Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 04ANKARA5980 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 04ANKARA5980 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Ankara |
| Created: | 2004-10-21 11:46:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED |
| Tags: | ETRD EAGR KPAO TU |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available. 211146Z Oct 04
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 005980 SIPDIS STATE FOR EB/TPP/ABT/BTT DEBORA MALAC, JACK BOBO USDA FOR FAS/OA/BIG PAUL SPENCER USDA FOR FAS/ICD SEAN CARMEDY E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ETRD, EAGR, KPAO, TU SUBJECT: Turkey's New Bio-safety Law Ref: Ankara 00801 Sensitive but Unclassified. Not for Internet Distribution. 1. (SBU) SUMMARY. AFTER YEARS OF DELAYS, TURKEY IS POISED TO PASS A FAR-REACHING BIO-SAFETY LAW, WHICH COULD RESTRICT ALL IMPORTS AND PRODUCTION OF BIO- ENGINEERED PRODUCTS, INCLUDING AGRICULTURAL AND POSSIBLY PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS. THE FRAMEWORK LAW IS QUITE GENERAL AND, GIVEN PAST EXPERIENCE, THE REGULATIONS, WHICH MUST STILL BE WRITTEN, COULD BE MORE RESTRICTIVE. THE TIME FRAME FOR PASSAGE IS THREE TO SIX MONTHS, ACCORDING TO GOT SOURCES. THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALL ASSOCIATED REGULATIONS USUALLY TAKES ONE YEAR. IN THE MEANTIME, BIOTECHNOLOGY HAS DRAWN CONSIDERABLE NEGATIVE COVERAGE IN THE MEDIA. DESPITE HAVING YEARS TO PREPARE, THE AFFECTED INDUSTRIES ARE UNPREPARED TO HANDLE THE PUBLICITY AND MAY ALSO BE LATE TO ACT IN LOBBYING THE GOVERNMENT FOR MORE RATIONAL LEGISLATION. MANY COMPANIES AND INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS HAVE ASKED THE EMBASSY NOT TO BE VISIBLY INVOLVED, SINCE THERE IS A FEAR THAT THE U.S. PERSPECTIVE - AND EXPERTISE - WILL BE PERCEIVED AS BEING BIASED. PLEASE SEE PARA 9. FOR POST REQUEST FOR GUIDANCE ON OUTREACH ISSUES. ------------ THE PLAYERS ------------ 2. (SBU) THE DOMESTIC STAKEHOLDERS IN THIS PROCESS CAN BE PUT INTO THREE BROAD GROUPS; THE ANTI-GMO COALITION, LED BY THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (CPA), THE TURKISH FOOD MANUFACTURERS PLATFORM, AND THE GOT. A COMMON PERCEPTION AMONGST ALL PARTIES IS THAT THERE IS `RISK' ASSOCIATED WITH GMOS, DESPITE THE OVERWHELMING LACK OF EVIDENCE TO THAT EFFECT. 3. (SBU) THE CPA HAS LAUNCHED AN AGGRESSIVE ANTI-GMO CAMPAIGN IN THE PRESS, WHICH CONSISTS OF INFLAMMATORY ACCUSATIONS AND FALSE STATEMENTS, INTENDED TO SCARE CONSUMERS AND ENLARGE THEIR BASE. GMO FOODS ARE DESCRIBED AS HARMFUL SUBSTANCES THAT WILL POISON CONSUMERS, OR AT A MINIMUM, GIVE THEM CANCER. TURKISH FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING COMPANIES HAVE BEEN SLOW TO REACT TO THESE CLAIMS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF POTENTIALLY RESTRICTIVE LEGISLATION. RECENTLY, HOWEVER, THEY FORMED THE TURKISH FOOD MANUFACTURERS PLATFORM TO PROVIDE A FORUM TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE WITH GOT REGULATORS. THIS PLATFORM WILL IDEALLY PUT GOVERNMENT AND AFFECTED INDUSTRY MEMBERS TOGETHER. AS IT MATURES, THIS ASSOCIATION WILL ALSO NEED TO ASSERT ITS VOICE IN THE TURKISH PRESS TO COUNTER NEGATIVE AND FALSE INFORMATION RELATED TO BIOTECHNOLOGY. THE TURKISH FOOD MANUFACTURERS PLATFORM IS ORGANIZING A SEMINAR IN EARLY DECEMBER THAT WILL FEATURE KEY EUROPEAN SPEAKERS IN AN ATTEMPT TO INFUSE SOME `SCIENTIFIC' AND `OBJECTIVE' PERSPECTIVES INTO THE DEBATE. 