US embassy cable - 05LJUBLJANA39

C O N F I D E N T I A L LJUBLJANA 000039 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
DEPT FOR EUR/NCE, NP/RA (SONTAG), L/NP (HERR), AND L/LEI 
(MANNING) 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/19/2015 
TAGS: KNNP, KTIA, MNUC, PARM, PREL, PHSA, EWWT, SI 
SUBJECT: SLOVENIA: LITTLE EU SUPPORT FOR U.S. AMENDMENTS TO 
SUA CONVENTION 
 
REF: A. SECSTATE 4828 
 
     B. EMAIL CROSBY TO SONTAG ET AL - 01/14/2005 
 
Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Dean J. Haas for reasons 1.4(b) 
and (d). 
 
1.  (C) As reported ref B, Pol-Miloff delivered ref A talking 
points on 12 January to MFA Security Policy Department 
staffer Bostjan Jerman, who serves as MFA's point person for 
non-proliferation issues.  Jerman read through the points and 
issue paper with interest, remarked that UNSCR 1540 is seen 
as very important by the EU and its member states, and opined 
that Slovenia would have no problem supporting the U.S. 
position on either issue: dual use offenses or non-state 
actors.  He said he would forward the points to MFA Legal and 
to the appropriate person in Slovenia's Mission to the EU in 
Brussels, noting that the Slovenes would be represented at 
the 17 January COMAR meeting.  Jerman noted that he had not 
been aware of the impact of the Indonesian proposal and 
expressed appreciation for the helpful policy issues paper. 
 
2.  (C) After an unrelated demarche on 20 January, Pol-Miloff 
asked Jerman if Slovenia had been able to send a 
representative to the 17 January COMAR meeting.  Jerman 
replied that Undersecretary Aleksander Cicerov, from MFA's 
Legal Department, had attended the meeting with Jerman's 
recommendation that Slovenia support the U.S. position on 
both open issues.  Jerman had not received a readout of the 
meeting; however, Jerman and Pol-Miloff encountered Cicerov 
on the way out of the MFA.  Asked by Jerman about the outcome 
of the COMAR meeting, Cicerov replied that the attendees had 
decided not to support the U.S. positions.  Perplexed, 
Pol-Miloff asked what happened.  Cicerov said that he and the 
other COMAR attendees had all received the U.S. position 
papers and collectively wondered why they had been contacted 
about the open issues.  He said the attendees decided that 
the U.S. overture amounted to an inappropriate attempt at 
politically pressuring fellow IMO Legal Committee members, 
and he opined that the U.S. should have delivered its 
position through the Committee chair.  Pol-Miloff clarified 
that the intent of disseminating the paper was to achieve a 
better-informed and more streamlined process for reaching an 
agreement within the Committee, stressing that there was no 
political pressure intended and that the U.S. overture should 
not be seen in such a light. 
ROBERTSON 
 
 
NNNN 

 2005LJUBLJ00039 - Classification: CONFIDENTIAL 


 
v1.6.2