Cable Viewer

Currently released so far... 12648 / 251,287

### Browse latest releases

2010/11 2010/12 2011/01 2011/02 2011/03 2011/04 2011/05
2010/11/28 2010/11/29 2010/11/30
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 2011/01/10 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

### Browse by creation date

66 72 73 75 79 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 97 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
1966/12
1972/02 1972/08
1973/04
1975/03
1979/08
1985/03 1985/05 1985/06
1986/05
1987/06
1988/01 1988/03 1988/07
1989/12
1990/01 1990/07 1990/08 1990/10
1991/05
1992/01 1992/03 1992/06 1992/09 1992/12
1993/01 1993/10
1994/12
1996/11
1997/06 1997/12
2000/05 2000/06 2000/09 2000/11
2001/02 2001/03 2001/06 2001/07 2001/09 2001/10 2001/11
2002/01 2002/02 2002/03 2002/04 2002/07 2002/08 2002/09 2002/11 2002/12
2003/01 2003/02 2003/03 2003/04 2003/05 2003/06 2003/07 2003/08 2003/09 2003/10 2003/11 2003/12
2004/01 2004/02 2004/03 2004/04 2004/05 2004/06 2004/07 2004/08 2004/09 2004/10 2004/11 2004/12
2005/01 2005/02 2005/03 2005/04 2005/05 2005/06 2005/07 2005/08 2005/09 2005/10 2005/11 2005/12
2006/01 2006/02 2006/03 2006/04 2006/05 2006/06 2006/07 2006/08 2006/09 2006/10 2006/11 2006/12
2007/01 2007/02 2007/03 2007/04 2007/05 2007/06 2007/07 2007/08 2007/09 2007/10 2007/11 2007/12
2008/01 2008/02 2008/03 2008/04 2008/05 2008/06 2008/07 2008/08 2008/09 2008/10 2008/11 2008/12
2009/01 2009/02 2009/03 2009/04 2009/05 2009/06 2009/07 2009/08 2009/09 2009/10 2009/11 2009/12
2010/01 2010/02

### Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z
Embassy Athens Embassy Asuncion Embassy Astana Embassy Asmara Embassy Ashgabat Embassy Apia Embassy Ankara Embassy Amman Embassy Algiers Embassy Addis Ababa Embassy Accra Embassy Abuja Embassy Abu Dhabi Embassy Abidjan Consulate Auckland Consulate Amsterdam Consulate Adana American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura Embassy Buenos Aires Embassy Budapest Embassy Bucharest Embassy Brussels Embassy Bridgetown Embassy Bratislava Embassy Brasilia Embassy Bogota Embassy Bishkek Embassy Bern Embassy Berlin Embassy Belmopan Embassy Belgrade Embassy Beirut Embassy Beijing Embassy Banjul Embassy Bangkok Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan Embassy Bamako Embassy Baku Embassy Baghdad Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen Embassy Conakry Embassy Colombo Embassy Chisinau Embassy Caracas Embassy Canberra Embassy Cairo Consulate Curacao Consulate Ciudad Juarez Consulate Chennai 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 Consulate Dubai
Embassy Freetown Consulate Fukuoka
Embassy Guatemala Embassy Gaborone Consulate Guayaquil Consulate Guadalajara
Embassy Helsinki Embassy Harare Embassy Hanoi Consulate Ho Chi Minh City Consulate Hermosillo Consulate Hamilton Consulate Hamburg Consulate Halifax
Iran RPO Dubai Embassy Islamabad Consulate Istanbul
Embassy Jakarta Consulate Jerusalem Consulate Jeddah
Embassy Kyiv Embassy Kuwait Embassy Kuala Lumpur Embassy Kinshasa Embassy Kingston Embassy Kigali Embassy Khartoum Embassy Kathmandu Embassy Kampala Embassy Kabul Consulate Kolkata
Embassy Luxembourg Embassy Luanda Embassy London Embassy Ljubljana Embassy Lisbon Embassy Lima Embassy Lilongwe Embassy La Paz Consulate Lahore Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE Mission USNATO Mission UNESCO Embassy Muscat Embassy Moscow Embassy Montevideo Embassy Monrovia Embassy Minsk Embassy Mexico Embassy Mbabane Embassy Maputo Embassy Manila Embassy Manama Embassy Managua Embassy Malabo Embassy Madrid Consulate Munich Consulate Mumbai Consulate Montreal Consulate Monterrey Consulate Milan Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia Embassy Niamey Embassy New Delhi Embassy Ndjamena Embassy Nassau Embassy Nairobi Consulate Naples Consulate Naha
Embassy Ouagadougou Embassy Ottawa Embassy Oslo
Embassy Pristina Embassy Pretoria Embassy Prague Embassy Port Of Spain Embassy Port Louis Embassy Port Au Prince Embassy Phnom Penh Embassy Paris Embassy Paramaribo Embassy Panama Consulate Peshawar
Embassy Quito Consulate Quebec
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 Strasbourg Consulate St Petersburg Consulate Shenyang Consulate Shanghai Consulate Sapporo Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis Embassy Tripoli Embassy Tokyo Embassy The Hague Embassy Tel Aviv Embassy Tehran Embassy Tegucigalpa Embassy Tbilisi Embassy Tashkent Embassy Tallinn Consulate Toronto Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York USEU Brussels US Office Almaty US Mission Geneva US Interests Section Havana US Delegation, Secretary UNVIE Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius Embassy Vienna Embassy Vatican Embassy Valletta Consulate Vladivostok Consulate Vancouver
Embassy Windhoek Embassy Wellington Embassy Warsaw
Embassy Yerevan Embassy Yaounde
Embassy Zagreb

### Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
AORC AF AU ASEC AMGT AS APER AR AG ARF AJ AA AINF APECO AODE ABLD AMG ATPDEA AE AEMR AMED AGAO AFIN AL ASUP ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG AID ASCH AM AORL ASEAN APEC ADM AFSI AFSN ADCO ABUD AN AY AIT AGR ACOA ANET ASIG AMCHAMS AGMT AADP ADPM ATRN ALOW ACS APCS AFFAIRS ADANA AECL ACAO AORG AROC AO ACABQ AX AMEX AFGHANISTAN AZ AND ARM AQ ATFN AMBASSADOR ACBAQ AC AUC ASEX AER AVERY AGRICULTURE AFU
BR BTIO BY BO BA BU BL BN BM BF BEXP BK BG BB BTIU BBSR BRUSSELS BD BIDEN BE BH BILAT BC BX BT BP BMGT BWC
CS CA CH CD CO CE CU CVIS CASC CJAN CI CPAS CMGT CDG CIC CAC CBW CWC COUNTER CW CT CY CNARC CACM CG CB CM CV CIDA CLINTON CHR COE CR CIS CDC CONS CF CODEL COPUOS CIA CFED CARSON CL CROS CAPC CTR CACS CN CBSA CEUDA COM CONDOLEEZZA CICTE COUNTRY CBE CKGR CVR COUNTERTERRORISM CITEL CLEARANCE CARICOM CSW CITT CDB CJUS CTM CAN CLMT CBC
DA DEA DR DEAX DHS DAO DCM DJ DOD DOMESTIC DO DK DPRK DEPT DISENGAGEMENT DOE DTRA DS DEFENSE DE
EAID ECON EFIS ETRD EC ENRG EINV EFIN EAGR ETTC ECPS EINT ES EIND EAIR EU EUN EG EPET ELAB EWWT EMIN ECIN ESA ER ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EAIG ET ETRO ELTN EI EN EUR EK EUMEM EPA ENGR EXTERNAL EUREM ELN EUC ENERG ENIV EZ ERD EFTA ETRC ETRN EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ESENV ENNP ENVI ETRDECONWTOCS ECINECONCS EFINECONCS ELECTIONS ENVR EXIM ERNG ECA EINVEFIN ETC EAP ECONOMY EINN ECONOMIC EXBS ECUN ENGY ECONOMICS EIAR EINDETRD ECONEFIN EURN EDU ETRDEINVTINTCS ECIP EFIM EAIDS EREL EINVETC ECONCS ETRA
FI FJ FR FDA FBI FTAA FAC FARC FTA FAO FMLN FO FAS FOREIGN FM FREEDOM FISO FOR FINR FINANCE FOI
GG GM GOI GT GR GH GTIP GV GA GAERC GE GCC GOV GZ GY GANGS GERARD GTMO GL GF GAZA GLOBAL
HR HA HU HO HURI HILLARY HYMPSK HSTC HK HEBRON HUMOR HI HUMAN
IC IV IAEA IR IO IT IN IS IZ IMO IPR IWC ICAO ILO ID ICTY ICJ INMARSAT INDO IL IMF IRS IQ IA ICRC IDA IAHRC IBRD ISLAMISTS IGAD ILC ITU ITF INRA INRO IDP ICTR IEFIN IRC ITRA ITALY INRB INTELSAT IBET IRAQI ISRAELI IIP ITPGOV ITALIAN INTERNAL INTERPOL IEA INR IZPREL IRAJ IF ITPHUM ISRAEL IACI
JA JO JM JOSEPH JP JUS JOHNNIE JOHN JAMES
