Cable by Dazzlepod US Embassy Diplomatic Cables from WikiLeaks Released 251287 Cables (Sep 2, 2012)  ·  About
ORIGIN DONATE BY BITCOIN 1LtADcWuX3Fn38GVrfAq73Mu1a7gtfzKGP
CONFIDENTIAL (97070)
CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN (4678)
SECRET (11322)
SECRET//NOFORN (4330)
UNCLASSIFIED (75792)
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (58095)
Reference ID 09UNVIEVIENNA337 (original text)
SubjectWASSENAAR ARRANGEMENT: EXPERTS GROUP TECHNICAL
OriginUNVIE
ClassificationCONFIDENTIAL
ReleasedAug 30, 2011 01:44
CreatedJul 16, 2009 09:00
VZCZCXRO8829
RR RUEHSL
DE RUEHUNV #0337/01 1970900
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 160900Z JUL 09
FM USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 9830
INFO RUCNWSN/THE WASSENAAR ARRANGEMENT
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
RUEKJCS/DOD WASHDC C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 06 UNVIE VIENNA 000337 
 
SIPDIS 
DEPARTMENT FOR ISN/CATR, T, PM/DTC, PM/RSAT 
DOD FOR OSD: PDASD/S&TR, DUSD/TSP 
DOD ALSO FOR DIR DTSA/ST AND DIR DTSA/STP 
DOD ALSO FOR USD/(A&T)/ODUSD(I&CP) AND USD(A&T)/IDA 
USDOC FOR BXA/EA/OAS AND BXA/EA/OSTFPC 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/15/2019 
TAGS:      
SUBJECT: WASSENAAR ARRANGEMENT: EXPERTS GROUP TECHNICAL 
WORKING GROUP MEETINGS JUNE 15-25 
 
Classified By: Counselor Eric Sandberg, Reason 1.4 (d). 
 
Summary 
------- 
 
 1. (SBU) At the intersessional meetings June 15 - 25, the 
U.S. Delegation to the Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) Experts 
Group (EG) made considerable progress in advancing a number 
of U.S. proposals and in shaping the proposals of others. 
Thirteen participating states attended some part of the 
intersessional meetings and 13 different topics were 
addressed.  The Technical Working Groups (TWGs) on Low-light 
Level and Infrared Sensors (LLL) and Information Security 
both made considerable progress.  U.S. proposals to add 
controls for semiconductor laser array stacks, and to revise 
controls on fibrous and filamentary materials were refined; 
revised versions will be recommended to the Fall EG. 
Discussion of U.S. proposals on Coordinate Measuring Machines 
(CMMs) and unmanned ground vehicle conversion systems made 
progress, but did not reach resolution.  The U.S. Delegation 
played a major role in reshaping the UK's proposal for Full 
Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC); two options will be 
forwarded to the Fall EG.  USDEL also helped shape British 
and Japanese proposals for diver detection sonar, the British 
proposal for bathymetric survey systems and the French 
proposal on operational mission concept.  Japan received 
favorable comments on its non-paper Chemical Abstract Service 
(CAS) registry numbers and promised a revised proposal for 
the Fall EG.  Delegations were skeptical of the French 
proposal on virtual radar.  Limited progress was made in 
discussing the Australian proposals on metal alloys in 
Australia's absence.  France announced during the course or 
the intersessional meetings that the decree by which France 
formally adopts use of the WA Munitions List (ML) had been 
signed.  An issue of how to handle New Forum documents within 
the Secretariat surfaced in course to intersesional 
discussions.  USDEL circulated, but got limited feedback on 
several revised proposals for Category 3.  End Summary. 
 
