Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 2497 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

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

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
QA
YE YM YI

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 10USNATO67, FRENCH MISTRAL SALE TO RUSSIA RAISED AT NATO

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. #10USNATO67.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
10USNATO67 2010-02-12 10:10 2010-12-06 21:09 CONFIDENTIAL Mission USNATO
VZCZCXRO2291
PP RUEHDBU RUEHSL
DE RUEHNO #0067 0431005
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 121005Z FEB 10
FM USMISSION USNATO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 3862
INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE
RUEHXD/MOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RHMFISS/USNMR SHAPE BE
RUEHNO/USDELMC BRUSSELS BE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC
C O N F I D E N T I A L USNATO 000067

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/12/2019
TAGS: PGOV PREL MARR NATO FR RS
SUBJECT: FRENCH MISTRAL SALE TO RUSSIA RAISED AT NATO

Classified By: Ambassador Ivo Daalder for reasons 1.4 (b/d).

1. (C) Lithuania's NATO PermRep Linkevicius raised France's
potential sale to Russia of a Mistral class ship during a
February 9 PermReps' lunch, noting that the sale was not
simply a national issue but a subject for discussion within
the Alliance.  French PermRep Andreani did not respond.
However, the following day, the February 10 NAC meeting,
Andreani made a point of highlighting France's commitment to
Baltic security by reporting that France had been
participating since January 4 in Baltic air policing.  She
cited this as evidence of France's commitment to the
collective defense of the Baltics.  The French Political
Counselor told us afterward that he was waiting for guidance
from Paris on the Mistral sale as the French Mission here had
not previously been involved in this issue.  On February 11,
Estonian PermRep Luik complained about the sale over lunch
with Ambassador Daalder, noting that inclusion of Allied
equipment could trigger third county transfer rules - in
particular the case of Canadian technology.

2. (U) NATO Spokesman James Appathurai was asked about the
sale during a February 10 press conference, in light of
Russia's newly released military doctrine that identifies
NATO enlargement as a key threat.  Appathurai noted that,
while Secretary-General Rasmussen recognized the concerns of
some Allies over the sale were real and understandable for
historic and geographic reasons, Rasmussen had told Russian
Foreign Minister Lavrov that he did not view Russia as a
threat and hoped Russians did not see NATO as a threat.

3. (C) Comment:  The Mistral sale had not been a topic of
debate at NATO prior to the Lithuanian-French exchange.
Several Allies have been reluctant to raise an Ally's
bilateral arms sales at NATO, even if they preferred that
France not sell the ship to Russia.  In the past, discussion
of bilateral arms sales have traditionally not been seen as
an appropriate topic at NATO.  Given the significance of the
potential Mistral sale and broader discussions on reassurance
and NATO's relations with Russia, the Mistral may be viewed
as an exception in light of some Allies' concerns regarding
Russia's military capabilities and intentions, and possible
third party transfer rules.  End Comment.
DAALDER