Wikileaks - MCCCL

206843 5/13/2009 15:37 09USUNNEWYORK497 USUN New York CONFIDENTIAL VZCZCXYZ0000 RR RUEHWEB DE RUCNDT #0497/01 1331537 ZNY CCCCC ZZH R 131537Z MAY 09 FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK TO RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC RUEKJCS/DOD WASHDC RHEBAAA/DOE WASHDC RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J5/UNMA// RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC RUEKJCS/OSD WASHDC RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6545 RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC INFO RUEHAS/AMEMBASSY ALGIERS 1873 RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA 1625 RUEHTH/AMEMBASSY ATHENS 0007 RUEHBK/AMEMBASSY BANGKOK 0635 RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 1203 RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 1059 RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 1107 RUEHSL/AMEMBASSY BRATISLAVA 0418 RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS 2040 RUEHBM/AMEMBASSY BUCHAREST 0465 RUEHUP/AMEMBASSY BUDAPEST 0390 RUEHBU/AMEMBASSY BUENOS AIRES 0635 RUEHEG/AMEMBASSY CAIRO 1048 RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 2307 RUEHDL/AMEMBASSY DUBLIN 0453 RUEHSB/AMEMBASSY HARARE 0162 RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 2305 RUEHJA/AMEMBASSY JAKARTA 2122 RUEHKL/AMEMBASSY KUALA LUMPUR 0713 RUEHLI/AMEMBASSY LISBON 0601 RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 1391 RUEHLE/AMEMBASSY LUXEMBOURG 0474 RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID 6375 RUEHML/AMEMBASSY MANILA 0304 RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 0772 RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 1321 RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 2607 RUEHNY/AMEMBASSY OSLO 0898 RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA 1164 RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 1294 RUEHPG/AMEMBASSY PRAGUE 0425 RUEHSA/AMEMBASSY PRETORIA 0879 RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 1090 RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 1088 RUEHGP/AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 1996 RUEHSM/AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM 0578 RUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV 2137 RUEHTC/AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE 9116 RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 8715 RUEHVI/AMEMBASSY VIENNA 0553 RUEHWR/AMEMBASSY WARSAW 3256 RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON 2894 RUEHKV/AMEMBASSY KYIV 0035 RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 3699 RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 0776 RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 1836 C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000497

SIPDIS

GENEVA FOR CD DEL, UNVIE FOR IAEA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/11/2019 TAGS: PARM, KNNP, NPT SUBJECT: A/S GOTTEMOELLER,S 5 AND 7 MAY BILATERAL MEETINGS ON THE MARGINS OF THE NPT PREPARATORY COMMITTEE

Classified By: VCI - Assistant Secretary Rose Gottemoeller. Reasons 1. 5 (b) and (d).

1. (SBU) Summary: Assistant Secretary of State for Verification, Compliance and Implementation, Rose Gottemoeller, held several bilateral meetings May 5 and 7 on the margins of the NPT Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) in New York. This cable reports on her meetings with: Brazil's Head of Delegation Luiz Filipe de Macedo Soares, Australia's Assistant Secretary for Arms Control and Counter-proliferation John Sullivan, Canada's Ambassador Marius Grinius, Executive Secretary of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) Tibor Toth, Egypt's Ambassador Maged Abdelaziz, Philippines, Ambassador Libran Cabactulan (President-designate of the 2010 NPT Review Conference), Japan's Ambassador Tarui Sumio, Conference on Disarmament President, Algeria's Ambassador Idriss Jazairy, and the United Kingdom's Ambassador John Duncan. (SBU) Meeting with Brazil's Ambassador Luiz Filipe de Macedo Soares (7 May) 2. (C) A/S Gottemoeller opened the meeting by saying that there was a good story to tell on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) as the United States moved toward ratification. When the Senate first addressed the Treaty in 1999, there were two main concerns which led to the negative vote in the Senate: whether the treaty was verifiable and whether the U.S. nuclear stockpile could be maintained without testing. There have been great strides in both these areas in the last ten years, and the Administration would work closely with the Senate, and particularly with those Senators who were not members then, to ensure the facts were presented clearly. It would be hard work, but it was

