 |
CFE:
Treaty On Conventional Armed Forces In Europe
Negotiations: Began 6 March 1989.
Signed: 19 November 1990.
Provisionally entered into force: 17 July 1992.
Legally entered into force: 9 November 1992.
CFE 1A:
The Concluding Act Of The Negotiation On Personnel Strength
Of Conventional Armed Forces In Europe
Negotiations: Began 26 November 1990. Signed: 10 July 1992.
Entered into force: 17 July 1992.
CFE Adaptation
Agreement
Final Negotiations: 17–18 November 1999.
Signed: 19 November 1999.
Entered into force: Pending
At the CFE Review
Conference of May 1996, France and Russia proposed adapting
the treaty to the post-Cold War security environment, with
individual national ceilings replacing the bloc limits imposed
by the original CFE Treaty. Some countries also wanted to
add more parties, add new equipment categories, and lower
TLE ceilings. {15-31.5}
In the autumn of 1996, the CFE Treaty’s Joint Consultative
Group (JCG) reviewed suggestions from NATO and Russia for
possible modifications to the CFE Treaty {8.10}. In December
1996, the JCG completed a document on the Scope and Parameters
of CFE adaptation that called for “specific adaptations
for specific purposes” {1.12}. While preserving the
existing TLE, area of application, and types of verification,
negotiations were to redefine the provisions relating to group
and zonal structures, stationing of troops, weapon coverage,
and membership expansion.
The JCG began negotiations on CFE adaptation on 20 January
1997 and reached agreement upon “certain basic elements
for treaty adaptation” on 23 July 1997 {ACR 407dCFE97
23.7}. Under the agreed framework for adaptation, the JCG
would negotiate new individual national and territorial ceilings
to replace the old group and zonal ceilings. The JCG began
these negotiations on 18 September 1997. The JCG made little
progress in 1998 {ACR 407bCFE98 30.6} and some observers thought
the talks might fail {ACR 407bCFE98 1.9}. But they continued
successfully in 1999. {ACR 407bCFE99 2.5}
On 11 November 1999, the parties to the CFE Treaty met in
Istanbul to finalize the Adaptation Agreement. The adopted
the Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional
Armed Forces in Europe on 19 November. The changes replaced
the limits previously defined with respect to blocs (NATO
and WTO) and zones with ceilings for each member country.
It eliminated the “flank” zones; and it provided
means for accession to the Treaty by opening membership to
all OSCE members. On 19 July 2004, Russian President Vladimir
Putin signed legislation ratifying the Adapted CFE Treaty,
which sets out limits on the number of troops and armaments
deployed across Europe, and the foreign ministry called on
other CFE signatories to the pact to ratify it immediately.
Out of the 30 signatory states, including Russia, Belarus,
Ukraine, and Kazakhstan, only a handful have ratified the
amended CFE Treaty as of 2005.
;
Linked OSCE-NATO-CFE Adaptation issues. Ratification
of the Adaptation Agreement has been delayed due in part to
independence-minded Russian-speaking citizens in Georgia and
Moldova, whose activities have delayed the withdrawal of Russian
bases and military equipment from those countries as promised
by Russia at the 1999 Istanbul summit. Though Russian military
withdrawal is not legally required under the terms of any
existing treaty, it has been repeatedly demanded by Georgia
and Moldova and most CFE countries have made it a pre-condition
for their ratification the Adaptation Agreement. The delay
in ratification, in turn, poses a problem for Russia in connection
with the NATO expansion. On 2 April 2004, NATO formally added
seven new European members: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania,
Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia {ACR 402bEUR04 17.3, 2.4}.
The new members are expected to accede to the CFE Treaty,
which would prohibit a large build-up of foreign NATO armed
forces on their territory. But since the original CFE Treaty
is not open for accession, their joining the CFE awaits ratification
of the Adapted Agreement, which does have provisions for accession.
Russia has repeatedly expressed great concern about the window
that has been created for a substantial NATO military build-up
on its borders in the three Baltic states (Latvia, Lithuania,
and Estonia).
MAJOR CHANGES
IN THE 1999 AGREEMENT ON ADAPTATION OF THE CFE TREATY
REPLACE CFE
TREATY PARAGRAPHS IV – XII WITH THE FOLLOWING
(XI, on armored vehicle launch bridges, deleted altogether):
IV. INDIVIDUAL
STATE FORCE LIMITATIONS
IV.1. ATTU-wide: subceiling shall be equal to national ceiling
unless otherwise specified.
