VZCZCXRO9965
OO RUEHCN RUEHGH RUEHVC
DE RUEHBJ #3393/01 3520855
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 180855Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY BEIJING
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7283
RUEHRC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHDC
INFO RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEHOO/CHINA POSTS COLLECTIVE
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 BEIJING 003393 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EEB/TPP/MTAA/ABT ARYAN 
STATE FOR C MPLOWDEN 
STATE FOR J BOBO 
STATE PASS USDA/ERS 
STATE PASS USDA/FAS/OSTA BERMAN/PORTER/JONES 
STATE PASS USDA/FAS/OCRA CHINA DESK 
STATE PASS USDA/OGA 
STATE PASS USDA/APHIS/SIMMONS/HERON 
STATE PASS USTR FOR STRATFORD 
STATE PASS USTR CLARKSON 
STATE PASS FDA/DEITZ 
STATE PASS EPA/WOZNIAK 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: SNAR SENV EAGR ETRD ECON CH
 
SUBJECT: 8th U.S.-China High Level Joint Biotechnology Working Group 
(BWG) Meeting in Beijing 
 
(U) This cable is Sensitive But Unclassified.  Please protect 
accordingly. 
 
¶1. (SBU) On September 16, government officials and technical experts 
convened the 8th meeting of the U.S.-China High Level Joint 
Biotechnology Working Group (BWG) in Beijing.  Discussion focused 
on: 1) affirming U.S. and Chinese joint interests in agricultural 
biotechnology; 2) recognizing the potential this technology to 
address current and future global agricultural and climate 
challenges; and 3) encouraging joint collaboration and global 
leadership in the development and use of products produced using 
agricultural biotechnology.  Discussions were frank, informative and 
constructive, and ended on a promising note for future exchange and 
technical collaboration.  END SUMMARY. 
 
Opening Session 
---------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) The United States and China convened the 8th meeting of the 
U.S.-China High Level Joint Biotechnology Working Group (BWG) in 
Beijing, September 16, 2009.  China's Ministry of Agriculture hosted 
the meeting.  Jim Miller, Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services (FFAS), led the U.S. delegation, presenting 
opening remarks and chairing the morning session.  Michael 
Schechtman, Biotechnology Coordinator for the Office of the 
Secretary, USDA/Agricultural Research Services, chaired the 
afternoon session.  The U.S. delegation was comprised of 
representatives from USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) and 
the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS); the 
Office of the Secretary, USDA; the U.S. Food and Drug Administration 
(FDA); and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  Niu Dun, Vice 
Minister, Minister of Agriculture (MOA), led the Chinese delegation 
at the morning session.  The Chinese delegation included 
representatives from the Ministry of Agriculture, the Chinese 
Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS), China Agricultural 
University, Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), Department for 
Supervision on Plant Quarantine (AQSIQ), and the Ministry of 
Health's (MOH) Center for Disease Control (CDC). 
 
¶3. (SBU) Vice Minister Niu opened the BWG by emphasizing the 
important role the BWG played in maintaining trade and enhancing 
mutual understanding and trust between China and the United States. 
He spoke of the overall trade picture between the U.S. and China, 
and the significant challenges we face.   He acknowledged the 
importance of ongoing U.S.-China cooperation on agricultural 
biotechnology and the role of agriculture in China to address food 
and energy security, social welfare issues, and climate change.  Niu 
proposed the United States and China strengthen cooperation and 
exchange through an expansion of research and development 
collaboration on agricultural biotechnology. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Niu also noted complaints received from Chinese soybean 
farmers about the large volumes of biotech soybean imports from the 
United States (USD 7.0 billion in 2008).  He commented that U.S. 
companies, including Monsanto, were earning "fat profits" from this 
trade and were only interested in expanding their market share.  He 
implied that the technology providers were unwilling to work 
collaboratively with Chinese research institutions to develop 
China's biotechnology industry and said if this were the case, the 
situation was unacceptable.  Niu stated that reciprocal and mutual 
cooperation in biotech will advance research and development to the 
benefit of both the United States and China. 
 
