This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS ROME 000463 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE PLEASE PASS TO AFRICAN UNION COLLECTIVE 
USDA FOR U/S PENN, U/S BOST, LREICH, RHUGHES 
STATE FOR IO/EDA, OES/E, E, EB/TPP/ABT, AF/EPS; 
USAID FOR EGAT, DCHA/OFDA, DCHA/FFP, AFR/DP 
NEW DELHI FOR LEE BRUDVIG 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR AORC EAID ETRD SENV KUNR XA FAO
SUBJECT: 24TH FAO AFRICAN REGIONAL CONFERENCE HIGHLIGHTS 
COMPETITIVENESS, BIOTECHNOLOGY, FIRE, LAND REFORM 
 
¶1.  Summary:  The biennial African Regional Conference 
(ARC) of the UN Agency for Food and Agriculture (FAO), 
held in Bamako, Mali, from January 30 to February 3 
highlighted the continent's lack of progress towards 
achieving the Millennium Development Goals for reducing 
hunger and poverty, and provided an opportunity to 
identify strategies to correct this.  Issues selected for 
detailed discussion included competitiveness of African 
agriculture; the African Seeds and Biotechnology Program; 
biotechnology regulation; fire in the agriculture- 
forestry interface; land reform; and information 
dissemination.  Reform of FAO and the Independent 
External Evaluation of FAO also were briefly discussed. 
End summary. 
 
¶2.  The ARC was attended by representatives of about 40 
countries from the region, together with observers from 
international organizations, NGOs, and from the U.S., 
France, Italy and the Holy See.  Rome-based Alternate 
Permanent Representative to the UN Agencies, Willem 
Brakel, represented the USG.  The first two days (January 
30-31) were dedicated to technical discussions.  A 
meeting of African Union (AU) agriculture ministers took 
place on February 1, followed by plenary sessions of the 
ARC on February 2 and 3.  Full documentation of the ARC 
is available at www.fao.org.  This cable selectively 
highlights debates and discussions of particular interest 
to USG audiences. 
 
OPENING HIGHLIGHTS 
 
¶3.  The ARC plenary opened with a ceremony attended by 
Malian President Amadou Toumani Toure, government 
ministers and the diplomatic corps.  Toure recalled the 
crisis that recently affected the Sahel, during which 
unfavorable climatic conditions were compounded by desert 
locust outbreaks and caused widespread hunger.  He 
affirmed that the right to food is the first human right 
that should be guaranteed, and questioned attempts to put 
conditions on food aid.  He had warm words of praise for 
Director General (DG) Jacques Diouf (who he revealed once 
held a Malian passport) and expressed support for the 
latter's efforts to reform FAO. 
 
¶4.  DG Diouf, in his remarks, highlighted Africa's 
decline in average per capita food production over the 
past 40 years, and the drop in the continent's share of 
global agricultural exports.  He cited water, rural 
infrastructure, fertilizer and financing as significant 
constraints, calling on African governments to honor the 
commitment made in the Maputo Declaration of July 2003 to 
allocation at least ten percent of national budgetary 
resources to agriculture and rural development within 
five years.  Diouf described current activities of FAO 
designed to complement the New Partnership for Africa's 
Development (NEPAD) Comprehensive Africa Agricultural 
Development Program (CAADP), adopted by African 
agriculture ministers in January 2002. 
 
¶5.  The new Independent Chair of the FAO Council, 
Mohammed Noori (Iran), elected last November, spoke of 
the scourge of hunger during a time of unprecedented 
wealth.  He pointed to the limitations of the "invisible 
hand" of markets, and suggested that FAO could be the 
world's "visible heart" to address the hunger problem. 
He pledged to work with members to reform FAO so that it 
could better respond to current needs and realities. 
 
¶6.  The ARC technical sessions were organized as 
discussions around several key themes, for which the FAO 
Secretariat had prepared background papers.  Highlights 
 
SIPDIS 
of the papers and discussions follow. 
 
AGRICULTURAL COMPETITIVENESS 
 
¶7.  FAO's analysis on "Enhancing the Competitiveness of 
Agriculture and Natural Resources Management under 
Globalization and Liberalization to Promote Economic 
Growth" was the starting point for discussions.  The 
paper called for urgent action to promote water control 
technologies, raise productivity, improve farmer 
incentives, promote use of modern agro-processing and 
farm mechanization, improve business skills, support 
vertical and horizontal linkages and farmer-market 
linkages, promote appropriate policy measures, extension 
services and research. 
 
