

Currently released so far... 51122 / 251,287
Articles
Brazil
Sri Lanka
United Kingdom
Sweden
00. Editorial
United States
Latin America
Egypt
Jordan
Yemen
Thailand
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
2011/05/01
2011/05/02
2011/05/03
2011/05/04
2011/05/05
2011/05/06
2011/05/07
2011/05/08
2011/05/09
2011/05/10
2011/05/11
2011/05/12
2011/05/13
2011/05/14
2011/05/15
2011/05/16
2011/05/17
2011/05/18
2011/05/19
2011/05/20
2011/05/21
2011/05/22
2011/05/23
2011/05/24
2011/05/25
2011/05/26
2011/05/27
2011/05/28
2011/05/29
2011/05/30
2011/05/31
2011/06/01
2011/06/02
2011/06/03
2011/06/04
2011/06/05
2011/06/06
2011/06/07
2011/06/08
2011/06/09
2011/06/10
2011/06/11
2011/06/12
2011/06/13
2011/06/14
2011/06/15
2011/06/16
2011/06/17
2011/06/18
2011/06/19
2011/06/20
2011/06/21
2011/06/22
2011/06/23
2011/06/24
2011/06/25
2011/06/26
2011/06/27
2011/06/28
2011/06/29
2011/06/30
2011/07/01
2011/07/02
2011/07/04
2011/07/05
2011/07/06
2011/07/07
2011/07/08
2011/07/10
2011/07/11
2011/07/12
2011/07/13
2011/07/14
2011/07/15
2011/07/16
2011/07/17
2011/07/18
2011/07/19
2011/07/20
2011/07/21
2011/07/22
2011/07/23
2011/07/25
2011/07/27
2011/07/28
2011/07/29
2011/07/31
2011/08/01
2011/08/02
2011/08/03
2011/08/05
2011/08/06
2011/08/07
2011/08/08
2011/08/09
2011/08/10
2011/08/11
2011/08/12
2011/08/13
2011/08/15
2011/08/16
2011/08/17
2011/08/18
2011/08/19
2011/08/21
2011/08/22
2011/08/23
2011/08/24
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Antananarivo
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Alexandria
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embasy Bonn
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Brazzaville
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangui
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Belfast
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Cotonou
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chiang Mai
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Chengdu
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
DIR FSINFATC
Consulate Dusseldorf
Consulate Durban
Consulate Dubai
Consulate Dhahran
Embassy Guatemala
Embassy Grenada
Embassy Georgetown
Embassy Gaborone
Consulate Guayaquil
Consulate Guangzhou
Consulate Guadalajara
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Hong Kong
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kolonia
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Krakow
Consulate Kolkata
Consulate Karachi
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Lusaka
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Lome
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy Libreville
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Leipzig
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Mission Geneva
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Mogadishu
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maseru
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Merida
Consulate Melbourne
Consulate Matamoros
Consulate Marseille
