G8 GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP: FRENCH CLAIM INTERAGENCY

C O N F I D E N T I A L PARIS 000212

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR ISN/CTR

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/23/2020
TAGS: PREL PGOV PARM ENRG SENV TRGY KNNP KRAD
FR
SUBJECT: G8 GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP: FRENCH CLAIM INTERAGENCY
BATTLE KEY TO OVERALL POLICY

Classified By: Acting Political Counselor Kim Krhounek, Reasons 1.4 (b)
, (d).


1. (C) SUMMARY: Lack of engagement by relevant French
ministries and political buck-passing of responsibilities
appear to be the primary impediments to greater French
political support for extension of the G8's Global
Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of
Mass Destruction (GP). The current perception is that the GP
focuses exclusively on Russian nuclear issues, which has led
to declining political interest in France, particularly
within the two biggest funding ministries -- the Ministries
of Industry and Energy -- who have effectively handed off
all responsibility to junior partners the MFA and MOD. The
French claim that while they could probably support - in
theory - the extension of the GP beyond 2012, any commitment,
even in principle, would only be possible if the MFA is able
to get better inter-agency buy-in and bring the bigger
ministries back on board. Post's analysis is that French
support will ultimately be a question of political will and
sufficient pressure at senior levels, particularly by the
office of the Presidency, which has a strong lead on
non-proliferation issues. END SUMMARY.


2. (C) MFA GP Action Officer Paul Furia said February 22 that
when France made its original ten-year commitment to the GP
in 2002, the Ministries of Industry and Energy were the
largest contributors, with the MFA and MoD as "junior
partners." This was largely due to the focus on removing
radioactive materials from, and clearing up, Russian military
sites, which were projects for which these ministries had
technical expertise. However, according to Furia, beginning
in 2006 these ministries began lobbying the Prime Minister's
office to allow them to leave their GP responsibilities to
the MFA and MoD, claiming that these ministries had primary
responsibility for disarmament and non-proliferation. The
creation in 2007 of the "super ministry" that would become
the Ministry of Ecology, Energy, Sustainable Development, and
Oceans (MEEDAT) encouraged this shift by absorbing many of
the GP-relevant competencies while allowing GP priorities to
get lost among the new ministry's other competing duties.
Additionally, Furia said the GP began to lose political
significance for the GOF as it came to be seen as little more
than a means for Russia to finance its nuclear clean-up.


3. (SBU) In this context, Furia said France has welcomed U.S.
and Canadian suggestions that, moving forward, the GP should
be considered less as a specific set of Russia-focused
projects and more as a larger effort to prevent the spread of
nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons and materials.
While cautioning that the GP would lose political relevance
were it to become a simple "accounting exercise" in which any
existing projects are used to account for funding
commitments, Furia said French officials were intrigued by
the U.S. example of considering relevant projects by
agriculture or public health authorities, for example, as
part of the overall GP effort. Having not considered the GP
in this light before, Furia added, the GOF was currently
looking at what assistance priorities outside the MFA and MoD
might fit into this rubric.


4. (SBU) Furia stressed, however, that France was not
currently in a position to commit to a GP extension beyond

2012. While in theory the MFA could support an extension,
Furia said France does not want to do so unless the GOF is
certain of what financial commitments will be involved. If
the MFA can convince Prime Minister Fillon that other
ministries - MEEDAT, or the ministries of agriculture,
health, or industry - should be involved, Furia said
continuing at existing levels of funding may be more of a
possibility. Existing U.S. and Canadian plans to enlarge the
GP beyond Russia and focus on projects beyond nuclear
decommissioning that are relevant to these ministries could
help encourage the involvement of other GOF actors.
Additionally, Furia reiterated a French suggestion to move
the GP from the Non-Proliferation Directors Group of the G8
to the Nuclear Safety and Security Group, which he claimed
would help the MFA make the case that the GP is wider than
just non-proliferation and that the MEEDAT should become
involved.


5. (C) Furia admitted, however, that the Prime Minister's
office has not so far shown a great deal of interest in the

topic, although he hoped that the upcoming preparatory
meeting in Montreal would attract more senior attention by
requiring France to consider its policy options.


6. (C) COMMENT: Although Furia's description of the GOF's
interagency buck-passing explains France's inability to
fulfill its existing commitments and its reluctance to take
on new ones, it does not provide a recipe for engaging France
on supporting an extension of the GP. It is in any case
questionable whether even ministries with bigger budgets than
the MFA have funds available to support future GP projects.
Ultimately, although the Prime Minister has the authority to
assign responsibilities to various ministries, the GOF's
reaction to U.S. proposals will depend on political will, and
senior Presidency staff will likely have to be convinced.
END COMMENT.
PEKALA