IV.2. State parties control and account for all armaments
limited by the Treaty.
IV.3. Each state may change its national ceiling and subceiling
as follows:
a). The increase of one subceiling must be accompanied by
a decrease of
another.
b) Each state may decrease its ceiling or subceilings unilaterally.
IV.4. Within a five year period, a state may increase its
ceilings as follows:
a) No more than 40 tanks, 60 ACVs, 20 artillery or 20 percent
of established national ceiling.
b) No more than 30 combat aircraft and 25 attack helicopters.
IV.5. A state must give 90 days notice if intending to change
national ceilings.
IV.6. An increase in subceiling must be accompanied by a decrease
in alternate subceiling.
V. CEILINGS
AND SUBCEILINGS
V.1. Flank limits: numbers must not exceed Treaty established
limits
V.2. Forces for UN Security Council and OSCE operations are
exempt.
V.3. Forces in transit are exempt.
VII. MILITARY
EXERCISES AND TEMPORARY DEPLOYMENTS
VII.1. Each state may temporarily exceed its limits for military
exercises and temporary deployments.
VII.2. If a military exercise and temporary deployment should
cause a territorial ceiling to be exceeded by more than 153
tanks, 241 ACVs or 140 artillery, any state may call a conference.
VIII. REDUCTION
PROCESS AND SITES
VIII.1. Reductions by means of destruction, recategorisation,
or reclassification.
VIII.4. Each State may designate as many reduction sites as
it wishes with a maximum of 20.
VIII.5. All subject to on-site inspection without limit or
right of refusal.
IX. DECOMMISSIONING
AND DISPOSAL
After rendering incapable of combat, not counted against ceilings.
Decommissioned conventional armaments shall not exceed one
percent of its national conventional holdings
REPLACE PREVIOUS
PARAGRAPH XVIII (on follow-on negotiations) WITH THE FOLLOWING:
XVIII. ACCESSION
TO THE TREATY
Any member of the OSCE may request to accede and must include
its existing types of armament and its proposed national ceilings.
CFE TREATY
AND CFE 1A AGREEMENT
Introduction. On 19 November 1990 the 16
members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and
the 6 members of the Warsaw Treaty Organization (WTO, also
called the Warsaw Pact) signed the CFE Treaty. The treaty
limited the total holdings of each group (NATO and WTO) in
Europe west of the Urals in five categories of weapons: tanks,
armored combat vehicles (ACVs), artillery, combat aircraft,
and attack helicopters. The treaty also divided the areas
of application (see below) into 5 zones and set sub-limits,
known as the flank limits, for the amount of treaty-limited
equipment (TLE) which could be placed within each zone.
Each group (NATO and WTO) agreed on national allocations to
meet the overall reductions for its respective group of states
(see below for allocations). Both groups reduced below their
ceilings within the deadline, but by December 1998, Azerbaijan
had not reduced to its national allocation ceilings {1.1.99}.
In November of 1999, the Treaty Parties met in Istanbul and
signed the Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional
Armed Forces in Europe. The agreement instituted new reductions
in armament and troop levels and eliminated zone ceilings
in favor of national ceilings. In June 2001, another Review
Conference was held in Vienna. However, no progress could
be made in regard to the Agreement on Adaptation. Many state
parties have declared that “ratification will be possible
only in the context of compliance with agreed levels of armaments
and equipment.”
The flank amendments. Soon after the treaty
entered into force, Russia found itself handicapped by the
flank limits for its North Caucasus military district. At
that time Russia faced a secessionist movement in its Chechen
republic as well as civil and ethnic wars in neighboring Georgia,
Azerbaijan, and Armenia. In September 1993, Russia proposed
that the flank limits be bypassed by suspending the sublimits
under Article V. {28.9}
Supported by Ukraine, which was also burdened by the flank
limits, Russia pursued the issue and declined to abide by
the flank limits, although it met its overall ceilings. On
17 November 1995, the Joint Consultative Group (JCG), the
body set up to oversee the treaty, agreed to seek a solution
through a new definition of the flank, new TLE limits, and
a new timetable for reduction.
