This document describes the differing views regarding safeguards. The Canadians strongly supported the former, âfull scope safeguardsâ (their terminology, which caught on), which the French saw as âtantamount to imposing NPT obligationsâ--a reference to the Treatyâs Article III--which they would not accept. Arguing that full-scope safeguards was âalien to [their] philosophy,â the French suggested that a âtraditional interpretation of the contamination principle (i.e., requiring safeguards on any materials produced in exported facilities),â would make it possible to achieve âthe practical equivalentâ of the Canadian proposal.