BRAZIL: VIEWS ON COALITION AGAINST WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING:

UNCLAS BRASILIA 001722 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS DEPT FOR OES/ETC, OES/STC, E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: SENV KSCA BR SUBJECT: BRAZIL: VIEWS ON COALITION AGAINST WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING: ILLEGAL LOGGING OUT, GENETIC RESOURCES IN ¶1. (U) THIS CABLE IS SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED, IT IS NOT INTENDED FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION. ¶2. (SBU) SUMMARY. Brazilian Ministry of External Relations Environment Division Director Coimbra stressed in an August 27 meeting with ESTH Counselor that Brazil had concerns about the scope of the Coalition Against Wildlife Trafficking, in particular the inclusion of flora, which would include timber. While adamant about wanting to keep "illegal logging" out of CAWT's scope, Coimbra also noted Brazil would like to include genetic resources within the scope. END SUMMARY. ¶3. (SBU) On August 27, ESTH Counselor and ESTH Officer met with Fernando Coimbra, the new Director of Brazil's Ministry of Exterior Relations (MRE) Environment Division, to discuss the Government of Brazil's (GOB) views on the Coalition Against Wildlife Trafficking (CAWT). Coimbra stressed that the GOB supported efforts to combat illegal trafficking in animals. He noted that Brazil is often a victim of such trafficking due to its rich biodiversity. Further, the GOB had attended CAWT meetings in London and Orlando as an observer. ¶4. (SBU) Nonetheless, Coimbra identified two areas of concern regarding CAWT's "scope": "illegal logging" and genetic resources. He added that who spoke for CAWT seemed an open question. The GOB had heard differing views from the United States, the Europeans, and Australia about CAWT's scope and purpose. He wanted to know how to get a definitive answer on CAWT's scope. He also sought clarification on how CAWT's decision-making process works. ¶5. (SBU) First, Coimbra expressed serious reservations about including flora within the scope of CAWT's work, in particular timber. He commented that "illegal logging" was a "non-starter" for the GOB. He complained that at the CAWT meeting in Orlando there had been a side-event on "illegal logging." (NOTE: Coimbra explained that from the GOB perspective, "illegal logging" is a domestic concept defined by national law, and not from outside. Of course, when timber that has been illegally harvested is exported from Brazilian territory in contravention to CITES then it could be considered "illegal." While the international community should not be characterizing Brazilian logging as legal or illegal, Coimbra commented, it certainly could help Brazil through capacity-building and strengthening institutions. END NOTE.) ¶6. (SBU) Second, after discussing concerns about flora and "illegal logging," Coimbra raised the GOB's interest in including genetic resources within the scope of CAWT's work. When asked whether the GOB insisted on including genetic resources within CAWT's scope, he demurred. ¶7. (SBU) Further, Coimbra noted that the GOB works with others in Brazil to combat wildlife trafficking. He mentioned that the GOB collaborates with the Brazilian NGO Renctas in this area. The Executive Coordinator of Renctas, Raulff Ferraz Lima, met with ESTH Counselor and confirmed that the GOB collaborates with Renctas in anti-trafficking campaign, and further that the GOB had interest in joining CAWT but it would have to work through its reservations beforehand. ¶8. (SBU) Coimbra stated that the GOB did not want to diminish or weaken CITES. He expressed some hesitation that CAWT could in some way be undermining CITES. ¶9. (SBU) COMMENT. Absent convincing assurances about keeping "illegal logging" outside of CAWT's scope, the GOB appears unlikely to upgrade its participation from observer to member. This task may have become more difficult if, as Coimbra indicates, other CAWT members are declaring that CAWT has such an expansive scope of work. END COMMENT. SOBEL