CUBA DETAINS SOME DIPLOMATIC POUCHES

C O N F I D E N T I A L HAVANA 001005 SIPDIS SIPDIS FOR WHA/CCA FOR WHA/EX FOR OFM FOR OIG FOR A/LM E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/24/2017 TAGS: AMGT ATRN CU SUBJECT: CUBA DETAINS SOME DIPLOMATIC POUCHES Classified By: COM Michael E. Parmly for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUEST: For the second time in a month, the Cuban government detained unclassified pouches destined for USINT Havana. Cuban officials claimed that the contents of these rejected pouches may violate the Vienna Convention by including items for personal rather than official use, but would not say how their suspicions arose. ¶2. (C) SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUEST CONTINUED: USINT recommends that the Department continue pouch shipments to Havana in spite of the risk that some may be rejected, as this is the principal lifeline for official supplies and personal mail. Likewise, the Department should use caution and consult with USINT if considering reciprocal measures. End summary and action request. ¶3. (U) The foreign ministry (Minrex) sent diplomatic note number 2713 on October 22, notifying USINT of "difficulties presented by six diplomatic pouches" currently at the airport. In response, USINT general services officer met with three Cuban officials at the airport on October 24: Ambassador Reinaldo Calviac Lafert, chief of Minrex protocol at the airport; Emilio Gonzlez Farrat, commercial director of the Aerovaradero freight forwarding company and the Cubana airline; and an unnamed Customs inspector. Calviac took the lead. Cuban procedures for incoming pouches -------------- ¶4. (C) Calviac explained that Customs is the first Cuban agency to deal with incoming pouches. If Customs finds anything of concern, they notify Minrex, which in turn notifies the diplomatic mission in question. Otherwise, Minrex doesn't become involved with pouches. (COMMENT: This is different from what we've been told recently, which is that Customs has changed its procedure and now consults with Minrex on every incoming pouch shipment for every foreign mission. When asked, Calviac stated that there has been no such change in procedure.) In this week's case, Customs and Minrex have "well-founded reasons to believe that the material in these six pouches does not comply with article 27 of the Vienna Convention," a phrase Calviac repeated several times throughout our discussion. What's wrong with these six? -------------- ¶5. (C) We attempted to clarify why Customs thinks these six bags, part of a shipment of 28 pouches, might contain objectionable material - and how they know the other bags don't contain such material. The Cubans strongly denied opening diplomatic pouches. But they fudged when asked whether they X-ray the bags, saying that they could not discuss "specific procedures." When we asked whether they use dogs to bomb-sniff and/or drug-sniff incoming pouches, they stated that their airports do have such sniffer dogs and use them "just as would any airport in the world." ¶6. (C) Asked what sort of items might violate the Vienna Convention on diplomatic pouch usage, Calviac explained that the pouch is to be used only for official correspondence and for articles intended for official use of the mission. He claimed that items for diplomats' personal use should not be included in diplomatic pouches, but should be imported using a Minrex-issued duty free entry permit, known in Cuba as a "franquicia." (COMMENT: As there is no APO in Havana, we have for many years used the pouch for personal mail and catalog orders. Other countries' missions in Havana do the same with their pouches. Minrex has been notoriously capricious in issuing and not issuing franquicias for import of USINT's official and personal goods.) ¶7. (C) We told Calviac that all USINT pouches contain only items for official use of the mission. We did not specifically address his assertion that use of the pouch for diplomats' personal mail may violate the Vienna Convention. We also provided him with copies of the Department's circular notes 03-54 and 04-181, describing our treatment of other countries' pouches in the US. Open up or ship out -------------- ¶8. (C) Regarding the six offending pouches, Calviac said we have two choices: We may ship them back to the US, or we may have them opened in the presence of a USINT officer and airport authorities. In the second option, Calviac stated that the opening would be filmed "so that all parties would know what is in the bags." The overseeing American officer would need to arrive at the airport with written authority from USINT and with materials to re-seal the bags in case they needed to be re-exported. ¶9. (C) In the future, Calviac told us, if Customs and Minrex are again concerned with the contents of our pouches, they will continue to advise us by diplomatic note and may offer a face-to-face meeting like the one yesterday. In any case, our options would be the same: ship the pouches back, or open them at the airport. ¶10. (C) After the meeting, airport authorities granted our request to see the six bags inside the Customs bonded warehouse. Together with our other pouches pending release, they appeared to be in good condition and unharmed. Cuban officials told us specifically that there was no problem with tears in the bags themselves. Same story three weeks ago -------------- ¶11. (C) In a similar incident about three weeks ago, the Cubans denied import approval for three crate pouches, while approving the rest of 16 crates shipped concurrently. We are returning the three crates to SA-32 via US Despatch Agency Miami, where we understand they will be opened and inspected. We believe two of the crates contain air conditioners - a puzzle because several of the crates that were released also were AC units. The third crate probably is a mix of officers' mail and small official purchases. ¶12. (U) Other than the three crates rejected and shipped back, and the six bags rejected this week, all incoming pouches to date have been cleared and released to us. ¶13. (C) COMMENT: USINT believes that Cuban authorities routinely X-ray incoming pouches. However, this alone would not explain their choice of bags to detain, as the detained pouches contain the same types of items found in other bags that are released. The best guess is that this is another act of random harassment by the Cuban government. ¶14. (C) COMMENT CONTINUED: We should, therefore, limit the time and energy we expend to determine the Cubans' "system," and we should not alter our own pouch shipments to Havana. In addition, we request that the Department consult with USINT on any planned reciprocal action against the Cubans, as such measures can have unintended consequences for our operations. Unless otherwise advised, we will plan to ship these six pouches back to USDA Miami for re-packing and re-shipment to Havana. PARMLY