INFORMING AUSTRIA OF U.S. NUCLEAR

C O N F I D E N T I A L VIENNA 002534 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/20/2022 TAGS: ENRG KNNP MNUC AU SUBJECT: INFORMING AUSTRIA OF U.S. NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION AND DISARMAMENT PROGRAMS Classified By: Econ/Pol Counselor Yap. Reasons: 1.4(b) and (d) Summary -------------- ¶1. (U) On the margins of the IAEA General Conference (GC), Will Tobey, Dep. Administrator for Nonproliferation of the National Nuclear Security Administration NNSA) at DoE, met with senior Austrian MFA officials to discuss U.S. nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament programs, as well as key non-proliferation issues. The Austrians welcomed the information, but also pointed out the strongly anti-nuclear (whether for energy or weapons) political environment in Austria as a factor in policy making. End Summary. ¶2. (U) Tobey's call on the Foreign Ministry on 9/20 was prompted by concern, given FonMin Plassnik's welcoming speech to the GC, that Austria was not well informed about the USG and, in particular, extensive DOE programs designed to advance non-proliferation and disarmament goals. Tobey met with MFA Political Director Mayr-Harting the chief of the Disarmament and Non-proliferation Division, Alexander Marschik, and the Austrian Ambassador to the IAEA, Thomas Stelzer. DOE Programs -------------- ¶3. (U) Tobey began the meeting with a briefing on NNSA's non-proliferation and nuclear security programs, providing the Austrians with basic background material and programs. The Austrians were interested to learn that NNSA activities include a small program in Austria and impressed with the scale and achievements of the programs. Tobey's presentation on U.S. nuclear disarmament steps was also welcomed, though at the conclusion of the briefing Mayr-Harting indicated that the U.S. could do more to take the lead on nuclear disarmament, including by ratifying the CTBT. Advocacy of nuclear disarmament would remain, he said, an important part of Austrian foreign policy. Other Issues -------------- ¶4. (C) Division chief Marschik expressed Austrian concern that a proposal by IAEA DG El Baradei on nuclear energy was too favorable to business interests and required a stronger non-proliferation element. Mayr-Harting said that, though Austria's domestic rejection of nuclear energy was clear, the country had changed its stance somewhat in international fora and would no longer act based on "missionary zeal. Rather, Austria would be seeking ways to make a constructive contribution. Dep. Adm. Tobey suggested that the U.S. and Austrians views, then, were perhaps not so far apart. The U.S., too, wanted to see strong non-proliferation conditions in the nuclear industry, in addition to secure access. ¶5. (C) Marschik suggested that the Austrian proposal for multilateral control of the nuclear fuel process, put forward by FonMin Plassnik at the opening of the GC, was perhaps a way to achieve both goals. Tobey, noting that he Austrian proposal deserved study and was one among many suggested that having many suppliers was also a way to guarantee access -- the U.S. did not envisage a single supply system. ¶6. (C) The Austrians were very interested in Tobey's views on how India would proceed with regard to Congressionally-mandated safeguards as a condition for ratification of the U.S.-India nuclear agreement. Austria, they said, could not take an official position until the Indian safeguards arrangements are presented to the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and that acceptance of real safeguards would be a positive step. Tobey reported that an optimistic timetable would see India-IAEA agreement in time for the November IAEA BoG, after which the agreement could be before the NSG in early 2008. Tobey and the Mayr-Harting agreed that the debate in India about the safeguards conditions required by Congress, though difficult, is a sign that the conditions are significant. ¶7. (C) Marschik raised a resolution being debated in the GC regarding the provision of technical assistance for the development of nuclear power in the least developed countries. Mayr-Harting said Austria did not believe that nuclear energy could be part of a sustainable development program and was also concerned about any language that "welcomed" growing interest in nuclear energy or that was intended to promote or encourage nuclear power development. Austrian Climate -------------- ¶8. (C) Mayr-Harting offered the Dep. Adm. a personal readout on Austria's anti-nuclear stance that focused heavily on the impact of Chernobyl on popular views. Tobey replied that there are benefits as well as costs to nuclear energy (e.g., fossil fuel power plants can cause deaths through pollution or mining accidents),and that these should be weighed objectively against alternatives. Mayr-Harting reiterated that Austria would seek to be constructive in international fora and concluded that perhaps there had been some convergence between Austrian and U.S positions. McCaw