KBTR KPAO KOMC KCRM KDEM KHIV KBIO KTIA KMDR KNNP KSCA KTIP KWMN KIPR KCOR KRVC KFRD KPAL KWBG KE KTDB KUNR KSPR KJUS KGHG KAWC KCFE KGCC KOLY KSUM KACT KISL KTFN KFLU KSTH KMPI KHDP KS KHLS KMRS KID KN KU KAWK KSAC KCOM KAID KIRC KWMNCS KMCA KNEI KCRS KPKO KICC KPOA KV KDRG KIRF KSEO KVPR KSEP KTER KBCT KFIN KGIC KCIP KZ KG KWAC KRAD KPRP KTEX KNAR KPLS KPAK KSTC KFLO KSCI KIDE KOMS KHSA KSAF KPWR KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KFSC KRIM KVRP KENV KNSD KCGC KDDG KPRV KTBT KWMM KMFO KMOC KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KPAI KO KVIR KREC KX KR KCRCM KBTS KOCI KGIT KNUP KPAONZ KNUC KNNPMNUC KERG KTLA KCSY KTRD KNPP KJUST KCMR KRCM KCFC KCHG KREL KFTFN KLIG KDEMAF KICA KHUM KSEC KPIN KESS KDEV KWWMN KOM KWNM KRFD KMIG KRGY KIFR
LH LY LE LI LG LO LA LU LTTE LAB LOG LT LABOR
MARR MOPS MASS MX MNUC MCAP MO MR MEPP MTCRE MAPP MEPN MZ MT ML MA MY MIL MD MASSMNUC MU MK MTCR MUCN MAS MEDIA MAR MC MI MQADHAFI MPOS MTRE MASC MG MARAD MRCRE MW MP MOPPS MTS MLS MILI MEPI MEETINGS MERCOSUR MCC MIK MAPS MV MILITARY MDC
NATO NZ NL NO NK NU NPT NI NG NEW NSF NA NPG NSG NE NSSP NS NDP NSC NAFTA NH NV NP NPA NSFO NT NW NASA NORAD NATIONAL NGO NR NIPP NZUS NC NRR NAR NATOPREL
OEXC OTRA OPRC OVIP OAS OIIP OSCE OREP OPIC OFDP OMIG ODIP OVP OSCI OIC OECD OIE OPDC ON OCII OPAD OBSP OFFICIALS OPCW OHUM OES OCS OTR OSAC OFDA
PGOV PREL PM PHUM PTER PINR PINS PREF PARM PL PK PU PBTS PBIO PHSA PE PO PROP PA PNAT POL PLN POLITICAL PARTIES PCUL PAK PGGV PAO PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PAS PGIV PHUMPREL PCI PG POGOV PHUMPGOV PEL POLITICS POLICY PINL PP PREO PAHO PBT PMIL POV PRL PDOV PTBS PRAM PREFA PSI PAIGH POSTS PALESTINIAN PARMS PROG PTERE PRGOV PORG PS PGOF PKFK PSOE PEPR PPA PINT PMAR PRELP PINF PNG PFOR PUNE PGOVLO PHUMBA PSEPC PNR POLINT PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PDEM PECON PROV PGOC PY PHUH PF PHUS
QA
RU RS RO RW RP RFE REGION REACTION REPORT ROOD RCMP RM RSO ROBERT RICE RSP RF RIGHTS RIGHTSPOLMIL RUPREL RELATIONS
SENV SU SCUL SOCI SNAR SL SW SMIG SP SY SA SHUM SZ SYRIA SF SR SO SARS SN SC SIPRS SI SYR SEVN SG SPCE SK STEINBERG SH SNARCS SAARC SCRS SENVKGHG SAN ST SIPDIS SNARIZ SNARN SSA SPCVIS SOFA SEN SANC SWE SHI
TW TU TBIO TSPL TPHY TRGY TC TT TSPA TINT TERRORISM TX TR TS TN TD TH TIP TNGD TI TZ THPY TP TBID TF TL TV TK TO TRSY TURKEY TFIN TAGS
UN UK UNSC UNGA US UNESCO UP UNHRC UNAUS USTR UNDP UNEP UY UNCHR UG UZ UNPUOS USEU UNMIK UNDC UNICEF UV UNHCR UNCHC UNCSD USOAS UNFCYP USUN USNC UNIDROIT UNO UNCND USPS USAID UE UNVIE UAE UNODC UNCHS UNFICYP UNDESCO UNC
VE VAT VZ VN VC VT VM VI VTPREL VTIZ VTEG
WMO WHO WHA WA WI WWARD WHTI WTRO WS WTO WTRQ WBG WMD WFP WIPO WZ WB WITH WEU
XK XF XY XG XB XV XR XA XZ XL XW XS XM XD XX XU XI XT XH XQ XE XTAG XC
YE YM YI YMCS
ZB ZI ZEALAND ZF ZK ZR ZP ZU ZO ZL ZOELLICK ZJ ZN ZA ZANU

