To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.
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. #07MOSCOW402.
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. #07MOSCOW402.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
07MOSCOW402 | 2007-01-31 14:22 | 2011-08-30 01:44 | SECRET | Embassy Moscow |
VZCZCXRO3677 OO RUEHDBU DE RUEHMO #0402/01 0311422 ZNY SSSSS ZZH O 311422Z JAN 07 FM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7040 INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE RUEHXD/MOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC RHMFISS/CDR USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 03 MOSCOW 000402 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/31/2017 TAGS: PARM MCAP PREL ETTC RS SUBJECT: RUSSIANS DEFEND ARMS TRANSFERS TO IRAN, SYRIA REF: A. MOSCOW 275 ¶B. STATE 7445 Classified By: Minister-Counselor for Political Affairs Alice G. Wells. Reasons 1.4 (B/D). ¶1. (S) SUMMARY: Visiting Moscow January 18-19, EUR/PRA Director Anita Friedt told Foreign Ministry officials that increased Russian transparency on arms transfers to sensitive countries could lessen the possibility of sanctions under U.S. law. Washington was willing to work with the Russian side, but Moscow would have to share more information about prospective transfers to address U.S. concerns. MFA officials emphasized that the sanctions' effect was more political than practical. The officials: -- Defended the transfer of the Tor-M1 air defense system to Iran as permissible under existing national law and international agreements; -- Explained that the vehicle-mounted Strelets system under consideration for Syria had been built exclusively for export and could not be modified; -- Requested additional information on the justification for sanctions, noting that they were unable to investigate allegations against the sanctioned individual Aleksandr Safanov; and -- Asked that the U.S. continue to consult with Russia on ballistic missile defense deployments in Europe. In separate meetings, defense analysts noted that it would be difficult for the sanctioned entities, particularly Rosoboronexport, to respond to U.S. requests for clarification. One analyst asserted that Russia's growing arms export industry had become increasingly profitable while undermining U.S. interests -- both were goals that appealed to a rising number of GOR and Kremlin officials. END SUMMARY. . --------------------------------------------- ----- EFFECTS OF SANCTIONS MORE POLITICAL THAN PRACTICAL --------------------------------------------- ----- ¶2. (S) Foreign Ministry officials decried the December 28 imposition of U.S. sanctions against four Russian entities and asserted that the arms transfers to Iran and Syria, which had triggered the sanctions, conformed with Russian law and export control regulations, as well as Moscow's international obligations. Igor Neverov, Director of the North America Department, said Russia viewed the sanctions as a "political" action done more for U.S. domestic consumption. There was little practical effect upon the Russian companies' operations and, in fact, the sanctions against Rosoboronexport might actually undermine U.S. companies that seek cooperation with that firm. Neverov noted that the sanctions would make it more difficult for the Foreign Ministry to tamp down rising anti-U.S. sentiment and calls for retaliatory action against the U.S. He added, however, that the Ministry would continue to argue within the GOR interagency community to avoid blowing the issue out of proportion. ¶3. (S) Sergey Petlyakov, Chief of the Foreign Ministry's Arms Technology and Transfer Policy Section, reiterated the GOR policy that, in addition to legal constraints, Russia's arms transfer decisions were guided by an analysis of the weapons system's effects upon regional stability. He added that Moscow shared U.S. concerns about man-portable systems (MANPADS) falling into the hands of terrorists, which was the reason behind Russia's investigation last summer into the diversion of Russian-origin anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) from Syria to Hizballah. The GOR had tightened its export control regime as a result of the ATGM case; among other measures, Russia will incorporate provisions for stricter end-use checks in future arms transfer contracts. ¶4. (S) In the case of the Tor-M1 transfer to Iran, Petlyakov said the system was a tactical-level system that could be used only for self-defense and would not destabilize the region. He acknowledged that the S-300 system, whose transfer to Iran was still under review, was more advanced but still permissible under Russian law and international regimes. Instability in Iran was of great concern to Russia because of that country's geographic proximity, Petlyakov continued, and was a major factor in Russia's security calculations when transferring weapons systems. ¶5. (S) Svyatoslav Tsukanov, Chief of the Ministry's Export MOSCOW 00000402 002 OF 003 Control Policy Section, stressed that the Strelets missile system was a vehicle-mounted weapon built exclusively for export, with separately deployed aiming and guidance systems designed so that it could not be easily deployed by terrorists. Tsukanov asserted that removing one of the launching tubes, as the U.S. had suggested, would not effectively modify the system. In any case, both he and Petlyakov acknowledged that Russia harbored misgivings about obtaining "U.S. approval" of its arms transfers and