US embassy cable - 05SOFIA924

C O N F I D E N T I A L SOFIA 000924 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
STATE FOR PM AND EUR 
DOD FOR OSD-P 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/20/2015 
TAGS: MARR, PREL, PGOV, BU 
SUBJECT: U.S. MILITARY PRESENCE IN BULGARIA: NEXT STEPS 
 
REF: STATE 85324 
 
Classified By: AMBASSADOR JAMES PARDEW, FOR REASONS 1.4 (A) AND (D). 
 
1. (C) SUMMARY:  A negotiating team led by Ambassador Robert 
Loftis made substantial progress in concluding a supplemental 
SOFA with the GOB during talks in Sofia May 16-17.  Amb. 
Loftis also presented the draft Defense Cooperation Agreement 
(DCA) and identified the military facilities of interest to 
the USG.  While receptive, the GOB interagency delegation 
raised several concerns with the draft agreement and also 
proposed that it be expanded to include a much larger sphere 
of cooperation.  The GOB will provide suggested revisions in 
2-3 weeks and Amb. Loftis expected to have a new draft that 
addresses GOB concerns in 3-4 weeks.  With Bulgaria's 
upcoming parliamentary elections on June 25, the formation of 
a new government and the August break, final consideration by 
the GOB will like be delayed until September. END SUMMARY. 
 
2. (C) Deputy Defense Minister Ilko Dimitrov led the GOB 
delegation, which included Deputy CHOD LTG Atanas Zaprianov, 
Deputy Foreign Minister Nikolai Milkov and Deputy Interior 
Minister Boyko Kotsev.  Dimitrov told Amb. Loftis that, while 
he understood the security benefits brought by an ongoing 
U.S. military presence in Bulgaria, the GOB needs to show 
more tangible benefits in order to win public support for the 
initiative. Dimitrov highlighted the following issues as 
areas of concern: 
 
a. Financial Compensation ) Amb. Loftis cited our worldwide 
policy against paying rent for use of military facilities. 
He also stressed the ancillary economic benefits of our 
facilities investments, procurements and employment. 
 
b. Freedom to deploy U.S. Force from Bulgaria ) Amb. Loftis 
called this issue critical and outlined the need for maximum 
flexibility on use of any forces stationed in Bulgaria. 
 
c. Command and Control of the shared facilities ) The 
Bulgarians were reassured that overall command of any 
facility would remain with the Bulgarian base commander, 
although specific areas/functions might be controlled by the 
American commander, and U.S. troops would be under American 
command and control. 
 
d. Greater specificity on the facilities being requested ) 
To avoid the need for future Parliamentary approvals, the 
Bulgarians asked that we identify all facilities we might 
want to use.  Amb. Loftis promised language that would 
address this concern. 
 
e. Limits on weaponry ) specifically listing nuclear weapons 
and landmines as problematic - Amb. Loftis responded the 
NATO-Russia agreement prohibited nuclear weapons on the 
territory of new NATO members and said he would provide a 
future response on the landmine issue. 
 
3. (C) Dimitrov also asked that the agreement address U.S. 
assistance for Bulgaria,s military modernization needs. Amb. 
Loftis stressed that the DCA would not be a vehicle to 
address assistance requests and urged the GOB to view the 
mutual benefits to be brought by a U.S. military presence in 
Bulgaria. 
 
4. (C) Comment: The Bulgarians will be motivated to resolve 
the outstanding issues, but clearly have their eye on 
upcoming elections and the need to defend any agreement 
before a possibly more hostile Parliament.  In the SOFA, they 
will be most sensitive on issues inferring a loss of 
sovereignty.  U.S. freedom to deploy from Bulgaria will 
likely be most problematic in the DCA discussions. 
 
5. (U) This cable was cleared with Ambassador Robert Loftis.