4. (SBU) THE GOT AND ITS BUREAUCRATS ARE PUT IN A VERY DIFFICULT POSITION BY ACTIONS OF THE CPA. GOT BUREAUCRATS ARE ALREADY SUBJECT TO A HIGH DEGREE OF PERSONAL LIABILITY ON THE JOB, AND MOST ARE UNWILLING TO TAKE A PROGRESSIVE STANCE ON ANY ISSUE. IN PUBLIC, GOT OFFICIALS APPEAR UNBIASED, HOWEVER, KEY OFFICIALS WHO ARE AGAINST THE TECHNOLOGY WITHIN THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTUE ARE CURRENTLY GUIDING POLICY. FURTHER, THE LACK OF INFORMATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF THIS ISSUE IN THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT IS QUITE STARTLING. ONE ACADEMIC WHO IS SERVING ON THE LAW'S DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW COMMITTEE CONFUSED BIOTECHNOLOGY WITH BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS AND WANTED TO IMPOSE A DEATH SENTENCE ON THE ILLEGAL USE OF GMOS. NOTE: ACCORDING TO A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE TURKISH SEED ASSOCIATION, THE ACADEMIC WAS BASING HIS POSITION ON A LAW FROM TAJIKISTAN. END NOTE. DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE EU RECENTLY SIGNALED ITS INTENTION TO BEGIN NEGOTIATIONS WITH TURKEY FOR ITS MEMBERSHIP IN THE EUROPEAN UNION, MOST TURKISH AGRICULTURE OFFICIALS BELIEVE THAT THE EU BANS ALL PRODUCTION AND IMPORTS OF GMO PRODUCTS. --------------- THE LEGISLATION --------------- 5. (SBU) WHILE MOST AGREE THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR TURKEY TO DEVELOP LAWS TO REGULATE THE USE AND PRODUCTION OF BIOTECH PRODUCTS, ALL AGREE THAT THE CURRENT DRAFT LAW MISSES THE TARGET. IF THE LAW WERE PASSED TODAY AS WRITTEN, THERE WOULD BE A DE FACTO BAN ON ALL AGRICULTURE PRODUCTS DEVELOPED THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGY. TO BE CERTAIN, FEW EXPORTERS WOULD RISK SHIPPING TO THIS MARKET. THE UNITED STATES EXPORTS APPROXIMATELY $600 MILLION IN CORN, SOYBEANS PRODUCTS AND COTTON TO TURKEY ANNUALLY. THE LAW DOES ALLOW FOR IMPORTS BASED ON `PERMISSION' ASSUMING A NUMBER OF CONDITIONS ARE MET. RISK ASSESSMENTS CAN BE ORDERED, AND THE COST OF TESTING SHOULD BE BORN BY THE COMPANY. ALSO OF NOTE, SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS CAN BE GROUNDS FOR REFUSAL. QUOTE: SOCIO-ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS ARE CARRIED OUT FOR EACH APPLICATION. THE OUTCOME OF A CERTAIN APPLICATION DOES NOT SET PRECEDENCE FOR ANOTHER ONE. END QUOTE. NOTE. THESE ARE SINGLE SHIPMENT IMPORT APPLICATIONS - NOT PRODUCT APPLICATIONS. MOREOVER, THE LAW CONTAINS A CIVIL AND PENAL RESPONSIBILITY SECTION WHICH STATES THAT THERE IS "UNCONDITIONAL LIABILITY" FOR THE IMPORTER AND PRODUCER SHOULD ANY HARM APPEAR - TO CONSUMERS OR THE ENVIRONMENT - WITHIN 30 YEARS. ------------------------- THE CURRENT MARKET IMPACT ------------------------- 6. (SBU) ALTHOUGH THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO RESTRICTIONS ON THE IMPORT OR USE OF