Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
10BERLIN214
2010-02-25 12:49:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Berlin
Cable title:
IRAN SANCTIONS: GERMANY FULLY SUPPORTIVE BUT
how-toVZCZCXRO3073 RR RUEHBC RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHKUK RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHNP RUEHROV RUEHSL RUEHSR RUEHTRO DE RUEHRL #0214 0561249 ZNY CCCCC ZZH R 251249Z FEB 10 FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6620 INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE RUCNIRA/IRAN COLLECTIVE RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE RUEHII/VIENNA IAEA POSTS COLLECTIVE
C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 000214
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/25/2020
TAGS: KNNP MNUC PREL PARM EFIN IR GM
SUBJECT: IRAN SANCTIONS: GERMANY FULLY SUPPORTIVE BUT
PREFERS SPECIFIC VS. BLANKET IRGC DESIGNATIONS
REF: SECSTATE 15554
Classified By: Political M/C George Glass for reasons 1.4 b and d
C O N F I D E N T I A L BERLIN 000214
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/25/2020
TAGS: KNNP MNUC PREL PARM EFIN IR GM
SUBJECT: IRAN SANCTIONS: GERMANY FULLY SUPPORTIVE BUT
PREFERS SPECIFIC VS. BLANKET IRGC DESIGNATIONS
REF: SECSTATE 15554
Classified By: Political M/C George Glass for reasons 1.4 b and d
1. (C) On February 23, Emboffs delivered reftel points on
IRGC designations to MFA and Economics Ministry officials.
Martin Lutz of the Economics Ministry made it clear that
Germany is supportive of the next round of sanctions and is
on board with targeting the IRGC. He expressed appreciation
for the reftel IRGC designations and added that this type of
specific transparent information is extremely useful to the
GoG and to the German business community -- noting that the
German legal system works better with designations of
specific companies and individuals as opposed to blanket
designations.
2. (C) Lutz argued that under the German legal system,
German companies needed "legal certainty and clarity." He
said it would be difficult for German companies to verify if
a particular company did or did not belong to the IRGC,
especially given the IRGC's penetration into the Iranian
economy. He said Germany would have no problem if the list
of designations was very long, but Germany strongly preferred
"precise, clear-cut, transparent" designations.
3. (C) In response to a question of what to do with the
problem of the evasive tactic used to avoid sanctions of
changing names of companies affiliated with IRGC, he conceded
this remained a problem. To help deal with this, Lutz said
Germany kept an informal "grey list" of just such companies
which the German intelligence service updates and circulates
to the German Industry associations as a first warning
mechanism. Lutz cautioned that this list is not legally
binding.
4. (C) MFA contacts stressed that Germany shares the goal of
designating the IRGC and that the only differences lay in
finding the best way to do it. They said the problem of a
blanket IRGC designation remained a "real" problem for the
German implementation and enforcement entities but that the
current planned "solution" being discussed in NY seemed a
workable go-around. He said the idea of a blanket
designation in a UNSCR to be followed up by a very precise
list of specific designations in an accompanying EU
implementing resolution would suffice to meet German legal
requirements.
Murphy
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/25/2020
TAGS: KNNP MNUC PREL PARM EFIN IR GM
SUBJECT: IRAN SANCTIONS: GERMANY FULLY SUPPORTIVE BUT
PREFERS SPECIFIC VS. BLANKET IRGC DESIGNATIONS
REF: SECSTATE 15554
Classified By: Political M/C George Glass for reasons 1.4 b and d
1. (C) On February 23, Emboffs delivered reftel points on
IRGC designations to MFA and Economics Ministry officials.
Martin Lutz of the Economics Ministry made it clear that
Germany is supportive of the next round of sanctions and is
on board with targeting the IRGC. He expressed appreciation
for the reftel IRGC designations and added that this type of
specific transparent information is extremely useful to the
GoG and to the German business community -- noting that the
German legal system works better with designations of
specific companies and individuals as opposed to blanket
designations.
2. (C) Lutz argued that under the German legal system,
German companies needed "legal certainty and clarity." He
said it would be difficult for German companies to verify if
a particular company did or did not belong to the IRGC,
especially given the IRGC's penetration into the Iranian
economy. He said Germany would have no problem if the list
of designations was very long, but Germany strongly preferred
"precise, clear-cut, transparent" designations.
3. (C) In response to a question of what to do with the
problem of the evasive tactic used to avoid sanctions of
changing names of companies affiliated with IRGC, he conceded
this remained a problem. To help deal with this, Lutz said
Germany kept an informal "grey list" of just such companies
which the German intelligence service updates and circulates
to the German Industry associations as a first warning
mechanism. Lutz cautioned that this list is not legally
binding.
4. (C) MFA contacts stressed that Germany shares the goal of
designating the IRGC and that the only differences lay in
finding the best way to do it. They said the problem of a
blanket IRGC designation remained a "real" problem for the
German implementation and enforcement entities but that the
current planned "solution" being discussed in NY seemed a
workable go-around. He said the idea of a blanket
designation in a UNSCR to be followed up by a very precise
list of specific designations in an accompanying EU
implementing resolution would suffice to meet German legal
requirements.
Murphy