UK TO HOST MULTILATERAL FUEL ASSURANCES CONFERENCE

C O N F I D E N T I A L UNVIE VIENNA 000040 C O R R E C T E D C O P Y (CAPTION) SIPDIS NOFORN DOE FOR NE(EMCGINNIS) AND NNSA(RGOOREVICH) E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/30/2029 TAGS: ENRG ETTC IAEA IN KNNP MNUC PARM TRGY SUBJECT: UK TO HOST MULTILATERAL FUEL ASSURANCES CONFERENCE ON MARCH 17-18 IN LONDON Classified By: Classified by Ambassador Gregory Schulte, Reasons 1.4 (b ) and (d) ¶1. (C) SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUEST: On January 27, a team from the British MFA and Department of Energy briefed Mission officers on plans for an upcoming conference on "Multilateral Approaches to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle" on March 17-18, in London. The conference is in response a public promise the British PM made to engage in the debate on an international fuel bank. The UK will bill the two-day conference as a follow-up to the 2008 Berlin conference on the fuel cycle but, participation will be expanded to include not only suppliers but also potential recipient states. The UK will not invite India, Israel, Iran, North Korea, Syria or Pakistan to the conference. The UK representatives told us their ambitious goal is to form a multilateral partnership of nuclear states promoting responsible access to nuclear fuel to emerging nuclear energy states while strengthening security, promoting peaceful applications of nuclear energy and creating an atmosphere of increasing trust and cooperation. The UK is proposing a tangible deliverable from the conference in the form of a "Draft Statement of Principles" that would indicate some criteria for recipient states should an international fuel bank be created. The UK said it would take the "Draft Statement of Principles" to the IAEA Board of Governors for approval or at least recognition. Post believes the "Draft Statement of Principles" is not a helpful deliverable from the conference because 1) the conference participation is not inclusive of all IAEA member states and therefore would only represent a partial consensus on possible criteria and 2) the Board of Governors has not begun substantive discussion on criteria and this could pre-judge any outcome of those discussions. ¶2. (U) ACTION REQUEST: Mission requests guidance on feasibility of moving forward with the "Draft Statement of Principles" (para. 6 ) and guidance on acceptable language. END SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUEST. -------------- CONFERENCE OBJECTIVES -------------- ¶3. (C) British diplomats in Vienna tell us they were caught unawares by Gordon Brown's announcement of a London conference on nuclear fuel supply. Having played catch-up for several months our UK colleagues now tell us their goal for the conference is to form a multilateral partnership between nuclear states which promote responsible access to energy and emerging nuclear energy states. The conference will also seek to strengthen security, promotion of peaceful applications of nuclear energy, and the creation of an atmosphere of increasing trust and cooperation. "Secondary objectives" (in this already daunting agenda) to develop a competitive nuclear industry operating in an "internationally-regulated environment that minimizes the risk of proliferation and maintains nuclear safety and security" with a better understanding of market barriers for nuclear material, equipment and knowledge that will educate states on the need for international regulations. -------------- DRAFT SCHEDULE -------------- ¶4. (C) The draft outline, presented by the UK, begins with presentations from potential supplier and recipient states. The UK shared that Germany and the Netherlands have already agreed to provide "supplier" presentations. Missionoffs suggested the UAE or South Africa as good candidates for "recipient" presenters. Following the presentations there will be break-out working groups to discuss multi-lateral approaches to the nuclear fuel cycle on the first day and practical considerations of the "Draft Statement of Principles". The UK stressed that they do not want the conference to become a drafting session for the Statement of Principles. The second day will include external perspectives from industry and NGOs. The World Nuclear Association will be a presenter; however, no companies have been identified. The IAEA will be represented at the staff level and provide a briefing on the nuclear fuel cycle. DG ElBaradei will provide a pre-taped statement to open the conference but declined an invitation to attend, citing other commitments. (NOTE: He will travel to South America for much of March. END NOTE) -------------- INFB PROPOSALS -------------- ¶5. (U) In recognition of the need to get much more information out on the INFB concept, the UK will set up booths during the lunch break on March 18 for countries to present their concepts and ideas. The market place concept, according to the UK, will allow conference participants to gain better understanding of each proposal. -------------- DRAFT STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES/ACTION REQUEST -------------- ¶6. (SBU) The UK shared a draft statement of principles with Missionoffs mentioning that they have also shared it with France and are awaiting comments. The UK invited U.S. comments on the text as well. Mission would appreciate Department guidance for responding either here or via Embassy London. (See also comment para. 8.) ¶7. (SBU) BEGIN UK DRAFT TEXT: The context for our discussions at this conference has been the following: the increase of interest shown by states in the development of civil nuclear power programmes and the potential benefits of nuclear as a low carbon energy source, with increased energy security and its use in other applications such as desalination; and the acknowledgment that it is the responsibility of all states to ensure that any global increase in nuclear energy does not lead to an increased proliferation risk. The states represented at this conference re-iterated rights and responsibilities under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) (including those of the Nuclear Weapons States under Article VI),whilst encouraging the IAEA in its work, particularly in nuclear safety and security, and the transfer of nuclear material and technology. In particular: NSG Guidelines (INFCIRC 254); UNSCR 1540; Amended Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials; INFCIRC255/Rev4; Code of Conduct on Safety and Security of Radioactive material; IAEA Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement and the Additional Protocol; Guidelines on the management of HEU and Plutonium. This conference respects Article IV of the NPT, which highlights states' rights to the peaceful use of nuclear technology, whilst also recognizing the important responsibility of states to adopt safeguards arrangements; under their Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA, and the (potential) benefits gained from an Additional Protocol. Our discussions have once again highlighted the proliferation risks involved in elements of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle and we agree that it is in every state's interest to minimize these risks without creating a barrier to the growth of civil nuclear power for peaceful purposes. We acknowledge that the commercial fuel market has been operating successfully for many decades, but that further enhancements in security of nuclear fuel services are desired by many. To this end, we encourage states to explore the use of Multilateral Nuclear Fuel Assurances as a means of enhancing the security of their access to nuclear fuel services, whilst reducing the need to develop costly indigenous enrichment and reprocessing. (We would wish to stress that the various proposals (currently 12) put forward by states are not in competition but instead offer states different options based on individual needs and concerns to give confidence in nuclear fuel supply.) We also recognize the importance of minimizing the impact and influence of any initiatives on the free running of the market. In all our deliberations we are very clear about the importance of driving this process forward through further discussions involving the IAEA, recipient and supplier states. END UK DRAFT TEXT. -------------- COMMENT -------------- ¶8. (C) Post welcomes the UK,s efforts to push the idea of an INFB forward, however the draft program is impossibly ambitious considering the continuing rift between supplier and potential recipient states due to the lack of understanding of various proposals and lack of direction from the IAEA on feasibility of concepts. Post believes the "Draft Statement of Principles" is not a helpful deliverable from the conference because 1) the conference participation is not inclusive of all IAEA member states and therefore would only represent a partial consensus on possible criteria and 2) the Board of Governors has not begun substantive discussion on criteria and this could pre-judge any outcome of those discussions. Vienna UK Mission (protect) has also expressed own skepticism about the ambitions of the conference and disconnect with Board realities and IAEA process. Mission suggests working with the UK to use this conference as a platform to promote multilateral partnerships between both supplier and recipient states and use the two days to build upon any outcomes from the March Board of Governors (March 2-6). Mission also believes the conference could be used to provide the new Administration's views on GNEP activities especially the complimentary GNEP meeting on March 18-19 in Paris on reliable nuclear fuel service. SCHULTE