Kholstov on OPCW Conference, Russian Progress in CW Destruction
ITAR-TASS by Mariya Fedorova
February 25, 2007
(For personal use only)

At the end of last year, 15 percent of all the stockpiled chemical weapons in Russia had already been destroyed. Viktor Kholstov, the deputy chief of the RF Federal Industry Agency, reported this in an exclusive ITAR-TASS interview. He attended the December session of the Conference of States Party to the Chemical Weapons Convention in The Hague.

[Fedorova] Viktor Ivanovich, what was the main issue, in your opinion, discussed at this session -- the organization's highest forum?

[Kholstov] It definitely is the highest forum. It is held annually to sum up the results of the previous year and set objectives for the near future. The main issue discussed at the session was the fulfillment of convention-related obligations by states. Above all, matters connected with the destruction of chemical weapons were discussed, because this is a particularly pressing problem today, primarily in view of the fact that virtually all of the states with chemical weapons have requested an extension of the deadline for the destruction of chemical weapons in each state.

This is an indication that the problem of chemical weapons destruction entails several difficulties of a technical, financial, legal, and environmental nature. In this context, regardless of the size of the stockpile in countries with chemical weapons, problems requiring the extension of deadlines will come up anyway.

Russia requested the organization for an extension of the deadline for chemical weapons destruction to 2012 back in 2001. This request was consistent with the convention provisions stipulating that a state may make this request. The decision to grant Russia this extension was made in 2003.

[Fedorova] What did the Russian delegation bring to this meeting?

[Kholstov] We reported the steps Russia had taken to meet its commitments in this important matter. Above all, we reported that we now have three operating chemical weapons destruction facilities. The process of chemical weapons destruction was completed at the end of last year at the facility in the settlement of Gornyy in Saratov Oblast. All of the chemical weapons there were destroyed. They amounted to 1,143 tonnes of blister agents.

In December 2005 we opened the second large facility for the destruction of blister agents in the city of Kambarka in the Udmurt Republic, and in August 2006 we opened a third facility in the settlement of Maradykovskiy in Kirov Oblast. It is fundamentally different from the first two because the chemical weapons being destroyed there are in aircraft munitions. At the first two, the weapons were destroyed in their storage containers. The toxic agents being destroyed in the third location are of different type -- nerve agents, a more highly toxic chemical weapon.

Consequently, we have now destroyed more than 15 percent of our existing stockpile. Of course, this progress attests to the steps Russia is taking to meet its commitments. There is no question that this is the result of not only the efforts of the people who build the chemical weapons destruction facilities and see to their operation, but also the decisions of our government and president.

The Russian budget allocated $718 million, or 18.3 billion rubles, for the work on the chemical weapons destruction program in 2006. Budget allocations in 2007 will be close to $980 million, or more than 26 billion rubles.

[Fedorova] How would you rate the level of assistance in the destruction of our chemical weapons by our foreign partners?

[Kholstov] Of course, in this context, we can already provide logical arguments to support our contention that the assistance Russia is receiving in the destruction of chemical weapons should take other forms. For one thing, we want international cooperation to be aimed at the concrete aspects of scheduled projects, taking the form of actual work at the facilities.

Second, we do not want the organizational aspects of the projects to take too long. We want them to be completed quickly. This is important to us, because the facilities have to be built quickly. Third, we want the contributions announced by our partners to be allocated in a predictable manner. We still are not completely satisfied with this aspect of the cooperation, because we have received only 20 percent of the total amount for the facility construction projects.

[Fedorova] Which of the other topics discussed at the conference did you find the most important?

[Kholstov] Other pressing problems were addressed at the conference. They were connected with the states' commitments stemming from Article 7 of the convention -- the national measures for its implementation. Regrettably, some states still have not passed the necessary laws and other regulatory enactments securing the implementation of the convention in its entirety. We are still discussing this.

In addition, questions connected with the inspections of various facilities -- for the storage, destruction, and production of chemical weapons -- were discussed. We expressed our concerns about the health of inspectors from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), because there were cases in which certificate-bearing inspectors from the organization could not be allowed to perform their inspection duties because of our national statutes. Of course, we also discussed the need for the better planning of inspections in Russia. Sometimes there are extra costs when a large team of inspectors arrives, and organizational resources have to be found.

