Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 08PARIS98, GROWING CRITICISM IN FRANCE ON GM SAFEGUARD

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #08PARIS98.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08PARIS98 2008-01-18 15:40 2011-08-24 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Paris
VZCZCXRO6266
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV
DE RUEHFR #0098/01 0181540
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 181540Z JAN 08
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1731
RUEHRC/USDA FAS WASHDC
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 2812
RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 000098 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
BRUSSELS PASS USEU FOR AGMINCOUNSELOR 
STATE FOR OES; EUR/ERA; EEB/TPP/ABT/BTT (BOBO); 
STATE PASS USTR FOR MURPHY/CLARKSON; 
OCRA/CURTIS; 
STA/SIMMONS/JONES/HENNEY/SISSON; 
EU POSTS PASS TO AGRICULTURE AND ECON 
GENEVA FOR USTR, ALSO AGRICULTURE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR SENV ECON ETRD EU FR
 
SUBJECT: GROWING CRITICISM IN FRANCE ON GM SAFEGUARD 
 
REF: (A) 2008 PARIS 00078 (B) PARIS 4731 
 
Sensitive but unclassified, please protect accordingly. 
 
1.  (U) Summary : France's decision to initiate the safeguard clause 
against Mon 810 (Reftel A), has been widely criticized by a growing 
number of scientists, parliamentarians and farm organizations as 
lacking scientific basis. A number of press articles have echoed 
their criticisms that the GOF's decision was politically motivated 
rather than scientifically justified. End summary 
 
2.  As reported (Ref A), immediately after the president of the 
interim high authority on GMOs (a senator) announced that there were 
"serious doubts" about MON 810 and that new facts demonstrating 
"negative effects" had been discovered, 12 of the 15 scientists on 
the authority refuted this statement.  These scientists represent a 
wide range of disciplines including genetics, molecular biology, 
toxicology, population genetics, genetic therapy, epidemiology, 
agronomy, entomology, microbiology, veterinary sciences, biomedical 
research, and statistics.  Additionally, an economist and a lawyer 
on the authority's social and ethical committee signed the petition. 
 The petition also lamented the lack of time the authority was given 
to perform its inquiry on MON 810. 
 
3. (SBU) In a meeting with EMBoffs, two of the scientists who signed 
the petition complained that while they were not at liberty to 
divulge the details of the proceedings, they were not given adequate 
time to prepare their recommendations or review the final wording of 
the report.  (The authority's first meeting took place in 
mid-December and the report was released on January 9.)  They also 
complained that in communicating to the public, the president of the 
authority selected certain phrases in the report to present an 
unbalanced picture of its contents.  It also became clear that the 
report took some scientific findings out of context.  For example, 
the report cites the work of Dr. Messean (2006) in arguing that it 
is impossible to avoid pollen drift on a local scale (i.e. in a 
region with many small farms). Upon questioning by Emboffs, Dr. 
Messean said that what his report had concluded was that it was 
impossible to ensure a zero threshold for pollen drift (as required 
for organic production in France), but possible to ensure that the 
EC threshold of 0.9 percent could be met. The toxicologist Emboffs 
queried emphasized that new positive evidence had come to light 
regarding mycotoxins.  (This finding did not receive wide 
publicity.) 
 
4. (U) The French Association for Scientific Information (AFIS) was 
one of the first organizations to criticize the GOF decision. AFIS 
is an organization of dozens of world-renowned French scientists 
that aims to promote legitimate  scientific discourse (as opposed to 
pseudo-science). After examining the authority's opinion and having 
had contact with several scientists who participated in the meetings 
of the Committee, AFIS publicly announced that it had concluded that 
that none of the arguments brought forward in the report could be 
considered new or severe, thereby justifying the activation of a 
safeguard clause. (AFIS was also behind the petition signed by 300 
scientists supporting biotech and discouraging the GOF from invoking 
the precautionary principle on MON 810 reftel B.) 
 
5. (U) Eminent members of the French Academies of Science, 
Technology and Agriculture published an open letter, in the daily Le 
Figaro, on 11 January 2008. Excerpt : "[...] We are astonished to 
see how little the work of scientists in the domain of GMOs is taken 
into account. Let's remember that before any authorization for 
cultivation of a GMO, each product is subject to a thorough 
evaluation on a case by case basis, on a national level as well as 
on a European one. [...] How to explain to the French people, that 
it's now proposed, without adding any new, well- founded and 
reasonable scientific elements, to ban this product today - which 
was initially authorized by all the review bodies appointed by the 
government - and how to convince the people to have confidence, 
tomorrow and in the future, in the arguments brought forward by such 
future authorities?". 
 
6. (U) After the public outcry of the President of the National 
Assembly, Bernard Accoyer in the weekly "Le Journal du Dimanche" 
(reftel A), other parliamentarians from both the majority and 
opposition parties openly criticized the GOF decision. Socialist 
depute Jean-Yves le Deaut said that "The potential decision to 
invoke the safeguard clause is not a credit to politics. The 
provisional authority has been exploited to allow the majority party 
to succeed in the municipal elections. In fact, the President of the 
 
PARIS 00000098  002 OF 002 
 
 
Republic was relying on an opinion that was not validated by the 
provisional authority [...] Neither the terms "serious risks" nor 
"negative effects" have been used in the opinion sent to the members 
(of parliament). [...] In fact, the allegedly new scientific 
publications have only confirmed what was already known [...]." 
Senator Jean Bizet, who is the rapporteur for the biotech 
coexistence law in the Senate, also expressed opposition to the use 
of the safeguard clause, saying it was not scientifically founded 
and that it would put France in "a ridiculous position at the EU 
level" . 
 
7. (U) According to the press, State Secretary for Ecology Nathalie 
Kosciusko-Morizet had to face a very hostile group of majority party 
parliamentarians. Deputies were worried that such safeguard decision 
could weaken France's competitiveness in agricultural and food 
trade. They were also furious that the executive branch had bypassed 
the legislative branch. 
 
8. The French Corn Growers Association (AGPM) denounced the 
arguments of the French interim High authority's report as being 
scientifically unjustified. They specifically provided arguments on 
the following issues 
- Pollen dissemination : corn pollen is one of the heaviest grain 
pollens : 98 percent of corn pollens falls within 4 meters of the 
plant. The remaining 2 percent flows further because dehydratation 
makes the pollen lighter. All but a few of these pollens are non 
viable. All European studies in Spain, Czech Republic, Italy and 
Germany have shown that good cultural practices and buffer zones 
allow neighboring crops to come in below the EU contamination 
threshold of 0.9 percent. 
- resistance in target insects : AGPM highlighted that insects 
gaining resistance to BT mentioned in the studies are not pests 
affecting corn and are not found in mainland France. 
- possible impacts on non-target fauna and flora: even if some 
studies show that the BT molecule can be found in soil and water, 
all studies show that its impact is less harmful than that of 
traditional pesticides. Studies also show that no impact was found 
on pollinating bees fed with BT corn pollen. 
 
9.  AGPM also noted that all the studies mentioned in the report had 
been reviewed by experts at both the French Food Safety Authority 
(AFSSA) and by its European counterpart (EFSSA). None of those 
agencies used those reports to revert their positive approval of 
MON810. On the other hand, AGPM noted that the Interim High 
Authority did not expand upon the benefits of cultivation of MON810 
regarding the lower level of mycotoxins, such as fumonisin, which 
are scientifically proven to cause cancer in mammals. 
 
 
STAPLETON