SOUTH AFRICA: INTERNATIONAL NUCELAR SAFEGURDS

UNCLAS PRETORIA 005005 SIPDIS SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED SIPDIS DEPT FOR AF/S ISN/NESS ENERGY PASS TO MMANNING, JKERR, SFRAZER E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ENRG PARM PREL ETTC MNUC AORC KNNP KTIA IAEA SF SUBJECT: SOUTH AFRICA: INTERNATIONAL NUCELAR SAFEGURDS COOPERATION RESPONSE REF: STATE 190583 ¶1. (SBU) This is an Action Cable -- See paragraphs 6 and 8. ¶2. (SBU) Summary. South Africa Department of Minerals and Energy (DME) Nuclear Chief Tseliso Maquebela requested that the two R&D agreeements under consideration be separated so that South African approval for one of the agreements can prcoeed alone. Maquebela also suggests a name change for the Agreement for Cooperation in Research and Development in Nuclear Material Safeguards Technologies (Safegurards Cooperation Agreement),(Catherine - anything to add here?) End Summary. ¶3. (SBU) Per reftel, a non-paper regarding the Safeguards Cooperation Agreement was delivered to the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) on . said that (Catherine: please complete details here as to response/reaction from DFA.) ¶4. (SBU) Econoff met with DME Nuclear Chief Tseliso Maquebela and delivered a copy of the non-paper December 7. Comment: Poloff later noted to econoff that it had previously requested that DFA provide Maquebela with a copy of the non-paper and that Maquebela had likely received the non-paper two weeks prior. End Comment. Maquebela stated that of all the nuclear energy issues between the U.S. and South Africa, the Safeguards Cooperation Agreement is the only one that is "making his life difficult". Maquebela said that his first issue with the agreement, now resolved, was the need to understand how the agreement fit with a circa 1995 broader nuclear cooperation agreement between the U.S. and South Africa. Maquebela stated that he now understands that both the Cooperation Agreement and the other Nuclear Energy R&D Agreement are subsidiary agreements. Maquebela then stated that his current issue deals with whether or not the Safeguards Cooperation Agreement encroaches on the multilateral function of the IAEA and on the individual IAEA member states themselves. Maquebela asked econoff "is this not an IAEA agreement?" Econoff responded to Maquebela by citing text of the non-paper where the objectives of the agreement within the context of the IAEA are clearly deliniated. Maquebela commented that SAG does not have this type of agreement with any other country and feels that the agreement encroaches on SAG's ties to multilateral institutions at the same time they are trying to strengthen these relations. Note Presumably, Maquebela was referring to the IAEA as the multilateral institution. End Note. ¶5. (SBU) Maquebela stated that while he agrees with the objectives of the agreement, he objects to the use of the term "Safeguards". He asked if this word could be deleted from the title of the agreement and instead suggested entitling the agreement "Verification Technology Cooperation Agreement". Maquebela said that re-naming the agreement would make it easier for him to gain SAG approval. He admitted that the key decision makers regarding the agreement are at the DFA. (Catherine - should we make a comment or note here that presumably Maquebela means "Minty"?) Maquebela requested that Post contact him within the next two weeks with an answer on changing the name of the agreement. He said that he may have further comments on the non-paper at that time. ¶6. (SBU) Action request. Post requests guidance on re-naming the Safeguards Cooperation Agreement. If re-naming the Agreement is approved, Post requests that revised copies of the agreement, reflecting the name change, be sent to Post. ¶7. (SBU) Maquebela told Econoff that he can not understand why or if the Safeguards Cooperation Agreement is linked to the Nuclear Energy R&D Agreement. He said that SAG would like to proceed with signing the Nuclear Energy R&D Agreement now. Maquebela said that the he understood from an un-named senior U.S. Department of Energy official attending the September IAEA General Conference that the two agreements were linked. Maquebela requested that the two agreements be delinked so that SAG can approve the Nuclear Energy R&D Agreement. ¶8. (SBU) Action request. Post requests approval to tell SAG that the two R&D agreements are not linked and that SAG may approve the Nuclear Energy R&D Agreement alone. ¶9. (SBU) Comment: Maquebela spoke in a relaxed confident style during the meeting with econoff. The meeting covered the status of other outstanding U.S./SAG nuclear energy initiatives including the return of U.S.-origin spent fuel assemblies, the Commodities Identifictation Training program and GIF. Joining Maquebela in the meeting was DME Nuclear Non-Proliferation Director Elsie Monale and a newly hired nuclear technology officer. Maquebela said that he was pleased that progress had been made on the spent-fuel project and expressed gratitude for training and support being provided by the U.S.G. Maquebela further noted that he felt that his office is finally starting to get the resources it needs to deal with long-standing issues. End Comment. BOST