achievable. 3. (C) Soares said there was reason for optimism regarding the current PrepCom The Zimbabwean was an able diplomat who had successfully managed adoption of the Durban Convention in one week. Soares noted that the debate thus far was very different from last year, saying contentious issues were not addressed, noting that the U.S. opening statement had not addressed Iran, and Iran itself had not been very aggressive. With the adoption of the RevCon agenda and procedures, the essential work had been done. Now, if the parties could agree to a short statement, that would be helpful, noting that the Chairman would soon circulate a draft document for parties to consider. 4. (C) Responding to A/S Gottemoeller,s question regarding his assessment of the state of play in the Conference on Disarmament (CD), Soares said that his impression was that the CD would adopt a program of work (POW) along the lines of the Algerian Ambassador's proposal. Soares opined that he hadn't heard of any opposition, and Pakistan, in particular, had agreed to it. He wasn't sure about Iran, but felt they wouldn't oppose as it wasn't in their interest. A/S Gottemoeller noted that there was much work to be done in preparing for negotiations, but her impression was everyone could be ready to begin in January. She asked about support within the G 21, to which Soares replied that in their last meeting, none had spoken against the Algerian proposal. In an implied reference to linkages, Soares opined that it was important not to lose sight of the other issues on the CD,s agenda, and that it was indeed possible to work on more than one issue at a time. (SBU) Meeting with Australia,s Assistant Secretary for Arms Control and Counter-proliferation John Sullivan (7 May)

5. (C) A/S Sullivan began the meeting by congratulating the United States on a successful PrepCom and giving credit to the United States for the positive atmosphere. He noted that nearly all delegations seemed to be showing some "restraint" this year, and there weren,t as many personal attacks as in past PrepComs. He added that other delegations had commented to him that even Iran,s statements showed some constraint. 6. (C) A/S Sullivan asked when the P5 1 negotiations with Iran were scheduled to commence. A/S Gottemoeller said that Washington was still working out tactics and timing, but President Obama made it clear the Middle East (including Iran) was a priority for his Administration; the President,s selection of George Mitchell as the Middle East envoy showed his dedication to resolving the Iran issue quickly and diplomatically. A/S Sullivan said that the P5 should give credit to Arab League partners for "reining in" Iran, but had hopes that the United States could lead peaceful Middle East negotiations. He added that the new positive atmosphere of the NPT community could pave the way for a Middle East Nuclear Weapons Free Zone (NWFZ) at the 2010 Review Conference (RevCon). A/S Gottemoeller asked how the Australians foresee the 2010 RevCon unfolding: would it be all Middle East, all the time, or would we focus on other issues? A/S Sullivan said that he believed the Middle East issue must be resolved first before States Party can make headway anywhere else. He noted his experience as the Ambassador to Cyprus, and explained how he saw hatred passing down from generation to generation, and he believed the Middle East was the same way. 7. (C) A/S Gottemoeller raised the issue of Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) negotiations and asked what Australia,s views were on Ambassador Jazairy's non-paper. She said she

