- l FL-2017-13804 A-00000766769 UNCLASS IL- __ United States Devartment of State IFl D 06 20 2024 The Deputy Secretary of State Washington UC 20520 Monday December 21 1998 Dear Yuri First let me thank you for all you did to make Leon Larry and me feel that our trip t11 Moscow was most worthv hile A few days later Igor Sergeyevich md I ere seakd next to each other at the Bosn ii l Peace Implementation Con ferencl' i 11 Madrid - o w had a bit of a chance amidst othl r busint ss to compare impre - i1 11 - Iri 14 I just talked to Torn who· s hack from a day in New York where hl · haJ a gl H d talk with Sergei ah out Wi l 'S ll make the most of our common ground JnJ to 111 magc the di fficuJties generate l h l llr difforences Madeleine is on 1 hriL· 1· huliday in Culora lo hut she will he calling Igor Sergeyc 'ich un se 'eral suhjcl't -- with special emplrnsis on Cyprus We nccd if possible to comc to terms on tl L· Ianguagc for a UN n solution since the l lllC hope of a possi h h Jc al may bang i 11 LI IL' bul mcc ·1nm tric l to reach you on this suhjt i l earlier today and may try agaill tomorrow On you can imagine the days since I returned from Moscow and Madrid ha ·e bc n pretty hel tic hence the delay in my getting back to you with some initial reactions to the ideas I heard in Mosco ' about CFE What I have to say here is in the same sririt as our conversation in your office mutual brainstorming I'm try in ' tu give you sorni s1 nse of how Craig and my other colleagues are likely to respDnd i the sort of ideas I heard come up in formal channels A - There an s vi ral points in what I heard that if clearly reflected as a Russian position in Vienna could give us a chance to move fon ·ard early in the new year when negotiations re ume there I hope I'm correct in inferring that Russia is llll prepareJ tu u ccpt the various flexibility-rnt chanisrns proposed by delegation representing NA TO member-states - and specifically our levels for Exceptional Tempor u y Deployments outside of the Flank - provided the resulting levels r t or es p1 r111itkd in l'1 ntral and Eastern Europe both permanently and temporaril arc vithin 'hat can bl agreed to as an acceptable range It would be an important step forwar l for Russia to state this in Vienna 1 Mr Georgiy Mamedov Deputy Foreign Minister Ministry of Foreign Affairs Moscow -2FL-2017-13804 A-00000766769 UNCLASSIFIED 06 20 2024 But in this regard I must also underscore what I see as a continuing problem There still seems to be a desire on your side to create a different set of rules for the new NA TO members than those that apply to the rest of the Alliance That crosses one of our red lines as such it won't move us forward If our negotiators focus on trying to create a new Treaty regulation mandating specified reductions in territorial ceilings from designated countries we will not make the rapid progress our ministers have agreed is a key priority We are more likely to achieve an early positive outcome if we focus on what would r sult from the commitment of individual countries to freeze their territorial ceilings and to undertake reductions in their holdings As for defining what these results should be - i e decisions on any future reductions in Central and Eastern Europe and elsewhere - that should remain the prerogativl of the individual governments of CFE states parties They have yet to be heard from definitively As I pointed out in my last letter to you on this subject their readiness to commit to real reductions will be influenced by evidence of comparable restraint from other states parties specifically those on their borders and Russia ·s restraint with regard to Kaliningrad - as well as by the current sizes of their militaries A one size fits all'' reduction for all countries of the reginn is unlikely to work On the flank I was encouraged to hear that Russia will continue its discussions with Turkey It's equally important to du so Vith Norway and the other concerned par1ies in this region It would b an important step if you accepll d the principles put forth by Turkey and Norway for operation of future Flank restraints under an adapted Treaty But other parties will be reluctant to say the ll ast 10 agree to m w Flank numbers unless your negotiators can assure them that ruturc ffank obligations will be not only legally-binding but durabk So much for the prose in what I heard in Moscow Now for the arithmetic I · 'e got to tell you that the numbers suggested diminish my hopes of a breakthrough I had thought we were further along in the process of hammering out a broadly al' ccptable solution than those numbers suggest For example when our experts met in Brussels last month after the latest PJC experts session on CFE your representatives indicated that Russia would seek among two options 2000 active ACVs for the --new'' flank geography within Russian territory We also understood that presuming a mutually satisfactory solution to the Capital Repair Facilities question you would not seek an increase in current permitted levels of tanks and artillery That ACV figure of 2000 would represent a significant increase over the 580 active ACVs currently allowed Russia I need hardly belabor the obvious point that the even higher figures I heard in Moscow wou d be even harder to sell -3FL-2017-13804 A-00000766769 U NC LASS IFl ED 06 20 2024 Finally let me echo a point that we've discussed before and that Tom Pickering made with Igor Sergeyevich in Oslo It concerns ··refraining from mutual accusations '' You bet Our task is hard enough given the complexity of the negotiations without overheated rhetoric or attempts to set separate deadlines for specific issues We're committed as we agreed in Oslo to pushing for progress in the first months of next year But our ultimate goal remains an adapted Treaty and we need lo conduct ourselves and our negotiations in a way that does not jeopardize that larger objective in the event our best efforts in the coming months are not immediately successful The U S government has trkd to maintain a positive approach - both in the actual negotiations and in our charm terization of them wc·ve tried to strike a balanl' c bc tween patience and pcrsislcm e We'll continue to do that It will not help if we ha 'e to reply to rhetorical statements not to mention outright warnings that seem to call into question the legitimacy of the Treaty and full compliance with its obligations In conclusion let me assure you that since my return r 'e been in close touch with Madeleine and Sandy about the priority we need to give CFE during the months ahead As I told Igor Scrgeyevich in Madrid I also had a very focused conversation with Javier on this subject You need have no doubt that ve're well aware ofth importance even the urgency ofthis issue - not just from your standpoint but from ours as well I ·l also been working with colleagues on other related issues including the Strategic Concept with an eye to making developments in ·99 as favorable as possible in their implications for U S -Russian - and NATO-Russian - relations Ld's continue to stay in the closest possible touch on CFE and all the other issues on our common plate Best regards Strobe Talbott If i - t i - 1 J n- L 3 o c r- i -- J 11--rn µ l µ