US embassy cable - 05CANBERRA361

C O N F I D E N T I A L CANBERRA 000361 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NP/CBM, EAP/ANP 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/24/2015 
TAGS: PARM, PREL, AS, MTCRE 
SUBJECT: MTCR: AUSTRALIA AGREES WITH USG'S SMALL GROUP 
PROPOSALS 
 
REF: A. STATE 31851 
 
     B. CANBERRA 354 
 
Classified By: POLCOUNS WOO LEE FOR REASONS 1.4 (B AND D). 
 
1.  (C) We presented ref A points on February 24 to 
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) 
Counterproliferation Section Director Peter Sawczak, 
soliciting Australian views on the three USG proposals for 
the April 4 Small Group meeting of the Missile Technology 
Control Regime (MTCR) and asking whether the GOA had any 
proposals of its own.  Sawczak said his office had been 
considering some ideas, but he liked all three U.S. proposals 
and agreed that those would be enough for the Small Group 
countries to manage.  He thought that ideas "A" (to pay 
special scrutiny to North Korean-flagged or destined vessels) 
and "B" (to scrutinize end-user requests for shipments 
transiting through key proliferation hubs like Singapore, 
Thailand and the UAE), would best be sponsored by either 
Australia or Japan.  He also saw a strong need for MTCR 
countries to give briefings on their industries' in-house 
compliance programs to non-partner countries, as described in 
proposal "C". 
 
2.  (C) Sawczak noted that Australia was already engaged in 
transshipment outreach similar to the "B" proposal for CW and 
BW-related items controlled under the Australia Group regime, 
so it would be a comfortable issue for the GOA to endorse 
under the MTCR.  However, he also saw merit in the GOA doing 
more to pressure the DPRK (ref B) and indicated a 
willingness to discuss these proposals with Japanese 
counterparts.  Sawczak strongly endorsed the Small Group 
mechanism as a way to build -- or if necessary, get around -- 
the consensus necessary within the MTCR regime.  He supported 
the U.S. approach of pursuing two or three initiatives of 
"tangible, practical counterproliferation benefit" that were 
fairly apolitical, although he mentioned that South Africa 
might balk at "naming the name" of North Korea. 
STANTON