are considering 
hosting a roundtable discussion on the topic in the 
future.  (Del Note: The TS has since agreed to 
invite Cristofaro or another Commerce rep to 
present the briefing to Inspection Team Leaders on 
the margins of the next Industry Cluster meetings, 
currently scheduled for September 8. End Note.) 
 
-------------------------------- 
JAPAN ON NORTH KOREA SANCTIONS 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶15. (SBU) Delrep Gibbs met with the Japanese 
delegation to briefly discuss the question the 
Japanese had raised on the potential seizure of 
North Korean chemical weapons under recent UN 
Security Council Resolution 1874 and the 
obligations of CWC States Parties (Ref D).  Gibbs 
pointed out that paragraph 14 of the UNSCR 
authorized States to "seize and dispose of" certain 
weapons including but not limited to chemical 
weapons "in a manner that is not inconsistent with 
their obligations" under the CWC.  In the event of 
seizure, this would raise the same issues present 
in the case of the Iraqi CW recoveries.  After a 
short survey of the questions that would result 
from a seizure, Director-General Masanori Nishi 
expressed his thanks that the discussion had taken 
place as he had not considered such complications. 
Qplace as he had not considered such complications. 
He asked if the US was drafting a paper on the 
subject or would raise it in the next EC.  Gibbs 
pointed out that the issue had been addressed in 
the just-concluded EC Report under Any Other 
Business and that, at this early stage, nothing 
more formal than consultations was appropriate. 
 
 
 
------------------------------------ 
BILATERAL WITH THE FRENCH DELEGATION 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶16. (U) The U.S. and French delegations held a 
bilateral meeting on July 16.  Robert Mikulak led 
the U.S. delegation. Jacques Raharinaivo led the 
French delegation and introduced the new French 
delegate, Raja Rabia. 
 
¶17. (SBU) Raharinaivo expressed concern that both 
the UK and Germany have nominated candidates for 
Director-General and noted a lack of discussion 
between the two governments.  He said that there 
had not been any substantive EU discussions on 
support of a particular candidate.  Raharinaivo 
expressed a preference for the German candidate. 
Mikulak agreed that the UK and German governments 
needed to talk, and that by late August, serious 
discussions would need to start to learn 
preferences for candidates.  He also raised the 
other senior positions including the Director of 
the Inspectorate that would also need strong 
candidates in the months ahead. 
 
¶18. (SBU) Mikulak and Raharinaivo commented on 
South Africa's reaction to the EC visit to the 
U.S., noting that their inclusion on the visit 
allowed for far more understanding and awareness of 
the complexity of the destruction task.  Mikulak 
noted that there would need to be both strategic 
and specific discussion of issues, and welcomed the 
Brazilian national statement that looked to the EC 
Chair to lead future discussion on the deadline 
issue. 
 
¶19. (SBU) Raharinaivo raised the issue of OPCW 
agreements with designated National Laboratories 
and said the French government could not support 
the OPCW's provision that National Laboratories 
would share data directly with the OPCW without 
disclosing it to the national government.  He 
indicated that this position was shared by other 
European delegations (Swiss).  One of the French 
laboratories is a military facility and the 
military personnel are under strict orders to keep 
their leadership informed of their daily 
activities; this is in direct conflict with the 
OPCW approach. Mikulak noted that his office had 
not been involved in the OPCW's negotiations with 
U.S. laboratories but would look into the matter. 
He agreed to support French reservations during the 
EC debate on the issue (Ref C). 
 
----------------------------- 
COUNTER-TERRORISM DISCUSSIONS 
----------------------------- 
 
¶20. (U) Following the bilateral meeting with the 
French delegation on July 16, Delreps Weekman and 
Smith met with Annie-Claire Mari in her capacity as 
former facilitator of the Open Ended Working Group 
(OEWG) on Terrorism to discuss her projections of 
the role of this group.  Mari expressed enthusiasm 
at the attention to the topic of terrorism during 
this EC session and noted that her national paper 
was well received thus far.  She stated a desire 
that this might serve as a launching pad for the 
OEWG to continue its activities under the new 
facilitator, Mike Byers (Australia).  Delrep 
inquired whether EU funding might be available to 
support a conference planned in Algeria on chemical 
security. Mari said there is a line item in the 
Qsecurity. Mari said there is a line item in the 
budget for a seminar and that the budget will 
likely be validated by the end of July.  She 
 
believed the allocation was for approximately 
70,000 Euros. 
 