was impressed with his ability to get consensus within the NAM so quickly, although Israel must be brought on board before any real action could take place on FMCT negotiations. A/S Sullivan agreed with A/S Gottemoeller,s comments, but said that Australia was not clear on the US plans for a way forward. He asked whether the US plan was to move forward on negotiations without consensus, or was the plan to begin negotiations only after all States agreed to commence negotiations? He said Australia was hesitant to make a decision on a way forward until they had clarification from the United States. A/S Gottemoeller requested Gary Larson, Charge d,Affaires from the US Mission to the Conference on Disarmament (CD), speak to the FMCT issue. He said that the process was progressing but the United States was giving a lot of study on the best way forward. He noted that Australia was only one Presidency away from becoming President of the CD, and that that FMCT negotiations may not begin until their Presidency, because of sensitivities with Israel. A/S Sullivan agreed and noted that his government had meetings scheduled with Israel this week and that FMCT probably would be raised. A/S Sullivan asked whether the United States believed other parties would expect quid-pro-quo verification measures, and Mr. Larson said one challenge for the nuclear weapons states and three non-states Party to the NPT would be handling expectations, including on negative security assurances (NSAs). A/S Sullivan noted that Australia did not have a strong position on NSAs one way or another. 8. (C) A/S Sullivan raised the issue of US ratification of the CTBT and asked what the US position was on process and timelines. A/S Gottemoeller reiterated President Obama,s pledge to ratify at an early date, and noted that while the

US goal was to gain the Senate,s advice and consent, we needed to do it carefully. A/S Sullivan asked how post-START negotiations would be affected by CTBT ratification. A/S Gottemoeller explained that START negotiations would commence earlier than CTBT, but that CTBT hearings would likely follow ratification of the post-START agreement. A/S Sullivan noted that he had been struck by the South Korean delegation,s remarks that US ratification of the CTBT would give the United States a greater "moral authority" and "diplomatic legitimacy" within the nonproliferation community, and hoped that the new Administration,s nonproliferation objectives would encourage or influence other countries (i.e. Iran) fulfill their own nonproliferation obligations. 9. (C) A/S Sullivan then raised the issue of the Russians and his experience with them as Chairman of the Australia Group. He noted that while the Russian mood on post-START was positive for now, the issue with NATO and Georgia could quickly sour negotiations, as it has in other fora. (SBU) Meeting with Canada,s Ambassador Marius Grinius (7 May) 10. (C) Ambassador Grinius noted his disapproval in the Russians trying to link CFE and START issues, and noted the problems with PAROS; he hoped that Russia would reconsider their plans for linking the two issues. A/S Gottemoeller asked Grinius about his take on the mood of the PrepCom. He cited a pleasant meeting he recently had with the Ambassador from Egypt, and compared it to a meeting before the PrepCom in which the Ambassador was "very aggressive." He believed most countries have much higher expectations for a positive PrepCom following the positive remarks by A/S Gottemoeller and President Obama,s statement in the opening remarks. He noted that all States, Article VI obligations have become much more important and he believes there will be renewed

effort from all States to encourage adherence to the Treaty. He also stated that he believed the United States had done a poor job highlighting their successes under Article VI and hoped that the new Administration would have a better public relations story than in the past. 11. (C) Grinius noted that during his trip to Washington last week, he met with John Wolfstahl at the National Security Council (NSC) to discuss CTBT and was encouraged by US plans to submit the Treaty to the Senate. A/S Gottemoeller discussed the recent STRATCOM conference on CTBT and stockpile reliability. She noted that the US voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing did not affect the confidence the United States has in its stockpiles and the overall consensus was that acceding to the CTBT probably would not put the reliability of the US stockpile at risk. 12. (C) Grinius fully supported US efforts to move quickly towards negotiations on FMCT and noted that it was time for the CD to "smoke out" Pakistan, Iran and Israel on their positions. He asked how the United States intended to use the US-India nuclear cooperation agreement to advance nonproliferation objectives. Adam Scheinman from the NSC said it was no longer considered the "US-India Deal" and that the United States was referring to it as the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) - India Cooperation. Grinius did not think this rebranding was fair, saying that most NSG members "gave up" and "joined the bandwagon" rather than fully supporting a nuclear agreement with India. He also noted that before India could enjoy open nuclear trade, it would have to do more in the form of export controls. A/S Gottemoeller agreed, stating that Washington will be much harder on India if they don,t strengthen export controls and nonproliferation measures.

