VZCZCXRO9014
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHRL #0658/01 1540559
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 030559Z JUN 09
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHRC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHINGTON DC
RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4248
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BERLIN 000658 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EB/TPP/BTT JACK BOBO, JFINN, GCLEMENTS 
USDA FOR FAS, EJONES, DYOUNG, SNENON, CRIKER, EPORTER 
STATE PASS TO USTR FOR MCLARKSON, JMURPHY 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR ECON ETRD KPAO TBIO GM
 
SUBJECT: BIOTECH ROUNDTABLE EXPOSES RIFT BETWEEN POLIITICAL 
FACTIONS 
 
REFS:  A) Munich 90  B) BERLIN 520 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED.  PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY. 
 
 
¶1.  (SBU)  SUMMARY. The first of a series of German roundtables on 
Plant Genetics on May 20 concluded that research in plant 
biotechnology remains essential to Germany as a research center and 
to the world as a response to food and energy needs.  However, 
tension remains behind the scenes between the German Federal 
Ministries of Research and of Agriculture, with the Agriculture 
Ministry suggesting at least in private that Research Ministry 
presented a biased panel.  Federal Research Minister Schavan of the 
Christian Democrat Union Party (CDU) and Federal Agricultural 
Minister Aigner of the Christian Social Union  (CSU) made a public 
show of cooperating in the round table, which was an attempt to 
paper over their public disagreement about the safety of 
agricultural biotechnology after Aigner banned the planting of 
biotech corn in April 2009.  A second roundtable is planned for 
sometime in mid-June or early July, after EU Parliamentary elections 
are concluded, which may make it easier for Aigner to be more 
accommodating.  END SUMMARY. 
 
 
RESEARCH MINISTRY EMPHASIZES LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE OF BIOTECHNOLOGY 
 
¶2. (SBU)  After Federal Agricultural Minister Ilse Aigner (CSU) 
banned the planting of biotech corn in Germany in April, 2009, 
Federal Research Minister, Annette Schavan (CDU), publicly 
criticized the action.  She then announced her intention to initiate 
a series of round tables to foster public discussion of and public 
confidence in agricultural biotechnology in Germany, reflecting its 
value for society, the economy, and the environment and to uphold 
Germany's reputation as a leading research country.   Schavan also 
pointed out that the meetings would provide transparency for the 
public about the opportunities and risks of the technology. 
 
¶3.  (SBU)   Despite their public spat, Aigner accepted Schavan's 
invitation for the Ministry of Agriculture to co-host the 
discussion.  Many observers saw this as an effort to try and bring 
the CSU and CDU to a more unified position in public.  Schavan 
invited 30 experts representing research, farm organizations, plant 
breeders, the food industry, churches, a consumer organization and 
representatives of the German states for the first round table.  It 
focused on how plant breeding can cope with increased global food 
demand and the demand for fuels, as well as on research and 
application of biotechnology in Germany. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) It was a surprise when Aigner said after the meeting that 
"modern biotechnology can account for future saving of energy and 
resources, and the development of healthier  animal feed or plants." 
 Observers credited the meeting with starting a more objective 
discussion of GMOs in Germany.  However, several media as well as 
discussion participants criticized the forum as lacking a sufficient 
number of biotech opponents and development aid experts.  The 
concluding press statements of the two ministers highlighted their 
different approaches.  Aigner emphasized that future biotech 
research should take place in greenhouses.  Schavan focused her 
statement on the opportunity to develop new crops resulting from 
advances in science. 
 
RESEARCH  MINISTRY STOUTLY DEFENDS A SCIENTIFIC APPROACH IN THE FACE 
OF POLITICAL PRESSURES 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Sources have indicated that Schavan plans to use the next 
meeting in mid-June or early July to counter complaints that there 
has not been enough research on biotechnology. We understand that 
she intends to highlight how biotech research has influenced 
national biotech policy decisions.  Experts at the Ministry of 
Research (BMBF) have privately indicated they would also like to 
compare the research efforts done on biotech versus organic 
agriculture.  BMBF contacts mentioned a possible topic could be a 
discussion on research done to assess the risk of the toxicity of Bt 
toxin in biotech corn plants and pollen compared to the toxicity of 
the Bt insecticide used by organic farmers. 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  Comment:  While Schavan and Aigner have tried to appear 
more cooperative publicly, behind the scenes, the situation is still 
tense.  Ag Ministry sources stated that Aigner was unhappy with the 
make-up of the first panel and thought that it was too heavily 
weighted toward industry views.  She has also said that she expected 
to issue the invitations to the second panel.  On the other hand, 
sources in BMBF indicate that Schavan does not intend to give up 
control of this process.  The CSU is using its opposition to biotech 
as a campaign issue in the June 7 EU Parliamentary elections.  It is 
 
BERLIN 00000658  002 OF 002 
 
 
possible that some of the tension between the CDU and CSU on this 
topic might dissolve thereafter.  End Comment 
 
¶7.  This cable was coordinated with Consulate General Munich. 
 
 
KOENIG