¶21. (SBU) Delrep Weekman met with Kryzsztof 
Paturej, Director of the OPCW Office of Special 
Projects, on July 16 to discuss future activities. 
Paturej asserted that all terrorism and 
security/safety related conferences should be 
coordinated through his office.  He shared a letter 
from Saudi Arabia committing to fund approximately 
15,000 Euros to support chemical safety and 
security projects.  He opined that the OEWG on 
Terrorism should use the French paper as a 
framework and alluded to playing a role in drafting 
the paper.  He encouraged stronger support from the 
U.S. on OPCW's efforts in this area and outlined 
plans for a nonproliferation seminar that he would 
like to organize in 2010 which would include 
invitations to Senator Lugar and President Bush, 
Sr. to open the ceremony. 
 
¶22. (SBU) At the request of Ambassador Benchaa Dani 
(Algeria), a bilateral meeting was held on July 16. 
Delreps Smith and Weekman represented the U.S., 
while Said Moussi joined his Ambassador for 
Algeria.    Dani delivered Algiers reaction to the 
draft agenda for the proposed international 
conference in Algiers on chemical terrorism that 
would focus on chemical safety and security.  Dani 
reported that Algiers supports the draft agenda and 
that the African Center for the Study and Research 
Against Terrorism will host the conference.  Dani 
reported that Algiers would like to host the 
conference in the fall of 2009.  Delrep suggested 
that the first quarter of 2010 might be better to 
permit more time to plan the conference.  Both 
delegations agreed that the next step should be a 
formal cable from the U.S. officially proposing the 
agenda and that Algiers host the conference in 
early 2010.  Dani agreed to check with the Swedish 
government (current EU President) and the Spanish 
(incoming EU President) on the potential for EU 
funding. 
 
¶23. (SBU) Delrep later briefed Director of Special 
Projects Paturej and the new facilitator for the 
Open Ended Working Group on Terrorism on the 
conversation with Dani. 
 
--------------------- 
WEOG VIEWS OF THE EC 
--------------------- 
 
¶24. (SBU) On July 21, Ruth Surkau (Germany) chaired 
the final meeting of the Western European and 
Others Group (WEOG) before the summer break. 
Delegations generally shared her views that the 
Executive Council session had gone smoothly under a 
strong new chair, the DG candidates' presentations 
had gone well, GRULAC had played a helpful role, 
and that a large workload awaits delegations in 
September.  The Dutch Ambassador quoted Secretary 
Khodakov as saying that the DG candidate 
presentations had set a precedent.  Delegations 
shared positive reviews of the process, but few 
views on specific candidates, not surprising as 
WEOG has five of the seven.  However, the 
Netherlands delegation opined that the performance 
of the Indonesian candidate was "disappointing." 
The UK delegation was pleased with the outcome on 
the Portreath facility and the TS guidelines on 
converted production facilities after ten years. 
Both the UK and Germany expressed concern over the 
QBoth the UK and Germany expressed concern over the 
tendency to add language into the final EC report 
that had not been discussed during the session and 
cautioned that this should be observed closely in 
the future. 
 
 
¶25. (SBU) Several delegations commented that the 
discussion on the U.S. projections for completion 
of CW destruction would remain an active discussion 
topic for the EC and likely move into the forefront 
following the DG selection.  Regarding the issue of 
U.S. and UK destruction of RCW in Iraq, Delrep 
noted that the language adopted under Any Other 
Business had been read by Russia as looking back 
into the historical record in Iraq, rather than 
forward for future similar situations.  Delrep also 
thanked the German delegation for proposing 
language for future items such as the U.S. 
technical changes to facility agreements that do 
not require Council action, language that should be 
a useful new precedent. 
 
¶26. (U) BEIK SENDS. 
GALLAGHER