UNCLASSIFIED US Department Of State Case NO F-2008-02356 Date 05l10l2012 1 PT9324B I Ezank senior Twiggy FULL CONFIDENTIAL PTQ3248 PAGE 01 STATE 036296 2317042 ORIGIN INFO LOG-00 OASY-OO SRPP-OO ADS-00 PA-OO PM-OO P-OO SP-oo SSO-OO SS-oo T-OO NISC-OO G-OO DRAFTED BI KAEDDINS KAE APPROVED BY EUR JCKORNBLUM CGDUNKERLEY s P DHAMILTON JHERBST DESIRED DISTRIBUTION EUR 1CB43C 2317172 22 231703z FEB 96 FM SECSTATE WASHDC To ALL EUROPEAN DIPLOMATIC POSTS IMMEDIATE 0 I I A STATE 036296 FROM EUR ACTING KORNBLUM E O 12958 TAGS PREL NATO MARR SUBJECT RUSSIAN ASSERTIONS ABOUT TWO-PLUS-FOUR AGREEMENT USVIENNA FOR USDEL OSCE CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 02 STATE 036296 231704Z UNCLASSIFIED US Department Of State Case NO F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 REF BONN 1800 NOTAL 1 U CLASSIFIED BY EUR ACTING REASON 1 5 D 2 U THE FOLLOWING IS THE TEXT OF AN EUR AND JOINT MEMORANDUM WHICH WE RECENTLY SENT TO ACTING SECRETARY TALBOTT I WANTED AMBASSADORS DCMS AND ECONOMIC OFFICERS TO HAVE IT AS BACKGROUND IN CASE THE TWO-PLUS-FOUR ISSUE COMES UP DURING YOUR DISCUSSIONS WITH HOST GOVERNMENTS OR WITH YOUR RUSSIAN EMBASSY COUNTERPARTS I WOULD ALSO URGE AMBASSADORS TO SHARE THIS TELEGRAM WITH YOUR PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICERS FOR THEM TO DRAW ON IN RESPONSE TO PRESS OR PUBLIC INQUIRIES FOR ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND I HIGHLY RECOMMEND EMBASSY RECENT ANALYSIS OF THE QUESTION REFTEL 3 C BEGIN TEXT OF MEMORANDUM TO THE ACTING SECRETARY FROM EUR - JOHN C KORNBLUM ACTING - - JOHN HERBST ACTING SUBJECT NATO ENLARGEMENT RUSSIAN ASSERTIONS REGARDING THE TWO-PLUS-FOUR AGREEMENT ON GERMAN UNIFICATION SENIOR RUSSIAN OFFICIALS HAVE BEEN ASSERTING THAT THE CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 03 STATE 036296 231704Z PROHIBITION ON STATIONING NON-GERMAN I E NATO FORCES ON THE TERRITORY OF THE FORMER GDR CONTAINED IN THE 11TWO-PLUS-FOUR THE TREATY ON THE FINAL SETTLEMENT WITH RESPECT TO GERMANY SOMEHOW APPLIES TO AND THEREFORE LIMITS OR EVEN PRECLUDES NATO EXPANSION TO THE OTHER STATES OF CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS ASSERTION IS FORMULATED -- AND THE RUSSIANS HAVE USED SEVERAL VARIANTS -- IT IS A SPECIOUS ARGUMENT WHICH WE SHOULD REFUTE DEFINITIVELY UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 0 2012 THE PROHIBITION DOES NOT APPLY TO TERRITORY OUTSIDE GERMANY THE TREATY PERMITS THE STATIONING OF NATO-INTEGRATED GERMAN FORCES IN THE EASTERN LAENDER NOW THAT TROOPS HAVE DEPARTED WHILE FOREIGN FORCES AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS SYSTEMS MAY NOT BE STATIONED OR DEPLOYED IN THOSE LAENDER QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE IMEANING OF ARE LEFT IN THE HANDS OF A SOVEREIGN GERMANY IN BROADER TERMS WE SHOULD ALSO REMIND MOSCOW THAT ITS TWO-PLUS-FOUR INVOLVEMENT IN INTERNAL GERMAN AFFAIRS I E PROHIBITING CERTAIN FORCE DEPLOYMENTS WAS UNIQUE ARISING FROM THE POST-WAR SETTLEMENT AND DID NOT SET ANY LEGAL