HUMALA CAMPAIGN ALLEGES U.S. SUPPORTS GARCIA AND

C O N F I D E N T I A L LIMA 001807 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/09/2016 TAGS: PGOV PINR PHUM PE SUBJECT: HUMALA CAMPAIGN ALLEGES U.S. SUPPORTS GARCIA AND BEHIND ATTEMPTS TO UNDERCUT THE UPP CANDIDATE REF: A. LIMA 1681 ¶B. 05 LIMA 0139 ¶C. 05 LIMA 0093 ¶D. 05 LIMA 0012 -------------- Summary: -------------- ¶1. (C) Battered by bad publicity resulting from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez' heavy-handed attempts to tilt the Peruvian election toward Union por el Peru (UPP) candidate Ollanta Humala (Ref A),the Humala campaign has responded with a series of allegations that the U.S.G. supports Alan Garcia and is seeking to undercut Humala. The most recent incident involves claims that leave the mistaken impression that the U.S. recently denied candidate Humala a visa, when, in fact, his visa was prudentially revoked by the Department over a year ago as a result of his suspected involvement in the coup attempt his brother led in Andahuaylas (Refs B-D). The Humala campaign is playing fast and loose with the facts in an effor to make the U.S., rather than Chavez, the bogeyman. End Summary. -------------- Nadine Humala Takes the Lead -------------- ¶2. (U) Over the weekend, candidate Ollanta Humala's wife and close political advisor, Nadine Humala, denied that her husband was a tool of Hugo Chavez. In a radio interview, she asserted that the real "puppet" in the campaign was Alan Garcia, whom she connected with the CIA. ¶3. (U) Former Humala campaign spokesperson and UPP Congressman-elect Daniel Abugattas alleged on 5/8 that the strategy of linking Ollanta Humala to Hugo Chavez was "created by the U.S. Embassy." Abugattas argued that Garcia had been coached to provoke Chavez, who then responded, creating the "erroneous" impression that Chavez was the aggressor. ¶4. (U) Abugattas also denied that Chavez was harming the Andean Community (CAN) by leaving the CAN. Instead, he argued, Colombia, Peru and Ecuador had broken with the CAN by negotiating free trade agreements with the United States, putting all CAN industries and domestic markets at risk. Abugattas characterized the FTA as "a treaty of aggression" by the U.S. that would subordinate the Peruvian constitution and Peruvian law to its dictates. -------------- -- Former Truth Commissioner on Humala's U.S. Visa -------------- -- ¶5. (U) The latest attempt to pull the U.S. into the campaign came on the morning of 5/9 when former Truth and Reconciliation Commission Member Carlos Tapia, a recent convert to Ollanta's campaign, told a radio interviewer that the United States had "denied" Ollanta Humala "an entry visa" to go to the United States for procedural reasons, but that the real motivations were human rights accusations against Humala and his alleged involvement in the coup attempt launched by his brother in Andahuaylas on 1/1/05 (Refs B-D). Tapia also said the visa denial meant Humala could not meet with human rights groups in the U.S. ¶6. (C) In his public comments, Tapia twisted the facts of Ollanta's case. In reality, the U.S. did prudentially revoke Humala's visa in January 2005 when Humala was still a Military Attache in Seoul, South Korea for possible involvement in his brother's rebellion in Andahuaylas. The Ambassador and other Emboffs have repeatedly told members of Humala's team (including Tapia) that if the candidate wanted to travel to the U.S., he should apply for a visa well in advance, since his alleged involvement in in the 2005 Andahuaylas uprising could lengthen the time necessary to process his case. We have not/not received a visa request from Humala since his visa was prudentially revoked. ¶7. (C) Note: Poloff briefed Tapia two weeks ago, one of several such Embassy messages to reps in Humala's campaign, on our readiness to facilitate a visa application by Humala. Poloff received a somewhat incoherent call from Tapia on the morning of 5/9, before news of the radio interview broke. Tapia told Poloff that he had not been aware of Ollanta's previously losing his visa (a topic Poloff had not discussed with Tapia) and seemed to complain that the Humala campaign did not trust him for his connection with Poloff. Later in the day, Poloff received a call from Reuters news agency. The Reuters official stated that Tapia had recommended Poloff as a definitive source on Humala's visa. Poloff referred Rueters to the Embassy's Press Attache. End Note. ¶8. (U) Tapia is a recognized expert on Shining Path and was recently working for an NGO that was helping the Toledo Government develop a plan for reparations. Two weeks ago, he shocked a number of his colleagues when he publicly endorsed Ollanta Humala. He has since been forced to leave the Catholic University's Human Rights Institute (IDEPUC). Tapia is something of a maverick and is a friend of Humala's first Vice Presidential candidate Gonzalo Garcia. Tapia recently told Poloff that he had decided to back Humala because the latter represented the best option for reviving Peru's fractured political left. End Note. -------------- Embassy Press Statement -------------- ¶9. (U) The Embassy issued a press statement during the afternoon of 5/9 clarifying the facts behind the revocation of Humala's visa. It reads: "In January 2005, the Department of State revoked Ollanta Humala's' visa pursuant to requirements of U.S. law based upon information that indicated possible ineligibility for admission to the United States. On April 28, 2006, the U.S. Embassy in Lima learned that Mr. Humala might be planning a private visit to the United States. The Ambassador advised a member of Mr. Humala's team responsible for international liaison that Mr. Humala's visa had been revoked and offered facilitative assistance should he wish to apply for a new visa." -------------- Comment: -------------- ¶10. (C) The Humala campaign was thrown off its stride by the popular blowback to Venezuelan President Chavez' heavy-handed intervention in Peru's politics (Ref A). Now, the campaign is attempting to tar Alan Garcia with a similar brush vis-a-vis the U.S. The Humalistas' strategy all along has been to portray their candidate as the victim of an outside conspiracy, but this line seems to be wearing thin with the electorate. STRUBLE