VZCZCXYZ0005
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHGV #1237/01 3542030
ZNY SSSSS ZZH
O 202030Z DEC 09
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1041
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/CJCS WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/VCJCS WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHEHNSC/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO IMMEDIATE 6100
RHMFISS/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHMFISS/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUESDT/DTRA-OSES DARMSTADT GE IMMEDIATE
RUENAAA/CNO WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHMFISS/DIRSSP WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
INFO RUEHTA/AMEMBASSY ASTANA PRIORITY 3279
RUEHKV/AMEMBASSY KYIV PRIORITY 2289
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY 7496

S E C R E T GENEVA 001237 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR T, VCI AND EUR/PRA 
DOE FOR NNSA/NA-24 
CIA FOR WINPAC 
JCS FOR J5/DDGSA 
SECDEF FOR OSD(P)/STRATCAP 
NAVY FOR CNO-N5JA AND DIRSSP 
AIRFORCE FOR HQ USAF/ASX AND ASXP 
DTRA FOR OP-OS OP-OSA AND DIRECTOR 
NSC FOR LOOK 
DIA FOR LEA 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/19/2019 
TAGS: KACT MARR PARM PREL RS US START
SUBJECT: START FOLLOW-ON NEGOTIATIONS, GENEVA 
(SFO-GVA-VII):  (U) JOINT TREATY TEXT AND DEFINITIONS 
WORKING GROUPS MEETING, DECEMBER 17, 2009 
 
REF: A. GENEVA XXXX (SFO-GVA-VII-134) 
     ¶B. GENEVA XXXX (SFO-GVA-VII-155) 
 
Classified By:  A/S Rose E. Gottemoeller, United States 
START Negotiator.  Reasons:  1.4(b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (U) This is SFO-GVA-VII-158. 
 
¶2.  (U) Meeting Date:  December 17, 2009 
                 Time:  3:30 P.M. - 5:00 P.M. 
              Place:  U.S. Mission, Geneva 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶3.  (S)  The Counting Rules and Definitions Sub-groups met in 
succession to review new and existing language in Articles 
II, III and IV and agreed to send seven terms to the 
Conforming Group ("air base," "deployed launcher of ICBMS," 
"deployed launcher of SLBMs," non-deployed ICBM," 
"non-deployed launcher of ICBMs" "non-deployed launcher of 
SLBMs," and "non-deployed mobile launcher of ICBMs"). 
 
¶4.  (S)  SUBJECT SUMMARY:  Article II:  Warhead Versus 
Armaments for Heavy Bombers; Article III:  What's the 
Attribution Number?; III: When Heavy Bombers Die; Article VII 
and XI Clean Up; Definitions Sent to Conforming; and 
Additional Discussions. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
ARTICLE II:  WARHEAD VERSUS ARAMAMENTS FOR HEAVY BOMBERS 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
 
¶5.  (S)  Mr. Taylor began the Counting Rules portion of this 
meeting of the sub-groups of the Treaty Text and Definitions 
Working Group by handing over a U.S. working paper with new 
text for paragraph 1(b) of Article II, which read: "((500))1 
((1550))2 , for warheads on deployed ICBMs, warheads on 
deployed SLBMs, and nuclear warheads counted for deployed 
heavy bombers in accordance with Article III."  He noted that 
the U.S. was largely accepting the Russian delegation's 
formulation for "counted for."  Adm Kuznetsov pointed out a 
difference between this subparagraph and the language in 
paragraph 2(b) of Article III, where the term "nuclear 
armaments" was used.  After a brief discussion, the sides 
agreed to drop the last five words of paragraph 2 (b) of the 
U.S. proposed Article II, because a reference to Article III 
already existed in the paragraph's chapeau.  The sides agreed 
to send this Article to conforming. 
 
-------------------------------------------- 
ARTICEL III:  WHAT'S THE ATTRIBUTION NUMBER? 
-------------------------------------------- 
 
¶6.  (S) Taylor provided a new version of subparagraph 2 (b) 
of Article III, as follows:  "For each deployed heavy bomber, 
the number of nuclear armaments shall be ((three))1 ((one))2 
. ((If there are no nuclear armaments on a deployed heavy 
bomber, one warhead shall be counted for each deployed heavy 
bomber)) 2." Kuznetsov asserted, as he had in previous 
meetings, that the Heads of Delegation had reached agreement 
on the number of warheads that would be counted (attributed 
 
 
to) each deployed heavy bomber; that number, he said, was 
one.  Taylor repeated that the numbers would remain 
bracketed, as no agreement had been reached. 
 
---------------------------- 
III:  WHEN HEAVY BOMBERS DIE 
---------------------------- 
 
¶7.  (S) Taylor provided a U.S. working paper with a sentence 
to be added to subparagraph 6 (c) of  Article III: 
 
Begin text: 
 
(c) Heavy bombers of a type shall cease to be subject to this 
Treaty when the last heavy bomber equipped for nuclear 
armaments of that type is either eliminated or converted to a 
heavy bomber equipped for non-nuclear armaments in accordance 
with Part Three of the Protocol to this Treaty. 
 
End text. 
 
¶8.  (S) Taylor explained that the purpose of this sentence 
was  similar to the sentence regarding when existing tyes of 
ICBMs "die" under the Treaty, which is when they ceased to be 
considered existing types.  Kuznetsov recognized quickly that 
this provision would mean the bombers were no longer subject 
to inspections under the treaty.  He argued that the treaty 
gave the right to inspect converted bombers to make sure they 
had not been reconverted back to equipped for nuclear 
armaments.  Taylor explained that the Agreed Statement on the 
B-1B Heavy Bomber would provide the necessary inspection 
rights.  Kuznetsov said the phrase "subject to the 
limitations of the Treaty" should be used instead of "subject 
to the treaty" to make clear that the converted bombers would 
still be inspectable.  The sides agreed to reflect the 
Russian position in brackets. 
 
