VZCZCXRO1623
RR RUEHBZ RUEHDU RUEHJO RUEHMR RUEHRN
DE RUEHSA #0357/01 0560623
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 250623Z FEB 09
FM AMEMBASSY PRETORIA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7477
INFO RUCPDC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
RUCNSAD/SOUTHERN AF DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY COLLECTIVE
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PRETORIA 000357 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR AF/S 
AMCONSUL CAPE TOWN FOR ALBERTA MAYBERRY 
AMCONSUL DURBAN FOR JILL DERDERIAN 
AMCONSUL JOHANNESBURG FOR ANDY PASSEN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ASEC ENRG ETTC EWWT PINS SF
SUBJECT: SOUTH AFRICA AGREES TO MEGAPORTS INITIATIVE WITH CAVEATS 
 
REF: A. STATE 04730, B. PRETORIA 238 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary. Post delivered Megaports Initiative talking points 
(Reftel A) to South African Revenue Service (SARS) officials.  SARS 
officials agreed to proceed with the Megaports initiative, given 
cabinet approval, but requested additional information before 
finalizing approval for a consultation meeting.  SARS officials 
expect to have a written request for additional information prepared 
by March 16.  The issues raised by the large number of South African 
stakeholders and sensitivities regarding national intelligence 
issues will take some time to address.  Post will follow-up with 
SARS and forward the document as soon as it is available.  End 
Summary. 
 
--------------------------- 
CABINET APPROVAL AND SARS 
RESTRUCTURING CAUSED DELAYS 
--------------------------- 
 
¶2. (U) Post Transportation Officer and Customs and Border Protection 
Attache delivered U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Megaports 
Initiative talking points (Reftel A) to South African Revenue 
Service (SARS) officials on February 17.  Post noted that South 
Africa has a long-standing invitation to participate in the 
Megaports Initiative and that the DOE would like to engage South 
Africa on the Megaports Initiative in time to assist with 2010 FIFA 
World Cup preparations.  Post inquired about appropriate next steps 
to finalize dates for a kick-off DOE Megaports consultation meeting 
with policymakers in Pretoria and a visit to the Port of Durban. 
Post also noted that the Megaports team would like to extend the 
program to include the Port of Cape Town.  SARS officials did not 
foresee any concerns with including the Port of Cape Town. 
 
¶3. (U) SARS Group Executive for Customs Strategy and Policy Erich 
Kieck acknowledged the time-lapse since the initial Megaports 
meeting in 2007 and was apologetic that it took so long for the 
South African Government (SAG) to address the Megaports invitation. 
Kieck explained that a wide-spectrum of SAG stakeholders (including 
SARS, the National Intelligence Agency, the Department of Transport, 
the Department of Minerals and Energy, the South African Police 
Service, and others) had to be brought on board before the cabinet 
finally approved South Africa's participation in the Megaports 
Initiative in late 2008. 
 
¶4. (U) The South African cabinet has tasked SARS as the lead agency 
to coordinate all SAG stakeholders' participation in the Megaports 
Initiative.  Kieck also indicated that SARS underwent major internal 
restructuring in the last year, which led to additional delays in 
the Megaports follow-up. 
 
-------------------------------- 
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED 
TO FINALIZE MEGAPORTS VISIT 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶5. (U) Kieck explained that SAG stakeholders raised some additional 
issues at an October 2008 meeting that SARS would like to raise with 
DOE before the Megaports team could proceed with plans to travel to 
South Africa for initial consultation meetings.   The SARS officials 
discussed some general areas of follow-up with post, but indicated 
that they would bring all of the stakeholders together to develop a 
written list of questions for the Megaports team.  SARS officials 
followed-up with Transportation Officer after the meeting to 
indicate that SAG stakeholders are tentatively scheduled to meet on 
March 12 and that the stakeholders are expected to forward a 
QMarch 12 and that the stakeholders are expected to forward a 
finalized written request for additional information to the 
Transportation Officer by March 16. 
 
¶6. (U) The SARS officials noted that the stakeholders would like 
some clarification on the type of equipment (fixed or stationary) 
that would be used for the Megaports Initiative.  Transnet is in the 
process of upgrading and expanding port capacity at all of South 
Africa's major ports in South Africa and the stakeholders would like 
to ensure that the Megaports equipment would interface well with 
existing and new equipment acquired by Transnet.  Kieck noted that 
the main decision-makers at Transnet were based at Transnet's 
corporate offices in Johannesburg since the upgrades are also 
intended to streamline all Transnet-owned and operated ports. 
 
¶7. (U) Kieck indicated that the stakeholders would like additional 
clarification on the language of the Megaports Memorandum of 
Understanding (MOU).  There was some confusion about the language in 
the MOU that discussed information exchange and they would like 
clarification on the scope of this information exchange. 
 
 
PRETORIA 00000357  002 OF 002 
 
 
¶8. (U) The SARS officials stated that there were some concerns about 
the maintenance of equipment after the initial three-year-period of 
DOE assistance ended.  They expected the stakeholders to raise 
questions about the feasibility and costs of acquiring spare parts 
after three years.  The SARS officials also inquired about the 
typical timeline between an initial consultation meeting and the 
implementation of Megaports equipment and training.  Post explained 
that the speed of implementation would depend heavily upon the SAG 
stakeholder decision-making processes and the finalization of the 
consultation visit dates. 
 
¶9. (U) The SARS officials also requested information on Megaports 
Initiative success stories.  They wanted to know whether any ports 
had been successful in intercepting sensitive material because of 
Megaports equipment or training and whether this information was 
publicly available.  They thought this type of information would be 
useful to share with the SAG stakeholders to continue to build 
domestic support for the Megaports Initiative. 
 
------- 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶10. (SBU) The SARS officials appeared ready to move forward with the 
Megaports Initiative.  However, the large number of SAG stakeholders 
involved in the process means that it will take additional time to 
address all SAG concerns and finalize a Megaports team visit.  There 
has also been some SAG sensitivity about perceived U.S. intelligence 
gathering at South African ports, which has lengthened the approval 
time for all USG maritime security initiatives involving the 
state-controlled ports.  SARS has a good working relationship with 
the Customs and Border Protection Attache in Johannesburg and the 
Container Security Initiative team in Durban.  Continuing to 
emphasize the training and capacity-building opportunities of USG 
maritime security initiatives is the best way to bring all SAG 
stakeholders on board.  Post will follow-up with SARS and pass along 
the request for additional information as soon as it is available. 
 
LA LIME