SLOW BUT STEADY: MOVING AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY FORWARD

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 VATICAN 000218

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/WE LARREA
DEPT FOR EB BOBOJ

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/18/2016
TAGS: VT TBIO EAGR EAID FA
SUBJECT: SLOW BUT STEADY: MOVING AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY FORWARD
AT THE VATICAN

REF: A. 05 VATICAN 515

B. VATICAN 15

C. VATICAN 25

CLASSIFIED BY: Peter G. Martin, Political Officer, Embassy
Vatican, State.
REASON: 1.4 (b),(d)
--------------

Summary

--------------




1. (C) With a grant from EB, Post brought three American

researchers to speak with various Holy See interlocutors

to increase acceptance and understanding of agricultural

biotechnology in advance of the publication of a key

Vatican document on hunger. After several years of

lobbying by Post, the Vatican has become "cautiously

optimistic" about GMO food. With most Vatican officials,

the science is not the issue. The question is about

exploitation: who benefits from these technologies, the

multinationals or the farmers? With the help of the

department we chose three speakers with experience in

the developing world who addressed these concerns

directly, discussing the economic and health benefits to

farmers, and important research that is being done on

non-cash crops such as cassava. The group met with an

impressive roster of interlocutors. Although progress

on a delicate question like this is necessarily slow, the

visit was another step forward on the issue. End Summary.



--------------

Experts from Academia and Non-Profits

--------------




2. (C) Mr. Lawrence Kent of the Donald Danforth

Plant Science Center, Dr. Carl Pray of Rutgers

University, and Dr. Greg Traxler of Auburn

University spoke with Vatican representatives from

the Pontifical Council Cor Unum (the Vatican's

clearinghouse for the Catholic Church's humanitarian

assistance),the Pontifical Academy of Life, the

Vatican's Secretariat of State (Foreign Ministry),

the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, and

a group of Jesuit administrators from Africa.

The Ambassador also hosted a working lunch with

representatives from other relevant Vatican

departments, including Health, Mission Territories

(covering much of the developing world),and the

Vatican's top theological body.




VATICAN 00000218 002 OF 005



3. (C) Our strategy was to target departments that

will have input - or at least a clearance on - the

revision of a Vatican document on hunger put out by

Cor Unum. We hoped to educate Vatican officials who

were suspicious of the technology, as well as those

who are already on board. The former could try to

halt forward progress on the issue, while the latter

will be more effective advocates if they can better

address typical Vatican concerns on the issue.

Conversations with representatives from the Franciscan

and Jesuit orders were particularly important due to

the vocal opposition of some members of these orders,

and many social-justice oriented Catholics with

connections to them.



--------------

What's in it for the Poor?

--------------




4. (C) Most interlocutors wanted to know how farmers

and the poor could benefit from agricultural

biotechnology, and were interested in data indicating

that the farmers themselves actually realized the

majority of economic benefits of GMO seed with greater

yields. Our speakers explained that the cost of seeds

was frequently offset by lowered pesticide expenses and

higher yields. The fact that farmers could also benefit

from the technology through better health conditions

(in particular, reduced use of pesticides) was also a

point of interest to most of the Vatican officials.

They were all keen to hear about the decrease in health

problems among Chinese farmers spraying cotton crops,

and the decrease in black fungus on corn crops in South

Africa, which have led to higher production and income

and lower medical costs.




5. (C) Kent's presentation was of particular interest

to the Holy See, as he discussed progress his NGO has

made on non-cash crops. Kent answered the very questions

that Vatican officials have asked us in the past: where is

the research on the crops that are really going to help

small subsistence farmers in the developing world?(ref a)

He described work being done on enriched, disease-

resistant cassava, an innovation that could be crucial

for Africa since more than a third of all Africans get

VATICAN 00000218 003 OF 005



most of their daily calories from cassava. While

cassava fills people's stomachs, Kent explained, it

doesn't provide nutrition, which means while some people

may not be hungry, they are still malnourished. Further,

he continued, an insidious virus can often destroy large

portions of the crop with little warning. Kent's point

hit home: his NGO is going to give away this technology

when it is ready. The U.S. and related multi-nationals

are not going to get rich off cassava. But as long as

irrational fears and restrictions hinder testing,

development, and implementation of the technology, the

hungry will continue to wait, Kent emphasized.