Embassy Nouakchott
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Nuevo Laredo
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Consulate Nagoya
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Praia
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Moresby
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Podgorica
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Hillah
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Surabaya
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy Tirana
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
Consulate Thessaloniki
USUN New York
USMISSION USTR GENEVA
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Mission CD Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
UN Rome
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vientiane
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AMGT
ASEC
AEMR
AR
APECO
AU
AORC
ADANA
AJ
AF
AFIN
AMED
AS
AM
ABLD
AFFAIRS
AMB
APER
ACOA
AND
AA
AE
AADP
AID
AO
AL
AG
AORD
ADM
AINF
AINT
ASEAN
AORG
ABT
APEC
AY
ASUP
ARF
AGOA
AVIAN
ATRN
ANET
AGIT
ASECVE
ABUD
AODE
ALOW
ADB
AN
ADPM
ASPA
ARABL
AFSN
AZ
AC
AIAG
AFSI
ASCE
ASIG
ACABQ
ADIP
AFGHANISTAN
AROC
ADCO
ACOTA
ANARCHISTS
AMEDCASCKFLO
AK
ARABBL
ASCH
ANTITERRORISM
AGRICULTURE
AOCR
ARR
ASSEMBLY
AORCYM
AFPK
ACKM
AGMT
AEC
APRC
AIN
AFPREL
ASFC
ASECTH
AFSA
AINR
AOPC
AFAF
AFARI
AX
ASECAF
ASECAFIN
AT
AFZAL
APCS
AGAO
AIT
ARCH
AEMRASECCASCKFLOMARRPRELPINRAMGTJMXL
AMEX
ARM
AQ
ATFN
AMBASSADOR
AORCD
AVIATION
ARAS
AINFCY
ACBAQ
AOPR
AREP
AOIC
ASEX
ASEK
AER
AGR
AMCT
AVERY
APR
AEMRS
AFU
AMG
ATPDEA
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AORL
ACS
AMCHAMS
AECL
AUC
ACAO
BA
BR
BB
BG
BEXP
BY
BRUSSELS
BU
BD
BTIO
BK
BL
BE
BMGT
BO
BM
BX
BN
BWC
BBSR
BTT
BC
BH
BILAT
BUSH
BHUM
BT
BTC
BMENA
BOND
BAIO
BP
BF
BRPA
BURNS
BUT
BBG
BCW
BOEHNER
BOL
BASHAR
BIDEN
BFIN
BZ
BEXPC
BTIU
CPAS
CA
CASC
CS
CBW
CIDA
CO
CODEL
CI
CROS
CU
CH
CWC
CMGT
CVIS
CDG
CTR
CG
CF
CHIEF
CJAN
CBSA
CE
CY
CB
CW
CM
CHR
CD
COE
CV
COUNTER
CT
CN
CPUOS
CTERR
CVR
CVPR
CDC
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
CONS
COM
CACS
CR
CONTROLS
CAN
CACM
COMMERCE
CAMBODIA
CFIS
COUNTERTERRORISM
CITES
CONDOLEEZZA
CZ
CTBT
CEN
CLINTON
CFED
CARC
CTM
CARICOM
CSW
CICTE
CYPRUS
CBE
CMGMT
CARSON
CWCM
CIVS
COUNTRYCLEARANCE
CENTCOM
CAPC
COPUOS
CKGR
CITEL
CQ
CITT
CIC
CARIB
CVIC
CAFTA
CVISU
CDB
CEDAW
CNC
CJUS
COMMAND
CENTER
COL
CAJC
CONSULAR
CLMT
CBC
CIA
CNARC
CIS
CEUDA
CHINA
CAC
CL
DR
DJ
DEMOCRATIC
DEMARCHE
DOMESTIC
DISENGAGEMENT
DB
DA
DHS
DAO
DCM
DAVID
DO
DEAX
DEFENSE
DEA
DTRO
DPRK
DOC
DTRA
DK
DAC
DOD
DRL
DRC
DCG
DE
DOT
DEPT
DOE
DS
DKEM
ECON
ETTC
EFIS
ETRD
EC
EMIN
EAGR
EAID
EFIN
EUN
ECIN
EG
EWWT
EINV
ENRG
ELAB
EPET
EIND
EN
EAIR
EUMEM
ECPS
ES
EI
ELTN
ET
EZ
EU
ER
EINT
ENGR
ECONOMIC
ENIV
EFTA
ETRN
EMS
EUREM
EPA
ESTH
EEB
EET
ENV
EAG
EXIM
ECTRD
ELNT
ENVIRONMENT
ECA
EAP
EINDIR
ETR
ECONOMY
ETRC
ELECTIONS
EICN
EXPORT
EARG
EGHG
EID
ETRO
EINF
EAIDHO
ECIP
EENV
EURM
EPEC
ERNG
ENERG
EIAD
EXBS
ED
EREL
ELAM
EK
EWT
ENGRD
EDEV
ECE
ENGY
EXIMOPIC
ETRDEC
ECCT
EUR
ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID
EFI
ECOSOC
EXTERNAL
ESCAP
ETCC
EENG
ERA
ENRD
ECLAC
ETRAD
EBRD
ENVR
ECONENRG
ELTNSNAR
ELAP
EPIT
EDUC
EAIDXMXAXBXFFR
EETC
EIVN
EDRC
EGOV
ETRA
EAIDRW
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ESA
ETRDGK
ENVI
ELN
EPRT
EPTED
ERTD
EUM
EAIDS
EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM
EDU
EV
EAIDAF
EDA
EPREL
EINVEFIN
EAGER
ETMIN
EUCOM
ECCP
EIDN
EINVKSCA
ENNP
EFINECONCS
ETC
EAIRASECCASCID
EINN
ETRP
ECONOMICS
ENERGY
EIAR
EINDETRD
ECONEFIN
EURN
ETRDEINVTINTCS
EFIM
ETIO
EATO
EIPR
EINVETC
ETTD
ETDR
EIQ
ECONCS
ENRGIZ
EAIG
ENTG
EUC
ERD
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EEPET
EUNCH
ESENV
ECINECONCS
ETRDECONWTOCS
ECUN
FR
FI
FOREIGN
FARM
FIR
FAO
FK
FARC
FAS
FJ
FREEDOM
FAC
FINANCE
FBI
FTAA
FM
FCS
FAA
FORCE
FDA
FTA
FT
FCSC
FMGT
FINR
FIN
FDIC
FOR
FOI
FO
FMLN
FISO
GM
GERARD
GT
GA
GG
GR
GTIP
GH
GZ
GE
GB
GY
GAZA
GJ
GEORGE
GOI
GCC
GMUS
GI
GLOBAL
GV
GC
GL
GOV
GKGIC
GF
GWI
GIPNC
GUTIERREZ
GTMO
GANGS
GAERC
GUILLERMO
GASPAR
HR
HA
HYMPSK
HO
HK
HUMAN
HU
HN
HHS
HURI
HUD
HUMRIT
HUMANITARIAN
HUMANR
HL
HSTC
HILLARY
HCOPIL
HADLEY
HOURANI
HI
HUM
HEBRON
HUMOR
IZ
IN
IAEA
IS
IMO
ILO
IR
IC
IT
ITU
ID
IV
IMF
IBRD
IWC
ICAO
ICRC
INF
IO
IPR
ISO
IK
ISRAELI
IQ
ICES
IDB
INFLUENZA
IRAQI
ISCON
IGAD
IRAN
ITALY
IRAQ
ICTY
ICTR
ITPGOV
ITALIAN
IQNV
IADB
INTERNAL
INMARSAT
IRDB
ILC
INCB
INRB
ICJ
ISRAEL
INR
IEA
ISPA
ICCAT
IOM
ITRD
IHO
IL
IFAD
ITRA
IDLI
ISCA
INL
INRA
INTELSAT
ISAF
ISPL
IRS
IEF
ITER
INDO
IIP
IND
IEFIN
IACI
IAHRC
INNP
IA
INTERPOL
IFIN
ISSUES
IZPREL
IRAJ
IF
ITPHUM
ITA
IP
IRPE
IDA
ISLAMISTS
ITF
INRO
IBET
IDP
IRC
KMDR
KPAO
KOMC
KNNP
KFLO
KDEM
KSUM
KIPR
KFLU
KE
KCRM
KJUS
KAWC
KZ
KSCA
KDRG
KCOR
KGHG
KPAL
KTIP
KMCA
KCRS
KPKO
KOLY
KRVC
KVPR
KG
KWBG
KTER
KS
KN
KSPR
KWMN
KV
KTFN
KFRD
KU
KSTC
KSTH
KISL
KGIC
KSEP
KFIN
KTEX
KTIA
KUNR
KCMR
KCIP
KMOC
KTDB
KBIO
KBCT
KMPI
KSAF
KACT
KFEM
KPRV
KPWR
KIRC
KCFE
KRIM
KHIV
KHLS
KVIR
KNNNP
KCEM
KLIG
KIRF
KNUP
KSAC
KNUC
KPGOV
KTDD
KIDE
KOMS
KLFU
KNNC
KMFO
KSEO
KJRE
KJUST
KMRS
KSRE
KGIT
KPIR
KPOA
KUWAIT
KIVP
KICC
KSCS
KPOL
KSEAO
KRCM
KSCI
KNAP
KGLB
KICA
KCUL
KPRM
KFSC
KQ
KPOP
KPFO
KPALAOIS
KREC
KBWG
KR
KTTB
KNAR
KCOM
KESS
KINR
KOCI
KWN
KCSY
KREL
KTBT
KFTN
KW
KRFD
KFLOA
KHDP
KNEP
KIND
KHUM
KSKN
KOMO
KDRL
KTFIN
KSOC
KPO
KGIV
KSTCPL
KSI
KPRP
KFPC
KNNB
KNDP
KICCPUR
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KDMR
KFCE
KIMMITT
KMCC
KMNP
KSEC
KOMCSG
KGCC
KRAD
KCRP
KAUST
KWAWC
KCHG
KRDP
KPAS
KTIAPARM
KPAOPREL
KWGB
KIRP
KMIG
KLAB
KSEI
KHSA
KNPP
KPAONZ
KWWW
KGHA
KY
KCRIM
KCRCM
KGCN
KPLS
KIIP
KPAOY
KTRD
KTAO
KJU
KBTS
KWAC
KFIU
KNNO
KPAI
KILS
KPA
KRCS
KWBGSY
KNPPIS
KNNPMNUC
KNPT
KERG
KLTN
KPREL
KTLA
KO
KAWK
KVRP
KAID
KX
KENV
KWCI
KNPR
KCFC
KNEI
KFTFN
KTFM
KCERS
KDEMAF
KMEPI
KEMS
KBTR
KEDU
KIRL
KNNR
KMPT
KPDD
KPIN
KDEV
KFRP
KTBD
KMSG
KWWMN
KWBC
KA
KOM
KWNM
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KRGY
KNNF
KICR
KIFR
KWMNCS
KPAK
KDDG
KCGC
KID
KNSD
KMPF
KWMM
MARR
MX
MASS
MOPS
MNUC
MCAP
MTCRE
MRCRE
MTRE
MASC
MY
MK
MG
MU
MILI
MO
MZ
MEPP
MCC
MEDIA
MOPPS
MI
MAS
MW
MP
MEPN
MV
MD
MR
MC
MCA
MT
MIL
MARITIME