### Browse by classification

CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN SECRET SECRET//NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

### Community resources

Follow us on Twitter Check our Reddit Twitter this Digg this page Contact us on IRC

courage is contagious

### Viewing cable 09WARSAW1139, HLDG: CONSTRUCTIVE PROGRESS ON U.S. BMD AND

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.

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.
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. #09WARSAW1139.

Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
09WARSAW1139 | 2009-11-12 07:06 | 2010-12-06 21:30 | SECRET | Embassy Warsaw

`

    VZCZCXYZ0000
    OO RUEHWEB

    DE RUEHWR #1139/01 3160706
    ZNY SSSSS ZZH
    O 120706Z NOV 09
    FM AMEMBASSY WARSAW
    TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 9155
    INFO RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
    RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
    RUEKJCS/OSD WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
    RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
    RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY

` `

    S E C R E T WARSAW 001139

    SIPDIS

    DEPT FOR EUR/CE (GLANTZ), OSD FOR MITCHELL

    EO 12958 DECL: 10/15/2019
    TAGS PREL, MARR, PL
    SUBJECT: HLDG: CONSTRUCTIVE PROGRESS ON U.S. BMD AND
    PATRIOT PROPOSALS

    REF: WARSAW 972

    Classified By: Ambassador Lee Feinstein for reasons 1.4 b and d

    ¶1. This corrected cable replaces WARSAW 01071.

    ¶2. (S) SUMMARY. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, led a U.S. delegation to Warsaw for the first-ever U.S.-Poland High Level Defense Group (HLDG). Polish Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Stanislaw Komorowski led the Polish delegation. The discussion on the first day of the HLDG focused on providing more details for U.S. Missile Defense plans and a prospective Polish role in the new concept as well as additional aspects for the deployment of a U.S. Patriot battery to Poland for training and exercises. Additionally, the U.S. delegation laid out three potential alternative presence options which, if Poland chose, could replace a Patriot garrison as a post-2012 permanent presence of U.S. Armed Forces. Day 2 of the HLDG focused on strategic discussions, including U.S.-Poland bilateral defense cooperation, Afghanistan, and NATO’s new strategic concept. In addition, the Polish side provided reaction to the possible alternative presence options the U.S. outlined the previous day. Polish reaction to the BMD proposal was positive, though they were disappointed that the SM-3 site would not become operational until 2018, and they sought more information about how early preparations for the deployment could begin. The response to alternative presence options was very positive, both in plenary session and in a small two-on-two dinner meeting the night before. The questions about the Patriot presentation focused on timing and interoperability. END SUMMARY.