At the May 1996 Review Conference, the parties adopted the
Flank Document, in which they agreed to shrink the flank areas,
raise the limits, and give Russia until 1999 to meet the new
limits. The parties also shrank Ukraine’s flank district
{15-31.5}. After surmounting difficulties in Congress, the
United States ratified the flank agreement just in time for
it to go into effect on 15 May 1997 {25.3, 14.5, 15.5}.
In 1998, NATO made a proposal in the JCG for reconciling the
flank regime with an adapted treaty {31.3.98}. Russia sought
the right to temporarily store TLE in its flank areas for
repair work, arguing that it was impractical to transport
the equipment to distant Siberian facilities. {20.1; 6.5}
CFE 1A. On 10 July 1992, the states-parties
to the CFE Treaty signed a second agreement, limiting troop
levels. However, they could only agree to make the second
treaty, CFE 1A, politically binding. Each nation declared
its own national ceiling on all land-based military personnel
within the area of application, and had 40 months to reduce
to that level. By 1 January 1998, all states had met their
targets. Greece and Armenia had personnel levels equal to
their ceilings; all other parties had personnel levels below
their ceilings. {1.1}
Titles. CFE and CFE 1A have the full titles
given above.
Signatories, entry into force. All 30 parties
ratified the CFE Treaty {9.11.92}, signed CFE 1A {10.7.92}
and the 1999 Adaptation Agreement. CFE 1A is politically but
not legally binding and therefore needs no ratification {section
VIII, CFE 1A text}. CFE 1A entered into force with the CFE
Treaty on 17 July 1992. The Flank Document went into effect
on 15 May 1997 {15.5.97}. As noted above, the CFE Adaptation
Agreement has not been ratified.
Area of application and group totals. The
treaty applies to the area “from the Atlantic to the
Urals” (ATTU), including (Article II[1][B]) the Faeroe
Islands of Denmark, Svalbard (Spitsbergen) of Norway, the
Azores and Madeira of Portugal, the Canaries of Spain, and
Franz Jozef Land and Novaya Zemlya of the USSR (now Russia).
The “Urals line” is drawn along the Ural River
and the Caspian Sea, and through Turkey to near Mersin {14.12.89,
1.11.90}.
In the original CFE Treaty, within the ATTU region, each group
(NATO and WTO) was limited to 20,000 tanks, 30,000 ACVs, 20,000
artillery pieces, 6,800 combat aircraft, and 2,000 attack
helicopters, in all 78,800 each or a combined total of 157,600
pieces of treaty-limited equipment (TLE). In the Adapted Agreement,
group totals are replace with individual country totals.
Weapons, maximum levels, and data exchanges.
The CFE Treaty limits artillery, main battle tanks, armored
personnel carriers, combat aircraft, and attack helicopters.
Each party was required to provide at signature its maximum
levels in each category, which the original 22 parties did
{18.11.90}. The eight successor states to the Soviet Union
agreed on their respective maximum levels (within the mandated
total for the former USSR) in 1992 {15.5}. The Treaty required
signatories to supply data in these categories at signature
(with corrections within 90 days thereafter), 30 days after
entry into force, and on 15 December of every year thereafter,
to apply on 1 January of the next year.
Procedures and Joint Consultative Group (JCG).
The treaty created a Joint Consultative Group to resolve questions
and disputes. Though only mandated to meet twice a year, the
JCG’s workload required more frequent meetings throughout
1992-1995 {5.7.91, 23.9.92, 17.12.93}. In 1997, the JCG formed
negotiating groups (the Operation and Implementation Group
and the Treaty Adaptation Group) while it considered the “basic
elements” of treaty adaptation {20.1}. When it began
work on the new treaty text and new ceilings, the JCG formed
three negotiating groups (the Negotiating Group, the Limitation
Group, and the Verification Group) to deal with different
aspects of its work. {18.9.97}
Verification. The Protocol on Inspections
permits inspections to verify compliance with the treaty’s
numerical limits and reduction of the specified categories
of weapons. Inspections are permitted during the “baseline
validation period” (the first 120 days following the
treaty’s entry into force), the “reduction period”
(the three years following the baseline validation period),
the “residual level validation period” (the 120
days following the reduction period), and the “residual
period” (the period following the residual level validation
period.
