Currently released so far... 4044 / 251,287
Articles
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/10
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Amsterdam
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Lagos
Mission USNATO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Browse by tag
AF
ASEC
AR
AORC
AJ
AM
AMGT
AU
AE
AGMT
AG
AS
AFIN
APER
ABUD
ATRN
AEMR
ACOA
AEC
AO
AX
AMED
ADCO
AODE
AFFAIRS
AC
AL
ASIG
ABLD
AA
AFU
ASUP
AROC
ATFN
AVERY
CU
CO
CH
CDG
CIA
CACM
CDB
CI
CS
CVIS
CA
CBW
CASC
CD
CV
CMGT
CLINTON
CE
CJAN
CG
CF
CN
CAN
COUNTER
CIS
CM
CONDOLEEZZA
COE
CR
CY
CTM
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
CPAS
CWC
CT
CKGR
CB
CACS
COM
CJUS
CARSON
COUNTERTERRORISM
EG
ECON
ETTC
EFIN
EZ
ETRD
EUN
ELAB
EU
EINV
EAID
EMIN
ENRG
ECPS
EN
ER
ET
ES
EPET
EUC
EI
EAIR
EAGR
EIND
EWWT
ELTN
EREL
ECIN
EFIS
EINT
EC
ENVR
ECA
ELN
EXTERNAL
EINVETC
ENIV
EINN
ENGR
EUR
ESA
ENERG
EK
ELECTIONS
ECUN
EINVEFIN
ECIP
EINDETRD
IV
IR
IS
IZ
IAEA
IN
IT
ICTY
IQ
ICAO
INTERPOL
IPR
INRB
IRAJ
INRA
INRO
IO
IC
ID
IIP
ITPHUM
IWC
ISRAELI
IRAQI
ICRC
IMO
IF
ILC
IEFIN
INTELSAT
IL
IA
IBRD
IMF
ITALY
ITALIAN
KGIC
KDEM
KTIP
KOMC
KNNP
KWBG
KU
KPAL
KGHG
KAWK
KISL
KPAO
KHLS
KSUM
KSPR
KJUS
KCRM
KGCC
KPIN
KDRG
KTFN
KG
KBIO
KHIV
KSCA
KN
KS
KCOR
KZ
KE
KFRD
KIPR
KPKO
KNUC
KMDR
KPLS
KOLY
KUNR
KIRF
KIRC
KACT
KRAD
KCOM
KMCA
KV
KHDP
KVPR
KDEV
KWMN
KTIA
KPRP
KAWC
KCIP
KCFE
KOCI
KTDB
KMRS
KLIG
KBCT
KICC
KGIT
KSTC
KPAK
KNEI
KSEP
KPOA
KFLU
KNUP
KNNPMNUC
KO
KTER
KHUM
KRFD
KBTR
KDDG
KWWMN
KFLO
KSAF
KBTS
KPRV
KMPI
KNPP
KNAR
KWMM
KERG
KFIN
KTBT
KCRS
KRVC
KR
KPWR
KWAC
KMIG
KSEC
KIFR
KDEMAF
MOPS
MARR
MNUC
MX
MASS
MCAP
MO
MIL
MTCRE
ML
MR
MZ
MPOS
MOPPS
MTCR
MAPP
MU
MY
MA
MG
MASC
MCC
MEPP
MK
MTRE
MP
MDC
MAR
MEPI
MRCRE
MI
MT
MQADHAFI
MD
MAPS
MUCN
MASSMNUC
OVIP
OPDC
OPRC
OIIP
OFFICIALS
OSAC
OAS
OEXC
ODIP
OREP
OFDP
OTRA
OSCE
OPIC
OECD
OPCW
OSCI
OIE
OTR
OVP
PARM
PREL
PTER
PHUM
PGOV
PINR
PINS
PREF
PK
PE
PBTS
POGOV
PROP
PINL
PL
POL
PBIO
PSOE
PHSA
PKFK
PO
PGOF
PARMS
PA
PM
PMIL
PTERE
PF
PALESTINIAN
PY
PGGV
PNR
POV
PAK
PAO
PFOR
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PNAT
PROV
PEL
PGOVE
POLINT
PRAM
POLITICS
PEPR
PSI
PINT
PU
POLITICAL
PARTIES
PECON
SOCI
SY
SENV
SA
SP
SNAR
SG
SCUL
SR
STEINBERG
SF
SW
SU
SL
SMIG
SO
SN
SHUM
SZ
SYR
ST
SANC
SC
SAN
SIPRS
SK
SH
SI
UK
UN
US
UNGA
UNSC
UNO
UNMIK
UV
UY
UP
UG
USEU
USUN
UZ
UE
UNESCO
UAE
UNEP
USTR
UNHCR
UNDP
UNHRC
USAID
UNCHS
UNAUS
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 08LONDON3041, LONDON P3 CONSULTATIONS ON UNSCR 1540 COMMITTEE
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #08LONDON3041.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
08LONDON3041 | 2008-12-04 16:04 | 2011-02-04 21:09 | CONFIDENTIAL | Embassy London |
VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB
DE RUEHLO #3041/01 3391653
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 041653Z DEC 08
FM AMEMBASSY LONDON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0584
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 1088
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 2753
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 3325
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 1315
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 0345
C O N F I D E N T I A L LONDON 003041
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/04/2018
TAGS: KNNP MNUC PGOV PREL PARM UK
SUBJECT: LONDON P3 CONSULTATIONS ON UNSCR 1540 COMMITTEE
PRIORITIES
Classified By: Political Counselor Rick Mills for reasons 1.4 b and d
¶1. (C) Summary: During a P3 working discussion hosted in London November 10 by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), both the British and French participants stressed that their countries remain committed to UNSCR 1540 Committee goals, but agreed that the Committee needs to be more focused and more flexible, with an emphasis on capacity building. The P3 representatives agreed during their London meeting that the U.S. will have the lead among the P3 for resolving assistance requests; the UK will have the lead for moving forward the P3,s goals for the Program of Work (POW); and, France will have the lead on funding mechanisms. Further to these discussions, Poloff followed up December 4 with the FCO and confirmed this division of labor among the P3. In a separate meeting, the Head of the Counterproliferation Department at the FCO stated that the UK will "remain engaged" on 1540 issues but suffers from "severe staffing resource constraints." End Summary.
Staunch UK Support( Despite Scant Resources -------------------------------------------
¶2. (C) Paul Arkwright, the Head of the FCO,s Counterproliferation Department told ISN Director Philip Foley and ISN 1540 Coordinator Thomas Wuchte during a November 10 meeting in London that the UK will "remain engaged" on 1540 issues but suffers from "severe staffing resource constraints." Asked about possible UK funding for 1540 Committee outreach, Arkwright responded that HMG would examine funding requests. He noted that "we'll fund things not explicitly linked to 1540, but that further counterproliferation goals." The Committee's "real battle" is implementing the UNSC's 1540 Resolution; as difficult as it was to renew the Resolution, implementation presents an even greater challenge and "we need cooperation now" to ensure implementation, Arkwright underscored.