Participation 
------------- 
 
 2.  (SBU) Thirteen countries (Canada, Denmark, Finland, 
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, 
Russia, Sweden, the UK and the U.S.) participated in some 
portion of the WA EG's intersessional meetings in Vienna from 
June 15 ) 25.  This is two fewer countries than in 2008, but 
the same as is 2007.  The Information Security TWG drew the 
widest representation with 10 Participating States 
represented.  However, lack of participation by some states 
could present additional challenges during the Fall EG.  The 
only Russian representative was Andrey Odnoral and he 
participated less than half the time during the first week. 
Historically, Russia has sent a significant delegation to all 
EG meetings.  Also, the German delegation was totally absent 
the second week.  This means that there was no German 
participation in the discussion of U.S. proposals for fibrous 
and filamentary materials or for unmanned ground vehicle 
conversion systems. 
 
 3. (C) In conversations on the margins, Odnoral expressed 
frustration with the lack of support from Moscow for these 
meetings.  He noted that plans for significant Russian 
participation were canceled shortly before the intersessional 
and implied that the reason was financial.  Comment: The lack 
of Russian participation in the intersessional meetings could 
make getting the Russians to join consensus on the issues 
discussed challenging.  Odnoral is still relatively new to 
the EG, does not seem to have a strong technical 
understanding of the issues, nor does he seem to have the 
same authority of his predecessor.  End Comment. 
 
 4. (SBU) The Japanese delegation to the EG is in the process 
of almost a complete change of personnel.  Masaaki Takabatake 
will step down as head of the Japanese delegation after three 
and a half years following the Intersessional meetings.  His 
successor Toshiki Wani arrived to attend the last two days of 
the intersessional meetings.  The deputy head of the Japanese 
delegation for the past year, Atsushi Tanizawa, stepped down 
after the first week of the intersessional meetings.  He will 
be entering a Masters Degree program in international 
relations at the Fletcher School at Tufts University this 
fall.  His successor, Hiroachi Machii, attended both weeks of 
the intersessional meetings, but will only serve for one year 
as he is also in the process of applying to a U.S. university 
 
UNVIE VIEN 00000337  002 OF 006 
 
 
for further education in the Fall of 2010.  It is anticipated 
that Japan will make a nomination in December to assume 
chairmanship of the EG in 2011. 
 
Low-Light Level Sensors 
----------------------- 
 
 5. (SBU) The LLL TWG addressed four issues: 1) monospectral 
and multispectral imaging sensors, 2) underwater cameras, 3) 
line scanning cameras and 4) direct view versus indirect view 
imaging equipment.  The TWG concluded that more study was 
required to address the recommendation in CA010 for moving 
controls for monospectral and multispectral imaging sensors 
designed for remote sensing applications from 6.A.2 to 6.A.3. 
 USDEL committed to explaining its concerns in greater detail 
prior to the Fall EG.  The TWG noted that the Oxford English 
Dictionary defines "remote sensing" as pertaining to space or 
high altitude aerial observation.  USDEL argued the term 
"high altitude" is subjective, and that remote sensing also 
applies to "slant range" terrestrial observation, from lower 
altitudes, a view also shared at the table by the FR, the TWG 
chair recommended that if this broader definition is to be 
considered in the future, a national proposal for a local 
definition would be in order.  The TWG considered two 
proposals and a non-paper (CA011, JP006 and JP010) with 
respect to underwater cameras.  CA011, that would move some 
of the underwater camera controls from 8.A.2. to 6.A.3., 
received the most attention.  A U.S. Defense representative 
also noted that current controls in 8.A.2.d.2. might not be 
adequate.  The U.S. committed to provide its own analysis for 
the Fall EG of how best to clarify and delineate camera 
controls relate to 6.A.3. and 8.A.2.  Several options were 
discussed for solving the problem of controlling lines 
scanning cameras that have little military utility raised by 
DE001, but the TWG made no specific recommendations.  The 
final topic discussed was the apparent ambiguity between 
control of direct view imaging systems in 6.A.2. and 6.A.3. 
Discussion focused on options 2 and 3 presented in US026, but 
no recommendation was made to the Fall EG.  France informed 
the LLL TWG that it was in the process of performing tests on 
tube-based cameras.  It promised to share the results of 
these tests prior to the Fall EG. 
 