--------------

Concerns

--------------




6. (C) Several interlocutors voiced concern about

the regulation of agricultural biotechnology, and were

reassured when the speakers explained U.S. procedures

for the approval of this technology - procedures they

compared to the hurdles pharmaceutical companies must

clear when introducing a new drug. Speakers

acknowledged Vatican concerns about multi-national

exploitation, and called for greater public-sector

investment in the technology. Pray noted that China

was one of the only countries with any such investment.



--------------

Surprising Frenchmen

--------------




7. (C) Vatican officials raised EU opposition to

agricultural biotechnology in several instances,

begging the question of the Vatican's role in the

debate. We impressed upon sympathetic listeners that

the Holy See could influence the conversation, even

in secular Western Europe, if the question is framed

as a moral one with implications for the hungry.

Several officials grasped the dynamic immediately.

French Monsignors Jean Laffitte and Jacques Suaudeau

from the Pontifical Academy of Life admitted that the

Europeans were against agricultural biotechnology out of

sheer protectionism. The Frenchmen were two of our


VATICAN 00000218 004 OF 005


most enthusiastic interlocutors on the issue, and

inquired about restrictions on testing and other barriers

in particular African nations (septel). Laffitte, Vice

President of the Academy, praised the government of

Burkina Faso for its testing of bt-cotton and criticized

Catholic involvement in the refusal of GMO food aid in

Zambia.



--------------

Jesuit Challenge

--------------




8. (C) After the controversy over Jesuit involvement

in the refusal of U.S. food aid to Zambia several years

ago, and the continuing vocal opposition among many

Jesuits to these technologies, our meeting with a group

of African Jesuits at the worldwide headquarters of the

order was particularly important. The deputy superiors

(provincials) of African provinces of the Society of

Jesus, hailing from Madagascar, Zimbabwe, Nairobi,

Cameroon, Dem. Congo, Rwanda, Zambia, and Nigeria were

in Rome for meetings with the Jesuit Father General,

and with the help of a good contact in the Jesuit Curia,

we were able to get on their schedule. The group lived

up to its reputation as skeptical: many voiced concerns

about U.S. economic interests, potential dependency on

the part of farmers, trade inequities, and concerns about

biodiversity. They also mentioned concerns over

corruption and inequitable food distribution. For our

part, we emphasized that the USG would never claim that

agricultural biotech was a cure-all for world poverty and

hunger; there are many aspects to the issue. Nevertheless,

we pointed out that the possibilities for these

technologies to contribute to a solution to these ills

were too great to ignore. Our speakers gained some

credibility with the Jesuits when they made it clear that

they were simply college professors and researchers

presenting what they had learned - not on the Monsanto

payroll. We may not have changed all of their minds, but

they surely left better educated on the issues, and with a

lot of questions for the naysayers in their order.



--------------

Comment

--------------

VATICAN 00000218 005 OF 005






9. (C) Progress on agricultural biotech at the

Vatican is slow, as is progress on any complicated

issue in which any number of Holy See departments can

claim an interest. Non-specialists are also susceptible

to the great amount of misinformation on the subject,

especially in Europe. Some officials has heard aspects

of our arguments before, but had been barraged in the

meantime by propaganda from anti-GMO groups, some of them

with a connection to the Catholic Church. Our goal was to

create a more knowledgeable audience among key decision-

makers at the Vatican, and a more receptive environment in

advance of the publication of the Cor Unum document on

hunger. The target date for the document is now uncertain,

but we see it as a key opportunity to advance our goals on

this issue. In the wake of the publication of the UN Food

and Agriculture Organization's 2003-04 State of Food and

Agriculture Report on agricultural biotechnology, it would

be difficult for Cor Unum to avoid the topic if it attempts

to address world hunger in any comprehensive way.




10. (C) In the meantime, this visit represented another

step forward in creating a more favorable atmosphere for

agricultural biotech at the Vatican. In one telling

moment at the Ambassador's luncheon, Fr. Wojciech Giertych,

the high-profile Theologian of the Papal Household, took

the floor after listening with interest to Kent's

presentation. He said that something about GMO food was

still a little unsettling to him, but that hearing about

the speakers' work had impressed him. Acknowledging the

promise of these technologies for the developing world, he

wondered if irrational fears were needlessly complicating

the issue. "We shouldn't be afraid of working with nature

to improve the lot of human beings," he concluded.




12. (SBU) Post would like to thank EB for funding this

program, EB/TTP/ABT/BTT and USAID/EGAT/ESP/IRBfor

their excellent speaker recommendations, and IIP for their

critical support and coordination.
SANDROLINI