P3 Priorities for the 1540 Committee( -------------------------------------
¶3. (SBU) Following the meeting with Arkwright, the ISN representatives met with UK and French counterparts at the FCO. During the meeting, both the British and French participants stressed that their countries remain committed to UNSCR 1540 Committee goals, but agreed that the Committee needs to be more focused and more flexible, with an emphasis on capacity building. The ISN representatives noted that they support a work program (POW) for the Committee along the lines of the UK draft that encourages complete assessments and analysis of each State's report(s) and that ensures the establishment of appropriate assistance and coordinating mechanisms. Specifically, the U.S. 1540 Coordinator stressed that the POW should encourage the Committee to:
1) develop useful information such as identification of gaps in laws and controls;
2) outline regional and state-specific assistance priorities for stemming proliferation activity; and
3) assist in coordination of assistance requests so that donors can work together and with recipients to help the latter implement their 1540 obligations. The UK representative stated that, insofar as the UK draft does not address all of these objectives, HMG is prepared to facilitate any new language in the draft POW to reflect the following priorities agreed upon during the P3 meeting: Priority 1: Developing useful information to identify gaps in laws. The mission should be to seek ways to empower the Committee to be more than a &collection box of information.8 A key requirement for the Committee should be to undertake assessments of the reports submitted, identify gaps in States, capacities as well as any pattern of deficiencies among states and across regions, and begin to prioritize steps that States should take to meet their commitments. While these would not be binding recommendations they could help shape States, approaches to implementing the resolution's requirements and focus the Experts. This kind of analysis would be of use to the United States and other donors in assessing where funding is needed and in planning assistance programs. Priority 2: Outlining regional and state-specific assistance priorities for stemming proliferation activity. Given the Committee's work, it is uniquely situated to make assessments regarding regions or states most in need of assistance programs because their legal and regulatory controls are particularly lacking or there is greater proliferation activity in their region or territory. Committee assessments are not binding, but could provide useful input for donors to consider in making assistance decisions. Priority 3: Assisting in the coordination of assistance requests so that donor states can work together to help states implement their 1540 obligations. While donors continue to make their own decisions regarding whether and how to provide assistance to states to implement their obligations under 1540, there is much the Committee can do to help donors coordinate on possible projects and help focus donors on priority gaps. The Committee could convene and chair meetings in which donor countries discuss their on-going assistance, highlight perceived gaps in aid, and share information or assessments regarding assistance.
P3 Agreement on Objectives
--------------------------
¶4. (C) The U.S., UK and France agreed upon the following objectives for the Committee at the November 10 P3 meeting. In a follow up discussion December 4 with Poloff, Stuart Brewer, in the FCO's Counterproliferation Department, reconfirmed the following as reflecting the consensus of the meeting regarding the 1540 Committee's work: -- Support for having a U.S.-UK-France agreed position on the Program of Work (POW). -- Work groups and task forces do not need a chair to meet. In fact, the absence of a chairman makes it easier for work groups and task forces to function, as outlined in a POW nonpaper submitted by the U.S based on UNSCR 1810 which extended the Committee's mandate for three years. -- There should be a discussion by year's end on making better use of funding mechanisms for UNSCR 1810. France will take steps to move this discussion forward. -- P3 members will submit common positions to reflect their unity on the Committee, just as the P3 demonstrated unity on renewal. Unity is essential since the POW will provide the basis for action for the next three years. - Interested countries should be kept in the loop regarding 1540 Committee activities, with more participation by non-UNSC members. France emphasized, and the U.S. and UK agreed, that the group of friends does not include just western countries. -- Experts should not tackle "broad policy" questions but should focus on areas related to their expertise; delegation representatives resolve broad policy questions.
¶5. (C) During the P3 meeting, the U.S. noted that the U.S. has already sent clear instructions on resolving the problems related to responding to assistance requests and posting the six decisions by the Committee on how to facilitate technical assistance. Consequently, the U.S. delegation will take the lead on this issue, with the UK taking up POW issues and France taking up the issue of funding mechanisms. (Note: The FCO's Brewer in his December 4 discussion with Poloff confirmed this division of responsibilities among the P3. End Note.) In regard to the need for streamlining the Committee's work, the P3 participants discussed the example of Iraq submitting a request in April that was never submitted to the Committee. The participants also discussed that NATO may create a 1540 Trust Fund; the NATO Seminar has a panel devoted entirely to UNSCR 1540. In regard to experts, France underscored that France has a good candidate. The participants discussed that China would like to see a balance between P5 and non-P5 members. The U.S. urged both the UK and France to keep POW discussion going despite not having resolved the issue of hiring of new experts.
¶6. (U) This cable was cleared by U.S. 1540 Coordinator, Thomas Wuchte, ISN, 202-736-4275. Visit London's Classified Website: XXXXXXXXXXXX
TUTTLE