¶5. (SBU) U/S Miller noted that both countries have similar goals and 
interests and encouraged China and the United States to work 
together bilaterally and as global partners to address the global 
challenges of food security, sustainability and climate change.  He 
spoke of the role of biotechnology as one important tool to help 
address these issues, of our joint role as world leaders in the use 
of the technology, and of the increasing convergence of U.S. and 
Chinese interests around the development, regulation, and use of the 
technology, especially in view of China's recently announced policy 
for "Accelerating the Development of Bioindustry".  Recognizing 
 
BEIJING 00003393  002 OF 005 
 
 
Niu's call for greater cooperation, the Under Secretary agreed in 
principle to increased U.S.-China engagement and collaboration. 
 
¶6. (SBU) The Chinese closed the morning session by emphasizing the 
significant role biotechnology has played in addressing plant pests 
and diseases in China and in improving the quality of crops, 
something conventional agriculture has been unable to address 
adequately.  China places great emphasis on the development of new 
biotech products that could improve Chinese agricultural 
productivity.  That said, MOA noted that it would take a "step-wise 
and steady approach" to approving new biotech products.  MOA 
suggested incorporating more collaboration at all levels of the BWG 
agenda would expand fruitful bilateral cooperation. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Despite a few surprising remarks from Niu, the morning 
session was informative and relatively friendly.  (In addition to 
the "fat profit" comment, he suggested that Monsanto should permit 
China to use its Round-Up Ready I technology "free-of-charge" in the 
waning years of the patent and claimed that the USG could control 
Monsanto policy).  It was made clear that China seeks closer 
collaboration in the field of biotechnology.  How and to what extent 
remains to be learned.  Niu noted that his and U/S Miller's 
participation enhanced the dialogue and put pressure on the group to 
find solutions and not simply discuss concerns. 
 
China and U.S. Collaboration on Biotechnology 
--------------------------------------------- 
 
¶8. (SBU) The afternoon session proceeded at the working level with 
further discussion of future U.S.-China cooperation.  The Chinese 
suggested increased collaboration in fundamental and field research 
and that future collaboration would involve increased activity not 
only between government scientists but also between academics and 
the private sector as well.  Several issues that would need to be 
addressed, e.g., intellectual property concerns and the ability to 
involve independent players from academia and the private sector, 
were noted. 
 
¶9. (SBU) In reply to a U.S. request, Chinese officials promised to 
provide a written proposal of their suggestions for further 
collaboration and cooperation.  The U.S. agreed to work with the 
Chinese to find an appropriate model for collaboration.  Both sides 
recognized that working out the details of increased collaboration 
would be challenging.  Points of contact, one at the U.S. 
Embassy/Beijing and one at the Ministry of Agriculture, were 
identified to ensure and facilitate communication. 
 
Recent Approvals and Products in the Queue 
------------------------------------------ 
 
¶10. (SBU) The United States and China exchanged information on the 
status of research on biotech products and product approvals in 
general in each country, and discussed the importance for continuing 
efforts to ensure regulations keep up with the increasing number and 
complexity of products.  However, China was unprepared to respond to 
specific U.S. inquiries about products under development.  Chinese 
officials noted that many domestic agencies are involved in the 
development of biotech products; good progress is being made on the 
development of biotech corn, soy, and rice, with some products in 
the field trial stage while others are undergoing safety 
assessments.  China hopes to accelerate the development and 
commercialization of biotech products but many obstacles exist. 
 
¶11. (SBU) China was unable to provide any information on the status 
of U.S. products up for renewal, many of which expire in December 
¶2009.  China stated that if there are no announcements to the 
contrary, renewals will be carried out in the same manner as in the 
past.  MOA noted that additional information may also be found on 
their web site.  In response to further prodding about the status of 
pending products, China agreed to provide information after the 
meeting but also said applicants would be provided with official 
responses, including requests for additional information, throughout 
the review process. 
 
BEIJING 00003393  003 OF 005 
 
 
 
Handling of Stacked Events 
-------------------------- 
 
¶12. (SBU) The United States noted the increased use of products 
containing multiple biotech traits (aka stacks) and discussed the 
regulatory challenges they pose.  MOA noted particular interest in 
learning more about products with new traits for drought tolerance, 
nutritional modifications, and insect resistance, among others.  MOA 
stated that it is studying how to best determine the safety of 
stacks.  To this end, MOA is looking at approaches taken by the 
United States and others, as well as consulting with other 
ministries in China and with consumers.  MOA noted that because 
consumers lack understanding about the technology and are worried 
about Bt crops, China would be required to conduct considerable risk 
analysis on stacks to assure the public.  China also indicated 
products would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and noted in 
addition that products containing a large number of stacked events 
could pose consumer concerns. 
 
