Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08BERLIN1146
2008-08-18 16:43:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Berlin
Cable title:
(S) GERMANY TO WEIGH U.S. OBJECTIONS REGARDING
how-toVZCZCXYZ0000 PP RUEHWEB DE RUEHRL #1146 2311643 ZNY CCCCC ZZH P 181643Z AUG 08 FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 1976 INFO RUCNFRG/FRG COLLECTIVE RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 0549
C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 001146
SIPDIS
STATE FOR ISN/CB (KRISTEN GASS) AND EUR/CE
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/18/2033
TAGS: PARM PINR ETTC CBW IN IR GM
SUBJECT: (S) GERMANY TO WEIGH U.S. OBJECTIONS REGARDING
EXPORT OF AUSTRALIA GROUP LISTED ITEMS TO UNITED PHOSPHORUS
LTD
REF: A. BERLIN 973
B. STATE 85368
C. BERLIN 1096
D. BERLIN 1103
Classified By: Global Affairs Unit Chief Don L. Brown for
reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 001146
SIPDIS
STATE FOR ISN/CB (KRISTEN GASS) AND EUR/CE
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/18/2033
TAGS: PARM PINR ETTC CBW IN IR GM
SUBJECT: (S) GERMANY TO WEIGH U.S. OBJECTIONS REGARDING
EXPORT OF AUSTRALIA GROUP LISTED ITEMS TO UNITED PHOSPHORUS
LTD
REF: A. BERLIN 973
B. STATE 85368
C. BERLIN 1096
D. BERLIN 1103
Classified By: Global Affairs Unit Chief Don L. Brown for
reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
1. (S) Before deciding on a pending German export request of
Australia Group (AG) listed items to the Indian firm United
Phosphorus LTD (UPL),German export control authorities
agreed to weigh U.S. concerns regarding the AG "no undercut
policy." On Monday August 18, MFA Export Control Division
Deputy Office Director, Markus Klinger, reiterated to
EconOffs Germany's vulnerable legal position if Germany were
to deny this export request given a lack of "well founded
proliferation reasons" for denial. EconOffs stressed to
Klinger the importance the U.S. places on maintaining a
strict AG "no undercut policy" and reminded him of similar
U.S. export denials to UPL on the grounds that the U.S.
continues to regard UPL as an end-user posing significant
proliferation risk.
2. (S) Klinger hypothesized that if Germany were to deny
this request and the German company were to challenge it in
court, there would be a "very high risk" Germany would lose
this legal case. In addition, Klinger commented about the
evidence supplied in the Ref B nonpaper regarding a 2005
Iranian price inquiry into UPL nerve agent precursors, saying
that even if this were the case, Germany would now have to
prove that Iran has an active chemical weapons program -
something that Germany has not seen evidence of.
3. (S) Klinger explained that if an AG member intends to
export an AG listed item, previously denied by another AG
member, the "no undercut policy" only requires a consultation
between the two AG participants - "an obligation that Germany
has now met." However, Klinger stated that he would be sure
to convey the U.S. concerns to the German interagency export
controls working body before a final decision is levied.
COMMENT
--------------
4. (S) The German responses in Refs C and D indicated that
Germany was under the gun to make of decision on this case by
August 15. Based on Klinger's comments, it now appears as
though Germany is taking a more cautious approach on this
decision than previously thought and would carefully consider
the U.S. position before making a decision.
TIMKEN JR
SIPDIS
STATE FOR ISN/CB (KRISTEN GASS) AND EUR/CE
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/18/2033
TAGS: PARM PINR ETTC CBW IN IR GM
SUBJECT: (S) GERMANY TO WEIGH U.S. OBJECTIONS REGARDING
EXPORT OF AUSTRALIA GROUP LISTED ITEMS TO UNITED PHOSPHORUS
LTD
REF: A. BERLIN 973
B. STATE 85368
C. BERLIN 1096
D. BERLIN 1103
Classified By: Global Affairs Unit Chief Don L. Brown for
reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
1. (S) Before deciding on a pending German export request of
Australia Group (AG) listed items to the Indian firm United
Phosphorus LTD (UPL),German export control authorities
agreed to weigh U.S. concerns regarding the AG "no undercut
policy." On Monday August 18, MFA Export Control Division
Deputy Office Director, Markus Klinger, reiterated to
EconOffs Germany's vulnerable legal position if Germany were
to deny this export request given a lack of "well founded
proliferation reasons" for denial. EconOffs stressed to
Klinger the importance the U.S. places on maintaining a
strict AG "no undercut policy" and reminded him of similar
U.S. export denials to UPL on the grounds that the U.S.
continues to regard UPL as an end-user posing significant
proliferation risk.
2. (S) Klinger hypothesized that if Germany were to deny
this request and the German company were to challenge it in
court, there would be a "very high risk" Germany would lose
this legal case. In addition, Klinger commented about the
evidence supplied in the Ref B nonpaper regarding a 2005
Iranian price inquiry into UPL nerve agent precursors, saying
that even if this were the case, Germany would now have to
prove that Iran has an active chemical weapons program -
something that Germany has not seen evidence of.
3. (S) Klinger explained that if an AG member intends to
export an AG listed item, previously denied by another AG
member, the "no undercut policy" only requires a consultation
between the two AG participants - "an obligation that Germany
has now met." However, Klinger stated that he would be sure
to convey the U.S. concerns to the German interagency export
controls working body before a final decision is levied.
COMMENT
--------------
4. (S) The German responses in Refs C and D indicated that
Germany was under the gun to make of decision on this case by
August 15. Based on Klinger's comments, it now appears as
though Germany is taking a more cautious approach on this
decision than previously thought and would carefully consider
the U.S. position before making a decision.
TIMKEN JR