ACTION REQUEST: IAEA BUDGET TALKS HIT WALL,

C O N F I D E N T I A L UNVIE VIENNA 000320 SENSITIVE SIPDIS FOR ISN, IO; DOE FOR NA-24, NA-25, NA-21; NSC FOR SCHEINMAN, CONNERY; NRC FOR DOANE, SCHWARTZMAN E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/12/2019 TAGS: AORC PREL KNNP IAEA UN SUBJECT: ACTION REQUEST: IAEA BUDGET TALKS HIT WALL, SOLUTIONS NEEDED REF: A. UNVIE 279 ¶B. UNVIE 313 Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Geoff Pyatt for reasons 1.4 b/d ¶1. (SBU) This is an action request. Please see paragraph 8. ¶2. (SBU) Summary: Mission is concerned that a months-long effort to achieve an increase in the IAEA budget is increasingly likely to end in failure. Hewing to a policy of zero growth, France and Germany have blocked Mission's efforts to build consensus around a proposal for an 8.5 percent increase that fulfills U.S. priorities in Nuclear Security and Safeguards. Many other Member States, including Russia and China, support an increase but avoid taking a public stance. As the U.S. appears increasingly isolated and opportunities to negotiate dwindle, the specter of stalemate grows. U.S. lobbying efforts in Berlin and Paris at the working level had no effect. The G-8 Summit at L'Aquila July 6 - 10 is our best - if not our only - remaining opportunity to alter the positions of Germany and France at the political level to break through the deadlock on the ground. Without a change in the E3 position and its renewed commitment to the IAEA, Member States may be forced to forfeit the progress we have made in G-77 budget negotiations and accept a zero growth budget in September. End Summary. ¶3. (C) Efforts to negotiate an increase in the IAEA budget have reached a dead end in Vienna. Germany and France - the leaders of a small group of "budget hawks" - have locked into a zero growth position that has successfully blocked Mission's attempts to build consensus for an increase. Germany and France routinely argue that despite ample evidence to the contrary, the IAEA does, in fact, command adequate resources. Since the release of its original proposal in February, the IAEA Secretariat has proposed millions of dollars of proposed cuts in travel, services and consultant contracts, but Germany and France still insist there is greater scope for savings. The arrival of a new French ambassador has done nothing to change France's hard-line position, and the German ambassador grows more strident as the months pass. U.S. demarches in Berlin and Paris at the working level have fallen on deaf ears. The UK, Italy, Spain, Canada, Mexico and Switzerland, also members of the group of "budget hawks," keep up the zero growth drum beat. ¶4. (C) Ironically, the U.S. has made better progress on other fronts. China and Russia have indicated support for an increase (though only Russia publicizes its position). Egypt, Argentina and Pakistan have negotiated productively among the G-77 to offer points for negotiation, including Regular Budget support for Nuclear Security (a U.S. priority) and categorical support to refurbish the Safeguards Analytical Laboratory (another U.S. priority). Pending reciprocal gestures of support from the U.S. in the area of technical cooperation, the G-77 is likely to agree to an increase that meets U.S. objectives. A handful of Europeans, including the Netherlands, Austria, Finland and Sweden, support an increase. Even the UK ambassador, who associates himself closely with the "hawks," admitted to Charge July 3 that Germany and France were too rigid, and that London would be comfortable with a budget increase above zero real growth. ¶5. (SBU) Negotiation with other Members and the Secretariat led to the July 1 tabling of a compromise budget based on an 8.5 percent increase (reftels). This latest proposal meets U.S. priorities and, pending additional political and financial gestures, will likely win the support of the G-77. In the positive atmosphere of Yukiya Amano's election as the next IAEA Director General, many of Vienna's diplomatic missions are ready to come to consensus on a budget and be done with the exercise. Only the budget hawks, led by France and Germany, stand in the way, refusing to negotiate any amount above inflation and quibbling over the magnitude of that factor. ¶6. (SBU) Breaking this stalemate will require a high-level political solution. Convincing France and Germany is key to this exercise, since the remaining "budget hawks" will follow the lead of the E3. Time is running short, given IAEA Member States must approve the budget at the IAEA General Conference in September. (August is moribund in Vienna, which leaves only July to convince other Member States to agree to the 8.5 percent proposal.) Our best opportunity - and perhaps our only remaining opportunity - to go over the heads of the local budget hawks is the G-8 Summit in L'Aquila July 8 - 10. ¶7. (SBU) As a basis for discussion, E3 representatives should be reminded that an 8.5 percent increase would raise the IAEA budget by only 25 million Euros (35 million dollars),spread across 148 Member States. None of the "budget hawks" would pay more than two million Euros annually above their current assessments, and Spain would pay less than a million. This is a minor increase for an organization that is legally obligated to address the mounting duties that preserve our collective security. As the nuclear landscape dims in Iran, North Korea and Syria, leaders of the G-8 should appreciate - and pay for - the IAEA's services. Action Request -------------- ¶8. (C) With a view to continued cooperation with the E3 on safeguards priorities, Mission requests Washington pursuit of a rapid, high-level solution to our current stalemate. The G-8 Summit in L'Aquila may provide the best opportunity to approach the E3, France in Germany in particular, at a high enough level to break through the deadlock. Those in the EU who support an increase have recommended that our approach to the Germans be addressed to the Chancellery and Ministry of Economics and Technology (the latter being the source of the FRG's IAEA assessments) as well as the Foreign Office; the approach in France should likewise go to those who can decide politically over budget resources. Only when the E3 agree at the political level to strengthen the IAEA will Vienna's local Ambassadors be released from obduracy. Suggested Points for Delivery -------------- ¶9. (U) Mission recommends the following points be included in any forthcoming conversations about the IAEA budget: - We share a recognition of the importance of the IAEA and its work keeping nuclear material out of the hands of terrorists and monitoring the nuclear ambitions of rogue states. Iran, North Korea and Syria are all high-risk investigations that demand the IAEA's constant attention. - Despite these risks, your position denies any increase in the budget. You stand in direct contradiction to the many IAEA Member States who recognize the need for an increase - including China, Russia, half a dozen of your fellow Europeans and the G-77 as a group. - We appreciate the burden of the financial crisis and are struggling with it ourselves. At the same time, there is no excuse for neglecting our mutual security needs. - The current budget proposal is based on an 8.5 percent increase for 2010. We ask that you support this proposal. This scenario would raise your assessment by only 1.96 million Euros (Germany) / 1.5 million Euros (UK) / 1.45 million Euros (France) / 1.2 million Euros (Italy) / 680,000 Euros (Spain). - This should be a time of mutual congratulation, as we usher in Yukiya Amano as the IAEA's next Director General. The United States and Japan have already offered additional extrabudgetary resources to support his tenure and the institution as a whole. Now is the time to make a positive commitment to this new era by agreeing to the negotiated budget proposal. PYATT