¶8.  Participants generally concurred with FAO's analysis, 
but underscored what they considered two key factors: 
constraints on African farmers' potential to realize 
economies of scale, and unfair competition in global 
markets due to developed countries' agricultural 
subsidies. 
 
¶9.  The U.S. observer delegate expressed support for 
NEPAD's agricultural agenda, recalling the September 2005 
USG announcement pledging $200,000 for CAADP annually 
over the next five years.  This support, he explained, 
was in the context of the President's Initiative to End 
Hunger in Africa, with a focus on increasing agricultural 
productivity and rural incomes, with emphasis on the 
poorest and most vulnerable groups.  He noted that U.S. 
official development assistance (ODA) to Africa had 
increased substantially since 2000, and that the 
President in 2005 had committed to a doubling of such 
assistance by 2010.  The U.S. representative pointed out 
that trade and investment had the potential to provide 
significant resources to the continent, far in excess of 
ODA -- hence the importance of the Doha Development 
Round, in which the U.S. had made ambitious proposals to 
cut tariffs deeply and eliminate all trade-distorting 
subsidies.  He also highlighted significantly increased 
USG contributions for trade capacity building, and noted 
the benefits realized from the African Growth and 
Opportunity Act (AGOA). 
 
BIOTECHNOLOGY 
 
¶10.  The Secretariat had prepared two papers related to 
agricultural biotechnology.  The first of these outlined 
a proposal for an African Seeds and Biotechnology 
Program.  The program goal is to increase food security 
through establishment of effective seed systems with the 
framework of the Global Plan of Action for Plant Genetic 
Resources for Food and Agriculture.  The AU would 
implement the program within the NEPAD framework.  It 
would address Africa's present inability to take full 
advantage of recent advances in seed sector development. 
 
¶11.  The Second FAO paper was on "Policy and Regulation 
of Biotechnology in Food Production."  The first sentence 
of the Executive Summary captured the document's 
generally precautionary, reluctant and worried stance 
towards the technology: "Modern agricultural 
biotechnology has become a highly controversial issue, 
which has polarized the civil society in terms of the 
potential benefits and risks of the adoption of genetic 
engineering technologies and resulting products in food 
and agricultural systems."  The paper reviewed existing 
policy and legal instruments, with a decided slant toward 
approaches that treat biotech products as new, different, 
and potentially threatening. 
 
¶12.  The two papers were discussed back to back, and the 
themes raised by delegates tended to blend.  Participants 
generally welcomed the seed initiative, although several 
called for increasing the emphasis on capacity building. 
The discussion on utilization and regulation of 
biotechnology included various reactions: 
 
-- Morocco observed that biotech "offers considerable 
opportunities" and therefore "should be applied" to help 
address food needs. 
 
-- Kenya opined that Africa needed to proceed with GMOs 
"very carefully." 
 
-- Libya stated that GMOs should be used to supplement, 
and not to replace, conventional germ plasm. 
 
-- Zimbabwe commented that "to play a meaningful role, we 
[Africans] need to have the capacity to be players in 
this game;" and "maybe some of the fears expressed about 
biotech are the result of a lack of national capacity." 
 
-- Nigeria said there needed to be "an indigenous 
biotechnology" in Africa. 
 
-- Mozambique described GMOs as an inevitable part of 
globalization that also were an issue in food aid. 
 
-- South Africa said biotech should be viewed as part of 
a broad range of scientific techniques, not just genetic 
modification, while many African countries are still 
struggling with basic techniques such as tissue culture 
and marker-assisted breeding.  Support for these 
activities needs to be sustainable.  SADC has established 
a regional advisory committee to inform decision-makers 
about biotech and biosafety. 
 
-- The observer from the Common Market of Eastern and 
Southern Africa (COMESA) said the organization has been 
working on a study to sample six of twenty member 
countries, seeing the need to consult broadly with 
stakeholders before there could be a harmonized position 
on biotech. 
 
-- Two NGO observers took a stridently anti-biotech line, 
calling for a 10-year moratorium on all biotechnology in 
Africa and demanding a ban on genetic use restriction 
("terminator") technology. 
 
