19 EU support for the Organisation for
the Prohibition of Chemical Weapon
| (35553)
—
—
| Council Decision in support of UN Security Council Resolution 2118 (2013) and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, in the framework of the implementation of the EU Strategy against Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction
|
| Legal base | Articles 28 and 31(1) TEU; unanimity
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration
| EM and Minister's letter of 28 November 2013
|
| Previous Committee Report
| None |
| Discussion in Council
| 8-10 December 2013 |
| Committee's assessment
| Politically important
|
| Committee's decision
| Cleared |
Background
19.1 The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons is the implementing body of the Chemical Weapons Convention
(CWC), which entered into force in 1997. The OPCW has 190 Member
States, who are working together to achieve a world free from
chemical weapons. They share the collective goal of preventing
chemistry from ever again being used for warfare, thereby strengthening
international security.
19.2 To this end, the Convention contains four key
provisions:
· destroying all existing
chemical weapons under international verification by the OPCW;
· monitoring chemical
industry to prevent new weapons from re-emerging;
· providing assistance
and protection to States Parties against chemical threats; and
· fostering international
cooperation to strengthen implementation of the Convention and
promote the peaceful use of chemistry.
19.3 The OPCW is given the mandate to achieve the
object and purpose of the Convention, to ensure the implementation
of its provision. The OPCW Technical Secretariat is responsible
for the day-to-day administration and implementation of the Convention,
including inspections, while the Executive Council and the Conference
of the States Parties are decision-making organs designed primarily
to determine questions of policy and resolve matters arising between
the States Parties on technical issues or on interpretations of
the Convention. The chairs of the Executive Council and the Conference
are appointed by each body's membership. The Technical Secretariat
is headed by a Director-General, who is appointed by the Conference
on the recommendation of the Council.[58]
19.4 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 28 November
2013, the Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington) explains that
on 27 September 2013:
· the OPCW Executive
Council adopted its "Decision on the destruction of
Syrian chemical weapons" during its EC-M-33 session; and
· the UN Security Council
adopted Resolution 2118 (2013), endorsing the OPCW Decision and
expressing deep outrage at the use of chemical weapons on 21 August
2013 in Rif Damascus, as concluded in the UN Mission's report,
condemning the killing of civilians that resulted from it, affirming
that the use of chemical weapons constitutes a serious violation
of international law, and stressing that those responsible for
any use of chemical weapons must be held accountable; as well
as stressing that the only solution to the current crisis in the
Syrian Arab Republic is through an inclusive and Syrian-led political
process based on the Geneva Communiqué of 30 June 2012,
and emphasising the need to convene the international conference
on Syria as soon as possible.
19.5 The Minister then explains that:
· by means of a declaration,
the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic acknowledged the existence
of a large scale chemical weapons programme and considerable quantities
of chemical weapons, including hazardous toxic chemical components
of such weapons, posing serious non-proliferation, disarmament
and security concerns;
· following Syria's
accession to the CWC (effective from 14 October 2013), the OPCW
is responsible for verifying the Syrian Arab Republic's compliance
with the provisions of the Chemical Weapons Convention, and the
terms of any relevant OPCW Executive Council Decisions, and as
part of the Joint Mission with the UN, for overseeing compliance
with the terms of any relevant UN Security Council Resolutions;
· on 15 November, the
OPCW's Executive Council adopted a decision [EC-M-34/Dec.1] approving
a detailed plan of destruction to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons
programme;
· the decision envisages
that the vast majority of Syrian Chemical Weapons will be transported
outside Syria's territory for the purposes of destruction in the
safest manner, to meet the ambitious timelines;
· the Chemical Weapons
Convention requires possessor States, in this case Syria,
to meet the costs of destruction; however, Syria indicated its
inability to meet the destruction costs and the Executive Council
as part of their decision established a special Trust Fund to
support Syria's chemical weapons destruction activities; and
· following the decision,
the OPCW Director General wrote to States Parties urging them
to make voluntary contributions to the special Trust Fund.
19.6 The Minister then notes that:
· on the 21 November
2013, the OPCW's Director General wrote to the High Representative
of the European Union of Foreign Affairs and Security Policy seeking
a financial contribution to the special Trust Fund relating to
destruction costs;
· the EU has approximately
€6 million from the under spend in the current CFSP budget
and is of the view that the funds could be allocated to the special
Trust Fund to meet destruction costs; and
· EU financial assistance
to the OPCW for the purpose of its work in the Syrian Arab Republic
is consistent with the EU Strategy against Proliferation of Weapons
of Mass Destruction adopted by the European Council on 12 December
2003.