MOPSGRPARM
MAAR
MOOPS
ML
MA
MN
MNUCPTEREZ
MTCR
MUNC
MPOS
MONUC
MGMT
MURRAY
MACP
MINUSTAH
MCCONNELL
MGT
MNUR
MF
MEPI
MOHAMMAD
MAR
MAPP
MNU
MFA
MTS
MLS
MEETINGS
MERCOSUR
MED
MNVC
MIK
MBM
MILITARY
MAPS
MARAD
MDC
MACEDONIA
MASSMNUC
MUCN
MQADHAFI
MPS
NZ
NATO
NI
NO
NU
NG
NL
NPT
NS
NA
NP
NASA
NSF
NEA
NANCY
NSG
NRR
NATIONAL
NMNUC
NC
NSC
NAS
NARC
NELSON
NATEU
NDP
NIH
NK
NIPP
NR
NERG
NSSP
NE
NTDB
NT
NEGROPONTE
NGO
NATOIRAQ
NAR
NZUS
NCCC
NH
NAFTA
NEW
NRG
NUIN
NOVO
NATOPREL
NV
NICHOLAS
NPA
NSFO
NW
NORAD
NPG
NOAA
OPRC
OPDC
OTRA
OECD
OVIP
OREP
ODC
OIIP
OAS
OSCE
OPIC
OMS
OFDP
OFDA
OEXC
OPCW
OIE
OSCI
OM
OPAD
ODPC
OIC
ODIP
OPPI
ORA
OCEA
OREG
OMIG
OFFICIALS
OSAC
OEXP
OPEC
OFPD
OAU
OCII
OIL
OVIPPRELUNGANU
OSHA
OPCD
OPCR
OF
OFDPQIS
OSIC
OHUM
OTR
OBSP
OGAC
OESC
OVP
ON
OES
OTAR
OCS
PREL
PGOV
PARM
PINR
PHUM
PM
PREF
PTER
PK
PINS
PBIO
PHSA
PE
PBTS
PA
PL
POL
PAK
POV
POLITICS
POLICY
PO
PRELTBIOBA
PKO
PIN
PNAT
PU
PGOVPREL
PALESTINIAN
PTERPGOV
PELOSI
PAS
PP
PTEL
PROP
PRELAF
PRHUM
PRE
PUNE
PIRF
PVOV
PROG
PERSONS
PROV
PKK
PRGOV
PH
PLAB
PDEM
PCI
PRL
PRM
PINSO
PERM
PETR
PPAO
PERL
PBS
PETERS
PRELBR
PCON
POLITICAL
PMIL
POLM
PKPA
PNUM
PLO
PTERM
PJUS
PARMP
PNIR
PHUMKPAL
PG
PREZ
PGIC
PAO
PROTECTION
PRELPK
PGOVENRG
PATTY
PSOC
PARTIES
PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ
PMIG
PAIGH
PARK
PETER
PHUS
PKPO
PGOVECON
POUS
PMAR
PWBG
PAR
PGOVGM
PHUH
PTE
PY
POLUN
PDOV
PGOVSOCI
PGOVPM
PRELEVU
PGOR
PBTSRU
PHUMA
PHUMR
PPD
PGV
PRAM
PARMS
PINL
PSI
PKPAL
PPA
PTERE
PGOF
PINO
PREO
PHAS
PAC
PRESL
PORG
PS
PGVO
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PINT
PRELP
PREFA
PNG
PTBS
PFOR
PGOVLO
PHUMBA
PREK
PHJM
POLINT
PGOVE
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PECON
PEACE
PROCESS
PLN
PEDRO
PF
PGPV
PCUL
PGGV
PSA
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PGIV
PHUMPREL
POGOV
PEL
PBT
PAMQ
PINF
PSEPC
POSTS
PAHO
PHUMPGOV
PGOC
PNR
RS
RP
RU
RW
RFE
RCMP
RIGHTSPOLMIL
REFORM
RO
ROW
ROBERT
REACTION
REPORT
REGION
RELATIONS
RAY
ROBERTG
RIGHTS
RM
RATIFICATION
RREL
RBI
RICE
ROOD
REL
RODHAM
RGY
RUEHZO
RELIGIOUS
RELFREE
RUEUN
RELAM
RSP
RF
REO
REGIONAL
RUPREL
RI
REMON
RPEL
RSO
SCUL
SENV
SOCI
SZ
SNAR
SO
SP
SU
SY
SI
SMIG
SYR
SA
SW
SF
SR
SYRIA
SNARM
START
SPECIALIST
SG
SNIG
SCI
SGWI
SE
SIPDIS
SANC
SELAB
SN
SETTLEMENTS
SCIENCE
SENVENV
SENS
SPCE
SPAS
SECURITY
SENC
SOCIETY
SOSI
SENVEAGREAIDTBIOECONSOCIXR
SEN
SPECI
ST
SL
SENVCASCEAIDID
SC
SECRETARY
STR
SNA
SOCIS
SADC
SEP
SK
SHUM
SYAI
SMIL
STEPHEN
SNRV
SKCA
SENSITIVE
SECI
SCUD
SCRM
SGNV
SECTOR
SAARC
SENVSXE
SWMN
STEINBERG
SOPN
SOCR
SCRS
SWE
SARS
SNARIZ
SUDAN
SENVQGR
SAN
SM
SFNV
SSA
SPCVIS
SOFA
SCULKPAOECONTU
SENVKGHG
SHI
SEVN
SH
SNARCS
SNARN
SIPRS
TBIO
TW
TRGY
TSPA
TU
TPHY
TI
TX
TH
TIP
TSPL
TNGD
TZ
TS
TC
TK
TURKEY
TERRORISM
TPSL
TINT
TRSY
TERFIN
TPP
TT
TECHNOLOGY
TE
TAGS
TRAFFICKING
TJ
TN
TO
TD
TP
TREATY
TR
TA
TIO
TECH
TF
TRAD
TNDG
TWI
TPSA
TWL
TAUSCHER
TRBY
TL
TV
THPY
TSPAM
TREL
TRT
TNAR
TFIN
TWCH
THOMMA
THOMAS
TERROR
TRY
TBID
UK
UNESCO
UNSC
UNGA
UN
US
UZ
USEU
UG
UP
UNAUS
UNMIK
USTR
UY
USUN
UNEP
UNDC
UV
UNPUOS
UNSCR
USAID
UNODC
UNRCR
UNHCR