OR POLITICAL RUSSIA DOES NOT HAVE A SIMILAR RIGHT TO DEFINE OR DICTATE THE SECURITY ARRANGEMENTS OF OTHER SOVEREIGN STATES IF THE RUSSIANS SEEK TO ADVANCE ANY SORT OF TWO-PLUS-FOUR PRECEDENT I E NATO MEMBERSHIP WITH LIMITATIONS WE SHOULD IMMEDIATELY REJECT ANY OVER THE HEADS OF THE CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEANS RUSSIAN ASSERTIONS CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 04 STATE 036296 2317042 IN RECENT YEARS RUSSIAN OFFICIALS HAVE MADE SPORADIC CLAIMS THAT THE TREATY ON THE FINAL SETTLEMENT WITH RESPECT TO GERMANY COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE WHICH PROHIBITS STATIONING OR DEPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN TROOPS AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS SYSTEMS IN THE EASTERN LAENDER OF THE FRG ALSO EXCLUDES -- AS PRESIDENT YELTSIN WROTE PRESIDENT CLINTON IN 1993 -- ITS MEANING THE POSSIBILITY OF EXPANSION OF THE NATO ZONE TO THE BEG INNING IN LATE-NOVEMBER WITH THE 16 QUESTIONS THE RUSSIANS PUT TO NATO ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL VON MOLTKE THE RUSSIANS HAVE MADE THIS CLAIMIA STAPLE ELEMENT OF THEIR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ARGUMENTS AGAINST NATO ENLARGEMENT IN A RECENT MEETING WITH AMBASSADOR COLLINS UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 FOR EXAMPLE A SENIOR KREMLIN OFFICIAL ARGUED THAT NATO TROOP DEPLOYMENTS EAST OF NOW-UNITED GERMANY WOULD THE SPIRIT OF THE TWO-PLUS-FOUR THE SAME OFFICIAL ALSO ASSERTED THAT THIS INTERPRETATION WAS SUPPORTED AT THE TIME BY OF EASTERN EUROPEAN LEADERS WHICH CONSTITUTED LEGAL COMMITMENTS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF INTERNATIONAL SENIOR RUSSIAN OFFICIALS USED SIMILAR TWO-PLUS-FOUR ARGUMENTS DURING GERMAN FOREIGN MINISTER RECENT TRIP TO MOSCOW AND BOTH OFFICIAL AND UNOFFICIAL RUSSIAN SPOKESMEN CONSISTENTLY MAKE THE SAME ASSERTIONS ON THE EUROPEAN THINK-TANK CIRCUIT AND WITH THE MEDIA YOU ASKED CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 05 STATE 036296 231704Z US TO REVIEW THESE RUSSIAN ASSERTIONS WHICH WE HAVE THEY ARE COMPLETELY UNFOUNDED TREATY PROHIBITIONS APPLY TO EASTERN GERMANY THE SEPTEMBER 12 1990 TREATY PRECLUDED THE STATIONING OF NATO-INTEGRATED GERMAN FORCES ON THE TERRITORY OF THE FORMER GDR UNTIL AFTER THE WITHDRAWAL OF SOVIET FORCES FROM THOSE LAENDER HOWEVER ONCE THE SOVIET LATER RUSSIAN TROOP WITHDRAWAL WAS COMPLETED ARTICLE 5 OF THE TREATY EXPLICITLY ALLOWED UNITS OF THE GERMAN ARMED FORCES ASSIGNED TO MILITARY ALLIANCE STRUCTURES I E NATO TO BE STATIONED IN EASTERN LAENDER BUT WITHOUT WEAPON FOREIGN I E OTHER NATO MILITARY FORCES AS WELL AS NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND THEIR CARRIERS COULD NOT BE STATIONED OR DEPLOYED ON THE TERRITORY OF THE FORMER GDR UNDER THE TERMS OF THE TREATY UNDER AN AGREED MINUTE TO THE TREATY QUESTIONS CONCERNING APPLICATION OF THE WORD ARE TO BE DECIDED BY GERMANY ALTHOUGH THEN-FOREIGN MINISTER GENSCHER MADE A UNILATERAL STATEMENT THAT