The draft Council Decision
19.7 On 15 November the OPCW's Executive Council
adopted a decision [EC-M-34/Dec.1] approving a detailed plan of
destruction to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons programme.
This draft Council decision will allow the EU to release financial
resources to in support of the destruction of chemical weapons
in the Syrian Arab Republic.
19.8 The Minister notes that the draft Decision was
circulated on 25 November 2013 at a joint RELEX meeting at which
an initial discussion took place; and that the aim is for it to
be adopted at 8-10 December 2013.
The Government's view
19.9 The Minister says that the Government is supportive
of the principle behind the draft Decision and understands that
the destruction of chemicals weapons is extremely costly and resource
intensive: thus, he says, to ensure the destruction process is
completed within the ambitious deadlines set out in the Syrian
chemical weapons destruction plan, he needs to ensure that the
OPCW is adequately equipped and financed.
19.10 The Minister then continues as follows (his
emphasis):
"This decision is currently in draft and is
in the process of being negotiated. We will write to committees
to report the outcomes of the negotiation but seek scrutiny clearance
now in light of planned adoption on 8-10 December.
"The UK position in the negotiations is as follows:
"Project 1: Security planning the provision
of situation awareness products related to the security of the
OPCW-UN Joint Mission, including the status of the road network,
for all their activities including verification and also movement
of the Syrian stockpile to the port for transfer out of Syria
for destruction; The UK will support.
"Project 2: Training EU personnel - training
personnel involved in transport, handling, storage and destruction
of chemical agents up to OPCW standards to constitute a pool of
available experts. The UK has queried whether the OPCW would welcome
this and whether the funds could be better directed to train OPCW
staff rather than EU personnel. The UK will support if we obtain
assurances that this project meets the OPCW's needs.
"Project 3: Provision of safety and security
equipment to the Mission ensuring the safety of materials,
and potential decontamination and medical support during the transportation
phase of the destruction plan. The UK supports the intention to
assist the UN/OPCW Mission, but would prefer a clearer reassurance
that the equipment provided goes that mission, not directly to
the Syrian regime. We will support on the basis language is
amended to reflect this.
"EU financial assistance to the OPCW for the
purpose of its work in the Syrian Arab Republic is consistent
with the EU Strategy against Proliferation of Weapons of Mass
Destruction adopted by the European Council on 12 December 2003.
"The EU contribution will be monitored via our
UK permanent representation to the OPCW. It will be essential
that all activities are coordinated, especially with the OPCW
and the UN. Officials have been working closely with the OPCW
and will continue to monitor the EU contributions."
The Minister's letter of 28 November 2013
19.11 The Minister notes that the draft Decision
was circulated by the European External Action Service (EEAS)
on the 25 November and says:
"as we stress in the
accompanying Explanatory Memorandum, the UK is not happy with
large parts of the proposal and our colleagues in Brussels are
currently negotiating important amendments."
19.12 The Minister continues thus:
"As you know, I am committed
to full and transparent scrutiny which is why I planned to submit
the draft even though the Decision had yet not been finalised.
On 27 November, the UK delegation in Brussels reported that the
EEAS have taken on board UK suggested amendments (as outlined
in the Explanatory Memorandum) to the draft Decision. The draft
reflecting these amendments is unfortunately not yet available
for deposit in Parliament. The EEAS intend to circulate a revised
draft Decision amongst Member States on Friday 29 November —
I thus expect this version of the draft Council Decision to be
available on Monday 2 December. At that point, I would be happy
to provide that later draft to your Committee and submit a Supplementary
EM noting the changes. However, as you will appreciate the timings
in this instance are extremely tight, and that later draft may
not arrive with your Committee for its consideration before its
meetings in w/c 2 December. As such, I was keen to ensure that
your Committee was sighted on the current, available draft —
even though we know it will be superseded in the coming days.
I hope that this gives your Committee the opportunity to scrutinise
this dossier in advance of its adoption on 8-10 December, although
I appreciate that sight of the final text would of course have
been preferable, had it been available earlier."
Conclusion
19.13 We have yet to hear further from the Minister.
However, we understand that, in the event, it was not possible
within the timeline to resolve the issues that he highlights with
respect to Projects 2 and 3; and that it has finally been agreed
that only Project 1 will be taken forward.
19.14 That being so, we are prepared to allow
the Minister to support the draft Decision, provided that the
text has been amended accordingly.
19.15 We would also like the Minister to submit
the final version of the draft Decision with a Supplementary Explanatory
Memorandum in due course.
58 See http://www.opcw.org/about-opcw for full information. Back
| 