UNDP
UNCRIME
UA
UNHRC
UNRWA
UNO
UNCND
UNCHR
USAU
UNICEF
USPS
UNOMIG
UNESCOSCULPRELPHUMKPALCUIRXFVEKV
UR
UNFICYP
UNCITRAL
UNAMA
UNVIE
USTDA
USNC
UNCSD
USCC
UNEF
UNGAPL
USSC
UNMIC
UNTAC
UNCLASSIFIED
USDA
UNCTAD
USGS
UNFPA
UNSE
USOAS
UE
UAE
UNCHS
UNDESCO
UNC
UNSCS
UKXG
UNGACG
UNHR
UNBRO
UNCHC
UNFCYP
UNIDROIT
WHTI
WIPO
WTRO
WHO
WTO
WMO
WFP
WEET
WS
WE
WA
WHA
WBG
WILLIAM
WI
WSIS
WCL
WEBZ
WZ
WW
WWBG
WMD
WWT
WMN
WWARD
WITH
WTRQ
WCO
WEU
WB
WBEG
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 08STATE100958, JUNE 25, 2008 U.S.-RUSSIA JOINT DATA EXCHANGE
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #08STATE100958.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
08STATE100958 | 2008-09-22 14:42 | 2011-08-24 01:00 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | Secretary of State |
VZCZCXYZ0020
OO RUEHWEB
DE RUEHC #0958 2661448
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 221442Z SEP 08
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW IMMEDIATE 0000
INFO RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHMFISS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE 0000
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE 0000
UNCLAS STATE 100958
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: MARR PARM PREL RS
SUBJECT: JUNE 25, 2008 U.S.-RUSSIA JOINT DATA EXCHANGE
CENTER (JDEC) LEGAL EXPERTS MEETING
REF: 07 STATE 097376
¶1. (SBU) Summary: On June 25, a U.S. interagency delegation
led by State/L conducted talks at the Russian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs in Moscow to discuss liability provisions in
the JDEC Memorandum of Agreement (MoA). Failure to resolve
liability and taxation issues has been an impediment to the
implementation of the U.S.-Russia JDEC and Pre-Launch
Notification System (PLNS) agreements since their signature
and entry into force in 2000. On June 25, the Russian legal
experts agreed to use the "Joint Statement on Liability and
Taxation Provisions" - that Acting U/S Rood presented to DFM
Kislyak on May 19 in Oslo - as the basis for subsequent
negotiations. The U.S. and Russian legal and policy experts
made significant progress and the Russian side agreed ad ref
to the liability provisions in the U.S. text - except as they
related to possible claims against U.S. contractors. After
initially resisting, the Russians agreed to a waiver of
state-to-state claims and a qualified waiver of claims
against USG personnel per the U.S. proposal, but asserted
that U.S. contractors (especially those working on the
construction of the JDEC) should not receive the same
protections and instead should be subject to an insurance
regime and Russian law. DoD,s Office of General Counsel
will assess the Russian position on U.S. contractors to
determine whether it is consistent with the protections from
exposure for U.S. contractors in other agreements/contexts
and what language adjustments might be possible. (Both
delegations agreed that in any event Russian subcontractors
would be subject to Russian law.)