Under the original CFE Treaty, each party must accept a number
of inspections equal to 15 percent of its objects of verification
(OOVs). The term OOV refers to units or organizations holding
TLE. Inspections are conducted on OOVs at declared sites—military
installations or facilities that could house more than one
OOV. Under the CFE Adaptation, the number of inspections is
equal to 20 percent of the OOV. Each party has the right to
conduct inspections (the “active inspection quota,”)
including five per year on a member of its own group. Each
group of states allocates its quota of inspections among its
member states. Each party is also obliged to receive inspections
(the “passive inspection quota”). Up to 23 percent
of the active quota may be used to conduct “challenge
inspections” of sites where the presence of TLE is suspected.
Inspections have not revealed any serious compliance problems.
History. The Conventional Armed Forces in
Europe (CFE) talks opened on 6 March 1989, with a mandate
to discuss artillery, combat aircraft, attack helicopters,
tanks, ACVs, and personnel. In July 1990, CFE negotiators
agreed to postpone discussion of personnel limits to follow-on
talks to begin immediately after CFE was signed so that the
initial treaty could be concluded before the 1992 Helsinki
meeting of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe
meeting (see ACR 402aEUR). Until the follow-on agreement was
in place, all parties agreed not to increase troop deployments
{16.7.90}. The CFE Treaty was finalized in November 1990 and
signed by heads of state in Paris on 19 November 1990 (see
ACR 407aEUR97 for additional early history).
The CFE IA talks. On 26 November 1990, talks
opened on the follow-on agreement, CFE 1A. The 22 parties
(down from 23 with the creation of a united Germany) used
the CFE mandate for the new talks. The agreement was signed
on 10 July 1992.
CFE 1A called for each party to declare a troop ceiling incorporating
all land-based military personnel in the area of application,
with some exceptions {10.7.92}. Negotiators agreed that CFE
1A would be politically binding.
The dissolution of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact.
The dissolution of the USSR in December 1991 and the Warsaw
Pact in July 1991 raised a question about how to distribute
the required USSR reductions among the successor states of
the former Soviet Union (FSU). At a JCG meeting in 1991, the
parties agreed that the three Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia,
and Lithuania) would not be among the successor states to
the USSR {18.10} and therefore not CFE parties. At a 15 May
1992 summit in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, the other FSU states
in the CFE’s area of application agreed on terms for
the re-allocation of TLE under the CFE Treaty, removing an
obstacle that had prevented other states from ratifying.
Beginning in 1991, signatories considered holding an “extraordinary
conference,” as permitted by Article XXI (2), to take
account of the new situation. On 10 March 1992, CFE signatories
agreed to hold such a meeting on 5 June 1992 in Oslo, Norway.
At that point they adopted wording changes to accommodate
the dissolution of the USSR {5.6}.
On 17 July 1992, the heads of state of the signatories agreed
to bring the CFE Treaty provisionally into force until a few
remaining states ratified. Baseline inspections began soon
after.
Entry into force, verification, and destruction of
TLE. On 9 November 1992, 10 days after the final
two states (Belarus and Kazakhstan) deposited their instruments
of ratification, the CFE Treaty entered fully into force.
The baseline inspection phase ended 14 November 1992 and inspections
to verify TLE destruction began. On 17 November 1995, the
TLE destruction period ended and the residual verification
period began.
By 17 November 1993, every party except Armenia and Azerbaijan
had successfully met the requirement to destroy 25 percent
of their TLE surplus {17.11}. By 17 November 1994, all but
Armenia and Azerbaijan had met the requirement to destroy
60 percent of their TLE surplus {17.11}. By late 1995, an
estimated 50,000 pieces of TLE had been destroyed. Russia
accounted for one-fifth of this total. Although some former
Soviet republics, such as Armenia and Azerbaijan, had failed
to meet their reduction liabilities {17.11}, the parties pledged
to seek full implementation of the treaty’s requirements
and to continue meetings to work on compliance issues.
Review conferences. The treaty mandated a
review conference 46 months after entry into force, and at
five-year intervals thereafter. Meeting in Vienna in May 1996,
the First Review Conference resolved the flank issue and decided
to adapt the treaty after the December 1996 OSCE Lisbon summit
{15(31.5.96}. In May 2001 the Second Review Conference was
held in Vienna (ACR HYPERLINK "407bCFE01.html"
407bCFE01). Since the adaptation was already completed,
the conference limited its work to a “brief set of formal
conclusions, noting the steps still needed to bring the adapted
Treaty into force.”
