Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08ROME888
2008-07-18 14:57:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Rome
Cable title:
ITALY: SUPPORTIVE ON INDIA-IAEA SAFEGUARDS
how-toVZCZCXRO3107 PP RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHFL RUEHNP DE RUEHRO #0888/01 2001457 ZNY CCCCC ZZH P 181457Z JUL 08 ZDS FM AMEMBASSY ROME TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0609 INFO RUEHAR/AMEMBASSY ACCRA 0456 RUEHAS/AMEMBASSY ALGIERS 0543 RUEHGB/AMEMBASSY BAGHDAD 0355 RUEHBK/AMEMBASSY BANGKOK 0308 RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 1304 RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 1841 RUEHSW/AMEMBASSY BERN 1422 RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 0534 RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS 1748 RUEHBU/AMEMBASSY BUENOS AIRES 0290 RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 0878 RUEHDL/AMEMBASSY DUBLIN 0317 RUEHHE/AMEMBASSY HELSINKI 0273 RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 0888 RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ 0225 RUEHLJ/AMEMBASSY LJUBLJANA 0546 RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 1491 RUEHML/AMEMBASSY MANILA 0171 RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 0539 RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 4429 RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA 1809 RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 2425 RUEHSA/AMEMBASSY PRETORIA 0534 RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO 0327 RUEHRB/AMEMBASSY RABAT 0413 RUEHRH/AMEMBASSY RIYADH 0480 RUEHSG/AMEMBASSY SANTIAGO 0283 RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 0519 RUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV 0972 RUEHTI/AMEMBASSY TIRANA 4326 RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 1942 RUEHVI/AMEMBASSY VIENNA 1410 RUEHVL/AMEMBASSY VILNIUS 0113 RUEHVB/AMEMBASSY ZAGREB 0786 RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 0031 RUEHFL/AMCONSUL FLORENCE 3124 RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA 0005 RUEHMIL/AMCONSUL MILAN 9469 RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 0036 RUEHNP/AMCONSUL NAPLES 3271 RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 6388 RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 0896 RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 0130
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ROME 000888
C O R R E C T E D C O P Y. Change text paragraph 4.
Changes apply to content of message
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/18/2018
TAGS: IAEA ETTC KNNP AORC PARM PREL IT
SUBJECT: ITALY: SUPPORTIVE ON INDIA-IAEA SAFEGUARDS
AGREEMENT, BUT ASKS URGENTLY FOR MORE INFO
REF: SECSTATE 74896
ROME 00000888 001.4 OF 002
Classified By: Economic Minister Conselor Tom Delare
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ROME 000888
C O R R E C T E D C O P Y. Change text paragraph 4.
Changes apply to content of message
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/18/2018
TAGS: IAEA ETTC KNNP AORC PARM PREL IT
SUBJECT: ITALY: SUPPORTIVE ON INDIA-IAEA SAFEGUARDS
AGREEMENT, BUT ASKS URGENTLY FOR MORE INFO
REF: SECSTATE 74896
ROME 00000888 001.4 OF 002
Classified By: Economic Minister Conselor Tom Delare
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
1. (C) Summary. Italy will seek to be supportive of India
in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Nuclear
Suppliers Group (NSG),but MFA officials urgently request
information on the Indian sites to be placed under
safeguards, and on the likely substance of the NSG waiver
request. If it is not possible for them to receive a draft
of the waiver request for review in July, then an NSG meeting
date very early in September may present problems for the
GOI. See also paragraphs 3 and 6 for other GOI questions.
End summary.
2. (C) On July 17 PolOff and SciCouns delivered reftel
points, encouraging Italy to support approval of the
India-International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards
agreement at the August 1 IAEA Board of Governors meeting, to
MFA Non-Proliferation Office Director Emanuele Farruggia and
MFA Disarmament and Nonproliferation Agreement Implementation
Office Director Vittorio Rocco. Farruggia had attended a
meeting with an Indian Embassy representative and the MFA
Deputy SYG earlier in the day on the same issue. He said
they had assured the Indian Rep. that Italy would seek to be
supportive in both the IAEA and in the Nuclear Suppliers
Group (NSG),but that in return Italy asked for more active
engagement from India in disarmament matters such as the
Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty.
3. (C) Farruggia noted two key concerns about the safeguards
agreement had arisen in discussions within the Italian
Government (GOI) and among IAEA representatives in Vienna: 1)
the absence of the annex listing the civil facilities to be
placed under safeguards; and 2) the possible corrective
measures India might take in case of an interruption of fuel
supply. Farruggia and Rocco both noted that the GOI would be
vulnerable to criticism from Parliament and pro-disarmament
groups for approving the agreement without having at least a
list of the facilities which will be placed under safeguards,
if not the complete declaration, and asked for U.S. help in
obtaining that information. On the corrective measures: they
appreciated the U.S. explanation of the preambular nature of
the text, and the reassurances regarding the permanent nature
of the safeguards, but would welcome additional information
ROME 00000888 002.4 OF 002
as to what "corrective measures" India might have in mind.
4. (SBU) Farruggia and Rocco both stressed the importance
that Italy historically has given to disarmament issues.
They also noted that for Italy, a key point is that by
approving the safeguards agreement and/or supporting the NSG
full-scope safeguards requirement waiver, they are not
acknowledging India as a military nuclear power. Rather, they are
making an exception for cooperation with India in the
civil nuclear field.