------------------------
June 25 Morning Session
------------------------
¶2. (SBU) U.S. Head of Delegation John Arbogast opened the
meeting by reviewing the background and rationale for the
liability section of the proposed U.S. JDEC "Joint Statement
on Liability and Taxation Provisions." Russian Head of
Delegation Alexander Bavykin said that Mr. Arbogast's review
was useful in laying out the history of the issue and the
U.S. approach and expressed the hope that the U.S. and
Russian delegations could narrow their differences even if
full agreement was not reached. He added that it was
important to have the JDEC functioning in the near future.
Further, for the Russians, liability was the most
complicated issue, while taxation was less complicated. In
laying out the Russian perspective, Bavykin said that the
Russians understood that the portion of the U.S. draft
dealing with liability had been drawn from the 2006 Plutonium
Disposition Liability Protocol and that while this language
was fine for dealing with nuclear matters, Russia was
doubtful about applying its principles in the JDEC context
because the JDEC did not involve nuclear materials. Arbogast
replied that the United States had tailored its draft so that
there were no provisions that were nuclear specific and that
the U.S. draft provided a framework for dealing with
contingencies that could create liability concerns. He added
that in drawing from the Plutonium Disposition Protocol the
U.S. did not want to suggest that the risks of JDEC
activities were in any way comparable to nuclear activities.
He emphasized that the U.S. goal was to take already
negotiated provisions in the context of a U.S.-Russian
cooperative activity and to apply them to the cooperative
activity of the JDEC. Arbogast also noted that to achieve
complete liability coverage, the U.S. wanted to add a
provision that incorporated the NATO-Russia Partnership for
Peace Status of Forces Agreement (PfP SOFA) which would for
example cover the issue of third-party claims. (NOTE:
Although Russia agreed to be bound by the PfP SOFA in August
2007, its application and the significance of certain Russian
"understandings" are currently being discussed within NATO
forums.) Bavykin said that Russia saw liability as being
mainly connected with the construction of the JDEC and asked
what was the nature of damage the U.S. could foresee that
would give rise to liability. Arbogast replied that the U.S.
did not foresee catastrophic damage occurring during either
the construction or operational phase, but there were things
that could go wrong as is the case with any activity.
Examples given included a drunken visitor to JDEC destroying
computer equipment; an accident in the facility,s parking
lot; or a design defect in the facility that contributes to
collateral damage to the surrounding area in the case of a
terrorist attack on JDEC. He added that incidents such as
this, while unlikely, could happen and that we should have a
liability regime in place to deal with them -- just as with
any other cooperative activity between governments.
¶3. (SBU) Russian HOD Bavykin said that the existing
U.S.-Russian JDEC Joint Statement on Privileges and
Immunities (P&I) covered the question of liability.
DOD/OGC-Carl Tierney responded that there was individual
liability and state-to-state liability and that the P&I Joint
Statement protected individuals while the U.S. draft Joint
Statement on Liability and Taxation addressed state-to-state
claims. Bavykin asked whether the discussion was about
state-to-state liability or contractor liability. Arbogast
replied that the discussion was about both and that the U.S.
wanted a liability regime in place that afforded basic
protection while providing a framework for resolving any
liability issues that arose. Bavykin responded that he did
not see any problem in the state-to-state relationship
involving liability - he did not foresee Russia suing the USG
during construction - but that in dealing with contractors
and subcontractors there needed to be a different model. He
added that there would be nothing unusual about the JDEC
construction site and that it was not necessary to invent any
liability provisions. Liability for contractors should be
protected against by insurance (e.g., for car accidents) and
governed by Russian law, not an international agreement.
