US embassy cable - 03ANKARA2374

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 002374 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
STATE FOR NP/ECC KATHY CROUCH 
ENERGY FOR SLD 
USCS/INA FOR DHARRELL 
ROME FOR CUSTOMS ATTACHE 
 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/10/2013 
TAGS: PARM, ETTC, PREL, KSTC, TU 
SUBJECT: EXBS: TURKS REJECT AGREEMENT ARTICLES; PROPOSE 
CASE-BY-CASE WORK 
 
REF: A. STATE 29502 
     B. 02 ANKARA 7670 
     C. 02 STATE 165781 
 
 
(U) Classified by Deputy Chief of Mission Robert Deutsch. 
Reasons 1.5 (b) and (d). 
 
 
1.  (U) This is an action request.  Please see para 7. 
 
 
2.  (C) Summary.  On March 31, the Turks objected to three 
articles of our proposed Export Control and Related Border 
Security Assistance (EXBS) Program agreement.  The articles 
govern the status of personnel, claims, and inspections and 
audits.  For the moment, we are at an impasse, and it appears 
as though these three articles serve as a proxy for the GOT's 
overall reluctance to conclude the agreement.  Turkey remains 
eager to cooperation regarding non-proliferation, but would 
like to work with us on a project-by-project basis, without 
an overarching framework or agreement.  End Summary. 
 
 
3.  (C) On March 31, MFA Disarmament Department Head Ibrahim 
Yagli convoked polmiloff to respond to the US's proposed text 
for an agreement "Regarding Cooperation to Facilitate the 
Provision of Assistance for Non-Proliferation Purposes."  We 
had presented our latest text to the Turks on September 30, 
2002.  Polmiloff had subsequently lobbied Turkish Customs and 
MFA on multiple occasions to dislodge a response.  Yagli said 
that the GOT had examined our text in detail and had 
concluded that articles III, IV, and V "were not in 
conformity with Turkish legislation."  Therefore, the GOT 
could not accept our text as it stands, absent action by the 
Turkish Parliament.  Yagli did not hold out parliamentary 
action as an option. 
 
 
4.  (C) Yagli urged us to put an overarching agreement to the 
side.  He said the GOT "on the whole attaches importance to 
cooperation on non-proliferation issues."  However, he 
proposed that the US and Turkey "continue cooperating with 
purpose-oriented projects, but without a big, extensive 
agreement."  He thought that the US seemed to be trying to 
use a generic text, perhaps appropriate for other 
circumstances, but for which Turkey did not see a need.  As 
Yagli put it, Turkey is "ready to receive proposals on what 
and how we can move forward." 
 
 
5.  (C) Polmiloff asked Yagli if we could get a detailed 
analysis of the legal obstacles to Turkey's accepting the 
three articles.  Yagli replied that he would have to refer to 
MFA's Legal Department to get specific information.  Noting 
the MFA's understanding is that the US position on the 
articles is "steady," he had not thought that we would want 
the particulars of why the article were objectionable.  Yagli 
recalled that in June 2002 Turkey had objected to these 
specific provisions, but in September the US's 
counter-proposal contained basically the "same articles." 
Polmiloff pressed Yagli on whether, hypothetically, 
modifications of the September text might make the agreement 
acceptable to Turkey, but Yagli could not commit on whether 
Turkey's reservations regarding the agreement, as opposed to 
the articles, were firm. 
 
 
6.  (U) The three articles to which the Turks object are as 
follow: 
 
 
Begin Text: 
 
 
Article III: Status of Personnel 
 
 
(a) Turkey shall accord civilian and military personnel of 
the United States Government present in Turkey in connection 
with United States assistance programs under this Agreement, 
status equivalent to that accorded administrative and 
technical personnel under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic 
Relations of April 18, 1961. 
 
 
(b) Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to derogate 
from the privileges and immunities granted to any personnel 
under other agreements. 
 
 
Article IV: Claims 
 
 
(a) Turkey shall, in respect of legal proceedings and claims, 
other than contractual claims, hold harmless and bring no 
legal proceedings against the United States and personnel, 
contractors, and contractors' personnel of the United States 
for damage to property owned by Turkey, or death or injury to 
any personnel in Turkey, arising out of activities pursuant 
to this Agreement. 
(b) Claims by third parties, arising out of the acts or 
omissions of any employees of the United States or 
contractors or contractors' personnel of the United States 
done in the performance of official duty, shall be the 
responsibility of Turkey. 
 
 
Article V: Inspection and Audit 
 
 
Upon reasonable request, Turkey, or its relevant authorities 
or entities subject to its jurisdiction, shall permit 
representatives of the United States to examine that 
utilization of any commodities, supplies, other property, or 
services provided under this Agreement at sites of their 
location or use; and to inspect or audit any records or other 
documentation in connection with the assistance wherever such 
records or documentation are located during the period in 
which the United States provides assistance to Turkey and for 
three years thereafter. 
 
 
End Text. 
 
 
7.  (C) Action Request:  Post requests the Department's 
guidance on a response to Turkey's position.  In the meantime 
we will follow up with MFA to try to nail down the legal 
particulars of why articles III, IV, and V are not "in 
conformity with Turkish legislation."  If the articles were 
the only obstacle to signing the agreement, we doubt it would 
have taken the Turks from September 2002 until March 2003 to 
reach their position.  Our discussions with MFA and Turkish 
Customs have consistently shown that the Turks are eager to 
receive assistance and equipment, but are reluctant to agree 
to an overall framework for the program.  Per Ref A, para 6, 
Post understands that the Department's position is that 
further equipment installation and "other significant EXBS 
program projects" cannot go forward absent the GOT's signing 
the proposed agreement.  We have communicated this fact to 
the Turks. End Action Request. 
 
 
PEARSON