noted that firms were reluctant to share potentially proprietary information in response to U.S . requests for clarification concerning pending transfers. ¶6. (S) Tsukanov noted that one of the sanctioned entities -- against the individual Aleksandr Safanov -- was a common name in Russia, akin to "John Brown" in English and often used as a pseudonym when an individual wanted to cover his tracks. Consequently, he said that even with the background provided by the U.S. in conjunction with the imposition of sanctions on Safanov, the GOR had been unable to unearth information related to any real individual with this name. He and Petlyakov used this case as an example of the need for the U.S. to provide more complete information to justify the imposition of sanctions. ¶7. (S) In all of her meetings with MFA officials, Friedt emphasized the need for dialogue. She noted that the U.S. had repeatedly asked for clarification concerning a number of transfer cases, including the Strelets and Tor-M1, but Moscow had not responded adequately despite assurances from senior officials. Friedt said increased transparency on arms transfers to sensitive countries could lessen the possibility of sanctions under U.S. law. Washington was willing to work with the Russian side, but Moscow would have to share more information about prospective transfers to address U.S. concerns. . --------------------------------- SANCTIONS AS RUSSIAN ARMS SUCCESS --------------------------------- ¶8. (C) Ivan Safranchuk, a defense analyst with the World Affairs Institute, told Friedt that many GOR officials believed U.S. sanctions were aimed at undermining Moscow's increasingly competitive market position in the arms trade, especially in the case of Rosoboronexport. Safranchuk added that the lifting of sanctions against Sukhoy had reinforced the view of some observers that the U.S. lacked sufficient evidence in the first place. Moreover, sanctions might actually boost the reputation of the smaller sanctioned firms because of the inadvertent "advertising." From a political perspective, Safranchuk continued, Rosoboronexport would never be able to respond to U.S. demands for clarification as Sukhoy had done. As the country's leading arms exporter, Rosoboronexport's reputation and prospective sales would suffer if others perceived it as intimidated by U.S. sanctions. ¶9. (C) Independent defense analyst Pavel Felgengauer agreed that GOR and Kremlin officials were proud of Russia's growing arms export industry, which had become increasingly profitable, often at the expense of U.S. interests in various parts of the world. Felgengauer said such a reality appealed to many of these officials. Responding to Friedt's query regarding the "cost" of sanctions to Rosoboronexport, Felgengauer highlighted banking problems. According to Felgengauer, Rosoboronexport is a "cash hungry" enterprise, which relies on cash profits to pay for items such as much needed refurbishment/upgrade of subsidiaries like Aftovaz. Felgengauer pointed out that Rosoboronexport relied on the Bank of New York for dollar transactions. As long as Rosoboronexport is under sanctions, it will not be able to use the Bank of New York, which provides the best transaction rate, or acquire lower-interest rate Western loans. This will not present a problem for "euro" transactions, but Rosoboronexport's arms sales to the Middle East and Asia are dollar transactions. Felgengauer estimated the financial cost to Rosoboronexport would be approximately 1-2 percent of its profits. . ---------------------------------------- CONSULTATIONS ON MISSILE DEFENSE WELCOME ---------------------------------------- ¶10. (S) Neverov requested that the U.S. continue to consult closely on plans to deploy components of a missile defense system in Europe. Although he made remarks before the announcement of U.S. negotiations with Poland and the Czech Republic (reftels), he said recent briefings in Moscow and MOSCOW 00000402 003 OF 003 within the NATO-Russia Council in Brussels had been helpful in alleviating concerns in Moscow. In this context, Neverov said both countries needed to highlight progress in bilateral relations more effectively. ¶11. (C) Both Safranchuk and Felgengauer viewed the missile defense deployment issue in political terms. Safranchuk predicted that the issue would become a major component of Russia's "anti-American industry." He argued for close and continuing consultation between Russia and the U.S. and suggested that advance notice of any significant action by the U.S. would derail to some extent the influence of hard-liners who wished to highlight the issue for political reasons. Speaking more broadly, Safranchuk lamented that conservative forces in Russia were increasingly challenging the view, held throughout most of the post-Soviet period, that areas of agreement with the U.S. far outweighed areas of disagreement. ¶12. (C) Felgengauer was even more emphatic that the issue was political. Russian military officials know that operational deployment of any system in Europe was years away and, in any case, they believe an effective interceptor is not currently available to meet the threat from the Persian Gulf or North Korea. He suggested that Russia's armed forces would not worry about deployment of a U.S. system until construction actually began; in the meantime, senior defense officials would complain about the proposed system for political mileage. ¶13. (U) EUR/PRA Director Friedt cleared this message. BURNS
Wikileaks