IRAN,S UPCOMING NUCLEAR CONFERENCE ON 30 NOVEMBER

C O N F I D E N T I A L UNVIE VIENNA 000575 SIPDIS STATE FOR ISN/RA: MONGIELLO, IO/T: VON BEHREN E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/27/2013 TAGS: KNNP IAEA ENRG TRGY AORC IR SUBJECT: IRAN,S UPCOMING NUCLEAR CONFERENCE ON 30 NOVEMBER 2008 REF: (A) STATE 112229 (B) UNVIE 477 (C) OTTAWA 1368 Classified By: Ambassador Gregory L. Schulte, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (C) IAEA participation in the November 30-December 1 Iranian-hosted conference on "Nuclear Power Plants, Environmental and Sustainable Development" would be confined, per current plans, to the presentation of one paper on reactor safety issues. DCM on October 28 alerted the DG's Special Assistant Graham Andrew to the conference web site's specious assertion that the conference is organized "in collaboration with the IAEA"; Andrew said DG ElBaradei would decide on IAEA participation. As reported ref b para 8, DG ElBaradei already directed once that there would be no IAEA participation in this conference after DDGs Tanaguchi (Safety) and Sokolov (Nuclear Energy) were invited. Tanaguchi apparently appealed that decision successfully and plans to send a subordinate. ¶2. (SBU) In October 24 meetings with IAEA Nuclear Safety and Security officials Philippe Jamet and Khammar Mrabit, Msnoffs had raised the issue of Agency participation in the conference. Jamet, Director of Nuclear Installation Safety, confirmed the Agency would attend the November conference by sending only one person, Christer Viktorsson, to deliver a paper on nuclear safety. Jamet opined that delivering a paper at the conference was good idea for the Agency and would send the message that the IAEA is supportive on issues of nuclear safety, even in Iran. (Note: This IAEA participation would be consistent with DDG Taniguchi's objective, stated to NRC Chairman Klein earlier this month, of persuading Iran to adhere to the Convention on Nuclear Safety. End Note.) ¶3. (SBU) As did the DCM at more senior level later, msnoffs stated strong USG concern that broad participation in the conference would legitimize Iran's nuclear program while Tehran defies its international obligations. Msnoffs noted an IAEA role could confer an inappropriate sense of normality on Iran's international interactions on nuclear issues. Having seen the "About the conference" page of the web site http://nppesd.org, which refers to IAEA "collaboration," msnoffs also raised with Jamet and Mrabit the question of IAEA "co-sponsorship" of the November conference. These IAEA interlocutors agreed that IAEA co-sponsorship would be counterproductive and they undertook to look into the matter. ¶4. (C) Msnoffs made parallel contacts about the Iranian conference to senior officials in the IAEA Safeguards Department who are investigating Iran's nuclear program and its possible military dimensions. Safeguards officials confirm they will have no role in the event, and DG Special Assistant Andrew shared with DCM that Safeguards DDG Heinonen had flagged the event for the DG's attention. ¶5. (C) Comment: As frustrated as ElBaradei is said to be over Iranian taunting and intransigence in the safeguards arena, he will be amenable to the argument of some in the Secretariat that nuclear plant safety and other areas of benign technical cooperation should be demonstrably apolitical and pursued on the merits. We first brought this Iranian conference to DDG Heinonen's attention in September, but he and others who may argue for no IAEA legitimation of an Iranian activity at this time are up against other views in the Secretariat. If the modest IAEA participation currently planned is to be turned off, it will require a direct intervention to ElBaradei. A coordinated approach, extending the Canadian position reported ref c, could hold more promise than a unilateral U.S. demarche on the DG. In the meantime, however, we have made clear to the IAEA that we expect they will be presenting to a relatively empty room. End comment. SCHULTE