LAUNCH OF HAITIAN NATIONAL DIALOGUE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PORT AU PRINCE 001039

SIPDIS

STATE ALSO FOR USOAS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL PGOV HA
SUBJECT: LAUNCH OF HAITIAN NATIONAL DIALOGUE

REF: A. PAP 966


B. PAP 446


1. (SBU) Summary: On April 7, Interim President Alexandre
formally launched the National Dialogue process. A
preparatory committee will, within sixty days, publicize the
national dialogue, help the Presidency choose a technical
committee and recommend names for a 30-person steering
committee. The goal is to create an atmosphere conducive to
holding elections, draft a development strategy and
strengthen good governance. Political leaders said it was
necessary to come together for the future of the nation, but
despite efforts by the Government, Lavalas participation in
the National Dialogue is uncertain, threatening its value.
End Summary.

President Launches National Dialogue
--------------


2. (U) The much-anticipated launching of Haiti's National
Dialogue took place on April 7 (the anniversary of the death
of founding father Toussaint Louverture) at a well-attended
event held at the National Palace. Political and civil
society leaders, the Cabinet, and the diplomatic and
international community attended, despite the short notice.
President Alexandre told the audience he felt national
dialogue was of such importance that he had skipped attending
Pope John Paul II's funeral. Alexandre said that the National
Dialogue was meant to overcome the divisions and violence
endemic in Haitian culture.


3. (U) The formal ceremony came on the heels of the
Presidential Decree issued April 6 outlining a national
dialogue structure that closely tracks with earlier Embassy
reporting (ref B). A yet-to-be named 12-person preparatory
committee will, within sixty days, publicize the national
dialogue, help the Presidency choose a technical committee
and recommend names for a 30-person steering committee with
President Alexandre as the honorary chair. The short term
goal is to create an atmosphere conducive to holding
elections, while the medium- to long-term goal is to draft a
development strategy and strengthen good governance. The
concrete result of the National Dialogue, as stated in the
Presidential Decree, is to create a "Pact to Live Together."

Committees Attempt to Be All-Inclusive
--------------


4. (U) Although the decree did not identify any specific
participants, it specified that the 12-member independent
preparatory committee will have representatives from the
religious sectors (Catholic, Protestant and voodoo),
political parties, civil society (including a women's group
representative),and from the Executive. The 30-member
steering committee will have a representative from each of
Haiti's ten Departments, three from the Diaspora (North
America, Latin America/Caribbean, and Europe/elsewhere),
civil society (rural, women, university, religious and
youth),political parties, a representative each from the
Council of Eminent Persons (Sages) and judiciary, and two
from the Executive. Interestingly, Micha Gaillard, who did
much of the ground work with his "reflection group" on
national dialogue, told PolOff April 12 that he had not been
asked to be on the preparatory committee, but that he may be
on the steering committee.

But Lavalas Might Not Participate
--------------


5. (SBU) Two sectors have already come out against
participation: Fanmi Lavalas and the group around Turneb
Delpe advocating a "National Sovereign Conference." The
sticking point for both is Article 3 of the decree, which
states that the national dialogue cannot modify the current
Interim Government, the constitution, the elections timetable
or the April 4, 2004 Transition Accord.

6, Of the two, Lavalas is by far the more important. The
President's office had invited Lavalas moderate leader Yvon
Feuille to participate in the preparatory committee (ref A).
Feuille first agreed to be a member, but then refused after
reading the decree. He publicly announced his objections to
Article 3 on the radio. Other Lavalas leaders have echoed
this line, although there has been no formal FL statement.


7. (SBU) Lavalas members Gerard Gilles and Rudy Heriveaux
told Ambassador April 13 that they objected to Article 3
because a change of government was essential to create a
proper climate for elections, restore neutrality to the
government, and show Lavalas partisans that national dialogue
would be inclusive. Jean-Claude Desgranges told the
Ambassador (in the company of Presidential Chief of Staff
Brunache and SRSG Valdes),that Article 3 was a "provocation"
designed to humiliate Lavalas. Ambassador firmly stated the
USG could not support changing the IGOH nor support Lavalas'
reasons for boycotting national dialogue. He urged the
Lavalas leaders not to make the same mistake they had made
last year when the party declined a seat on the Provisional
Electoral Council (CEP); it would be excluding itself and
could not expect our support. Valdes recalled the history of
the anti-Pinochet opposition movement in Chile in the 1980's,
which had accepted the Pinochet-written constitution and
electoral rules in order to get to an election (which the
opposition won). Desgranges said he would "reflect on" the
Ambassador's suggestion to find a way to join the National
Dialogue while perhaps "reserving" on Article 3.


8. (SBU) In a separate conversation, Gilles told PolCounselor
that discussions were still going on inside Lavalas, implying
that the initial rejection was not necessarily final. Palace
National Dialogue Coordinator Henri D'Orleans told us that
talks with Feuille were still occurring, though he insisted
that the decree would not be rewritten.

National Sovereign Conference or bust
--------------


9. (SBU) Turneb Delpe of the National Democratic
Progressive Party (PNDPH),who has long called for a
"National Sovereign Conference" to shape Haiti's future, had
previously called for changes to the constitution and argued
that a dialogue could not be held simultaneously with
elections. PolOff met April 12 with PNDPH's J.W. Timothee,
who serves as "Executive Secretary of the National Sovereign
Conference movement. As in the case of Feuille, Timothee
told PolOff he had been invited by the Palace's D'Orleans to
be on the preparatory committee but refused after reading the
Presidential Decree. Timothee took umbrage with Article 3
and said that without amending the decree, the national
dialogue was "bound to fail." He further criticized what he
considered the limited scope of the process.

Comment
--------------


10. (SBU) National Dialogue can go forward without the
relatively small national sovereign conference movement, but
a process that does not include Lavalas offers little value
given how divided the country is over the movement's legacy
and future role. We frankly do not have much patience with
the Lavalas objection. Although Lavalas leaders argue
principle, we see it much more as reflecting the continuing
inability or unwillingness of those who say they want to
participate in the process to put their words into action.
Thus we are pressing them hard to swallow their objections
and walk through the door that is open to them. The IGOH is
not likely to change the decree, but the continuing
discussions inside Lavalas and between the Palace and Lavalas
give us some room to work. We will continue to press both
the IGOH and Lavalas to find a way to ensure that Lavalas is
included in the national dialogue process.

FOLEY