NATO WOULD NOT BE MOVED EASTWARD THIS WAS A UNILATERAL COMMITMENT AND -- REGARDLESS -- APPLIED ONLY TO THE FORMER GDR LAENDER THE TREATY MAKES NO MENTION OF NATO DEPLOYMENTS BEYOND THE UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 BOUNDARIES OF GERMANY BECAUSE THE TREATY DEALT ONLY WITH WE SHOULD POINTEDLY REMIND THE RUSSIANS OF THIS BASIC FACT CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 06 STATE 036296 2317042 THE TREATY AND ITS RELATED PROVISIONS ALSO CONTAIN NO REFERENCES TO EXERCISES INVOLVING FOREIGN FORCES ON EASTERN GERMAN TERRITORY THE DECISION WHETHER TO HOLD SUCH EXERCISES REMAINS THE PREROGATIVE OF A SOVEREIGN UNITED GERMANY HOLDING FIRM ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AND WAS IN FACT A KEY FINAL POINT IN THE TWO-PLUS-FOUR NEGOTIATIONS AND THE U S GERMANY AND OUR ALLIES HAVE INTERPRETED THIS TO MEAN THAT EXERCISES ARE ALLOWED THAT SAID GENSCHER ALSO UNILATERALLY COMMITTED GERMANY NOT TO HOST SUCH EXERCISES IN THE EASTERN LAENDER AND THE GERMANS HAVE NOT DONE SO WE SHOULD ALSO REMEMBER THAT MOSCOWIS RIGHT TO INVOLVE ITSELF IN SETTING THE TERMS OF GERMAN UNIFICATION WHICH IN EFFECT IMPOSED LIMITS ON GERMAN SOVEREIGNTY GREW OUT OF THE UNIQUE POST-WAR ARRANGEMENTS UNDER WHICH A DEFEATED NAZI GERMANY WAS ADMINISTERED IT DID NOT SET A PRECEDENT FOR RUSSIAN OVERSIGHT OF THE OTHER STATES IN CENTRAL OR EASTERN EUROPE WE CONTINUE TO BE WILLING TO ENGAGE THE RUSSIANS IN A DIALOGUE ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF ENLARGEMENT FOR THE CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEAN STATES BUT THE TREATY NEITHER APPLIES TO SUCH A DISCUSSION NOR SETS ANY PRECEDENTS BINDING 0N NATO OR THE CENTRAL OR EASTERN EUROPEANS STATEMENTS BY EASTERN EUROPEAN REGARDING THE RUSSIAN ASSERTION ABOUT CONTEMPORANEOUS LEGALLY-BINDING DECLARATIONS BY EASTERN EUROPEAN LEADERS NEITHER INR NOR THE OFFICE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CONFIDENTIAL UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 07 STATE 036296 2317042 IDENTIFY ANY SUCH STATEMENTS WITHOUT SPECIFIC REFERENCES IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO COMMENT DEFINITIVELY BUT -- AS MOST VIVIDLY EVIDENCED BY THEIR ACTIVE PURSUIT OF NATO MEMBERSHIP -- NONE OF THE CENTRAL OR EASTERN EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS APPEAR TO SHARE THE RUSSIAN VIEW IN FACT ONE OF THE BASIC PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE TREATY THE SUBSEQUENT CHARTER OF PARIS AND THE CFE TREATY ALL SIGNED BY THE SOVIETS AND SUBSEQUENTLY ENDORSED BY THE RUSSIANS IS THE SOVEREIGN RIGHT OF EVERY STATE TO CHOOSE ITS OWN SECURITY ARRANGEMENTS THIS PRINCIPLE WAS AGAIN REAFFIRMED IN THE 1994 OSCE BUDAPEST SUMMIT DECLARATION AND THE DECEMBER 1995 OSCE MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BOTH WHICH THE RUSSIANS THEMSELVES SIGNED IF THE RUSSIANS RAISE THESE SUPPOSED EAST EUROPEAN UNILATERAL DECLARATIONS AGAIN WE SHOULD INSIST ON SPECIFIC CITATIONS REGARDING ANY ALLEGED LIMITATIONS WHICH WOULD