Navigating the Global Regulatory Process and Building on Experiences 
to Streamline the Regulatory Processes 
 
¶13. (SBU) U.S. and Chinese officials discussed the evolving status 
of each country's biotech industry: China perhaps moving toward 
becoming an exporter of biotech agricultural products and the U.S. 
moving toward becoming an importer; of the new obligations this 
evolution would place on both countries to avoid trade disruptions; 
and the lessons we can learn from each other.  The Chinese were 
non-committal about China's export future. 
 
¶14. (SBU) The United States noted the importance of seeking 
authorizations in important foreign markets for biotech products in 
development, even if exports are not intended, so as to avoid 
possible trade issues.  U.S. officials offered to facilitate 
authorization requests for Chinese products into the U.S. regulatory 
system.   They also offered to provide, informally and regulator-to 
regulator, additional technical information on products under review 
in the United States to facilitate reviews by Chinese authorities, 
once those products officially begin review in China. 
 
¶15. (SBU) MOA acknowledged the importance but complexity of 
streamlining the regulatory review process.  For example, it would 
require making adjustments and changes to existing regulations, 
which would involve considerable coordination within the government. 
 MOA is studying this idea, and agreed to take the conclusions of 
this discussion into account. 
 
Cooperation in International Fora 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶16. (SBU) The United States stressed that the increasing convergence 
of our interests would make it possible and desirable for increased 
cooperation and collaboration in international forums where 
biotechnology policies and regulations are being developed, such as 
the upcoming APEC High Level Policy Dialogue on Agricultural 
Biotechnology (HLPDAB) Steering Group meeting and in discussions 
related to the Biosafety Protocol (BSP). 
 
¶17. (SBU) MOA officials were unfamiliar with the HLPDAB Steering 
Group but agreed to convey our points to the relevant officials. 
Regarding the BSP, MOA briefed the meeting on the status of the 
liability and redress and 18.2a discussions, including the divergent 
objectives of varying Parties, while APHIS briefed on activities 
related to the Road Map Sub-Group of the for Ad Hoc Technical 
Experts Group under the BSP.  MOA said it would analyze the impact 
of the Road Map and agreed to communicate our points to the Ministry 
of Environment.  MOA officials acknowledged the benefit of the U.S. 
and China keeping each other informed on the various activities of 
the BSP.  MOA officials also noted that they are closely following 
international dialogue and work within international organizations, 
specifically mentioning labeling discussions within Codex 
Alimentarius. 
 
BEIJING 00003393  004 OF 005 
 
 
 
¶18. (SBU) The United States closed the discussion by recognizing the 
importance of previous and ongoing collaborative biotech-related 
exchanges between China and the United States exemplified by the 
U.S. Trade and Development Authority (TDA) funded activities, first 
initiated in 2006.  U.S. officials noted that Phase III activities 
started earlier in the week in Beijing and are scheduled to continue 
over the next few years and reviewed upcoming activities.  Officials 
also noted the science policy fellowships being managed by the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture. (Two recently selected Borlaug Scholars 
participated in the BWG discussions.)  MOA noted with appreciation 
the importance these activities have played in training the 
technical and regulatory staff.  MOA made several suggestions to 
upcoming TDA activities that U.S. officials said they would 
consider. 
 
Conclusion of BWG 
----------------- 
 
¶19. (SBU) At the conclusion of the meeting, both sides reaffirmed 
their support for the BWG and looked forward to the next meeting in 
the United States, dates to be determined later.  Both sides 
affirmed their support for increased collaboration on agricultural 
biotechnology and MOA promised to provide a written proposal on 
future collaboration.  The United States noted its hope that China 
would increase its engagement on agricultural biotechnology in 
international fora. 
 
