Viewing cable 10VILNIUS125
Title: GOL VIEWS ON OPEN SKIES TREATY

IdentifierCreatedReleasedClassificationOrigin
10VILNIUS1252010-02-26 15:03:00 2011-08-30 01:44:00 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Vilnius
VZCZCXYZ0002
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHVL #0125/01 0571503
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 261503Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY VILNIUS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4208
INFO RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 1635
RUEAHQA/HQ USAF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUGIAAA/NGA NAVY YARD WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEANQA/NGA HQ BETHESDA MD PRIORITY
RHMFISS/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L VILNIUS 000125 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/25/2020 
TAGS: OSCE PARM PREL LH
SUBJECT: GOL VIEWS ON OPEN SKIES TREATY 
 
REF: SECSTATE 15591 
 
Classified By: AMB Anne E. Derse for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1. (C) Summary.  We spoke with Dovydas Spokauskas from the 
MFA's Transatlantic Cooperation and Security Policy 
Department as well as Robertas Sapronas from MOD's 
International Relations and Operations Department to collect 
information about the GOL's views on Open Skies (OS).  The 
GOL considers the Open Skies Treaty to be part of its 
national defense strategy.  The MFA and MOD collaborate on 
key Open Skies decisions which are further vetted at the EU 
level. 
 
¶2. (C) Spokauskas said that key government personnel for Open 
Skies decision-making remain the Transatlantic Cooperation 
and Security Policy Department at the MFA and the 
International Relations Department at MOD, specifically the 
Control of Arms Division and the officers going on CSBM 
(Confidence and Security Building Measures) missions. 
 
¶3. (C) Spokauskas said that the Open Skies policy-making 
process between the two ministries is, "A combination of two 
interests.  For defense there's a military-security 
interest... At the MFA, there's political interest for using 
Open Skies."  He underscored that joint decisions evolve 
before EU meetings. 
 
¶4. (C) The MFA views the Open Skies agreement as a part of 
other CSBMs.  Spokauskas said that Open Skies remains 
important because the treaty is still active despite a 
decline in other security treaties.  He cited the example of 
Russia's suspension of the CFE treaty in 2007.  MOD's 
Sapronas said that the OS treaty is less important than the 
Vienna Document, for example.  He noted that the GOL does not 
plan to use its active quota this year. 
 
¶5. (C) Spokauskas characterized Lithuanian NGOs as 
disinterested in the Open Skies Treaty and could not identify 
any academics specifically interested in the Open Skies 
Treaty. 
 
¶6. (U) Our contacts provided the following response to the 
Open Skies non-paper (reftel). 
 
¶7. (U) Begin response. 
 
-- What topics would your government like to see included as 
agenda items for the RevCon?  Could your delegation provide a 
food-for-thought paper on this subject for review in advance 
of the RevCon? 
 
MFA:  We have consulted with the outline of topics for the 
agenda and found that it very thoroughly reflects the scope 
of issues related with the Treaty.  We have no such plans 
(for a food-for-thought paper) at the current stage. 
 
MOD: We hope that there will be a joint Nordic-Baltic 
position developed and presented. 
 
--The U.S. supports the goal of a consensus political 
document, e.g., Final Document, at the close of the RevCon. 
Does your government share this goal? 
 
MFA:  Yes.  The Treaty on Open Skies remains the only fully 
functioning legal instrument on CSBMs in the OSCE area.  We 
should reaffirm our strong support to it. 
 
-- How does your government view the contributions of Open 
Skies to the broader European security architecture? 
 
MFA:  The very fact that the Open Skies system has now been 
functioning for more than eight years is a proof that states 
recognize it as in important tool to promote transparency. 
Together with the CFE treaty, Vienna Document and OSCE Code 
of Conduct, Open Skies Treaty form a backbone of European 
security architecture. 
 
--How does your government plan to continue support for the 
Treaty in the future, including the transition to digital 
sensors/media? 
 
MFA:  We do not operate our own Open Skies aircraft, however 
transition to digital media would make the footage from the 
missions more attractive and easily accessible to the 
relevant authorities. 
 
MOD: These (technological developments) have to be somehow 
reflected in the revised Treaty. 
 
--Is your government considering replacing your Open Skies 
aircraft and/or sensors? 
 
MFA:  We do not operate our own Open Skies aircraft. 
 
--Does your government plan to continue exercising Open Skies 
quotas missions? 
 
MFA:  Due to a substantial cost of the operation, we are not 
planning to conduct independent Open Skies missions.  We are, 
however, looking forward to sharing our quotas with 
interested states. 
 
--Does your government continue to value missions as CSBMs 
and as transparency measures? 
 
MFA:  As mentioned, we believe that Open Skies CSBMs regime 
has both real and symbolic value in today's situation. 
 
MOD: As you know, Lithuania was not taking part in the 
preparation of the Treaty and, mainly due to the costs 
involved, was not very active in taking part in its 
implementation... The key concerns which, I believe, our 
countries will raise, will be related to the economic aspects 
of the implementation- i.e. searching for ways to make 
participation in OS less costly. 
 
--Is your government interested in conducting missions for 
other "transnational" threats (see OSCE Ministerial Decision 
2/09)? 
 
MFA:  We think that an initiative to conduct missions for 
"transnational threats" properly reflects OSCE's efforts to 
take a multidimensional approach to security.  We are looking 
forward to a first overview on progress by Secretariat due by 
1 April. 
 
End response. 
DERSE