5. (SBU) Regarding the upcoming NSG meeting, Farruggia noted
that he had heard that it may be early in September, and that
the GOI will essentially be closed for all of August. He
requested that the U.S. provide, if at all possible, a draft
of the waiver request, so that it can be considered in Rome
while the key players and political-level officials are still
present. He expressed concern that an early September
meeting date may present problems for Italy if they do not
have the chance to circulate the key elements of the waiver
request for GOI consideration in July.
6. (C) Separately, EconOff presented reftel points to
Counselor Roberto Liotto of the MFA,s economic bureau, who
has the lead on Nuclear Suppliers Group issues. Liotto also
stressed the need for the GOI to receive a draft of the NSG
waiver request as soon as possible, noting that if the NSG
meeting is held very early in September, and the documents
for the meeting have not been reviewed by the GOI in July, it
may be impossible for the GOI to prepare for the NSG meeting.
Liotto noted that he had seen, 18 months to two years ago,
an NSG confidential document laying out what India would need
to do to win the NSG,s blessing for trade in civil nuclear
goods. He asked if the U.S. plans to circulate an updated
version of the document.
7. (C) Comment: In Post's judgment, a meeting date in the
week of September 15 likely would give the GOI just enough
time for internal consultations, if the waiver request is not
available for review until August. End comment.
SPOGLI
C O R R E C T E D C O P Y. Change text paragraph 4.
Changes apply to content of message
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/18/2018
TAGS: IAEA ETTC KNNP AORC PARM PREL IT
SUBJECT: ITALY: SUPPORTIVE ON INDIA-IAEA SAFEGUARDS
AGREEMENT, BUT ASKS URGENTLY FOR MORE INFO
REF: SECSTATE 74896
ROME 00000888 001.4 OF 002
Classified By: Economic Minister Conselor Tom Delare
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
1. (C) Summary. Italy will seek to be supportive of India
in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Nuclear
Suppliers Group (NSG),but MFA officials urgently request
information on the Indian sites to be placed under
safeguards, and on the likely substance of the NSG waiver
request. If it is not possible for them to receive a draft
of the waiver request for review in July, then an NSG meeting
date very early in September may present problems for the
GOI. See also paragraphs 3 and 6 for other GOI questions.
End summary.
2. (C) On July 17 PolOff and SciCouns delivered reftel
points, encouraging Italy to support approval of the
India-International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards
agreement at the August 1 IAEA Board of Governors meeting, to
MFA Non-Proliferation Office Director Emanuele Farruggia and
MFA Disarmament and Nonproliferation Agreement Implementation
Office Director Vittorio Rocco. Farruggia had attended a
meeting with an Indian Embassy representative and the MFA
Deputy SYG earlier in the day on the same issue. He said
they had assured the Indian Rep. that Italy would seek to be
supportive in both the IAEA and in the Nuclear Suppliers
Group (NSG),but that in return Italy asked for more active
engagement from India in disarmament matters such as the
Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty.
3. (C) Farruggia noted two key concerns about the safeguards
agreement had arisen in discussions within the Italian
Government (GOI) and among IAEA representatives in Vienna: 1)
the absence of the annex listing the civil facilities to be
placed under safeguards; and 2) the possible corrective
measures India might take in case of an interruption of fuel
supply. Farruggia and Rocco both noted that the GOI would be
vulnerable to criticism from Parliament and pro-disarmament
groups for approving the agreement without having at least a
list of the facilities which will be placed under safeguards,
if not the complete declaration, and asked for U.S. help in
obtaining that information. On the corrective measures: they
appreciated the U.S. explanation of the preambular nature of
the text, and the reassurances regarding the permanent nature
of the safeguards, but would welcome additional information
ROME 00000888 002.4 OF 002
as to what "corrective measures" India might have in mind.
4. (SBU) Farruggia and Rocco both stressed the importance
that Italy historically has given to disarmament issues.
They also noted that for Italy, a key point is that by
approving the safeguards agreement and/or supporting the NSG
full-scope safeguards requirement waiver, they are not
acknowledging India as a military nuclear power. Rather, they are
making an exception for cooperation with India in the
civil nuclear field.
5. (SBU) Regarding the upcoming NSG meeting, Farruggia noted
that he had heard that it may be early in September, and that
the GOI will essentially be closed for all of August. He
requested that the U.S. provide, if at all possible, a draft
of the waiver request, so that it can be considered in Rome
while the key players and political-level officials are still
present. He expressed concern that an early September
meeting date may present problems for Italy if they do not
have the chance to circulate the key elements of the waiver
request for GOI consideration in July.
6. (C) Separately, EconOff presented reftel points to
Counselor Roberto Liotto of the MFA,s economic bureau, who
has the lead on Nuclear Suppliers Group issues. Liotto also
stressed the need for the GOI to receive a draft of the NSG
waiver request as soon as possible, noting that if the NSG
meeting is held very early in September, and the documents
for the meeting have not been reviewed by the GOI in July, it
may be impossible for the GOI to prepare for the NSG meeting.
Liotto noted that he had seen, 18 months to two years ago,
an NSG confidential document laying out what India would need
to do to win the NSG,s blessing for trade in civil nuclear
goods. He asked if the U.S. plans to circulate an updated
version of the document.
7. (C) Comment: In Post's judgment, a meeting date in the
week of September 15 likely would give the GOI just enough
time for internal consultations, if the waiver request is not
available for review until August. End comment.
SPOGLI