ALLOW US TO REFUTE THE ASSERTION ONCE AND FOR ALL A CONCERN WE CAN ADDRESS DURING GERMAN FOREIGN MINISTER RECENT TRIP TO MOSCOW THE RUSSIANS ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERNS THAT NATO MIGHT USE ENLARGEMENT AS A PRETEXT FOR BREAKING SOME OF THE ORIGINAL TWO-PLUS-FOUR COMMITMENTS ESPECIALLY REGARDING NUCLEAR DEPLOYMENTS ON THE TERRITORY OF THE FORMER GDR ON THIS POINT WE CAN REASSURE RUSSIA THAT GERMANY HAS STATED REPEATEDLY THAT IT WILL COMPLY FULLY WITH ALL COMMITMENTS IN THE TREATY INCLUDING PROVISIONS REGARDING BOTH CONVENTIONAL AND NUCLEAR THERE IS CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 08 STATE 036296 2317042 ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE OF ANY GERMAN PLANS TO THE CONTRARY MDREOVER AN ENLARGED NATO AND ALL ITS MEMBERS WILL ALSO FULLY RESPECT THE TREATY UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 0511012012 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 IF THE RUSSIANS HAVE SOMEHOW READ ANY AMEIGUITY ON THIS POINT INTO THE ENLARGEMENT STUDY WE SHOULD IMMEDIATELY DISABUSE THEM OF SUCH A NOTION THE NATO ENLARGEMENT STUDY MAKES CLEAR THAT IS NO A PRIORI REQUIREMENT FOR THE STATIONING OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON THE TERRITORY OF NEW AND THERE IS NEED NOW TO CHANGE OR MODIFY ANY ASPECT 0F NUCLEAR POSTURE 0R WE HAVE REPEATEDLY REVIEWED THIS ISSUE WITH SENIOR RUSSIAN OFFICIALS UNFORTUNATELY SOME MEDIA REPORTS AND SOME STATEMENTS BY RUSSIAN COMMENTATORS HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY MISTATED THIS ISSUE THE BROADER QUESTION OF PRECEDENTS MORE BROADLY THE RUSSIANS MAY BE GROPING TOWARDS A SOMEWHAT MORE SUBTLE OUTCOME SINCE KEY MEMBERS OF NATO HAVE IN CASE ACCEPTED A LEGALLY-BINDING ARRANGEMENT WHICH PROHIBITS THE STATIONING OR DEPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN FORCES OR NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON SOVEREIGN TERRITORY OF AN ALLY RUSSIA MIGHT HOPE EVENTUALLY TO EXTRACT A SIMILAR LIMITATION FROM NATO ITSELF WITH REGARD TO AN ENLARGED ALLIANCE THIS INTERPRETATION WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH RECENT STATEMENTS THAT MOSCOW COULD ACCEPT NATO SECURITY GUARANTEES T0 CENTRAL EUROPE BUT NOT THE EXTENSION OF I E STATIONED FORCES CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 09 STATE 036296 2317042 NUCLEAR WEAPONS FACILITIES IN ESSENCE WHAT FOREIGN MINISTER PRIMAKOV SET FORTH IN MINSK AND KIEV MAY HAVE REPRESENTED AN EMERGING FORMULA -- ILL-DEFINED BY THE WEST TO THE CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEANS WOULD BE -- NATO MEMBERSHIP FOR THE CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEANS REMAINS ANTI-RUSSIAN AND UNNECESSARILY PROVOCATIVE BUT MIGHT PROVE ULTIMATELY ACCEPTABLE IF SOMEHOW -- THE EXTENSION OF NATO INTO CENTRAL AND UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 EASTERN EUROPE WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR RUSSIA EVER TO ACCEPT AND WOULD DOOM OUR EFFORTS TO CREATE A COOPERATIVE