Information Security 
-------------------- 
 
 6. (SBU) The Information Security TWG recommended language 
for a new Note 4 Category 5 Part 2 on ancillary encryption 
(based on US003) and a revision of the 5.A.2. decontrol note 
for personalized smart cards (based on JP004).  The inclusion 
of an illustrative list of items that would be decontrolled 
by Note 4 proposed in US020 was moved to an annex.  Whether 
to include this annex remains under discussion.  The TWG 
discussed, but left open, the reconfiguration of existing 
decontrol notes for 5.A.2. based on the incorporation of new 
Note 4.  The open issues will be taken up in the Fall EG. 
 
Semiconductor Laser Array Stacks 
-------------------------------- 
 
 7. (SBU) The working group addressing semiconductor laser 
array stacks, based on US019 Rev 1, worked through several 
iterations of draft text.  The working group developed local 
definitions for "bars" and "stacked arrays" and a new 
sub-paragraph "e" to address modules.  This last issue was 
not fully resolved, but overall this proposal is now well 
positioned for agreement at the Fall EG.  The JP DEL has an 
action to demonstrate a product that establishes the need for 
the newly proposed 6.A.5.d.1.e.3.  The UK stated that they do 
not support this control because it is an 'empty box' and 
they do not understand how stacked arrays designed to be 
combined could be limited by design to not exceed the control 
threshold.  The U.S. Defense representative shares this view. 
 
Fibrous and Filamentary Material 
-------------------------------- 
 
 8. (SBU) USDEL worked revised controls on fibrous and 
filamentary material both in the working group and 
bilaterally.  The working group produced a revised text that 
it has recommended to the Fall EG.  Supported by the 
participation of industry experts from both the U.S. and UK, 
the working group made several changes to improve the 
technical requirements which should reduce the potential for 
misinterpretations.  The text recommended to the Fall EG 
 
UNVIE VIEN 00000337  003 OF 006 
 
 
incorporates JP001, CA003, US006 and US008.  USDEL, including 
industry experts, engaged with the Japanese delegation 
bilaterally to address a number of concerns raised by their 
delegation.  These bilateral consultations seem to allayed 
Japanese concerns. 
 
 9. (C) During the first week of the intersessional meetings, 
the Japanese delegation requested a bilateral meeting to 
discuss fibrous and filamentary materials.  Japan was 
concerned that the proposed revisions in the controls for 
1.C.10. proposed by the U.S. would relax technology controls 
essential for composite materials.  The Japanese were 
uncharacteristically blunt saying they were concerned about 
the spread of composite technology to China and potentially 
to North Korea.  After careful consideration of the Japanese 
points, U.S. defensive and industry representatives explained 
that technology currently controlled would remain controlled 
and that the U.S. proposal had no impact on current 
technology controls.  This point was reinforced during the 
bilateral meetings during the second week when additional 
U.S. industry and defensive representatives were present. 
 
Coordinate Measuring Machines (CMMs) 
------------------------------------ 
 
 10. (SBU) Discussion of CMMs was supported by five industry 
representatives (1 US, 3 German and 1 UK).  The working group 
considered both US009 and NL001 and produced two options for 
consideration by the Fall EG.  The largest unresolved issue 
is whether to use the term "tested" or "specified".  There 
was considerable opposition to the decontrol note proposed by 
the U.S.  The issue of probe accuracy in US009 would now be 
addressed as "with the most accurate configuration of the CMM 
specified by the manufacturer (e.g. probe, stylus, length, 
motion parameters environment)."  Because the new ISO 
standard has not yet been approved, alternative bracketed 
text was included in both options to account for the new 
standard.  There seemed to be consensus that when the new ISO 
standard is adopted, it should be incorporated into the 
control text. 
 
 11. (SBU) An interesting side issue raised by the industry 
representative was the need to control probes as well as CMMs 
for the controls to be effective.  Industry representatives 
stressed that the CMM and the probe are a system.  It takes 
both a good probe and a good CMM to get a good result. 
Industry representative noted that countries outside of the 
WA already produce CMMs.  However, these countries do not 
produce good probes.  If top of the line probes can be 
exported without a license these countries will be able to 
improve their CMMs and defeat the controls. 
 
