Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06SEOUL1128
2006-04-06 02:35:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Seoul
Cable title:  

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION KEY TO RESOLVING IMPASSE

Tags:  ETRD EAGR KS 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0002
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHUL #1128 0960235
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 060235Z APR 06
FM AMEMBASSY SEOUL
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7148
INFO RUEHRC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC IMMEDIATE
UNCLAS SEOUL 001128 

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR EAP/K AND EB/ATT
USDA FOR ACTING U/S LAMBERT AND FAS/WETZEL
NSC FOR TONG
PASS USTR FOR CUTLER, AUGEROT AND KI

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD EAGR KS
SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION KEY TO RESOLVING IMPASSE
OVER RESUMING BEEF IMPORTS


UNCLAS SEOUL 001128

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR EAP/K AND EB/ATT
USDA FOR ACTING U/S LAMBERT AND FAS/WETZEL
NSC FOR TONG
PASS USTR FOR CUTLER, AUGEROT AND KI

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD EAGR KS
SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION KEY TO RESOLVING IMPASSE
OVER RESUMING BEEF IMPORTS



1. (SBU) Prior to USTR Ambassador Portman's call to Trade
Minister Kim Hyun-chong about the beef issue, Embassy Seoul
would like to offer some current context, and try to explain
the possible reasons for the apparent disconnect between
messages given to us by Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Trade (MOFAT) on one hand and the Ministry of Agriculture
and Forestry (MAF) on the other.


2. (SBU) Embassy Seoul's view is that the discrepancy
between the optimism heard from MOFAT and the obstinacy
heard from MAF regarding sending the site survey teams and
generally resuming progress towards implementing the January
13 import protocol is twofold. (Note: According to the
protocol, sending teams to inspect the operations of packing
plants set to export to Korea is a prerequisite for resuming
imports.)


3. (SBU) First, MOFAT is basing its information on
conversations it is having with the political level at MAF,
who appear to be telling MOFAT that there will be no problem
in moving forward once MAF has enough information to make a
convincing case that the Alabama cow was born prior to April

1998. (According to the import protocol, cases of BSE found
in animals born prior to that date -- which is interpreted
as being the "effective" date of the U.S. ban on feeding
ruminant-based feed to ruminants -- would not be cause to
ban imports.) We believe MAF officials are telling MOFAT
that the will and intention to resume progress is there, but
all necessary technical groundwork needs to be laid. We do
not believe that MAF wants to use this as an excuse to hold
up beef imports indefinitely, and do think MAF does intend
to resume progress once it feels the timing is right for its
political needs.


4. (SBU) That timing will kick in once MAF feels it has
enough information about the animal to make a compelling
argument to the National Assembly and other important
stakeholders. Not to convince them, because those groups
cannot be convinced, but enough to make a compelling case
and show that MAF did not merely go through the motions of
verifying the age and push ahead solely due to U.S.
pressure.


5. (SBU) Second, we think MAF is probably being sincere when
it tells us that it needs more information to fully
establish the age of the Alabama animal. In other words,
MAF is not yet itself convinced that the animal really is as
old as USDA says it is. The MAF veterinarian is apparently
sincere in his estimation that the animal -- based on the
one picture provided -- is 6 - 7 years old.


6. (SBU) So the information requests coming out of MAF are
not merely political cover -- which is what MOFAT emphasizes
-- but also reflect some real doubts about the age of the
animal in some technical quarters of MAF. That is the basis
for MAF requests to see more pictures of the animal, as well
as comparison photos of the dentition of Alabama animals
known to have been born earlier than April 1998.


7. (SBU) Finally, we need to be clear and realistic in our
expectations of MOFAT. MAF is running this show, is firmly
in control, and it is MAF that will have to answer in the
inevitable National Assembly hearings and investigations.
This issue lies squarely in MAF's portfolio -- we will not
be able to change that. MOFAT can urge and cajole -- and is
doing so. But, in Embassy's estimation, MOFAT cannot roll
MAF on this issue. We have consistently received this
message from MOFAT, and believe it is an accurate reflection
of the current bureaucratic truth. MOFAT probably has the
most leverage in pushing for sending the site survey teams
independently of final, absolute age verification -- but we
should be very cautious about MOFAT's ability to move or
push MAF on its own.

VERSHBOW