SOUTH AFRICA AGREES TO MEGAPORTS INITIATIVE WITH CAVEATS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PRETORIA 000357 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED SIPDIS DEPT FOR AF/S AMCONSUL CAPE TOWN FOR ALBERTA MAYBERRY AMCONSUL DURBAN FOR JILL DERDERIAN AMCONSUL JOHANNESBURG FOR ANDY PASSEN E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ASEC ENRG ETTC EWWT PINS SF SUBJECT: SOUTH AFRICA AGREES TO MEGAPORTS INITIATIVE WITH CAVEATS REF: A. STATE 04730, B. PRETORIA 238 ¶1. (SBU) Summary. Post delivered Megaports Initiative talking points (Reftel A) to South African Revenue Service (SARS) officials. SARS officials agreed to proceed with the Megaports initiative, given cabinet approval, but requested additional information before finalizing approval for a consultation meeting. SARS officials expect to have a written request for additional information prepared by March 16. The issues raised by the large number of South African stakeholders and sensitivities regarding national intelligence issues will take some time to address. Post will follow-up with SARS and forward the document as soon as it is available. End Summary. -------------- CABINET APPROVAL AND SARS RESTRUCTURING CAUSED DELAYS -------------- ¶2. (U) Post Transportation Officer and Customs and Border Protection Attache delivered U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Megaports Initiative talking points (Reftel A) to South African Revenue Service (SARS) officials on February 17. Post noted that South Africa has a long-standing invitation to participate in the Megaports Initiative and that the DOE would like to engage South Africa on the Megaports Initiative in time to assist with 2010 FIFA World Cup preparations. Post inquired about appropriate next steps to finalize dates for a kick-off DOE Megaports consultation meeting with policymakers in Pretoria and a visit to the Port of Durban. Post also noted that the Megaports team would like to extend the program to include the Port of Cape Town. SARS officials did not foresee any concerns with including the Port of Cape Town. ¶3. (U) SARS Group Executive for Customs Strategy and Policy Erich Kieck acknowledged the time-lapse since the initial Megaports meeting in 2007 and was apologetic that it took so long for the South African Government (SAG) to address the Megaports invitation. Kieck explained that a wide-spectrum of SAG stakeholders (including SARS, the National Intelligence Agency, the Department of Transport, the Department of Minerals and Energy, the South African Police Service, and others) had to be brought on board before the cabinet finally approved South Africa's participation in the Megaports 
Initiative in late 2008. ¶4. (U) The South African cabinet has tasked SARS as the lead agency to coordinate all SAG stakeholders' participation in the Megaports Initiative. Kieck also indicated that SARS underwent major internal restructuring in the last year, which led to additional delays in the Megaports follow-up. -------------- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED TO FINALIZE MEGAPORTS VISIT -------------- ¶5. (U) Kieck explained that SAG stakeholders raised some additional issues at an October 2008 meeting that SARS would like to raise with DOE before the Megaports team could proceed with plans to travel to South Africa for initial consultation meetings. The SARS officials discussed some general areas of follow-up with post, but indicated that they would bring all of the stakeholders together to develop a written list of questions for the Megaports team. SARS officials followed-up with Transportation Officer after the meeting to indicate that SAG stakeholders are tentatively scheduled to meet on March 12 and that the stakeholders are expected to forward a QMarch 12 and that the stakeholders are expected to forward a finalized written request for additional information to the Transportation Officer by March 16. ¶6. (U) The SARS officials noted that the stakeholders would like some clarification on the type of equipment (fixed or stationary) that would be used for the Megaports Initiative. Transnet is in the process of upgrading and expanding port capacity at all of South Africa's major ports in South Africa and the stakeholders would like to ensure that the Megaports equipment would interface well with existing and new equipment acquired by Transnet. Kieck noted that the main decision-makers at Transnet were based at Transnet's corporate offices in Johannesburg since the upgrades are also intended to streamline all Transnet-owned and operated ports. ¶7. (U) Kieck indicated that the stakeholders would like additional clarification on the language of the Megaports Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). There was some confusion about the language in the MOU that discussed information exchange and they would like clarification on the scope of this information exchange. PRETORIA 00000357 002 OF 002 ¶8. (U) The SARS officials stated that there were some concerns about the maintenance of equipment after the initial three-year-period of DOE assistance ended. They expected the stakeholders to raise questions about the feasibility and costs of acquiring spare parts after three years. The SARS officials also inquired about the typical timeline between an initial consultation meeting and the implementation of Megaports equipment and training. Post explained that the speed of implementation would depend heavily upon the SAG stakeholder decision-making processes and the finalization of the consultation visit dates. ¶9. (U) The SARS officials also requested information on Megaports Initiative success stories. They wanted to know whether any ports had been successful in intercepting sensitive material because of Megaports equipment or training and whether this information was publicly available. They thought this type of information would be useful to share with the SAG stakeholders to continue to build domestic support for the Megaports Initiative. -------------- COMMENT -------------- ¶10. (SBU) The SARS officials appeared ready to move forward with the Megaports Initiative. However, the large number of SAG stakeholders involved in the process means that it will take additional time to address all SAG concerns and finalize a Megaports team visit. There has also been some SAG sensitivity about perceived U.S. intelligence gathering at South African ports, which has lengthened the approval time for all USG maritime security initiatives involving the state-controlled ports. SARS has a good working relationship with the Customs and Border Protection Attache in Johannesburg and the Container Security Initiative team in Durban. Continuing to emphasize the training and capacity-building opportunities of USG maritime security initiatives is the best way to bring all SAG stakeholders on board. Post will follow-up with SARS and pass along the request for additional information as soon as it is available. LA LIME