¶9.  (S)  The Qdes agreed to send Article III to conforming. 
Taylor also handed over a new version of paragraph 3 of 
Article IV, to rephrase the limit on non-deployed launchers. 
There was no discussion of this language: 
 
Begin text: 
 
((3.  Each Party shall limit deployed and non-deployed 
launchers of ICBMs and deployed and non-deployed launchers of 
SLBMs so that seven years after entry into force of this 
Treaty and thereafter, the aggregate number of such launchers 
shall not exceed 800.))1 
 
End text. 
 
¶10.  (S)  After initial resistance, the Russian delegation 
agreed to send this Article to conforming. 
 
--------------------------- 
ARTICLE VII AND XI CLEAN UP 
--------------------------- 
 
¶11.  (S) The sides quickly reviewed the status of a 
conforming issue in Article VII on Conversion or Elimination 
about whether the verification activity was "inspections" or 
"inspection activities."  The Russian delegation confirmed 
 
 
its brackets nd insistence on "inspections."  Moving to 
Artice XI on inspections, the U.S. side agreed to drop ts 
bracket in the last sentence of paragraph 2 around the phrase 
"equipped for nuclear armaments" ince it was redundant of 
the term "deployed heav bomber."  The sides agreed to send 
Article XI t conforming. 
 
------------------------------ 
DFINITIONS SENT TO CONFOMING 
----------------------------- 
 
¶12.  (S)  The following terms were set to the Conforming 
Group: 
 
-- The term "air bse" means a facility at which deployed 
heavy bomers are based and their operation is supported. 
-- The term "deployed launcher of ICBMs" means an IBM 
launcher that contains an ICBM and is not a tst launcher, a 
training launcher, or a launcher ocated at a space launch 
facility. 
 
-- The ter "deployed launcher of SLBMs" means an SLBM 
launcher installed on a submarine that has been launched, 
that contains an SLBM, and is not used for testing or 
training. 
 
-- The term "non-deployed ICBM" means an ICBM not contained 
in or on a deployed launcher of ICBMs. 
 
-- The term "non-deployed launcher of ICBMs" means an ICBM 
launcher that does not contain a deployed ICBM, or an ICBM 
launcher that is used for testing or training, or that is 
located at a space launch facility. 
 
-- The term "non-deployed launcher of SLBMs" means an SLBM 
launcher that does not contain a deployed SLBM, or an SLBM 
launcher that is used for testing or training. 
 
-- The term "non-deployed mobile launcher of ICBMs" means a 
mobile launcher of ICBMs that does not contain an ICBM, or a 
mobile test launcher, or a mobile launcher of ICBMs located 
at a space launch facility. 
 
---------------------- 
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS 
---------------------- 
 
¶13.  (S)  Adm Kuznetsov opened the discussion with a new 
proposal for the term warhead. The sides discussed the need 
for this term and whether or not it should be "warhead" or 
"nuclear warhead." 
 
¶14.  (S) The sides continued to discuss using the terms "ICBM 
base" and "basing area" in place of "deployment area" and "re 
stricted area" but did not reach agreement(Ref A).  Mr. 
Siemon proposed more specific limitations in the definitions 
that would specify a limited area of 125,000 sq km for an 
ICBM base and 5 sq km for a basing area. 
 
¶15.  (S)  Col Kamenskiy reported back, after reviewing 
paragraph 2 of Article IV of the INF Treaty following the 
suggestion of the U.S. side (B), that Russia had no concerns 
(SFO-GVA-VII):  (U) JOINT TREATY TEXT AND DEFINITIONS 
WORKING GROUPS MEETING, DECEMBER 17, 2009 
 
about compliance. Taylor and Mr. Fraley explained that the 
concern was that if the Russian proposal for the "new type" 
definition were to be accepted together with the declaration 
of the RS-12M2 as an existing type in Article III, there 
could potentially be a INF violation.  The U.S. side further 
clarified that the purpose of this intervention only was to 
be sure that no problems were created with this new treaty. 
Kuznetsov said the Russian delegation would continue to study 
this issue. 
 
¶16.  (U)  Documents Provided: 
 
- UNITED STATES: 
 
      --U.S. Working Paper, Article II, paragraph 1(b), dated 
December 17, 2009, in English; 
 
      --U.S.Working Paper, Article III, paragraph 2(b), dated 
December 17, 2009, in English; 
 
      --U.S. Working Paper, Article III, paragraph 6(c), 
dated December 17, 2009, in English; 
 
      --U.S. Working Paper, Article IV, paragraph 3, dated 
December 17, 2009, in English. 
 
- RUSSIA: 
 
      -- Russian Federation proposal on the term "warhead", 
17 December 2009; 
 
      -- Russian Federation proposal on the term 
"missile-defense interceptor", 17 December 2009; and 
 
      -- Russian Federation proposal on the term "test heavy 
bomber", 17 December 2009 
 
¶17.  (U)  Participants: 
 
UNITED STATES 
 
Mr. Siemon 
Mr. Taylor 
Mr. Dean 
Dr. Dreicer 
Dr. Fraley 
Ms. Stewart 
Mrs. Zdravecky 
Ms. Gesse (Int) 
 
RUSSIA 
 
ADM Kuznetsov 
Ms. Fuzhenkova 
Col Kamenskiy 
Ms. Melikbekian 
Mr. Pogodin (Int) 
 
¶18.  (U) Gottemoeller sends. 
GRIFFITHS