Arbogast replied that it was not just a question of
contractors because USG employees would be at the site. He
added that it was a common feature of
government-to-government agreements to have liability
provisions and that the plutonium disposition protocol's
provisions did not only apply to catastrophic events but also
to normal activities that are part of a cooperative effort.
It therefore made sense to have these provisions apply to the
JDEC's type of cooperative activity. Bavykin again raised
the point that if the JDEC did not involve nuclear damage,
there was no need to apply the Plutonium Disposition
Protocol. He said that the MFA could not go to the Duma and
say that Russian or foreign firms would be immune from
liability; the MFA could not justify this position.
¶4. (SBU) Arbogast suggested that the discussion focus on
government-to-government claims. DOD/OGC-Tierney noted that
both the U.S. and Russia were parties to the PfP SOFA in
which they had agreed to a state-to-state liability waiver.
MOD Col. Il'in said that the PfP SOFA dealt with joint
military exercises or operations within the context of the
PfP, but that JDEC activities have nothing to do with the PfP
and that the JDEC was a bilateral activity whose purpose is
to minimize the risk of use of nuclear weapons. Tierney
responded that the USG takes a broader view of the PfP SOFA's
application in the sense that the U.S. viewed U.S. personnel
in a receiving State as covered by its provisions even if
they were not involved in PfP activities. He added that
without the JDEC agreements the U.S. would look to the PfP
SOFA by default, since it is a multilateral agreement both
the U.S. and Russia have agreed to and that Russian personnel
in the U.S. for JDEC activities would also be covered by it.
Tierney said that the PfP SOFA is a baseline in that if
issues arose that were not covered by the U.S. draft Joint
Statement, the PfP SOFA would provide guidance. He added
that it was a framework among allies - a model for
cooperative relations around the world -- that the U.S. was
not seeking advantage from its liability provisions and that
while there may never be a claim, we need a structure in
place just in case claims arise. Bavykin replied that there
was agreement on having liability provisions but that the
question was what kind of liability provisions were
appropriate.
¶5. (SBU) Arbogast noted that the understanding coming out of
the June 27-28, 2007, JDEC plenary meeting (reftel) was that
the Plutonium Disposition Liability Protocol provisions would
be the basis for further deliberations. He asked if the
discussion could proceed on that basis and on the basis of
Russian comments to the U.S. draft. Col. Il'in responded
that it was only agreed at the June 2007 meeting that legal
experts should review the Plutonium Disposition Protocol
approach. Arbogast replied that the U.S. approach was that
both sides have agreed to certain basic liability provisions
not only in the plutonium disposition context but also in the
PfP context and that the U.S. approach was fair, workable,
and took into account the nature of JDEC activities. A lot
of hard work had gone into the PuD liability agreement and it
does reflect a real cooperative approach, with a great
emphasis on consultations. He added that the liability
provisions of the U.S. draft were not unique to the plutonium
disposition protocol, that these provisions fit the JDEC
context, and that they should not be hard to explain to the
Duma or anyone else.
¶6. (SBU) Bavykin said that the problem with the U.S. approach
was not the waiver of government-to-government liability, but
the waiver of liability for contractors and he asked whether
Russian firms would be free from liability. Arbogast asked
if it was possible to view state and contractor liability
separately and that if the U.S. text modified its references
to contractors, would the Russians agree to the U.S. draft as
it relates to claims against the USG and its employees.
Bavykin replied that he would favorably recommend this to
his superiors. He added that he did not know whether this
would be approved. Arbogast said that this would be a good
step forward and that the U.S. would want to see the Russian
approach regarding contractors. In summarizing his position,
Bavykin said that it was fair to state that (1) both
governments would not sue each other in relation to
construction work and the activity of the JDEC once it is in
place; (2) contractors' activities being predominantly
construction or related activities would not be covered by
the liability provisions but by provisions of Russian law;
and (3) U.S. government personnel working at the JDEC would
enjoy the privileges and immunities of U.S. Embassy personnel
in Moscow. OSD/MDP - Phil Jamison noted with regard to
contractors that it was the U.S. understanding from the JDEC
negotiating record that the vast majority of contractor
personnel would be Russian subcontractors (not covered by the
U.S. draft's liability waiver) with a U.S. prime contractor
managing the project. Bavykin responded that it would be
necessary to take into account all the elements of our
agreements and to look at the situation in terms of a new
JDEC site to assess the work responsibilities of the
different types of contractors and their liability status.
Arbogast said that the U.S. delegation was pleased to have a
meeting of the minds on governmental claims.
