US embassy cable - 03THEHAGUE1848

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.

NETHERLANDS REPLY ON DIAMOND-LIKE CARBON TECHNOLOGIES

Identifier: 03THEHAGUE1848
Wikileaks: View 03THEHAGUE1848 at Wikileaks.org
Origin: Embassy The Hague
Created: 2003-07-22 10:59:00
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Tags: ETTC NL PARM ECON
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.

221059Z Jul 03
UNCLAS THE HAGUE 001848 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
NP/ECNP FOR C.KESSLER AND R.GAREL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETTC, NL, PARM, ECON 
SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS REPLY ON DIAMOND-LIKE CARBON 
TECHNOLOGIES 
 
REF: STATE 183590 
 
On July 18, Dutch Wassenaar Arrangement delegate Theo Regier 
sent EconOff the attached note in response to ref demarche on 
diamond-like carbon technologies: 
 
BEGIN TEXT 
 
Wassenaar Arrangement Controls for Diamond Like Carbon 
Technologies -- Reply by the Netherlands to the United States 
Note received through the US Embassy in The Hague on 1 July 
2003: 
 
The Netherlands thanks the United States for raising the 
issue of continuing controls over diamond like carbon (DLC) 
technologies.  We trust that the information provided below 
adequately clarifies the position taken by The Netherlands in 
the Expert Group (EG) of the Wassenaar Arrangement on this 
issue. 
 
When the US proposal on DLC controls was discussed at the 
April 2003 meeting of the EG, the Netherlands asked for 
"study time" and stated that an extension of the validity 
would be an option.  This position has been clearly reflected 
in the report of the Chairman WA-EG(03)CHAIR009.  This does 
not necessarily imply that we advocate lifting controls of 
DLC technology by letting the validity note expire.  Asking 
for "study time" on complex issues is a normal procedure 
within the List Review process which is used by all WA 
Participating States, including the US. 
 
We have since posed several technical questions to the US 
Delegation to the EG, particularly on the use of DLC coating 
technology in Beryllium alloys.  This unleashed a discussion 
that is still ongoing.  Our experts claim that DLC coating on 
Beryllium has so far only been used for military goods.  This 
would mean that DLC coating technology on Beryllium should be 
controlled under ML22 of the Munitions List, together with 
other military technologies.  On the other hand, DLC coating 
on Beryllium-alloys (Note:  "alloys" bolded in original text. 
 End Note.) is widely used in civilian applications, e.g. in 
the field of mould production for die-casting and injection 
molding of plastics and other synthetic materials.  Therefore 
we would like an extension of the exclusion note in this 
particular field. 
 
The intent is to discuss the issue of DLC coating during the 
intercessional expert meeting in London in late July 2003, as 
organized by the UK. 
 
The Netherlands is confident that mutually acceptable 
conclusion can be reached. 
 
END TEXT 
 
RUSSEL 

Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04