VZCZCXRO4277
OO RUEHCHI RUEHCN RUEHDT RUEHHM
DE RUEHC #1350/01 3030657
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 281834Z OCT 09
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
INFO RHMFISS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 STATE 111350 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
C O R R E C T E D  C O P Y  (SENSITIVE CAPTION ADDED) 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL ARF EAID MARR
SUBJECT: (U) ARF ADVANCES DISASTER RELIEF INITIATIVES AT ANNUAL 
RELIEF CONFERENCE, SEPT 16-18 
 
REF: STATE 86139 
 
STATE 00111350  001.2 OF 003 
 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1. (U) The ASEAN Regional Forum's (ARF) 27 members, along with other 
international representatives, advanced a number of proposals for 
disaster relief cooperation at the annual ARF Inter-Sessional Meeting 
on Disaster Relief (ISM-DR) in Honolulu, Hawaii, September 16-18. 
Working in small discussion groups, ARF advanced these initiatives 
which were designed to increase the interoperability of ARF civilian 
and military agencies for major, multinational relief operations. 
Focus areas included developing a common text for temporary, disaster 
relief Status of Forces Arrangements (SOFAs), planning for ARF's next 
disaster relief exercise in Indonesia, improving coordination with 
other regional organizations, advancing ARF's disaster relief work 
plan, and revising ARF's Strategic Guidance for disaster relief 
document.  Co-chaired by the United States and Thailand, the meeting 
did see very real progress in a number of areas. 
 
-------------------- 
CONFERENCE STRUCTURE 
-------------------- 
 
¶2. (U) Co-chaired by the United States and Thailand, delegates from 
21 of ARF's 27 countries attended the meeting along with a few 
regional and international non-governmental organizations.  The 
annual Inter-Sessional Meeting on Disaster Relief (ISM-DR) serves as 
ARF's policy exchange and working group on DR issues.  Delegates 
included diplomatic officials, civilian national and international 
relief experts, military planners and policy experts, and NGO 
representatives.  A copy of the Co-Chair's report of the meeting can 
be found by visiting the State Dept intranet site for ARF matters at 
http://eap.state.gov/EAPOffices/RSP/ARF.cfm. 
 
¶3. (U) DAY ONE:  The ISM-DR opened up with remarks from the two 
co-chairs, EAP Regional and Security Policy Director Henry Jardine 
and Thai Deputy Director-General of ASEAN Affairs Manasvis 
Srisodapal.  USPACOM Center of Excellence for Disaster Management and 
Humanitarian Affairs Director LTGEN (Ret) John Goodman delivered a 
keynote address highlighting the key considerations for 
civil-military coordination in disaster relief operations involving 
foreign military forces. 
 
¶4. (U) DAY TWO:  Delegates worked in five Discussion Groups focusing 
on particular disaster relief initiative on ARF's agenda.  These 
Discussion Groups included:  1) planning for the next ARF disaster 
relief exercise, 2) reviewing the text of ARF's "Model Arrangement" 
concept, 3) advancing work on ARF's Disaster Relief Work Plan, 4) 
improving coordination of disaster relief capacity-building efforts 
undertaken by regional and international organizations, and 5) 
reviewing ARF's Strategic Guidance document for disaster relief. 
Facilitators from across ARF's membership led each of these sessions 
(see paras 6-10). 
 
¶5. (U) DAY THREE:  Returning to a plenary format, officials from four 
ARF countries (Japan, the Philippines, Thailand, and Bangladesh) and 
representatives from two regional fora (the Multinational Planning 
Augmentation Team (MPAT) and UN's Office of the Coordinator for 
Humanitarian Affairs' annual Asia-Pacific Conference on Military 
Assistance to Disaster Relief Operations (UNOCHA)) delivered 
presentations offering views on the civil-military coordination 
challenges of disaster relief operations.  In the afternoon session, 
the discussion groups' facilitators presented their group's outcomes 
to the plenary, discussed areas of agreement and disagreement, and 
recommended next steps on each of these initiatives. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
STATUS OF ONGOING ARF DISASTER RELIEF INITIATIVES 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
 
¶6. (SBU) EXERCISE PLANNING:  Indonesia and Japan, as co-chairs for 
the next ARF disaster relief exercise, facilitated this Discussion 
Group and distributed a draft concept paper for their planned, March 
2011 exercise.  The concept paper included notional plans for a more 
dynamic and comprehensive exercise compared to the May 2009 ARF 
exercise in the Philippines.  Indonesia and Japan sought input from 
ARF members on the paper, including from the U.S. and Philippines 
co-chairs of the previous exercise. The Discussion Group also 
discussed at length suggestions from ARF members on the exercise 
 
STATE 00111350  002.2 OF 003 
 
 
structure, in part based on lessons learned from the May Philippines 
exercise.  These suggestions centered on: 
 
--the need to test the full range of strategic, operational, and 
tactical protocols involved in civil-military disaster relief 
operations 
--increasing the role of civilian agencies during the planning and 
execution of the exercise 
--including decision-makers during planning conferences and 
incorporating lessons learned from the May 2009 exercise 
--ensuring site surveys remain an integral part of the planning 
process 
 