¶13.  Responding to participants' comments, the FAO 
Secretariat's speaker from the African regional office 
 
SIPDIS 
proclaimed FAO's neutrality and deference to the policy 
choices of member states, stating that the organization 
was there only to assist states in implementation. 
Significantly, however, this speaker went on to explain 
how FAO could help a country that might want to ensure 
that its borders are closed to GMOs.  FAO's press release 
at the opening of the ARC again reinforced the negative 
aspects, with a sub-heading in bold type asserting that 
"GMOs remain a source of concern." 
 
¶14.  The Report of the ARC Technical Committee summarized 
the above discussion neutrally as follows: "Participants 
also stressed the need to have an understanding of the 
benefits and risks associated with the adoption and use 
of biotechnology products and called upon public research 
institutions to be in the forefront of research on 
biotechnology while ensuring effective public awareness 
and information sharing." 
 
¶15.  Comment:  We subsequently learned in Rome that the 
paper on biotech policy and regulation had been drafted 
by a consultant hired by the FAO Regional Office in 
Accra.  Experts at Headquarters had seen several drafts 
and had urged changes that the consultant chose to 
ignore.  There is no formal clearance process in FAO, and 
the African Regional Office was free to make its own 
decision on this.  From the USG perspective, FAO's high- 
profile State of Food and Agriculture (SOFA) Report for 
2003-4 on "Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs 
of the Poor?" remains the authoritative, scientifically 
balanced FAO assessment.  End comment. 
 
FIRE; LAND REFORM; INFORMATION 
 
¶16.  The ARC also discussed FAO papers on "Fire in the 
Agriculture-Forestry Interface" and on "Agrarian Reform, 
Land Policies and the MDGs: FAO's Interventions and 
Lessons Learned During the Past Decade."  The latter 
paper noted that "secure rights to land and greater 
equity in land access are important for poverty 
reduction," but that land interventions had received 
limited recognition in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers. 
The paper will serve as a useful prelude to the upcoming 
FAO International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural 
Development (ICARRD), to be held in Brazil in March 2006. 
There was also a paper presented on FAO's role as a 
knowledge organization, and the current and future role 
of FAO's World Agriculture Information Center (WAICENT) 
framework. 
 
HIV/AIDS; AVIAN INFLUENZA 
 
¶17.  The implications of HIV/AIDS for agriculture and 
food security, although not a separate agenda item, came 
up in various contexts, and was highlighted implicitly by 
the conspicuous red ribbons worn by Malian President 
Toure and many senior officials during the opening 
ceremony.  (HIV/AIDS had been notably under-emphasized 
during the 2004 ARC in Johannesburg; this deficiency was 
somewhat rectified in the current ARC.) 
 
¶18.  Several delegates expressed concern about Avian 
Influenza and asked about assistance from FAO.  The 
Secretariat replied that FAO was involved in 
 
SIPDIS 
demonstration and capacity building activities, but that 
FAO was not a financial agency for government-implemented 
actions.  (This discussion occurred a week before it was 
publicly announced that the highly pathogenic H5N1 
variant of the virus had been detected in Nigeria.) 
 
FAO REFORM; INDEPENDENT EVALUATION; ARREARS 
 
¶19.  During the plenary session there was little time 
available for discussion of FAO institutional questions. 
The Secretariat had prepared a paper the Director 
General's revised proposals for FAO reform, but 
participants did not have a significant opportunity to 
study the document beforehand or to discuss it.  The 
Independent Chair of the Council reported on his recent 
consultations in Rome.  He highlighted the Independent 
External Evaluation (IEE) of FAO, and the importance for 
broad participation in the voluntary funding of the IEE. 
He also spotlighted the issue of members' arrears to FAO 
-- a problem that he noted complicated the organization's 
financial situation and could serve as a pretext for 
others to scale back their contributions. 
 
¶20.  Kenya offered to host the ARC in 2008. 
 
COMMENT 
 
¶21.  FAO's African Regional Conference provided a useful 
forum for discussions of agricultural development in the 
continent.  At times, however, what was left unsaid in 
the formal sessions was as important as what was made 
explicit.  In the discussion on biotechnology, for 
instance, it was evident that delegations were taking a 
cautious stance in public, while in a number of their own 
countries research on biotech crops has already advanced 
considerably.  To cite another example, after the USG 
statement highlighting the importance of trade and 
investment, several delegates came up to the U.S. rep to 
thank us for our comments, wishing that others had made 
the same point.  USG support for NEPAD and CAADP also was 
quietly acknowledged and appreciated by some delegates in 
the corridors. 
 
CLEVERLEY