COMPREHENSIVE EUROPEAN SECURITY SYSTEM THUS IF NATO ENLARGEMENT ULTIMATELY PROVES INEVITABLE PRIMAKOV MAY BE POSITIONING RUSSIA TO PURSUE A DEAL IN WHICH NEW ALLIES WOULD HAVE TO ACCEPT LIMITATIONS ON THEIR MEMBERSHIP EQUIVALENT TO THE TWO-PLUS-FOUR RESTRICTIONS ON GERMANY IN THE MEANTIME CONSISTENT WITH FUNDAMENTAL OPPOSITION TO NATO ENLARGEMENT PRIMAKOV CONTINUES TO PORTRAY ALLIANCE PLANS AND ACTIONS AS UNNECESSARY PROVOCATIVE AND INCONSISTENT WITH TWO-PLUS-FOUR COMMITMENTS NATO HAS REPEATEDLY MADE CLEAR TO THE RUSSIANS THAT THE ENLARGEMENT STUDY DOES NOT FORESHADOW CONVENTIONAL STATIONING OR NUCLEAR DEPLOYMENTS IN CENTRAL OR EASTERN EUROPE AND IN RESPONDING TO 16 QUESTIONS -- CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 10 STATE 036296 2317042 VON MOLTKE HAS REJECTED ANY NOTION THAT TWO-PLUS-FOUR APPLIES TO THE ENLARGEMENT PROCESS NEVERTHELESS RUSSIAN TACTICS WILL LIKELY CONTINUE TO BE TO USE THESE ISSUES TO SEEK TO CREATE DIVISIONS BOTH WITHIN NATO AND BETWEEN THE ALLIANCE AND THE CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEANS OUR MESSAGE IN RESPONSE ON THE BASIC QUESTION OF WHETHER THE APPLIES TO THE STATES EAST OF GERMANY WE SHOULD BE VERY DIRECT -- THE TREATY PROHIBITS THE STATIONING OR DEPLOYMENT OF NON-GERMAN FORCES AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS SYSTEMS ONLY ON THE TERRITORY OF THE FORMER GDR THESE TREATY LIMITATIONS DO NOT APPLY TO THE STATES EAST OF GERMANY AND THUS HAVE NO BEARING ON NATO ENLARGEMENT -- JUST LIKE ALLIANCE AN ENLARGED NATO AND ALL UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date 05 10 2012 ITS INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS WILL CONTINUE TO HONOR ALL COMMITMENTS IN THE TREATY ON THE BROADER ISSUE OF EMERGING EFFORT TO POSITION ITSELF FOR POSSIBLE DEAL-MAKING BASED ON THE TWO-PLUS-FOUR PRECEDENT OF WITH WE SHOULD FORCEFULLY REMIND MOSCOW THAT WE ARE NOT PREPARED TO CUT ANY DEALS OVER THE HEADS OF THE CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEANS BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THE POST-WAR CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL PAGE 11 STATE 036296 231704Z SETTLEMENT MOSCOW HAD A LEGAL ROLE IN GERMAN UNIFICATION GERMANY HAD A COMPELLING REASON TO PURSUE A DEAL WITH THE RUSSIANS AND THE GERMANS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BORDER WERE FULL PARTIES TO THE NEGOTIATIONS THE SITUATION VIS-A-VIS THE CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEANS IS VASTLY DIFFERENT ANY SUGGESTION THAT WE WERE PREPARED TO COUNTENANCE SUCH DEAL-MAKING THEM BUT WITHOUT WOULD BE DEVASTATING TO OUR POLITICAL POSITION AND CREDIBILITY THERE AND WOULD UNDERCUT FIVE YEARS OF EFFECTIVE OUTREACH END TEXT CHRISTOPHER UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2008-02356 Date                     National Security Archive    Suite 701  Gelman Library  The George Washington University    2130 H Street  NW  Washington  D C  20037    Phone  202 994‐7000  Fax  202 994‐7005  nsarchiv@gwu edu