VZCZCXYZ0006
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #0087/01 0431307
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 121307Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3766
INFO RUEHAS/AMEMBASSY ALGIERS PRIORITY 1070
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID PRIORITY 5192
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY 0717
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 000087 
 
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: AL PARM PREL PTER CWC
SUBJECT: CWC: MEETING WITH ALGERIAN DELEGATION AND  OPCW TO 
DISCUSS THE PROPOSED CHEMICAL TERRORISM  CONFERENCE IN 
ALGIERS 
 
REF: A. THE HAGUE 00048 
     ¶B. ALGIERS 00084 
     ¶C. STATE 01954 
 
This is CWC-11-10 
 
¶1. (U) On February 11, Delrep Landsman met at the 
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical 
Weapons (OPCW) with Algerian DCM Sid Al Branci and 
OPCW Technical Secretariat (TS) officials to 
discuss the proposed chemical terrorism conference 
in Algiers (refs A-C).  TS officials present were 
Office of Special Projects (OSP) Director Krzysztof 
Paturej, OSP Officer Irakli Beridze, and Head of 
the Assistance and Protection Branch (APB) Gennadi 
Lutay; no officials from the International 
Cooperation Branch (ICB) were available to attend. 
 
¶2. (SBU) After Delrep briefed the TS on the concept 
of the conference and shared a draft agenda, the TS 
officials expressed enthusiasm for working with 
Algeria, the U.S. and the EU in ensuring a 
successful event.  Paturej said that the OPCW 
Director-General (DG) had already indicated his 
support for the conference but was unable to commit 
OPCW funding.  Paturej requested that the Office of 
Special Projects serve as the OPCW's lead office on 
this conference since the subject matter most 
closely reflects OSP's mission, but he recognized 
that OSP, with only one officer (Beridze), lacked 
the administrative capacity to organize the 
conference on its own.  APB and ICB are best placed 
to play a role in this regard.  (Del comment: 
Paturej wants to ensure political credit for the 
conference falls to OSP, thus further justifying 
the work of OSP in the field of counter-terrorism.) 
 
¶3. (U) TS officials advised that the three 
sponsoring parties must decide how involved they 
want the OPCW to be in the organization of the 
event.  If the OPCW is to serve as an official 
"sponsor," either the TS would need to allocate 
fumds for such an event in the 2011 budget under 
the International Cooperation and Assistance (ICA) 
Division which Paturej noted could be politically 
difficult or the U.S., EU, and Algeria would need 
to transfer funds to the TS in separate sub-trust 
funds established specifically for the conference. 
In a sponsorship capacity, the TS would need to 
devote significant internal resources to the 
organization of the event, including arranging the 
travel for the participants and speakers. 
Organizing such an event with over 50 participants 
from across Africa would be a substantial 
undertaking and would be impossible to do by May 3- 
4, as initially proposed by the African Center for 
the Study and Research Against Terrorism (CAERT). 
 
¶4. (U) Instead, the TS recommended that the three 
parties simply seek OPCW "support" for the 
conference which would allow the TS to get involved 
substantively, i.e. providing assistance in 
developing the program and identifying speakers, 
and logistically, i.e. the issuance of invitations, 
with minimal internal cost to the TS.  Funds for 
the conference would remain with the three parties, 
and the TS would need not have to account for the 
Qand the TS would need not have to account for the 
event in that year's program and budget.  Any 
administrative costs to the OPCW for helping with 
the event would come out of regular OSP/APB/ICB 
funds.  The TS officials said that in previous 
conferences funded by States Parties, money had 
always been set aside to cover the cost of TS 
 
 
participation, and the TS officials asked that 
consideration be given in this regard, if not from 
the U.S., side then perhaps from the EU. 
 
¶5. (U) The TS recommended that the three parties 
look as an exemplar to the June 2009 international 
seminar on national implementation of 
nonproliferation obligations which was hosted by 
the Bosnian government and supported by the OPCW. 
This conference was funded by the EU and 
administratively organized by Bosnia, but the TS 
issued the invitations and helped devise the 
program.  Participants corresponded directly with 
the Bosnian MFA on registration, travel, and 
sponsorship availability.  The TS officials advised 
that the next step would be for the three parties 
to submit a letter to the DG formally requesting 
the specific type of OPCW involvement sought in the 
conference; without such a letter, the TS cannot 
proceed with any further specifics on the 
conference. 
 
¶6. (U) Regarding the substance of the conference, 
the TS fully agreed with Algeria that while the 
focus should be on Africa, the event should be 
international in scope and include other 
organizations in this field.  The TS offered to use 
its network of contacts to ensure participation 
from key players in the chemical safety and 
security field.  Delrep indicated that the U.S. 
would not object to having participants/speakers 
come from outside Africa but said that U.S. funding 
would be targeted at Africa, a point both the TS 
and Algeria appreciated.  TS officials also thought 
the draft U.S. agenda seemed to focus too much in 
its current form on the "safety" side of the debate 
and not enough on the "security" aspects of 
preventing chemical terrorism.  The TS also 
encouraged the three parties to look at the 2011 
time frame, as invitations would need to be sent 
out at least five months in advance and the OPCW 
would not want the event to compete with other 
programs, such as the Assistex 3 exercise in 
Tunisia in October.  There is also already an OPCW 
event scheduled for May 5 in Chile which the DG 
will participate in. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Del Comment: Del recommends that 
consideration of the "Bosnian model" as a good 
exemplar to follow, and that the USG provide the 
Algerian MFA with draft language to insert into a 
formal letter to the DG, but that the letter come 
from Algeria vice the United States.  We believe 
the letter should be delivered well before July 
when the current DG departs, as the next DG could 
not choose to support this conference.  Del also 
agrees that a 2011 timeframe appears far more 
realistic. It seemed that Branci grasped this 
reality as well.  Finally, Del suggests that U.S. 
Embassy Algiers, the Algerian MFA, and the CAERT 
convene a meeting in Algiers, if that has not taken 
place already.  Even with extensive assistance from 
OPCW, the organizational and logistical burden lies 
in Algeria. 
 
¶8. (U) BEIK SENDS. 
NOLAN