Unmanned Ground Vehicle Conversion Systems 
------------------------------------------ 
 
 12. (SBU) Discussion of unmanned ground conversion systems 
(US023) raised a number of challenges.  The UK delegation 
included two industry representatives who were very skeptical 
of the proposed control.  The UK made a presentation to 
demonstrate the capabilities of the systems produced by AB 
Dynamics.  The U.S. made two presentations that tried to 
focus the discussion.  The UK remained skeptical that the 
systems the U.S. was proposing to control merited control on 
the dual-use list.  USDEL presented the Kairos Autonomi 
system being used as a target for advanced munitions, but the 
UK did not feel that the threat posed by such targets rose to 
a level that merited control.  USDEL had little success in 
meaningful engagement on discussion of the most critical 
elements of the conversion systems (i.e. steering, software). 
 At the last meeting of this TWG the UK unofficially tabled 
an alternative text that included a decontrol note to items 
designed for legislative testing or not designed to operate 
without external input beyond a certain range.  Japan 
mentioned that the decontrol note in the current U.S. 
proposal was important for their national interests. 
 
 13. (C) The performance of the UK delegation on this proposal 
was most unhelpful and bordered on being unprofessional and 
obstructionist.  The UK delegation had dinner with their 
industry representatives the night prior to the first meeting 
of the working group and seem to have accepted the line given 
to them by industry without question.  Anthony Best, the 
founder and CEO of AB Dynamics made a presentation that 
showed in some detail the capability of the systems designed 
by his company.  While the systems cannot operate 
 
UNVIE VIEN 00000337  004 OF 006 
 
 
autonomously, the accuracy of the robotic control of test 
vehicles is quite impressive.  The UK tried to argue that the 
AB Dynamics systems are unsophisticated and ordinary.  This 
was belied by AB Dynamics presentation.  AB Dynamics tried to 
argue that they only sold their systems as components and not 
as whole systems.  USDEL exposed this argument as false and 
AB Dynamics did eventually admit that they do sell whole 
systems when that is what a customer requests.  The UK tried 
to argue that critical components such as the hybrid 
navigation system would be controlled as a separate item. 
However, the UK delegation had no response when queried by 
the USDEL of how they would license the navigation system 
that was a component of a complete system.  At one point 
David Wookey argued that he had previously pushed for 
dual-use control of explosive handling equipment because the 
U.S. had dual-use products in that area while the UK treated 
all explosive handling equipment as munitions.  USDEL pointed 
out on the margins that his argument appeared to be that it 
was fine to control U.S. dual-use items, but not UK dual-use 
items. 
 
Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) 
--------------------------------------------- 
 
 14. (SBU) Supported by three representatives from U.S. 
industry, USDEL succeeded in getting the FADEC TWG to develop 
control language that reduces the ambiguity in the current 
control text and that moves beyond the UK proposal that is 
ambiguous and possibly would decontrol critical elements of 
the technology for designing high performance gas turbine 
engines.  The TWG recommended two options to the Fall EG for 
consideration.  Both options are intended to accomplish the 
same thing, the difference is in the format.  Option 1 would 
control "FADEC systems" and have a note that elaborates how 
to apply the control.  This is an awkward construction. 
Notes are normally used in the WA lists to give an 
illustrative list of types of items controlled, or a list of 
items not controlled.  Defining the scope of control in a 
note raises a number of questions.  Option 2 would move the 
control for FADEC to 9.E.3.h.  The disadvantage of this 
format is it moves the FADEC controls away from the rest of 
the technology controls for gas turbine engines in 9.E.3.a. 
The advantage is that it has positive control text rather 
than a note and it removes the need to interpret the word 
"required" which is often not clearly understood as the FADEC 
TWG discussions revealed.  The proposed control text, both in 
the note and the sub-paragraphs in 9.E.3.h., explains the 
technology to be controlled.  If this text is acceptable it 
could provide a useful model for restructuring and clarifying 
all of the 9.E.3.a. controls.  The TWG also developed a new 
definition for "FADEC systems" that is an improvement over 
the previous definition for FADEC. 
 