Completion of destruction. By 17 November
1995, all signatory nations were to have equipment levels
below their national limits. At that time, Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Belarus, and Georgia had failed to meet their national requirements.
Russia and Ukraine had met the national ceilings, but not
the requirements for the outermost flank zone. Armenia and
Georgia had reduced their holdings below their ceilings by
the end of 1996 {13.12} and Belarus did so by the end of 1998
{1.1.99}. At the beginning of 1999 Azerbaijan still remained
above ceilings in tanks, artillery, and ACVs {1.1}, but by
the beginning of 2001, it was within the limits { HYPERLINK
"407cCFE02.html" 407cCFE02}.
JCG history/flank issue. The JCG, set up
provisionally (Protocol on Provisional Application), spent
the first part of 1991 resolving the Article III dispute {14.6}.
Later in the year it worked on the reporting formats for challenge
inspections and accident reports {20.12}, as well as apportioning
the costs of inspections {2.9}. In 1992, the JCG considered
problems such as CIS allocation difficulties {27.4}, entry
into force {9.11}, and revised inspection procedures {15.12}.
In 1993, the JCG revised some equipment destruction procedures
{19.4} and considered a Russian request to suspend CFE Article
V’s flank limits {28.9}. The flank issue remained a
major point of contention throughout 1994 and 1995, several
draft compromises were tabled {15.9; 31.10}, and no agreement
was reached until the 1996 Review Conference {15-31.5}. In
1997, the JCG discussed the scope and parameters of CFE adaptation
and later began negotiation of new national and territorial
ceilings {20.1, 31.3, 23.7, 18.9}. In 1998, the JCG considered
proposals on new ceilings, but made little progress {20.1,
31.3, 23.6, 30.6, 1.9}. However, it resolved the outstanding
issues during the course of 1999, permitting the signing of
the Adaptation Agreement on 19 November that year.
OUTLINE
OF CFE TREATY PROVISIONS
I. GENERAL
OBLIGATIONS; CONTENTS
II. DEFINITIONS
II.1(a). “groups of states.”
II.1(b). “area of application.” ATTU including
islands.
II.1(c). “battle tank.” Self-propelled armored
combat vehicle capable of heavy firepower, primarily via a
high-muzzle-velocity, direct-fire main gun necessary to engage
armored and other targets, with high cross-country mobility
and providing a high degree of self-protection.
II.1(d). “armored combat vehicle.” Includes APC,
AIFV, HACV.
II.1(e). “unladen weight.”
II.1(f). “Artillery.” Indirect fire over 100 mm.
II.1(g). “stationed conventional armed forces.”
II.1(h). “designated permanent storage site.”
II.1(i). “armored vehicle launched bridge.”
II.1(j). “conventional armaments and equipment limited
by the treaty.” Those items subject to the limits of
Articles IV, V, VI.
II.1(k). “combat aircraft.” Does not include primary
trainers.
II.1(l). “combat helicopter”
II.1(m). “attack helicopter.” Equipped to employ
anti-armor or air-to-air guided weapons, with fire control
and aiming system.
II.1(n). “specialized attack helicopter.”
II.1(o). “multipurpose attack helicopter.”
II.1(p). “combat support helicopter.” Does not
fit definition of attack helicopter, armed with self-defense
and area suppression weapons.
II.1(q). “conventional armaments and equipment subject
to the Treaty.” Those items subject to information exchange
under the Protocol.
II.1(r). “in service.”
II.1(s). “armored personnel carrier look-alike and armored
infantry fighting vehicle look-alike.”
II.1(t). “reduction site.”
II.1(u). “reduction liability.”
II.2. Lists of existing types in Protocol on Existing Types.
II.3. Recategorization in accordance with Protocol on Helicopter
Recategorization
III. COUNTING
RULES
III.1. Seven “not counted” categories: items in
manufacture, R&D, historical collections, awaiting disposal,
awaiting export, held by internal security functions, or in
transit.
III.2. If an unusually high number of these is specified in
information exchange, the possessing state shall explain in
the JCG.
IV. COLLECTIVE
CEILINGS FOR GROUPS OF STATES-PARTIES
IV.1. ATTU-wide: {see weapon subsection E-0 18.11.90}
IV.2. Super-extended Central Zone: {those in draft outline
407.D 6.90, V.2 less Kiev}
IV.3. Extended Central Zone: {those in draft outline 407.D
6.90, V.3 plus Kiev}
IV.4. Central Zone: Benelux, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia.
