VZCZCXRO6137
PP RUEHSK RUEHSL
DE RUEHVEN #0203/01 2581533
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 151533Z SEP 09
FM USMISSION USOSCE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6586
INFO RUCNCFE/CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/DIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEASWA/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC//OSAE
RUESDT/DTRA-OSES DARMSTADT GE
RHMFISS/CDR USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J5-DDPMA-IN/CAC/DDPMA-E//
RUEAHQA/HQ USAF WASHINGTON DC//XONP//

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 USOSCE 000203 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR VCI/CCA, EUR/RPM 
NSC FOR NILSSON, HAYDEN 
JCS FOR J5 NORWOOD, COL SMITH 
OSD FOR ISA (KEHL, WALLENDER) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KCFE OSCE PARM PREL
SUBJECT: CFE/JCG:15 SEPTEMBER:  12 ALLIES CRITICIZE RUSSIAN 
 
REFUSALS (SBU) 
 
REF: STATE 92639 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  In the JCG on 15 September, Russia claimed 
to welcome elements of the U.S. opening of round statement 
last week and said it was open to U.S. overtures to work in 
the JCG on matters other than those simply technical in 
nature.  Bulgaria noted Russia's refusal of an inspection and 
twelve Allies expressed support for Bulgaria.  Russia then 
reminded States Parties that there has been no response to 
its previous charges of NATO's gross violation of the Treaty. 
 The UK, Germany, The Netherlands, Turkey and the U.S. 
briefly countered these allegations, including by referring 
to previous Allied statements.   End Summary. 
 
Russia Lauds U.S. Opening Statement 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
¶2. (SBU) General Statements.  Russia (Ulyanov) responded to 
the statement made by the U.S. at the Opening of the Fall 
Session, 8 September and noted a number of positive notes in 
it.  He was heartened to see that his U.S. colleagues 
acknowledged the JCG could work to further strengthen the 
Treaty and not merely discuss technical issues.  Overall 
Russia was quite happy with the U.S. position and delighted 
to lend a hand.  Ulyanov looks forward to further suggestions 
on the JCG work. (Comment.  Ulyanov apparently was referring 
to the line in the U.S. statement (Ref A) which stated only, 
"...what we can and must do is sustain the core functions the 
JCG is chartered to perform: oversee Treaty implementation; 
consider disputes; raise compliance issues; resolve 
ambiguities and technical questions; and consider means to 
enhance the viability and effectiveness of the Treaty."  End 
Comment.) 
 
 
Allies Pile on Russia Over Inspection Refusal 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
¶3. (SBU) The Bulgarian Chairman (Iliev), in his national 
capacity, notified state parties that on 8 September 2009 
Bulgaria notified Russia of its intent to conduct a CFE 
inspection IAW Section 4, Para 1&2, POI.  Russia rejected 
this planned inspection citing its statement made on 14 July 
¶2007.  Bulgaria reaffirmed its firm commitment to the CFE 
Treaty and called upon others to do so as well.  Twelve 
Allies (the U.S., UK, France, Czech Republic, Romania, 
Portugal, The Netherlands, Georgia, Italy, Denmark, Turkey, 
Germany and Hungary) intervened in support of Bulgaria. 
Turkey, in addition to supporting Bulgaria, also stated that 
it hoped the JCG could function with other core activities as 
outlined in Article 16 of the Treaty.  Russia did not reply. 
 
Hand in your summer assignments now please... 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
¶4. (SBU) Under the topic of limitations, Russia (Ulyanov), 
reminded states parties that prior to the summer break he had 
raised the issue of "gross violations" of the established 
group levels.  Russia expects its Treaty partners to give 
some explanations and a date as to when this will be 
remedied. 
 
It must be Ground Hog Day 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 
¶5. (SBU) Overall reaction to the Russian statement was barely 
concealed annoyance as Allies had heard this worn Russian 
argument several times during the spring round.  The UK 
(Gare) referred delegates to its comments made before the 
summer break and then reminded Russia that it had asked for 
evidence of these violations in writing and is still waiting 
for this. 
 