    ¶3. (U) The U.S. delegation included USAF MG Paul Schafer, EUCOM Director, Strategy, Policy, and Assessment; USAF BG John Hesterman, Joint Staff Deputy Director for Politico-Military Affairs; Ambassador Lee Feinstein, U.S. Embassy Warsaw; DAS Pamela Quanrud, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs; DAS Frank Rose, Verification, Compliance, and Implementation; and Ms. Nancy Morgan, MDA Director for International Affairs. The Polish side included Deputy Foreign Minister Jacek Najder; MG Mieczyslaw Gocul, Chief of Strategic Planning Directorate, General Staff of the Armed Forces; and Piotr Pacholski, MOD Director of the Missile Defense Office.
    NEW BMD ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

    ¶4. (S) Undersecretary Komorowski began by explaining that Poland understood the reasoning for the U.S. decision to change direction on a European Ballistic Missile Defense program, but that more detail on the threat and the potential SM-3 deployment in Poland would be welcome. Komorowski underscored that Poland wanted to take its responsibility for the decision on whether to take part in the new system seriously and was looking for further details on the system to inform that decision.

    ¶5. (S) Ambassador Vershbow opened by stating that we know the September 17 briefing on the new U.S. approach had raised many questions. We welcomed this opportunity to explain this approach in greater detail, and why we felt it was a better approach for U.S.-Polish relations and for NATO. Nancy Morgan of the Missile Defense Agency briefed the Polish side on the U.S. Missile Defense Phased Adaptive Approach (PAA) plan. The brief laid out the objectives for each of the four phases, described the potential role that Poland could play, and illustrated the differences between the Ground Based Interceptors (GBI) and the Standard Missile (SM)-3 program. Following the brief, the Polish delegation asked many questions about the importance of Poland’s location for the program, other ways Poland might be able to participate in the system beyond hosting a land-based SM-3 system, and the timing necessary for Poland’s decision. The Poles also asked how the SM-3 system, if deployed in Poland, could become a NATO system, and finally, a series of hypothetical questions on the adaptive nature of the system vis-a-vis the changing threat.

    ¶6. (S) ASD Vershbow said that with regard to location, Poland was given “right of first refusal” because of its previous commitments and because Poland was a very good site for defending all of Northern Europe. That said, Poland was not the only possibility for a northern European interceptor site. ASD Vershbow said that the timing of activating the Polish site in 2018 rather than 2015 was driven by analysis of the threat, but also by the development timeline of the SM-3 Block IIA interceptor, which was key to providing wide-area protection to allies in Northern Europe. Ambassador Vershbow stressed, however, that preparation of the site could begin well in advance of activation, possibly in 2013, but that we would need to work with Congress to get funding for early site preparation. With regard to how NATO might defend itself from missiles coming from elsewhere than Iran or Syria, BG John Hesterman of the Joint Staff said that sea-borne platforms could provide surge capability against threats from an unforeseen direction, land-based sites could be upgraded with more interceptors if the scale of the threat were increased, and radars could be reoriented. The Poles asked whether proceeding with Phase III when SM-3 Block IIA would be deployed to Poland was firm or would die if perception of the threat receded. ASD Vershbow reassured the Poles of U.S. commitment on this point.

    PATRIOT PHASE 1 WILL NOT BE OPERATIONAL

    ¶7. (S) Following delivery of the Non-Paper providing further definition to the US policy regarding Patriot rotations, LTC Sean Gainey from U.S. Army Europe briefed the concept for the Phase 1 rotations of a U.S. Patriot battery to Poland. In response to a direct question from Komorowski following the brief, ASD Vershbow emphasized that the rotations will be solely for training and exercises and would not add to Polish air defense capabilities, and Maj Gen Schafer reinforced the point made by the interagency cleared Patriot non-paper that the Patriot battery would not be operational at any time. The U.S. delegation asserted that the U.S. is committed to doing quarterly rotations in Poland through 2012. However, it was made clear that training opportunities would be limited to basic familiarization training due to current disclosure restrictions unless Poland decided to buy Patriot systems. ASD Vershbow also reiterated that a deployment of a Patriot battery would not take place without a ratified Supplemental Status of Forces Agreement (SSA). However, the U.S. would, on the basis of continued progress on SOFA negotiations, move forward with bilateral planning for a March 2010 deployment in good faith that the SSA would soon be brought into force.

