Identifier | Created | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|
09BERLIN658 | 2009-06-03 05:59:00 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | Embassy Berlin |
VZCZCXRO9014 RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV RUEHSR DE RUEHRL #0658/01 1540559 ZNR UUUUU ZZH R 030559Z JUN 09 FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN TO RUEHRC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHINGTON DC RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4248 INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE |
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BERLIN 000658 |
1. (SBU) SUMMARY. The first of a series of German roundtables on Plant Genetics on May 20 concluded that research in plant biotechnology remains essential to Germany as a research center and to the world as a response to food and energy needs. However, tension remains behind the scenes between the German Federal Ministries of Research and of Agriculture, with the Agriculture Ministry suggesting at least in private that Research Ministry presented a biased panel. Federal Research Minister Schavan of the Christian Democrat Union Party (CDU) and Federal Agricultural Minister Aigner of the Christian Social Union (CSU) made a public show of cooperating in the round table, which was an attempt to paper over their public disagreement about the safety of agricultural biotechnology after Aigner banned the planting of biotech corn in April 2009. A second roundtable is planned for sometime in mid-June or early July, after EU Parliamentary elections are concluded, which may make it easier for Aigner to be more accommodating. END SUMMARY. RESEARCH MINISTRY EMPHASIZES LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE OF BIOTECHNOLOGY 2. (SBU) After Federal Agricultural Minister Ilse Aigner (CSU) banned the planting of biotech corn in Germany in April, 2009, Federal Research Minister, Annette Schavan (CDU), publicly criticized the action. She then announced her intention to initiate a series of round tables to foster public discussion of and public confidence in agricultural biotechnology in Germany, reflecting its value for society, the economy, and the environment and to uphold Germany's reputation as a leading research country. Schavan also pointed out that the meetings would provide transparency for the public about the opportunities and risks of the technology. 3. (SBU) Despite their public spat, Aigner accepted Schavan's invitation for the Ministry of Agriculture to co-host the discussion. Many observers saw this as an effort to try and bring the CSU and CDU to a more unified position in public. Schavan invited 30 experts representing research, farm organizations, plant breeders, the food industry, churches, a consumer organization and representatives of the German states for the first round table. It focused on how plant breeding can cope with increased global food demand and the demand for fuels, as well as on research and application of biotechnology in Germany. 4. (SBU) It was a surprise when Aigner said after the meeting that "modern biotechnology can account for future saving of energy and resources, and the development of healthier animal feed or plants." Observers credited the meeting with starting a more objective discussion of GMOs in Germany. However, several media as well as discussion participants criticized the forum as lacking a sufficient number of biotech opponents and development aid experts. The concluding press statements of the two ministers highlighted their different approaches. Aigner emphasized that future biotech research should take place in greenhouses. Schavan focused her statement on the opportunity to develop new crops resulting from advances in science. RESEARCH MINISTRY STOUTLY DEFENDS A SCIENTIFIC APPROACH IN THE FACE OF POLITICAL PRESSURES 5. (SBU) Sources have indicated that Schavan plans to use the next meeting in mid-June or early July to counter complaints that there has not been enough research on biotechnology. We understand that she intends to highlight how biotech research has influenced national biotech policy decisions. Experts at the Ministry of Research (BMBF) have privately indicated they would also like to compare the research efforts done on biotech versus organic agriculture. BMBF contacts mentioned a possible topic could be a discussion on research done to assess the risk of the toxicity of Bt toxin in biotech corn plants and pollen compared to the toxicity of the Bt insecticide used by organic farmers. 6. (SBU) Comment: While Schavan and Aigner have tried to appear more cooperative publicly, behind the scenes, the situation is still tense. Ag Ministry sources stated that Aigner was unhappy with the make-up of the first panel and thought that it was too heavily weighted toward industry views. She has also said that she expected to issue the invitations to the second panel. On the other hand, sources in BMBF indicate that Schavan does not intend to give up control of this process. The CSU is using its opposition to biotech as a campaign issue in the June 7 EU Parliamentary elections. It is BERLIN 00000658 002 OF 002 possible that some of the tension between the CDU and CSU on this topic might dissolve thereafter. End Comment 7. This cable was coordinated with Consulate General Munich. KOENIG |