{See numbers at 5 October 1990}
IV.5. TLEs may be located on the territory of another state
in the same group.
IV.6. One state may make up low numbers of another state in
the same group.
V. FLANK
LIMITATIONS
V.1 A. Flank limits {see 5 October 1990}.
V.1.B,C. Temporarily exceeding limits {box 19.11.90}.
V.2. Notice
VI. CEILINGS
FOR EACH STATE-PARTY (sufficiency rule)
Battle tanks 13,300
Artillery pieces 13,750
ACVs 20,000
Combat aircraft 5150
Attack helicopters 1500
VII. INDIVIDUAL
CEILINGS
VII.1. Each state to reach its individual ceiling, agreed
within its group, within 40 months.
VII.2. Notice of allocation.
VII.3. Notice of change; corresponding reduction, if needed,
by another state.
VII.5. Notice to included notice of maximum regional levels.
VII.6. No compensation for decrease in items under information
exchange.
VII.7. Sole responsibility of each party.
VIII. REDUCTION
PROCESS AND SITES
VIII.1. Reductions by means of destruction, recategorisation,
or reclassification.
VIII.4. Three phases: (a) first 12 months after entry into
force, 25 percent; (b) second 12 months, total of 60 percent;
(c) by the end of 40 months, completion.
VIII.6. Each party to announce reduction liability 30 days
after entry into force.
VIII.13. All subject to on-site inspection without limit or
right of refusal.
IX. TLE
IN TEMPORARY STORAGE
After rendering incapable of combat, not counted against ceilings.
X. PERMANENT
STORAGE SITES
Equipment within counted. Sites to contain only facilities
relevant to storage of any armaments and equipment. Some equipment
can be removed and returned in 42 days for exercises.
XI. ARMORED
VEHICLE LAUNCHED BRIDGES
740 each in active units; remainder must be placed in storage
(none actually reduced) {see box 19.11.1990}.
XII. TLE
IN PARAMILITARY FORMATIONS {see box 19.11.1990}.
XII.1. No more than 1000 AIFVs in paramilitary formations.
XII.2. Reassignment of TLE to “any organization not
part of its conventional armed forces.”
XIII. NOTIFICATION
AND EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION
Done in accordance with Protocol on Information Exchange.
XIV. VERIFICATION
XIV.1. Inspections under Protocol.
XIV.2. Inspections to monitor holdings; destruction; recategorisation
of helicopters; reduction of personnel; designated storage
sites; stabilizing measures and movements of TLE into ATTU.
XIV.3. “No State Party shall exercise the rights set
forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article in respect of
States Parties which belong to the group of States Parties
to which it belongs in order to elude the objectives of the
verification regime.”
XIV.6. Aerial overflights. To be worked out in CFE IA.
XV. NATIONAL
TECHNICAL MEANS
XV.1. NTM permitted.
XV.2. No interference with treaty inspections or NTM.
XV.3. No concealment.
XVI. JOINT
CONSULTATIVE GROUP
XVI.2. Coverage.
XVI.3. Each party may raise issues.
XVI.4. Operation by consensus.
XVI.5. May propose amendments.
XVI.7. Follows procedures of Protocol on the Joint Consultative
Group (see below for frequency of meetings).
XVII. COMMUNICATION
AMONG STATES-PARTIES
XVIII. FOLLOW-ON
NEGOTIATIONS. Negotiations to continue with the same
mandate {see section 410}.
XIX. DURATION,
WITHDRAWAL
XXIX.1. Unlimited duration.
XXIX.2. Withdrawal - supreme national interests. 150 days'
notice.
XXIX.3. Withdrawal if one country increased its holdings outside
ATTU “in such proportions as to pose an obvious threat
to the balance of forces within the area of application.”
XX. AMENDMENTS
XX.1. Any party may propose.
XX.2. Approved by all parties.
XXI. CONFERENCES
XXI.1. Treaty will be open to accession.
XXI.2. Extraordinary Conferences, in particular to consider
withdrawal of a party from its group of States Parties or
joining the other group. To open within fifteen days of request
by any State Party, and to last not more than three weeks.