Sonar Diver Detection Systems 
----------------------------- 
 
 15. (SBU) The working group on diver detection systems had 
two separate issues to address: individual diver detection 
sonar (based on GB002), and diver detection sonar systems 
(based on JP008 and JP012).  The working group produced 
recommended text for the Fall EG incorporating both issues. 
Many questions were raised about these proposed controls and 
only partially answered.  It is not clear that the proposed 
text would actually catch the indented sonar.  This issue 
will have to be resolved at the Fall EG. 
 
Bathymetric Survey Systems 
-------------------------- 
 
 16. (SBU)  In the sonar diver detection working group, the UK 
acknowledged the problem raised by the U.S. during the Spring 
EG with its proposed change to the control text to wide-swath 
bathymetric survey systems.  The UK will propose an interim 
change for this year with a Plenary mandate for 2010 to 
address this problem.  The interim change will lead to an 
expansion of the current scope of control text, but it 
conforms to the way the Department of Commerce interprets the 
text.  The working group agreed that the current control text 
needs to be revised. 
 
Operational Mission Concept 
--------------------------- 
 
 17. (SBU) After hearing reservations about FR006 Rev 2, the 
French delegation used this working group to try to develop a 
 
UNVIE VIEN 00000337  005 OF 006 
 
 
definition of "combat mission".  This proposal had been put 
forward initially to meet French concerns with trying to 
adapt the French munitions list to the WA ML.  France's 
adoption of the WA ML (see para 20) removes some of the 
impetus for this proposal.  Nevertheless, France will 
continue to explore the ideas developed in the discussion of 
FR006 over the next year as a means of limiting the growth of 
the WA ML to non-munition related items. 
CAS Registry Numbers 
-------------------- 
 
 18. (SBU) This working group addressed JP002 on adding CAS 
registry numbers to the dual-use list.  Prior to the 
intersessional meetings, Japan circulated a non-paper, JP011, 
that effectively revised JP002.  Japan used the TWG to gage 
support for its revised approach.  JP011 proposed slightly 
revised wording for Note 2 of the ML and adding this revised 
note as Note 2 to the Dual-Use List as well.  The revised 
wording was well received.  Japan recommended that CAS 
numbers not be used for common elements that have multiple 
CAS numbers.  This view was supported the UK and the U.S. 
During the working group, the idea was raised of having the 
Secretariat pay the CAS registration fee so that all 
Participating States could have access to the CAS registry 
system.  The Secretariat was already exploring the 
possibility of having the Secretariat subscribe to all of the 
standards listed in the Dual-Use List.  The Secretariat will 
make a recommendation to the Fall EG for its consideration. 
Japan intends to circulate a revised version of JP002 based 
on the positive responses received during the working group 
to JP011. 
 
Virtual Radar 
------------- 
 
 19. (SBU) The French proposal to add a control for 
internet-based systems that track air traffic, FR007, met 
with a great deal of skepticism.  U.S. representatives from 
the FAA and U.S. industry were especially critical.  They 
were joined in their criticism by the UK and Roger 
Cucchietti, Senior Advisor, WA Secretariat (who is also 
French. It was unclear in what capacity he was speaking.) 
The French delegation said that it had gained the information 
that this control is needed and suggested on the margins that 
it might raise this issue in the General Working Group as a 
political issue related to combating terrorism. 
 