    ALTERNATIVE PRESENCE OPTIONS IN PLACE OF PATRIOT GARRISON

    ¶8. (S) Near the end of Day 1 discussions, ASD Vershbow presented new options for potential cooperation which the U.S. believed may be more useful to Poland than Patriot rotations. He explained that we looked at other alternative programs that would be affordable for both countries, would assist in the modernization of the Polish Armed Forces, would help Poland better meet its NATO force goals, and would be sustainable by the U.S. military. The three options presented were: 1) a quarterly rotation of F-16s, and the establishment of a small permanent support detachment, which would focus on enhancing Polish fighter capabilities, increasing sortie readiness and meeting NATO commitments; 2) quarterly C-130 rotations from Ramstein AFB, also with a small permanent support detachment in Poland with the goal of increasing Polish readiness and ability to support own and NATO operations; 3) the relocation of a U.S. Naval Special Warfare unit from Stuttgart to Gdansk or Gdynia. The Polish delegation accepted U.S. unwillingness to discuss Patriot Phase 2 and the garrison until after consideration of the alternate presence options, and the atmosphere in the room was positive and constructive. Komorowski also said both in a small meeting preceding the HLDG and in plenary that the Patriot’s contribution to Polish air defense is minimal, though important symbolically.

    ¶9. (S) At the start of Day 2, the Polish delegation presented its initial reactions to the alternative presence proposals. Undersecretary Komorowski said he believed the proposal for F-16 rotations was his favorite. The reactions from the Polish experts included many questions of detail: when could the rotations arrive, how many planes would each rotation have, how many people would be in the permanent support unit, would the U.S. be able to provide tanker and AWACS support, and would the rotation only operate in Poland, or would it be allowed to train Polish ground and air crews? EUCOM pledged to follow up with more detailed discussions on these proposals at a later date. To the three proposals, Undersecretary Komorowski added a fourth for the U.S. to consider - as an additional rather than a replacement for any of the U.S. proposals. Noting that Polish Minister of
    Defense Bogdan Klich planned to sign an agreement with his Ukrainian counterpart that very day establishing the framework for a combined Polish-Ukrainian-Lithuanian Brigade that would be stood up for international deployments by 2013, Komorowski asked if it would be possible for U.S. involvement in this brigade, either assigning some forces or stationing officers at the permanent headquarters to be located in Lublin.

    DEFENSE COOPERATION

    ¶10. (S) Undersecretary Komorowski defined the Polish approach to defense cooperation by dividing proposals for new programs into two categories: Afghanistan deployment assistance and programs funded through Foreign Military Financing (FMF). On Afghanistan, Komorowski detailed a “wishlist” for U.S. cooperation including better help on UAVs and other sensors, giving Poland access to “Four Eyes”-level intelligence by making it a Fifth Eye, increased U.S. provision of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, and the building of a runway in Ghazni to support C-130 flights. On FMF, Komorowski stated that Poland wishes to focus mainly on C4ISR purchases to increase the interoperability of Polish military equipment. BG Hesterman of the Joint Staff related that the Chairman has a lot of empathy for Poland’s MRAP issues based on our own experiences with IEDs and that the Chairman remains fully engaged in assisting Poland in this critical area. On the runway question, Hesterman reiterated what the Chairman told the Polish CHOD in June that the U.S. is willing to assist with contracting support coordination to build the extension. He added that with the Afghanistan strategy and resourcing under review and decisions pending in our capital and others, that there could be more developments in this area.