XXI.3. Treaty Depositary must inform States Parties of all
new Treaty information.
XXI.4. Conference to consider withdrawal of a party from the
treaty; depositary to convene no later than 21 days after
notice of withdrawal.
XXII. RATIFICATION,
DEPOSITARIES, ENTRY INTO FORCE
XXII.1. Ratification to be deposited with Kingdom of the Netherlands.
XXII.2. Entry into force ten days after all instruments of
ratification deposited.
XXIII. AUTHENTIC
TEXTS
Six languages: English, Russian, French, German, Spanish,
and Italian.
PROTOCOLS
AND OTHER ANNEXES
PROTOCOL
ON EXISTING TYPES OF CONVENTIONAL ARMAMENTS AND EQUIPMENT
With annex on the types of the treaty-limited categories of
conventional armaments. Contains lists of equipment covered
by the treaty.
PROTOCOL
ON RECLASSIFICATION OF COMBAT-CAPABLE TRAINERS
Lists combat-capable training aircraft and gives each party
the right to remove numerical limitations on these aircraft.
PROTOCOL
ON DESTRUCTION
I. General Requirements
II. Standards for Presentation at Reduction Sites
III-VII. Procedures for battle tanks, artillery, ACVs, combat
aircraft, attack helicopters {8.2.90}.
VIII. Conversion for Non-Military Purposes.
IX. Loss or accident.
X. Static display.
XI. Ground targets.
XII. Ground instructional purposes.
PROTOCOL
ON RECATEGORIZATION OF COMBAT HELICOPTERS
Discusses the procedure for the recategorization of combat
helicopters with special exceptions for Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine.
PROTOCOL
ON NOTIFICATION AND EXCHANGES OF INFORMATION
Each party to provide the following information on dates specified
in section VII of this protocol:
I. Structure All combat, combat support,
and combat service support formations down to regiment.
II. Overall holdings TLEs by number and type.
III. Location and numbers. (A) For each formation
and unit under I, normal peacetime location; (B) Holdings
of TLE; (C) Location and numbers of non-TLEs. Combat support
helicopters, unarmed transport helicopters, armored vehicle
launched bridges, AIFV look-alikes, APC look-alikes, primary
trainer aircraft, reclassified combat-capable trainer aircraft,
and Mi-24R and Mi-24K helicopters {see box 19 November 1990}.
IV. Location and numbers of any TLEs not subject to
limitation e.g. held by paramilitary personnel or
produced but not in service.
VII. Timetable Upon signature, with corrections
90 days thereafter, 30 days after entry into force, 15 December
of every year thereafter, and following completion of the
reductions period.
IX. Information about entry into service,
of new or additional equipment.
X. Information on entry into area of application.
ANNEX ON
THE FORMAT FOR THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION.
PROTOCOL
ON INSPECTION
with annex on privileges and immunities
I. Definitions. Object of verification approach.
II. General Obligations; quotas.
II.10(A) Passive quota 20 percent of objects of verification
during baseline inspection, first 120 days after entry into
force.
II.10(B) Passive quota 10 percent during each year of reduction
period.
II.10(C) 20 percent for 120 days to monitor residual levels.
II.10(D) 15 percent each year thereafter.
II.11 Passive quotas on challenge inspection.
III. Pre-inspection requirements.
IV. Notice of intent to inspect.
V. Procedures upon arrival at point of entry.
VI. General rules.
VII. Declared site inspections.
VIII. Challenge inspection within specified
areas
IX. Inspection of certification.
X. Inspections during reduction phase.
XI. Cancellation of inspections.
XII. Inspection reports.
XIII. Privileges and immunities.
PROTOCOL
ON THE JOINT CONSULTATIVE GROUP
3. “The Joint Consultative Group shall meet for regular
sessions to be held two times per year.”
5. “Sessions of the Joint Consultative Group shall last
no longer than four weeks, unless it decides otherwise.”
PROTOCOL
ON PROVISIONAL APPLICATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS
1. List of provisions (includes JCG, individual allocations,
withdrawal in extraordinary circumstances, information exchange,
inspections).
2. This protocol entered into force at signature and will
remain in force for twelve months. The period of application
may be extended “if all the States Parties so decide.”
DECLARATIONS
ACCOMPANYING THE TREATY
Land-based naval aircraft.