Metal Alloys 
------------ 
 
 20. (SBU) This working group had been requested by Australia 
to address the issues raised by AU001 and AU002.  For 
financial reasons, Australia was not able to attend the 
intersessional meetings.  The UK volunteered to chair the 
meetings in the absence of Australian representation.  The 
working group also briefly reviewed CA008, a non-paper on the 
ambiguity of the current control text for certain metal 
alloys.  The working group recommended several alternative 
formulations for the Technical Note in AU002 for 
consideration by the Fall EG.  Concern was expressed by a 
number of delegations about the expanded control for aluminum 
alloys proposed in AU001.  Concerns raised include foreign 
availability, the wide spread commercial use, the possibility 
of avoiding the control by simply exporting the unfinished 
product license free, and completing the tempering process at 
the destination.  Australia sent a written statement saying 
that it acknowledged these concerns and would continue 
studying if there was a way to refine its proposal. 
 
Other items 
----------- 
 
 21. (U) During the course of the intersessional meetings, 
France announced that the decree adopting the WA ML as the 
French munitions list had been signed.  This happened earlier 
than expected and would cause some regulatory problems. 
Whether France will request that reference to France be 
removed from the footnote that always appears with respect to 
mention of the WA ML in Wassenaar documents, indicating that 
France, Russia and the Ukraine only take the WA ML as a 
reference, the French EG delegation could not say. 
 
 22. (SBU) During the course of discussion in the EG the 
origins of the controls and the initial rationale for 
adopting the control is a frequent question.  Many of the 
 
UNVIE VIEN 00000337  006 OF 006 
 
 
controls date to the prior organizations of New Forum and 
COCOM.  During the course of discussion on the French 
proposal on operational mission concept, the UK requested the 
Secretariat search for the origins of the language in several 
ML controls.  The search surfaced a New Forum document from 
Working Group G that was identified as being of U.S. origin. 
This document was circulated by the UK delegation without 
consulting the USDEL.  The Secretariat subsequently 
criticized the UK for circulating another country's document 
from another organization without that country's permission. 
The document in question was innocuous (and did not 
materially address the question at hand). 
 
 23. (SBU) The Secretariat has a complete set of New Forum 
documents.  However, these documents have no official status 
as New Forum countries never made any decision on the 
disposition of these documents.  As a result of this incident 
Ambassador Danielsson suggested that the issue of the New 
Forum documents should be raised in the GWG/Plenary.  Their 
disposition, he suggested, should take into account 
consultations of former New Forum participating states.  He 
also suggested that perhaps these documents should be turned 
over the U.S. Mission to International Organizations in 
Vienna (UNVIE) for safe keeping.  USDEL expressed concern 
about this idea pointing out that these documents are a 
valuable resource for the Secretariat.  USDEL recommended 
that the Secretariat keep these documents for the time being, 
but handle them with discretion.  Prior to the incident with 
the UK the Secretariat was planning on scanning all of these 
documents so that they can be accessed electronically as they 
currently exist only in paper form.  The Secretariat 
indicated this project will now be put on hold pending 
further discussion of how these documents should be handled. 
 
 24. (SBU) USDEL distributed draft revisions of US010 Rev 1 
and US015 to several delegations.  Due to the press of other 
topics, USDEL got limited feedback on these revised drafts. 
The UK noted that it remains uncomfortable with the current 
text "are to be connected to" in 3.B.1.e. and continues to 
look for a way to improve that language.  Comment: The 
versions circulated by USDEL was circulated by U.S. 
Department of Commerce on June 5.  Back in Washington, at the 
Department of Defense sponsored interagency meeting on 
Category 3, 4, 5, on July 1, it appeared that a new text is 
under consideration.  After interagency agreement is reached, 
this new version will be circulated to WA participating 
states.  End Comment. 
 
 
PYATT
This website hosts an archive of all 251,287 US Embassy diplomatic cables that were released by WikiLeaks between November 28, 2010 and September 2, 2011.

While the cables are generally available at http://wikileaks.org/cablegate.html, we find it hard to search or even navigate the site to read the cables.

We have made all 251,287 cables available here at Dazzlepod with the hope to make it easier for readers to browse, search, share and discuss about the released cables.

The cables are periodically selected and posted to our Twitter page and Facebook page for readers to review them.

For comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at wikileaks@dazzlepod.com.

- Dazzlepod