PDAS SHAPIRO/AMBASSADOR MEET WITH HUMALA

C O N F I D E N T I A L LIMA 002017 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/19/2016 TAGS: PGOV PINR PHUM PE SUBJECT: PDAS SHAPIRO/AMBASSADOR MEET WITH HUMALA Classified By: Ambassador Curt Struble for Reasons 1.4 (b,d) ¶1. (U) Visit.. id: 65100 date: 5/23/2006 13:25 refid: 06LIMA2017 origin: Embassy Lima classification: CONFIDENTIAL destination: header: VZCZCXYZ0000 RR RUEHWEB DE RUEHPE #2017/01 1431325 ZNY CCCCC ZZH R 231325Z MAY 06 FM AMEMBASSY LIMA TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0593 INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 3412 RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 6754 RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 9468 RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ MAY QUITO 0353 RUEHSG/AMEMBASSY SANTIAGO 0536 RUMIAAA/CDR USCINCSO MIAMI FL RUEHC/DEPT OF LABOR WASHINGTON DC -------------- header ends -------------- C O N F I D E N T I A L LIMA 002017 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/19/2016 TAGS: PGOV PINR PHUM PE SUBJECT: PDAS SHAPIRO/AMBASSADOR MEET WITH HUMALA Classified By: Ambassador Curt Struble for Reasons 1.4 (b,d) ¶1. (U) Visiting PDAS Charles Shapiro and Ambassador Struble met for one hour on May 17 with nationalist Presidential candidate Ollanta Humala. The latter was accompanied for part of the meeting by his candidate for First Vice President, Gonzalo Garcia. ¶2. (C) Humala, who assumed a low key and friendly manner throughout, opened by saying that he wanted to have good relations with the United States, which he considered an important partner on issues like coca and biodiversity. Saying he would speak frankly, Humala voiced concern about the revelation last week that his U.S. visa had been revoked -- both because it was news to him and because the timing appeared aimed at influencing the election. Ambassador Struble reminded the candidate that one of his spokesmen had publicized the revocation -- something that the Embassy would not have done. The Ambassador gave Humala a copy of the revocation certificate and explained that we had only recently become aware Humala did not previously receive the notice, but reminded the candidate that the Embassy had repeatedly tried to speak with him about his visa since learning this January that he might travel to the U.S. The Ambassador explained that the revocation was prudenial based upon statements from the time indicating that Ollanta was involved with his brother,s uprising in Andahuayas during which several policemen were killed. Simply declaring that the old visa was valid again, as Humala had insisted, was not possible; U.S. immigration systems show the old visa as void and a new one would have to be applied for. Humala observed that he had never been charged in connection with the Andahuayas uprising and said that he had only called upon Peruvians to employ their constitutional right to rebel. While showing no rancor, he said that he did not plan to apply for another visa. ¶3. (C) Ambassador Shapiro said that the United States intended to work constructively with whoever was elected President in Peru. The key issue for us was not whether governments were of the left or the right but rather poverty. Peru appeared close to making an economic and development breakthrough; the U.S. sought to promote inclusion of the poor in economic opportunity. Humala responded that he likewise did not believe in left/right axis, agreeing the problem was the poor; he was not part of any bloc, was not anti-Chilean and was not anti-American. Shifting to new ground, he said he did believe in the need to revise Peru,s anti-narcotics approach. Peru should cut off diversion of precursor chemicals, give priority to interdiction, and resume its aerial interdiction program. ¶4. (C) Ambassador Struble said that the principal concern of the United States was that Peru's anti-narcotics policy be viable, meaning that it result in reduced illegal drug production rather than increases, despite great effort and expenditure. The Ambassador noted that the situation Peru faced with coca was not static. Colombia recognized that coca fed violence in the country and was committed on national security grounds to eradicate all it could. That was driving up prices in Peru and Bolivia, and cultivation was increasing. Ambassador Shapiro observed that experience showed voluntary eradication did not work without the incentive of a credible forced eradication program. Humala said that he would permit forced eradication if alternative development were offered but refused. He added the significant condition