1. No one state will have in the area of application of the
Treaty more than 400 permanently land-based combat naval aircraft.
2. The number of such combat naval aircraft held by either
of the two groups will not exceed 430.
3. No one state will hold in the area any permanently land-based
attack helicopters.
Strength Of German Armed Forces {see 30 August
1990}.
[The Federal Republic of Germany] commits itself to reduce
the personnel strength of the armed forces of the united Germany
to 370,000 within three to four years. . This reduction is
to begin with the coming into force of the CFE Treaty.
Within the framework of this overall limit, not more than
345,000 men will belong to the land and air forces, which
according to the agreed mandate are the object of the negotiations
on conventional armed forces in Europe.
Freeze on personnel {see 30 August and 19
November 1990}.
The States Parties to that Treaty declare that, for the period
of these negotiations, they will not increase the total peacetime
authorized personnel strength of their conventional armed
forces pursuant to the Mandate in the area of application.
The Joint Declaration of the 22 {see 14 November
1990}.
The signatories solemnly declare that, in the new era of European
relations which is beginning, they are no longer adversaries,
will build new partnerships, and extend to each other the
hand of friendship.
OUTLINE
OF CFE 1A PROVISIONS
I. SCOPE
OF LIMITATION
I.1. Full-time military personnel.
I.2. Exclusions for internal security forces, personnel in
transit, and troops under UN command.
I.3. Newly-formed units will face review by the JCG, if it
is asked.
II. NATIONAL
PERSONNEL LIMITS
II.1. After 40 months from entry into force, states may not
exceed declared limits.
III. REVISION
PROCEDURES
III.1. To revise downward, the state must notify all other
participants of the effective date.
III.2. To revise upward, the state must notify all other participants
and include an explanation for the increase. Participating
states have 42 days to object to the increase.
III.3. If an objection is raised; any participating state
may request an extraordinary conference to discuss the increase.
IV. INFORMATION
EXCHANGE
IV.1. States will provide information on aggregate numbers
of personnel and the number in each unit down to the brigade/regiment
and wing/air regiment level.
IV.6. Data will be exchanged within 30 days following the
entry into force of the CFE Treaty and on 15 December of each
year after.
V. STABILIZING
MEASURES
V.1. A state will provide 42-day advance notification when
it increases the size of any unit by more than 1000 at the
brigade/regiment level or more than 500 at the wing/air regiment
level.
V.2. A state will provide 42-day notification when it calls
up more than 35,000 reservists to full-time duty.
V.3. Forty-two day notification is not required when reservists
are called up for emergencies, such as natural disasters.
Notification in those cases must be provided no later than
the date the threshold is exceeded.
V.4. The notification will include the number of personnel
involved, the purpose of the call-up, the planned beginning
and ending of the period the threshold will be exceeded, and
the location at which large numbers of called-up troops are
deployed.
V.5. Resubordination of units subject to limits must be given
to all participating states.
V.6. Such notification of resubordination must include the
date of resubordination, the designation and location of units
undergoing resubordination, the size of each unit undergoing
resubordination, and the number of CFE TLE held by those units.
V.7. Resubordinated units remain subject to limitation for
one year after the resubordination takes place.
V.8. Forty-two days prior to the end of the one-year period
described in V.7, the state with the resubordinated unit will
provide notification of the unit's pending exclusion.
VI. VERIFICATION/EVALUATION
VI.2. Inspected states will provide the personnel strength
of a site during the pre-inspection briefing.
VI.3. In the case of a challenge inspection, the host state
will provide the inspectors with the troop strength declared
in the most recent data exchange.
VI.5. Inspectors will include troop strength evaluations in
their inspection reports.
VI.6. Evaluation may be improved by CSBMs under negotiation.
VII. REVIEW
MECHANISMS
VII.1. The agreement will be reviewed in the framework of
CSCE.
VII.2. States may use the Joint Consultative Group to clarify
questions.
VII.3. A review conference will be held six months after entry
into force and at five-year intervals thereafter.
VII.4. Any state may call an extraordinary conference if exceptional
circumstances have arisen.
VIII. CLOSING
PROVISIONS
VIII.1. The agreement is politically binding. It will come
into force simultaneously with the CFE Treaty.
VIII.2. The agreement will have the same duration as the CFE
Treaty.
VIII.3. The Netherlands is the depositary state.
|