Related Meetings 
----------------- 
 
¶20. (SBU) Members of the U.S. delegation participated in the Trade 
Development Agency Workshop on Combined Events that was held 
September 12-15.  The workshop was organized by Dasun Consulting 
with participating government and industry officials and experts 
from Beijing, other cities in China, the United States, and Canada. 
Based on initial feedback, the workshop was well received, providing 
the technical detail and an exchange of information that MOA 
officials requested. 
 
¶21. (SBU) On September 15, officials and technical experts from the 
United States and China convened the Sixth Meeting of the U.S.-China 
Biotechnology Technical Working Group on Food and Environmental 
Safety (TWG).  Discussion focused on scientific and regulatory 
issues relevant to genetically engineered plants and the foods 
derived from them.  Included in this discussion was an explanation 
of both the U.S. and Chinese approaches to the low level occurrence 
in commerce of unauthorized genetically engineered plants and 
material derived from such plants.  The discussions were very 
informative and open, with the Chinese delegation presenting 
detailed information about their development of Bt rice.  The formal 
TWG meeting was preceded by a field trip to Shanghai to discuss the 
development of transgenic goats, environmental safety assessment of 
biotech products, and database and detection methods for biotech 
products. 
 
Participants 
------------ 
 
¶22. (SBU) Participants and contacts for the BWG included: U.S. 
Delegation: Jim Miller, Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services, USDA; William Westman, Agricultural 
Counselor, Foreign Agricultural Service in Beijing, USDA; Michael 
Schechtman, Biotechnology Coordinator for the Office of the 
Secretary, Agricultural Research Service, USDA; Beverly Simmons, 
Associate Deputy Administrator for Emerging and International 
Programs, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Services, USDA; Ed Porter, Deputy Director, New 
Technologies and Production Methods Division, Foreign Agricultural 
Service, USDA; Dave Heron, Assistant Director, Policy Coordination 
Programs, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Services, USDA; Elizabeth Jones, International Trade 
Specialist, New Technologies and Production Methods Division, 
 
BEIJING 00003393  005 OF 005 
 
 
Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA; Wade Sheppard, Senior Advisor 
for North Asia, Office of Country and Regional Affairs, Foreign 
Agricultural Service, USDA; Joan Hurst, China Desk Officer, Office 
of Country and Regional Affairs, Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA; 
Mark Petry, Agricultural Attache, Foreign Agricultural Service in 
Beijing, USDA; Jason Dietz, Science Policy Analyst, Office of 
Regulations, Policy and Social Services, Center for Food Safety and 
Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and Drug Administration; Chris Wozniak, 
Biotechnology Special Assistant, Office of Pesticide Programs, 
Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Environmental 
Protection Agency; Frederick Thomas, Agricultural Science Officer, 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in Beijing, USDA; Irene 
Chan, Assistant Country Director, U.S. Food and Drug Administration 
in Beijing; and Karen Green, Biotechnologist, Environmental Risk 
Analysis Program, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Services, USDA.  Chinese Delegation:  Niu 
Dun, Vice Minister, Minister of Agriculture (MOA); Jinming Bai, 
Director General, Department of Science and Technology and 
Education; Shi Yanquan, Deputy Director General, Department of 
Science and Technology and Education, MOA; Xie Jianmin, Deputy 
Director General, Department of International Cooperation, MOA; Duan 
Wade, Director General, Center for Science and Technology 
Department, MOA; Wu Kongming, Director and Professor, Institute of 
Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CASS); 
Jia Shirong, Professor, Biotechnology Research Institute, CASS; Li 
Xinhai, Professor, Crop Research Institute, CASS; Huang Kunlun, 
Professor, China Agricultural University; Wang Delu, Department of 
WTO Affairs, Ministry of Commerce; Xu Qiang, Department of 
Supervision on Plant Quarantine, AQSIQ; Wei Zhenglin, Director, 
Department of International Cooperation; Xu Yubo, Project Officer, 
Department of International Cooperation, MOA; Zou Ping, Director, 
Department of Science, Technology and Education, MOA; Shao 
Jiancheng, Deputy Director, Department of Science, Technology and 
Education, MOA; Li Ning, Director, Center for Science, Technology 
Development, MOA; Sun Junli, Project Officer, Department of Science, 
Technology and Education, MOA, and Zhang Wei, Interpreter, Center of 
International Cooperation Service, MOA. 
 
GOLDBERG