13. (C) Grinius believed the Middle East Nuclear Weapons Free Zone would be a dominant issue at the RevCon. He noted Canada,s pro-Israel policy and that his government was discussing ways to move forward on a NWFZ before the RevCon. Grinius passed a copy of the Canadian paper on institutional reform, and highlighted its recommendation for a three person team, similar to the one in the BWC, consisting of the past, present, and subsequent PrepCom Chairs supported by the UN Office of Disarmament Affairs in Geneva. He noted that having a three person team would allow further consultations in the lead up to the 2010 RevCon and such a team could share the Chairperson,s responsibilities to better facilitate a Conference. 14. (C) A/S Gottemoeller then discussed Article X and asked for Canada,s position on DPRK withdrawal. Grinius said he raised the same question during a meeting on the margins of the UN First Committee, and everyone laughed. He believes that no country wants to address the question. He believes that States Parties need to address the issue in full Plenary because the DPRK fully believes that they are no longer party to the Treaty. He suggested the United States may be in a position to call for a meeting on the DPRK and noted Canada,s support for a formal discussion. A/S Gottemoeller asked whether he believed a smaller meeting with more like-minded states would be preferable, or if it should be a large scale meeting with all delegations. He noted his support for either, although he suggested that a smaller meeting would be easier to manage. Scheinman asked whether Canada believed withdrawal and compliance issues could adequately be dealt with in the NPT process, or if it needed to be elevated to the UN Security Council. Grinius said that Canada believes it should first be handled in the NPT

channels and if no resolution is met, then it should be elevated. (SBU) Meeting with the Executive Secretary of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) Tibor Toth (7 May) 15. (C) Executive Secretary Toth opened the meeting by thanking the United States for its opening statement which was very supportive of the CTBTO. He then asked about the US strategy for gaining the Senate,s advice and consent for the CTBT. A/S Gottemoeller discussed the recent STRATCOM conference on CTBT and stockpile reliability. She further stated that the Administration would ensure they had all the votes necessary before it formally requested the Senate,s advice and consent. 16. (C) Toth then discussed the upcoming conference on verification, which will be held in Vienna from 10-12 June 2009. He explained that the intent of the meeting is to have technical level discussions on verification, and he believed it would be very helpful and fruitful if the United States strongly supported the meeting and sent several technical representatives from government and national laboratories to provide presentations and serve on discussion panels. Toth then asked whether the Secretary would be willing to provide brief remarks at the Article 14 Conference in New York, after the UNGA meeting this fall. He noted that the invitation would be going out soon, and A/S Gottemoeller said she would inquire once she returned to Washington. 17. (C) A/S Gottemoeller asked how the CTBTO was preparing for alleged future DPRK nuclear tests. Toth explained that the International Monitoring System (IMS) was monitoring the area regularly. Toth stated that the IMS performed well after the 2006 DPRK test, and he was confident the IMS would

detect any future test. Toth further stated that the IMS was studying how to better prepare for the DPRK vis-a-vis Iran and other countries. He noted they were looking at additional site installations in the region and more active monitoring, but noted that the CTBTO has a small budget and could only make limited increases. Before concluding the meeting, Toth asked that the United States reconsider its $20M "red ink" policy towards the CTBTO, noting that the Organization will face extensive financial trouble in FY2010. He said there was a $15-20M deficit in the regular budget, which will substantially affect the work of the Agency. A/S Gottemoeller asked if paying the U.S. arrears would solve the CTBTO,s financial problems or was their greater need. Toth replied that even after the U.S. paid in full, the CTBTO would still have a significant shortfall. A/S Gottemoeller said she would convey his concerns to Washington. (SBU) Meeting with Egypt,s Ambassador Maged Abdelaziz (7 May) 18. (C) Abdelaziz began by praising President Obama,s recent speech in Prague and US/Russian efforts to negotiate a follow-on START agreement. He then proceeded to ask about the new Administration,s policy for the Middle East in the context of the NPT. A/S Gottemoeller said that policy still was evolving but that certain contours already should be clear: the President is serious about the Middle East peace process and has appointed a special envoy to that end; there is an evolving policy on Iran, which includes direct diplomacy; and the Administration is advocating the quick commencement of negotiations on a verifiable FMCT. All of these initiatives, she argued, contribute to the kind of atmosphere that will be required to make progress on the 1995 Resolution on the Middle East at the 2010 NPT Review Conference. Abdelaziz said he was encouraged the United