    AFGHANISTAN POLITICAL CHALLENGES

    ¶11. (S) Deputy Foreign Minister Jacek Najder, the Polish Plenipotentiary for Afghanistan, provided a Polish strategic overview for Afghanistan. He concurred with COMISAF’s assessment that the Alliance had lost the strategic initiative and that NATO was not keeping pace with the insurgents. In Ghazni province, where Poland is focusing most of its attention, voting irregularities were high. While Poland is also disappointed with the way the election played out, Najder asserted that regardless of whether there is a run-off, the challenge will be in incorporating the lessons learned from the August election so that the 2010 Parliamentary elections in Afghanistan function better. Najder also called for a greater regional focus to expand to both India and Iran. Finally, Najder stressed that Poland remained in Afghanistan because of NATO and the importance that NATO has to Poland’s national security. However, he believed that NATO should delink success in Afghanistan with evaluations of NATO’s overall success. Komorowski emphasized that Poland was committed to the pledge of “in together, out together” on Afghanistan. However, he noted the difficulty for Polish politicians in reconciling the high public support for Polish membership in NATO with public support for consequences and responsibilities such as operation in Afghanistan, which come with NATO membership.

    ¶12. (S) ASD Vershbow noted that President Obama was still reviewing the recommendations of COMISAF and his resource requests, but emphasized that the U.S. would not turn away from Afghanistan, which was a test of NATO’s credibility. He agreed that it would be better to expand the discussion with Iran to encourage better behavior, but said that this was unlikely to succeed in the short term. In response to questions on the role of Russia in Afghanistan, ASD Vershbow recalled that Russia also wants to contain many of the threats to Russia, including terrorism and narcotics trafficking, but was also sensitive about the U.S. presence in Central Asia. Recalling the July agreement for air transit of lethal goods through Russia, ASD Vershbow stated his belief that NATO and the U.S. could find additional ways to partner with Russia on Afghanistan.

    NATO STRATEGIC CONCEPT: DEFENSE OVER SECURITY

    ¶13. (C) Komorowski declared that it was time for a new document, not just the alteration of the 1999 Strategic Concept. He said that the most important aspect of the new strategic concept for Poland will be the reaffirmation of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty as the most important agreement between the Allies, and that Article 5 shall take
    precedence over expeditionary operations. Noting that the strategic environment had changed, he stated his belief that a new doctrine was needed that would expand NATO’s capabilities to deal with its members’ obligations under Article 5. Komorowski explained that while out-of-area operations were valid NATO missions, that the new Strategic Concept must clearly state that NATO’s door remained open as well as introduce clarity into how NATO deals with its international partners, especially Russia. Komorowski related that Poland’s member of the “wise persons” group, Adam Rotfeld, was consulting with other central European countries to give them the sense that their input was taken in the process. Minister Najder concluded by simply stating that NATO remained a defense alliance, not a security organization.

    ¶14. (C) ASD Vershbow remarked that both countries came at the issue from a similar perspective. NATO, in his opinion, needed a shorter, crisper document which would be more accessible to both parliaments and public and better made the case for an increase in resources to meet NATO’s full mission set. There was a need to find the proper balance between Article 5 and expeditionary missions. Observing that Article 5 may need to be viewed more broadly to encompass non-military threats like cyber-attacks. ASD Vershbow cautioned that we would need to have a strategy with real meaning, backed up by planning, exercises, and capabilities. He said it was clear that zero growth of the NATO budget was unsustainable with the expansion of NATO missions and we needed to look at common funding and other reforms and get more value for money.

    ¶15. (S) COMMENT. In marked contrast to September 17, the mood of the two days of HLDG discussions was positive and constructive. The Polish delegation listened to U.S. proposals on BMD and Patriot, and both sides conveyed a sense that real progress was made. Concerns exist on the Polish side at having to wait until 2018 for SM-3 site activation, but the possibility raised by ASD Vershbow of early site preparation helped mitigate the concern. The Poles asked specific questions in an effort to determine whether Phase 1 Patriot rotations would have any operational capacity, but seemed to accept the fact that they would not and that this was the established U.S. position (despite the public comments of Komorowski following the meeting). The Polish side was prepared to defer discussion of the Phase 2 Patriot garrison, and the alternative presence options generated favorable interest. The question moving forward is the extent to which this constructive progress will be felt higher in the Polish government, particularly by Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski. END COMMENT

    ¶16. (U) ASD Vershbow has reviewed and cleared this cable.

    FEINSTEIN

`