VZCZCXYZ0001
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #0021/01 0141651
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 141651Z JAN 10
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3644
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
RHMFISS/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC//OSAC PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 000021 
 
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: DECL: 01/13/2020 
TAGS: PARM PREL OPCW CWC
SUBJECT: CWC: EC CHAIR ON MEETING THE 2012 DEADLINE FOR CW 
DESTRUCTION 
 
REF: A. 09 THE HAGUE 632 
     ¶B. MIKULAK-BEIK EMAIL (01/12/10) 
 
Classified By: Janet E. Beik for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) 
 
This is CWC-02-10. 
 
¶1. (U) This is an action request: see para 9. 
 
¶2. (SBU) SUMMARY:  Delreps called on Executive 
Council (EC) Chairman Ambassador Jorge Lomonaco 
(Mexico) on January 12 in advance of Lomonaco's 
first round of informal consultations on issues 
related to meeting the 2012 deadline for 
destruction of chemical weapons (CW) stockpiles. 
Lomonaco shared his thoughts on how to address the 
issue.  He plans to discuss his ideas with 
Director-General (DG) Pfirter later in the week and 
welcomed feedback from Delreps and colleagues. 
Lomonaco plans to hold two rounds of consultations 
during the remainder of his tenure -- the first on 
January 21 in advance of the February EC session 
(EC-59) and the second sometime in March before the 
April EC session (EC-60) -- before handing over to 
his successor in May.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶3. (SBU) On January 12, Delreps Beik and Granger 
and Embassy Legal Counselor John Kim met with EC 
Chair Lomonaco and his deputy, Blanca Polo, to 
discuss Lomonaco's intentions for his first round 
of consultations (scheduled for January 21) on 
issues related to meeting the 2012 CW destruction 
deadline.  Lomonaco's primary consideration is to 
follow the mandate given to him by the EC during 
its October session (EC-58), but this discussion 
will clearly extend into the next year beyond his 
chairmanship.  He plans to hold a first round of 
consultations and to report to the Council in 
February, and to hold a second round of 
consultations before EC-60 in April, the last 
session he will chair.  Lomonaco intends to begin 
the process in as positive a direction as he can 
before handing the main work to his successor (yet 
to be chosen from the Western European and Others 
Group, WEOG). 
 
¶4. (SBU) Lomonaco shared points he had considered 
to guide discussion during the January 21 meeting. 
He plans to raise the points with DG Pfirter before 
the meeting to get his input and to enlist the 
support of Technical Secretariat (TS) for potential 
requests for papers or reports on specific topics. 
He welcomed U.S. feedback.  Lomonaco divided the 
points into two categories: 
 
a. How and when to initiate discussions by the EC 
(the mandate from EC-58 for the EC Chair's 
consultations) 
- timing for the discussions 
- legal considerations 
- long-term/strategic considerations 
- political considerations 
- the possibility of convening a Special Conference 
 
b. OPCW adjustments post-2012 
- reduction in Verification income 
- redundancy of Inspection personnel 
 
¶5. (C) Under practical considerations (the second 
category), Lomonaco suggests a focus on 
organizational adjustments resulting from the draw- 
down and eventual completion of destruction 
activities, including the redundancy of inspection 
personnel and the reduction in income from 
possessor states for TS verification of 
destruction.  Lomonaco observed that these real and 
pressing considerations could provide a positive 
focus for delegations' energy and discussions 
Qfocus for delegations' energy and discussions 
 
rather than falling into hypothetical debate on 
non-compliance.  He recalled a previous meeting in 
November with U.S. Representative to the EC and 
ISN/CB Executive Director Mikulak on this issue and 
reiterated his personal view that it would be best 
to contain and minimize a political discussion, 
which would inevitably become more contentious the 
longer it went on.  Instead, Lomonaco prefers to 
focus on practical issues first before moving to 
other, more political considerations closer to the 
deadline.  Delrep said the U.S. had not been 
thinking in terms of the budget and personnel 
implications for this consultation but that a 
discussion of the practical organizational impact 
of the deadlines (met or not) could be productive 
and provide useful background for the incoming 
Director-General and his new senior management. 
 
¶6. (C) Referring to the EC's mandate for the 
consultations (Ref A), Lomonaco said that the other 
set of issues relate to how and when to initiate 
discussions by the EC on not meeting the 2012 
deadline.  These issues range from the timing for 
such discussions to legal, strategic and political 
considerations.  Lomonaco also included the 
possibility of a special conference, as suggested 
several times by the Director-General, but he 
agreed that timing and the agenda for such a 
conference would be extremely sensitive and would 
have to be planned carefully.  He noted that there 
will be a political price to pay for missing the 
2012 deadline but predicted that it would be better 
to deal with all affected possessor states together 
rather than only focusing on the U.S. now and 
letting other states "avoid the heat" but reap the 
benefits of any agreed solution. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Lomonaco also shared with Delreps a paper 
he is drafting with thoughts on facilitating the 
work of the Conference of the States Parties (CSP) 
based on his experience from the Second Review 
Conference and the last two CSP sessions.  The 
paper focuses primarily on a more representative 
and transparent composition of small drafting 
groups (draft paper being scanned and sent 
separately to ISN/CB).  Lomonaco plans to introduce 
the paper informally during either EC-59 or EC-60 
to stimulate discussion, without aiming for a 
"noted" report or decision but to provide some 
concrete suggestions for the future.  He asked for 
thoughts and feedback to incorporate into what he 
sees as a contribution to improving the working 
methods of the policy-making organs. 
 
¶8. (SBU) DEL COMMENT:  Lomonaco used similar 
techniques in leading the process for selection of 
the new Director-General, with great effect (Ref 
A).  He has a thoughtful plan but will listen to 
feedback, allowing ventilation of views in an open 
meeting but keeping the process under control. 
With the transition of leadership this summer from 
DG Pfirter to his successor, Ahmet Uzumcu (Turkey), 
Lomonaco's approach of focusing on organizational 
issues seems a productive one that could help the 
OPCW transition, both on the highly toxic deadline 
issue and for the working methods of the political 
bodies.  END COMMENT. 
Qbodies.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶9. (U) ACTION REQUEST:  Del requests feedback on 
Lomonaco's notional points in advance of the 
January 21 meeting, and any response or suggestions 
to his draft paper on improving CSP procedures. 
 
¶10. (U) BEIK SENDS. 
 
LEVIN