States finally was taking the issue seriously. He acknowledged that the 1995 Resolution indeed was linked to the peace process, but he said this link cannot be abused. Egypt has tried for years to foster peace in the region, and will continue to do so, but it is unwilling to wait fifty more years to see progress in implementing the 1995 Resolution. He said a new approach to Iran would be good, and that Iran cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, but the Iranian nuclear issue also should not prevent progress on implementing the Resolution. The 1995 Resolution was supposed to foster security and stability in the region, and for Cairo the issue relates directly to national security; statements from Israeli,s Prime Minister that his state possesses nuclear weapons do not contribute to security or stability. Abdelaziz said Egypt,s President soon will visit Washington, and he expected all these issues to be raised with President Obama. Egypt needs agreement on the implementation of the 1995 Resolution at the 2010 RevCon, and suggests a package approach to the issue that would include Iran, Israel, and regional security. It further emphasized the need for definite timeframes for implementation. He said if the Middle East Resolution is solved, everything else would fall into place for Egypt, including CTBT and CWC. Abdelaziz acknowledged that the contours of policy elucidated by A/S Gottemoeller address "big picture" goals for the region and the world, but said Egypt would not sacrifice its regional security for global objectives. On FMCT he emphasized the need to deal with existing stocks of fissile material. 19. (C) A/S Gottemoeller asked about Egypt,s view of the interest in nuclear energy throughout the region. Abdelaziz said it was spreading throughout the region, but states were E

concerned about perceived attempts to impose restrictions on civil nuclear technology. He said the idea of responsible vs. irresponsible states is very dangerous, and the best way to handle the growing interest in this technology was to strengthen the IAEA. He respected A/S Gottemoeller,s point that NPT Parties have both rights and responsibilities, but warned against discriminatory approaches to civil nuclear technology. 20. (C) Abdelaziz said positive momentum toward the 2010 RevCon has been established, especially with the decision to negotiate a follow-on START agreement, and the adoption of an agenda for the RevCon. He said the RevCon must produce a final document and progress must be made on the Middle East Resolution, which would help bring all non-parties into the Treaty. A/S Gottemoeller described the ways in which the US-India civil nuclear cooperation agreement had brought India further into the nonproliferation regime. Abdelaziz said if this were true, it would better his disposition toward the agreement. Finally, in an apparent attempt to portray Egypt as a responsible member of the international community, Abdelaziz claimed that Egypt had been offered nuclear scientists, materials and even weapons following the collapse of the Soviet Union, but Egypt had refused all such offers. A/S Gottemoeller asked him how he knew this to be true, to which Abdelaziz replied he was in Moscow at that time and had direct personal knowledge. (SBU) Meeting with Philippines, Ambassador Libran Cabactulan: President-designate of the 2010 NPT Review Conference (7 May) 21. (C) Cabactulan said the speeches at this year,s PrepCom have been inspiring, but it remains to be seen what the ground truths are about states, goals for the RevCon. He