-------------------------
June 25 Afternoon Session
--------------------------
¶7. (SBU) At the start of the session, Russian HOD Bavykin
gave the U.S. delegation a copy of a four-point paper he had
prepared over the lunch break entitled "Preliminary Views on
Civil Liability Issues as Possible Grounds to Elaborate
Relevant Provisions in a Document to the JDEC Memorandum of
Agreement." It included the three points above plus a fourth
stating that paragraph 4 of the U.S. draft Joint Statement
(which sets out five basic provisions such as non-waiver of
sovereign immunity) shall be construed as applying to the two
governments only (and not contractors). Arbogast commented on
each without agreeing expressly to the formulations, and
observed primarily that the provision dealing with
contractors and their coverage under Russian law would have
to be studied further back in Washington. (NOTE: DoD,s
Office of General Counsel will assess the Russian position on
U.S. contractors to determine whether it is consistent with
the protections from exposure for U.S. contractors in other
agreements/contexts and what language adjustments might be
possible. Both delegations agreed that in any event Russian
subcontractors would be subject to Russian law.)
¶8. (SBU) U.S. HOD Arbogast suggested a brief discussion of
where things stood regarding the taxation provisions of the
U.S. draft and observed that in the past the Russians had
said that once liability was resolved taxation should not be
a problem. He asked Bavykin to give a sense of any problems
the Russians saw with how taxation was addressed by the U.S.
draft. Bavykin said that he was a specialist in liability,
that he had not looked carefully at the U.S. taxation
language, but that he did not see any major problems and that
Col. Il'in could speak to taxation. Col. Il'in noted that
the U.S. taxation language was not within the MOD's
competence but was within the jurisdiction of the Ministry of
Finance. He added that as with the liability language,
references to contractors would have to be removed from the
taxation language. He also noted that the word "any" would
have to be replaced in the sentence mentioning waiver of
taxes and fees for any equipment, supplies, materials or
services brought into Russia to implement the JDEC MoA. He
recommended replacing "any" with "necessary." On the
question of removing reference to contractors in the taxation
language, Tierney responded that a potential problem with
this approach was that it went to the aspect of the JDEC
involving shared costs and that the U.S. could end up bearing
more costs than Russia.
¶9. (SBU) Arbogast said that the U.S. delegation would be
returning to Washington with the understanding that Russia
accepted the U.S. draft with the exception of the bracketed
liability language on contractors and that the taxation
language would need further review. Bavykin replied that
this was basically the case and that his delegation had no
problem accepting the approach laid out in the U.S. draft
with the adjusted language. Arbogast asked if there would be
any Russian adjustments beyond the reference to contractors.
Bavykin said the Russians would like to reserve the right to
introduce changes in other areas of the draft. He added,
that while in principle accepting the concept of the draft,
they still wanted to review it carefully and that changes
might go beyond what had been discussed but would not
challenge the overall approach of the U.S. draft. (NOTE: The
PfP SOFA provision (para 9) of the U.S. draft might also end
up being a recommended deletion by the Russian side, in view
of the strong views expressed by Col. Il,in on the subject.)
¶10. (SBU) Arbogast inquired as to whether the U.S. could
expect a response in two weeks on the taxation provisions.
Bavykin replied that it might take more than two weeks to
provide a response on liability as well as to get the
response of the Ministry of Finance and other relevant
agencies. Col. Il'in said that a Russian delegation could
not go to Washington in July to discuss JDEC taxation issues
and that responses from Russian tax agencies would be
conveyed through diplomatic channels. Arbogast raised the
possibility of having a meeting on taxation in early August
in Moscow if a U.S. delegation went there to discuss JDEC
site facility issues.
¶11. (U) Participants:
United States
John Arbogast - State Department Office of the Legal Adviser,
Head of Delegation
Phil Jamison - OSD Office of Missile Defense Policy, Deputy
Head of Delegation
Carl Tierney - DOD/Office of the General Counsel
CDR Nadeem Ahmad - Joint Chiefs of Staff Office of Legal
Counsel
Bradley Martin - U.S. Strategic Command
Steve Rosenkrantz - State Department Office of Missile
Defense and Space Policy,
Delegation Executive Secretary
Margaret Hawthorne - Head of Political External Section, U.S.
Embassy, Moscow
Yuri Shkeyrov - Interpreter, Department of State
Russian Federation
Alexander Bavykin - Deputy Director MFA Legal Department,
Head of Delegation
Alexander Borisov - Councilor, MFA Legal Department
Alexandra Kotsuybinskaya - MFA Legal Department
Vladimir Lapshin - Senior Councilor, MFA North America
Department
Sergey Kashirin - Councilor, MFA Security and Disarmament
Affairs Department
Col. Yevgeny Il'in - MOD
Col. Vadim Stalinsky - MOD
Col. Viktor Grigorenko - MOD
RICE