This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HANOI 001870 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR CA/OCS/CI, CA/OCS/ACS/EAP, CA/OCS/PRI, 
DEPARTMENT ALSO FOR CA/VO/F/P, EAP/BCLTV, AND L/EAP 
Bangkok for DHS/DD 
Ho Chi Minh City for CONS and DHS OIC 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KOCI CVIS CASC PREL VM
SUBJECT: VIETNAM ADOPTIONS:  NO FORWARD MOTION, LOSS OF 
YARDAGE 
 
REF: A) HANOI 1759 B) STATE 168760, C) AND PREVIOUS 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary.   The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) 
reorganization has all but halted forward progress on 
reaching any bilateral understanding on adoptions.  Post has 
yet to receive written confirmation that a document other 
than a bilateral agreement will be acceptable, and has been 
told that the offices of the Prime Minister and State 
President are not currently likely to accept anything other 
than a bilateral agreement.  In addition, the GVN's former 
lead adoption agreement negotiator (who was the principal 
source of support for the USG position) is no longer in 
charge.  We expect little progress in the foreseeable future 
as the Ministry of Justice's new Office of International 
Adoptions gets up and running.  End Summary. 
 
NO ONE IN CHARGE 
---------------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) As initially reported ref A, a July 12 
reorganization within MOJ resulted in the nominal shifting 
of responsibilities for adoptions negotiations to the newly 
created Office of International Adoptions (OIA).  However, 
OIA is still in transition.  The individuals formerly 
responsible for adoption "agreements" no longer have any 
decision-making authority, and their successors (and their 
roles) have not yet been identified. 
 
NO RESPONSE 
----------- 
 
¶3.  (SBU) On July 11, the Consular section contacted MOJ 
Director of International Cooperation, Nguyen Van Binh, to 
reiterate the USG request for written confirmation that a 
document other than a bilateral agreement would be 
acceptable.  When no response to the request was 
forthcoming, the Consular section contacted Binh again on 
July 16.  Binh admitted that the offices of the Prime 
Minister and State President are opposed to any document 
that is not a formal bilateral agreement.  Additionally, 
Binh noted that he strongly believes that if he officially 
asks for approval to move forward with negotiation of a 
document other than a bilateral agreement at this time, the 
answer will be "no." 
 
BINH IS AN ALLY... 
------------------ 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Binh said that he had been trying to find legal 
precedents in which the GVN entered into (and the State 
President ratified) an accord that was not a bilateral 
agreement, but to date has been unsuccessful.  He has 
requested the assistance of the Vietnamese Embassy in 
Washington in this matter. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Binh nonetheless expressed hope in building 
consensus in support of an MOU, Protocol, or similar 
document within the interagency working group on 
international adoptions.  This group will include members of 
all relevant Ministries, as well as representatives of the 
offices of the Prime Minister and State President.  It is 
the same group that will consider our latest draft Protocol. 
Binh asked for more time to build this consensus.  He stated 
that no interagency working group meeting would take place 
until after the staffing of the MOJ's new Office of 
International Adoptions was clarified, the issues thoroughly 
reviewed by the new staff, and summer vacation season was 
over.  The earliest this meeting could take place is late 
September or October. 
 
 
... BUT IS NO LONGER IN CHARGE 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Unfortunately, however, Binh is no longer the 
point person for adoptions - his Prime Ministerial 
designation as lead negotiator for international adoptions 
expired July 12.  Binh now serves only as an "advisor" on 
the issue while OIA gets up to speed.  Per ref A, Binh has 
said that it was unlikely that he would be assigned to head 
up the new OIA. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) Binh has consistently demonstrated an understanding 
of the U.S. position and a willingness to work with us to 
reach bilateral consensus.  However, with the loss of his 
authority as lead negotiator for international adoptions, it 
is not at all clear that he will be in a position to 
influence policy decisions in this area. 
 
¶8.  (SBU) What is clear is that, with the creation of OIA, 
we are potentially back to square one.  The change in 
personnel responsible for international adoptions is likely 
to result in a thorough re-evaluation of the issues and the 
GVN's position.  Given the current opposition in the offices 
of the Prime Minister and the State President, and further 
given the tendency of GVN officials to reject positions of 
their predecessors in an effort to exert authority, 
cultivating support with the new personnel in the OIA will 
be an uphill battle. 
 
¶9.  (SBU) We will continue to make every effort - engaging 
both Binh and the (as yet unnamed) new officials at OIA - to 
move forward with the latest draft.  However, we expect 
little progress in the foreseeable future as the OIA 
concentrates on getting up and running. 
BURGHARDT