¶7. (SBU) MODEL ARRANGEMENT:  PM/SNA's Security Negotiations and 
Agreements Senior Advisor Kurt Amend facilitated a session of 30-45 
officials from a variety of ARF countries.  The Discussion Group 
conducted an extensive, line-by-line review of the ARF Voluntary 
Model Arrangement for the Use of Military and Civil Defense Assets 
(MCDA) in Disaster Relief text.  The Model Arrangement text will 
eventually serve as a common, regional starting point for countries 
to pursue, on a bilateral basis, temporary Status of Forces 
Agreements (SOFAs) for disaster relief operations involving foreign 
military forces.  As the sponsor for the proposal, the United States 
will circulate a revised version of the text reflecting the 
Discussion Group's edits, seek further input from ARF members, and 
continue to advance a revised text through the ARF political process 
for final endorsement by ARF ministers in the Summer of 2010.  The 
Discussion Group also recommended the Model Arrangement's testing at 
the planned 2011 exercise. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Participants identified areas of broad agreement on the ARF 
Voluntary "Model Arrangement" for the Use of Military and Civil 
Defense Assets (MCDA) in Disaster Relief such as: 
 
--Importance of the Model Arrangement as a mechanism for reducing 
response time 
--Respect for sovereignty of Affected and Assisting States 
--Mutually agreed nature of MCDA activities. 
--Peaceful nature of MCDA activities. 
--General applicability of Oslo Guidelines (with some concerns 
expressed). 
--Importance of uniform terminology and common understanding. 
 
¶9. (SBU) However, a number of areas remain sensitive for some ARF 
countries including: 
 
--Scope of applicability (natural vs. manmade disasters) 
--Command & control over MCDA operations 
--Criminal jurisdiction (shared vs. exclusive), custody, detention, 
and dispute resolution 
--Individual member-nation concerns (e.g., quarantine, licensing, 
sovereign immunity of vessels & aircraft, limitations due to internal 
laws) 
--Carrying of arms by MCDA members 
--Adjudication and resolution of claims 
 
¶10. (SBU) STRATEGIC GUIDANCE FOR HADR:  Australian Wing Commander 
Antony Martin facilitated a discussion on the ARF Strategic Guidance 
for Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) text. 
Thailand was particularly interested in the Strategic Guidance's 
timeline for assisting ARF nations, such as how long after an event 
assistance should shift from search and rescue to emergency relief to 
recovery efforts.  Participants agreed to provide further written 
comments by the end of October and move the document through ARF's 
political process for Ministerial endorsement in Summer 2010.  Key 
changes to the document include: 
 
--Removing the Virtual Task Force Model to keep the document at the 
strategic level 
--Updating terminology to remain consistent with other 
internationally recognized documents and guidelines 
--Reflecting recent initiatives such as the ARF Model Arrangement and 
ARF Disaster Relief Mapping Service initiatives. 
 
¶11. (SBU) DISASTER RELIEF WORK PLAN:  Thailand and the ASEAN 
Secretariat co-facilitated a session designed to jumpstart ARF's 
disaster relief Work Plan.  Progress on the Work Plan has been slow 
due to a lack of interest from ARF countries to serve as the ASEAN 
and non-ASEAN Lead Countries in ARF's three priority areas:  disaster 
risk reduction, emergency response, and improving regional 
coordination of capacity-building efforts.  ASEAN announced it would 
nominate three ASEAN countries to serve in that role following a 
late- October ASEAN business meeting.  Australia agreed to lead 
disaster risk reduction efforts.  Other recommendations included 
refining the Work Plan's structure, monitoring its progress, and 
modifications to a few existing projects.  The Work Plan will be 
revised accordingly and project ideas can be submitted by ARF 
countries. 
 
¶12. (SBU) COORDINATION OF REGIONAL EFFORTS:  This Discussion Group, 
 
STATE 00111350  003.2 OF 003 
 
 
facilitated by an Australian disaster relief official, shared 
information regarding the core strategies and activities of 
Asia-Pacific regional and international organizations involved in 
disaster relief capacity-building efforts.  The Discussion Group 
gained consensus on pursuing an active role for ARF in working with 
these regional organizations like Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation 
(APEC), South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the 
Trilateral Strategic Dialogue (TSD), and other fora (including ASEAN 
itself).  ARF's efforts could improve regional coordination to avoid 
duplication of effort and to identify these institutions' strengths 
and weakness in this crowded field of cooperation. 
 
¶13. (U) POC: POC for this report and further questions/comments on 
ARF's work is EAP/RSP Kevin Sheives (sheiveskw@state.gov, 
202-647-1217).  You can also visit the State Department Intranet Site 
for ARF at http://eap.state.gov/EAPOffices/RSP/ARF.cfm. 
 
¶14. (SBU) COMMENT:  Disaster relief continues to serve as ARF's most 
successful area of work.  ARF leverages its inclusive membership, 
involvement of military forces, and growing expertise to build 
interoperability among ARF members for major, multinational relief 
operations in response to regional disasters.      The approach of 
working in small groups on specific issues was helpful for moving 
discussions forward.  This format was a first for ARF which prefers a 
slower, more inclusive process for discussion.  In a positive sign of 
ARF's increasing relevance for regional disaster management, progress 
was made on defining areas of general consensus on the Model 
Agreement, next steps for the training exercise in Indonesia, and for 
coordination of regional efforts. 
CLINTON