Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06VATICAN221
2006-10-19 11:41:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Vatican
Cable title:  

SLOW BUT STEADY: MOVING AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY FORWARD

Tags:  EAGR EAID ECON TBIO VT OIIP 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO3240
RR RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHSR
DE RUEHROV #0221/01 2921141
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 191141Z OCT 06 ZDK
FM AMEMBASSY VATICAN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0529
RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
INFO RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 0071
RUEHRN/USMISSION UN ROME 0002
RUEHROV/AMEMBASSY VATICAN 0557
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 VATICAN 000221 

SIPDIS

CORRECTED COPY
SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/WE LARREAJ
DEPT FOR EB BOBOJ

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/19/2016
TAGS: EAGR EAID ECON TBIO VT OIIP
SUBJECT: SLOW BUT STEADY: MOVING AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY FORWARD
AT THE VATICAN

REF: A. 05 VATICAN 515


B. VATICAN 15

C. VATICAN 25

VATICAN 00000221 001.4 OF 003


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

Summary

--------



C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 VATICAN 000221

SIPDIS

CORRECTED COPY
SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/WE LARREAJ
DEPT FOR EB BOBOJ

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/19/2016
TAGS: EAGR EAID ECON TBIO VT OIIP
SUBJECT: SLOW BUT STEADY: MOVING AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY FORWARD
AT THE VATICAN

REF: A. 05 VATICAN 515


B. VATICAN 15

C. VATICAN 25

VATICAN 00000221 001.4 OF 003


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

SIPDIS
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.




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

VATICAN 00000221 002.4 OF 003


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
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 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

VATICAN 00000221 003.4 OF 003


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

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




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 had 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