BIO-ENGINEERED PRODUCTS, SOME COMPANIES ARE REQUESTING NON-GMO INGREDIENTS. COKE AND PEPSI REQUIRE ALL CORN-SWEETENERS FOR PRODUCTION OF SOFT DRINKS TO COME FROM NON-GMO CORN. LOCAL TURKISH AGRICULTURE INDUSTRIES AND ASSOCIATIONS ARE RELUCTANT TO SPEAK OUT DIRECTLY IN FAVOR OF BIOTECH PRODUCTS FOR FEAR OF NEGATIVE REACTION. RECENTLY, A TURKISH POULTRY COMPANY WHOSE STOCKS ARE TRADED IN THE TURKISH STOCK MARKET WAS FORCED TO DEFEND THE SAFETY OF ITS PRODUCTS - DIRECTLY TO THE STOCK EXCHANGE - BECAUSE THEY USE BIOTECH CORN AND SOY IN THEIR FEED. FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL COMPANIES ARE FEARFUL OF BEING ASSOCIATED WITH THE ISSUE, AND LACK A COMMON VOICE TO DISPEL FALSE AND MISLEADING INFORMATION IN THE PRESS. 7. (SBU) ALTHOUGH CURRENTLY THERE IS A BAN ON GROWING GMO PRODUCTS HERE IN TURKEY, SOURCES INDICATE THAT ABOUT 2000 HECTARES OF GMO COTTON IS BEING GROWN IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE COUNTRY. THE CPA ALSO ANNOUNCED IN A RECENT SEMINAR THAT IT HAS TESTED LOCALLY PRODUCED TOMATOES AND POTATOES AND DISCOVERED GMO CONTENT. -------------------------- THE NEED FOR MORE OUTREACH -------------------------- 8. (SBU) THE NEXT SIX MONTHS ARE EXPECTED TO DEFINE THE PLAYING FIELD FOR AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY IN TURKEY. ONE THING IS CERTAIN - THE INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT ARE BOTH UNINFORMED AND UNSURE HOW TO MANAGE AN ISSUE THAT CONTINUES TO BE SUBJECT TO MISINFORMATION IN THE PRESS. THE CPA AND THEIR ANTI-GMO CAMPAIGN ARE CURRENTLY WINNING THE BATTLE FOR CONSUMERS. 9. (SBU) PER REFTEL, GOING BACK SEVERAL YEARS, FAS/ANKARA HAS ARRANGED SEVERAL SEMINARS ON BIOTECHNOLOGY AS WELL AS SEVERAL TRIPS TO THE UNITED STATES UNDER THE COCHRAN FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM TO INTRODUCE REGULATORS TO U.S. REGULATORY AGENCIES AND RESEARCH FACILITIES WORKING ON THIS ISSUE. IN ADDITION, EMBASSY HAS SENT SEVERAL TURKISH OFFICIALS ON ITS INTERNATIONAL VISITOR PROGRAM. U.S GRAINS COUNCIL ALSO INCLUDES TURKISH PARTICIPANTS IN ITS DOMESTIC PROGRAMS. IN EACH CASE, PARTICIPANTS HAVE RETURNED TO TURKEY OVERWHELMINGLY IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTINUED USE OF AGRICULTURE BIOTECHNOLOGY. THEY HAVE ALSO STRONGLY ADVOCATED THE CONTINUATION AND EXPANSION OF SUCH EXCHANGE PROGRAMS. HOWEVER, ONE TURKISH OFFICIAL INDICATED THAT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS HAD BEEN TOLD NOT TO SPEAK OUT PUBLICLY IN FAVOR OF GMOS. FOR THIS REASON, THERE IS A NEED TO EXPAND THE RANGE OF PARTICIPANTS IN THESE PROGRAMS TO UNIVERSITIES, JOURNALISTS, FOOD AND FEED ASSOCIATIONS, AND FARMERS. FOR EXAMPLE, THE TURKISH FOOD MANUFACTURERS PLATFORM HAS EXPRESSED INTEREST IN SENDING A GROUP OF JOURNALISTS TO THE UNITED STATES TO ENLARGE THEIR EXPOSURE TO THIS ISSUE. POST REQUESTS CONTINUED SUPPORT FOR COCHRAN AND IV EXCHANGE PROGRAMS, AS WELL AS OTHER PROGRAMS TO INCREASE EXPOSURE OF THESE ISSUES TO A BROADER AUDIENCE. POST ALSO REQUESTS U.S. AND EU SPEAKER RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SEMINARS THAT ARE ORGANIZED IN TURKEY. EDELMAN
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04