Pages 17-19 from FCO 177-1303

The document provided discusses transparency in armaments and post-COCOM (Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls) initiatives. The sender expresses gratitude for the recipient's understanding of the challenges faced by the Ministry of Defence (MOD) in addressing transparency issues. They propose that the larger group should not be a watered-down version of the small group but should complement it by addressing global trends and considering purchasing patterns and supplies outside the post-COCOM arrangements.

The sender opposes expanding the categories of equipment to be covered and more frequent reporting of transfers. They argue that expanding categories would require technical definitions that should be addressed by the Panel of Experts, and frequent reporting would burden the industry. However, they consider the designation of types of equipment transferred as a way to demonstrate seriousness while maintaining individual transfer discussions in the small group.

The sender acknowledges pressure to designate types of equipment and suggests that the concession may be necessary for the credibility of the UK as the proposer of the Register. They propose that the designation be made in a small, confidential forum of like-minded allies and not in a universal and public register. The designation would not apply to contracts already made and subject to confidentiality agreements.

Regarding missiles, the sender suggests that they require special consideration due to their sustainability and operational reasons. They argue that missile types should not be discussed without the customer's approval, citing the UK's security interests and the military significance of being transparent about missile types and stocks.

In summary, the sender proposes that the wider group focuses on general trends and purchasers of concern, resists expanding categories and more frequent reporting, and considers designation of types for six categories while rejecting it for missiles. They suggest exploring and debating options in a meeting in Paris while reserving some points for the Hague meeting to preserve the fragile consensus on large/small groups.