said expectations were high, but cautioned memories are not short, and states will remember the disappointments of 2005. A couple concrete achievements before the RevCon could catapult the Conference to success. He said he was in a listening mode and was ready to "roll-up his sleeves and hit the road." A/S Gottemoeller discussed the expected timetables for US progress on a follow-on START agreement, the nuclear posture review, CTBT, and FMCT. She said all of these new initiatives should set a positive atmosphere for the RevCon and convince the world that the United States is serious about its NPT Article VI commitments; however, she noted it would not only be the United States that had heavy lifting to do. All NPT Parties will have to work hard to make the 2010 RevCon a success. In particular she noted the importance of dealing with the difficult problems of Iran and North Korea. 22. (C) A/S Gottemoeller asked about the 1995 Resolution on the Middle East and what role regional states like the United Arab Emirates might play to help achieve progress on the Resolution in 2010. Cabactulan said it was a very difficult subject that was affected by the peace process and other regional issues, but that progress must be made on the Resolution, or the RevCon could fall apart. He said progress on an FMCT and Israel,s consideration of the CTBT would increase the chances for progress on the Resolution. He was unclear whether a simple reaffirmation of the Resolution would satisfy Egypt, but this was something he would investigate. 23. (C) Cabactulan asked several basic questions on international fuel supply initiatives, expressing confusion about the many different proposals. He also asked how to mitigate concerns that such proposals reinterpret the NPT,s

Article IV. A/S Gottemoeller and Director of Nonproliferation at the NSC Adam Scheinman explained that the diversity of proposals in fact provided greater assurance of fuel supply and that such proposals represented ways of fulfilling the NPT,s Article IV in proliferation-responsible ways. Cabactulan was interested in these responses, but thought more work would need to be done to explain to the international community the benefits of such initiatives. 24. (C) Finally, Cabactulan said his door would always be open for discussion, and suggested he could play a moderating role within the Non-Aligned Movement. (COMMENT: Cabactulan, though perhaps somewhat nave about the particular issues likely to confront him in his role as the President of the NPT Review Conference, clearly was pleased with his appointment and determined to make the RevCon a success. He appeared particularly receptive to consultations with the United States throughout the course of preparations for the RevCon. END COMMENT) (SBU) Meeting with Japan,s CD Ambassador Tarui Sumio (7 May) 25. (C) Ambassador Tarui opened the meeting by observing that everyone was saying this year,s Prepcom was much different. He said that Japan very much welcomed President Obama,s Prague speech, and that the world had high expectations. Tarui cautioned that progress could be achieved in a step-by-step manner, but the world was expecting drastic actions. Tarui worried that if something tangible couldn,t be done quickly, there would be great disappointment. He offered that if negotiations could begin on FMCT, that would constitute a great breakthrough, adding that France had expressed reservations on the Algerian POW, but told him they expected negotiations on FMCT to begin in January. Tarui highlighted FMCT, CTBT, and a follow-on to START as the three

big issues that must be dealt with first. He added that A/S Gottemoeller,s speech was welcomed even by Cuba, and thus we must take advantage of the momentum it generated as soon as possible. Tarui asked if the U.S. was prepared to accept the Algerian proposal, to which A/S Gottemoeller replied affirmatively. Tarui noted that the Pakistani Ambassador had told him very clearly that they were prepared to accept it as well. 26. (C) A/S Gottemoeller said that her list of priorities matched his and that progress on the three issues would -- In addition, U.S. law requires preapproval for demilitarization or destruction of defense articles provided by the USG through a foreign assistance program. For example, the GOU would need to seek approval for modification of the Thompson submachine guns, included in the types of firearms to be converted into collectibles according to the GOU proposal. The U.S. Department of State will then need from the GOU the exact number and type of U.S.-origin weapons, such as the Thompson, that the GOU intends either to destroy or demilitarize. As the original list of 400,000 SA/LW to be destroyed did not include any U.S.-origin weapons, the USG requests clarification from the GOU on whether the list has changed to include U.S.-origin weapons.

End non-paper.

POINT OF CONTACT
----------------
8. (U) Please contact Sho Morimoto (PM/WRA) at (202) 663-0290 or via e-mail for any necessary further background information or points to meet our objectives. Department appreciates Embassy assistance. CLINTON