¶6. (SBU) The U.S. (Neighbour) stated that the U.S. takes all 
allegations of non-compliance with the CFE Treaty seriously 
and also referred delegates to the U.S. comments made prior 
to the summer break.  He noted that the Russian claim is 
inconsistent with the structure of the Treaty since there is 
no basis under the Treaty or applicable customary 
international law to count the holdings of new NATO members 
from the Eastern group against Western group limits.   The 
 
USOSCE 00000203  002 OF 002 
 
 
group limits are applied to the cumulative holdings of 
specific States Parties that are specified by name in each of 
two separate groups.  States Parties may only change groups 
by an amendment of the Treaty.  The U.S. concluded that the 
discussion merely showed the importance of moving to A/CFE. 
The only way to do that is through the Parallel Actions Plan 
through bilateral talks which are held elsewhere. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Germany (Schweizer) elaborated that the so-called 
criticism for these gross violations is based on basic 
provisions for group states in the Treaty, but that this 
concept has lost significance.  Germany does not share the 
Russian interpretation of the CFE Treaty and has not violated 
the Treaty in any way.  The only possible solution is to do 
everything possible to get A/CFE ratified and implemented so 
that group ceilings don't apply. 
 
¶8. (SBU) The Netherlands (Kleinjan) pointed out there was a 
dichotomy in thinking.  The philosophical view with Germany 
looking forward and the legalistic, Russian view that wants 
to adhere to what is still in force.  Nonetheless, there are 
certain stipulations in the Treaty regarding changing groups 
and this has not been done, therefore the Russian views do 
not hold ground. 
 
¶9. (SBU) In a separate intervention, Germany (Schweizer) 
pointed out that the Russians keep referring to Article 2 in 
the Treaty which refers to "the group of States 
Parties...that signed or acceded to the Treaty of Brussels or 
the Treaty of Washington".  Both are past tense referring to 
a completed action and those states that were already members 
of those Treaties.  The Treaty does not use the future tense 
implying all subsequent members were then part of that group 
of States Parties.  Schweizer then pointed out that Russia 
was merely taking the 1990 group limits and adding numbers of 
states who were part of the Warsaw Pact.  Before the summer 
break Germany asked Russia to explain why the maximum level 
of holdings should be unchanged and applied to the Western 
Group of States Parties.   Real holdings are much lower than 
stipulated numbers.  He asked Russia to acknowledge that the 
29 countries who exchanged information on their current 
holdings that all NATO states are far below in real holdings 
and the group holdings of 1990.  Summing up the group 
holdings is not helpful.  We must move forward with a/CFE. 
Russia (Ulyanov) conceded that many countries are below their 
required levels, however in the flank regions, there are 
objective, realistic violations in the number of battle 
tanks, fighting units, and armoured combat vehicles.  When 
confronted with this violation in numbers, Russia's refusal 
to allow inspections is a" lesser sin". 
 
¶10. (SBU) Turkey (Begec) was heartened to see that Russia and 
Turkey agree about the core functions of the JCG, but he was 
disappointed about the integrity and credibility of this 
forum.  The current CFE Treaty is not in touch with the 
political realities of the day, but that is not due to NATO 
expansion.   The U.S. (Neighbour) intervened that as Germany 
pointed out and Russia acknowledged, holdings are way down 
and he can't imagine where the U.S. is in violation of TLE 
holdings in Europe.  As Russia noted, a number of countries 
exercised their sovereign right and decided to become members 
of NATO.  However the CFE Treaty and the Washington Treaty of 
1949 are wholly separate.  There is no mechanism that ties 
the CFE group structure to Alliance membership or that 
requires changes to the CFE group structure based on changes 
in Alliance membership.  Let's move forward to A/CFE. 
 
¶11.  The next JCG is scheduled for Tuesday, 29 September 
2009, chaired by Bulgaria. 
 
 
FULLER