that the alternative products had to offer farmers a level of income similar to coca. Humala repeated the "zero cocaine, not zero coca" slogan his campaign has borrowed from Bolivia,s Morales. Coca should be part of the agricultural agenda, he said, saying he would move the issue from the Ministry of Interior/police to the Ministry of Agriculture. (Comment: Humala's understanding of narcotics trafficking in Peru is very shallow. He was clearly unaware that only a small portion of cocaine now moves out of Peru by air and that no licit product grown in the coca zone commands prices as high as what narcotraffickers will pay for coca. He did not give the impression, however, of someone whose policy towards the coca/cocaine problem would be altered by exposure to the facts.) ¶5. (C) Humala next reiterated his concern that the United States was intervening in Peru,s election. Apart from the visa issue, he cited the Ambassador's April meetings with Lourdes Flores and her campaign team. Ambassador Struble replied that he had simultaneously requested meetings with Flores and Humala after the first round of elections; Flores accepted while Humala had not. Such meetings were customary diplomatic practice, Struble said, noting that Humala had himself met with a number of foreign Ambassadors. The alleged meeting with Flores' campaign team would likewise have been quite normal, the Ambassador observed, but in fact that was not what happened * it was a lunch with an old Peruvian friend and his colleagues, one of whom was a prominent advisor to Flores. Humala said he wanted all foreign countries -- Venezuela, Argentina and the U.S. -- to avoid actions that could be deemed interference in Peru,s electoral process. Ambassador Struble replied, "We have our first agreement * we want the same thing," holding out his hand to shake on it -- a hand Humala accepted. ¶6. (C) Asked for his views on Colombia, Humala said that he recognized the legitimacy of President Uribe and did not want the Colombian conflict to enter Peru. He was ready to cooperate with the United States on the matter though he would always be respectful of Colombian sovereignty. Humala said that he would reinforce the border; he did not want Peru to be an R&R zone or logistics base for the FARC. ¶7. (C) Humala asked whether the US Embassy had a financial relationship with Human Social Capital (CHS),a consulting firm headed up by former Minister of Interior Rospigliosi. The Ambassador said that the Embassy valued the analyses produced by CHS and was among its clients. Anticipating the reason for Humala,s question (Rospigliosi is also a columnist and has been very critical of Humala),the Ambassador noted that questions sometimes arise as to whether groups that receive funds from the US Embassy are expressing our viewpoint. In fact, our assistance partners receive funds from various sources and usually have broader agendas than the issue on which we work together. NGOs that receive US funding have at times publicly criticized U.S. policies. Humala asked whether he could have a list of NGOs the Embassy worked with. The Ambassador said that the information was available on the web. When Humala reiterated that he would like a list, the Ambassador said he would send something over. ¶8. (C) Gonzalo Garcia, in the only intervention he made during the meeting, said he would like to organize a meeting between Humala,s economic team and Embassy counterparts. The Ambassador agreed and promised to follow up. ¶9. (C) Concluding the meeting, Humala said that his speech struck many as radical, but that was just because he reveals how many Peruvians see their situation. He spoke of the concern many Peruvians have that they do not benefit from their natural resources, citing the Camisea project, and that they have been disadvantaged by corrupt deals, citing Yanacocha. He recalled that the U.S. Congress had recently blocked an Arab-owned firm from controlling U.S. ports and said that his concerns about Chilean control of Peruvian ports was similar -- not directed against Chile, but by a concern that a Chilean operator of Peruvian ports would not work hard to compete against facilities in Chile. -------------- COMMENT: -------------- ¶10. (C) This meeting was positive in that it opened a line of communication and defanged the visa issue, which has now passed entirely from view. It served to confirm, however, what we have heard from some of the people within Humala,s organization who are friendlier towards us -- the candidate looks at us through a very paranoid lens. END COMMENT. STRUBLE =======================CABLE ENDS============================ .