In addition to all of this, the proper inspection of facilities in the chemical industry was discussed at length at the conference. These facilities have to be inspected to ensure that their administrators are fully aware of the convention provisions and to ensure that there is no reason to suspect any violations of these provisions. In addition, the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, including chemical weapons, was discussed at length. Everyone knows that Russia was one of the initiators of UN Security Council Resolution 1540, which addresses this issue. Russia is one of the principal and active participants in the implementation of this resolution.

Of course, we discussed the fact that 2007 marks the 10th anniversary of the signing of the convention. Events have been planned, including the unveiling of a memorial to the victims of chemical weapons in The Hague.

[Fedorova] You were talking about inspections. How often are the chemical weapons facilities in Russia inspected?

[Kholstov] In Russia these facilities are inspected regularly. Chemical weapons storage facilities are inspected once a year, chemical weapons production facilities are inspected once or twice a year, and the operating chemical weapons destruction facilities have teams of full-time inspectors. Two of the facilities now have full-time inspectors -- in Kambarka and in Maradykovskiy. The inspections in Gornyy stopped last year after the team of inspectors confirmed that all of the chemical weapons had been destroyed.

[Fedorova] If Russia has destroyed 15 percent of all the stockpiled chemical weapons by now, is it realistic to expect the destruction of the whole 100 percent in the next five years -- before 2012? Will the deadline have to be extended beyond 2012?

[Kholstov] There is no reason to expect another request to extend the deadline, because Russia is making such a great effort, partly with foreign assistance. The timeframe is realistic. Of course, we have a great variety of different types of chemical weapons, and we will have to augment the capacities of existing facilities to destroy all of the weapons.

[Fedorova] What about the 14 countries that still are not party to the convention?

[Kholstov] A plan of action was drawn up for them and was approved last year. Standardization efforts are envisaged, so that as many states as possible will sign the convention. During the year since the 10th session in November 2005, six states became party to the convention. This attests to considerable progress. Iraq and Libya have initiated the intra-state procedures connected with the ratification of the convention. In other words, two more states will be party to the convention soon.

The problem might be most serious in the Middle East, where six states are not party to the convention.
At this conference, OPCW Director-General Rogelio Pfirter said that chemical weapons are now being excluded from all the arsenals of armed struggle and that he would not link them with nuclear weapons. This link is characteristic of the Middle East: Some countries have nuclear weapons and others have chemical weapons. They form a chain that must be broken. Pfirter suggested that the nuclear issue must be resolved separately, while the issue of chemical weapons can be resolved within the convention framework.

[Fedorova] What problems has Russia encountered in the destruction of chemical weapons aside from organizational and financial difficulties?

[Kholstov] There have been no other problems. Today this is the main thing for us. We know how to destroy the chemical weapons and we have not experienced any particular difficulties. We know the proper design for these facilities. We have the necessary organizational basis. We do have to build the facilities quickly, however. We actually have three years left to finish all of the construction projects. Of course, we will need large sums of money in this short period of time.

[Fedorova] Is it possible that underfunding by the international community will disrupt construction schedules and jeopardize their completion?

[Kholstov] We understandably want to avoid this. We are now urging our partners to meet their commitments. We are already frankly pointing out the shortcomings in this cooperation. I realize this could offend some states and arouse the displeasure of others, but we have to talk about this, because we speak frankly and we do not conceal anything from one another.

We are giving them the necessary information about our stockpiles and our technology, after all. In exchange, we are entitled to know how much money they will be allocating and when they will be doing this. In addition, we are taking some measures to ensure that any unexpected problems impeding the timely receipt of money will have a minimal impact.

Besides this, our technology is highly reliable from the standpoint of safety and performance. The states assisting us realize it is worth the investment.

[Fedorova] To what extent is Russia satisfied with the cooperation with the OPCW in general? How would you rate the level and nature of this cooperation?

[Kholstov] We have no major problems with the organization. We have a few minor problems with the technical secretariat. We are discussing some matters and I think we will continue discussing them.