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

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HANOI 002860 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR EAP/BCLTV and DRL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM PREL PGOV SW SZ AS NO VM HUMANR
SUBJECT: VIETNAM'S EXPERIENCE WITH HUMAN RIGHTS DIALOGUES 
 
Ref:  Hanoi 2175 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  Vietnam's series of human rights 
dialogues with foreign governments are broad-based and 
generally non-confrontational.  Many are linked to ongoing 
aid programs related to governance reform, but few dialogues 
result in -- or are expected to - produce concrete short- 
term results.  Third-country diplomats in Hanoi nonetheless 
value these dialogues as an opportunity to encourage long- 
term grassroots changes, as well as to convey concerns about 
human rights issues and sometimes about individual cases to 
a host government that appears increasingly sensitive to 
international criticism.  End Summary 
 
Norway 
------ 
 
¶2. (SBU) Norway established relations in Vietnam in 1997, 
and has held bilateral human rights dialogues in November 
2001 in Oslo and January 2003 in Hanoi.  The Norwegian MFA 
and GVN are currently planning for their third dialogue, 
scheduled for April or May 2004 in Oslo.  A Norwegian 
diplomat described the first two meetings as "getting to 
know each other" and dealing with issues in only a "very 
general" manner.  In the first dialogue, the Vietnamese 
delegation was headed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
(MFA), but included representatives from the Ministry of 
Justice, Ministry of Public Security (MPS), Supreme People's 
Court, and the National Assembly.  Topics of discussion were 
"non-confrontational;" the Norwegians addressed the need for 
GVN adherence to United Nations conventions, and the GVN 
requested Norway describe its criminal justice system.  The 
GVN group spent a week in Oslo, with one day for the 
dialogue, followed by visits to Norwegian judicial 
facilities and discussions with NORAD - the Norwegian aid 
agency - on identifying areas for aid in promoting good 
governance, a primary theme in Norwegian development 
assistance. 
 
¶3. (SBU) The Norwegian return visit to Hanoi in 2003 was led 
by the MFA's Director General of Humanitarian Affairs, Human 
Rights, and Democracy (equivalent to Assistant Secretary 
Craner), and included representatives from NORAD, the 
Norwegian Supreme Court, and an criminologist from the 
University of Oslo.  Issues were a continuation of those 
from the first dialogue.  The Norwegians did not raise 
specific cases of concern with the Vietnamese.  In planning 
the third dialogue, the Norwegian diplomat expressed a hope 
the meeting will become "more substantive" and that NORAD 
could reach agreement on some aid projects developed from 
themes discussed in the dialogue, notably criminal law 
reform.  The diplomat also assessed that the dialogues had 
already helped develop a level of some trust on human rights 
issues between the GVN and Government of Norway.  He noted 
that he had recently been allowed by the MPS to visit a 
Vietnamese prison (which U.S. poloffs have done twice; a 
third request has been outstanding for almost one year). 
 
SWEDEN 
------ 
 
¶4. (U)  Sweden not only participates in the EU - GVN human 
rights dialogue (para 6) but also deals with a number of 
human rights issues in its annual bilateral review of 
development cooperation.  Sweden established relations with 
Hanoi in 1968, and has the longest standing diplomatic 
relations of any Western country.  Considered a "friend of 
Vietnam," it nonetheless published a human rights report in 
January 2003 that was critical of the GVN's record (earlier 
year's reports had not been made public).  Through its 
bilateral review, Sweden also targets aid to what it sees as 
human rights-related areas.  These are broadly defined, and 
the current theme, established at the request of the GVN, is 
anti-corruption (ref a).  In 2002, Sweden invited Vietnam as 
an observer to the Sweden-Canada-China regional issues 
dialogue, held that year in Jakarta.  The Swedes considered 
it an "eye-opening" experience for Vietnam to see the 
relatively open way China addresses human rights 
accusations. 
 
Australia 
--------- 
 
¶5. (U)  Australia holds the "Australia-Vietnam Bilateral 
Dialogue on International Organizations and Legal Issues, 
including Human Rights," which its diplomats characterize as 
an annual "non-confrontational" discussion of issues.  The 
meeting, along with talks with Iran and China, is one of 
only three dialogues Australia holds worldwide.  The most 
recent dialogue - the second - was held on June 27 in 
Canberra, and included GVN representatives from the MFA, the 
MPS, the Supreme People's Procuracy, and Supreme People's 
Court.  In these dialogues, the Australians have provided 
the GVN with a list of specific cases, and have been 
relatively pleased with responses they receive.  The 
Government of Australia does not link aid programs to issues 
discussed in the meetings.  After the Canberra round, the 
GOA sponsored a group of GVN officials to a human rights 
course in Australia, followed by a study tour.  The next 
round of meetings is anticipated to take place in Hanoi in 
August 2004. 
 
EU 
-- 
 
¶6. (SBU) The European Union's dialogue has been held at a 
lower level that Australia and Norway's, but on a biannual 
basis.  The EU and GVN have held three dialogues so far - 
all in Hanoi - with the most recent one in June and the next 
one scheduled for November 26.  The meetings are planned by 
a working group of all EU embassies in Hanoi along with the 
Delegation of the European Commission, but at the dialogue 
itself the EU is represented by the "Troika" ambassadors. 
One EC representative was guardedly positive about the June 
meeting, noting some GVN responses provided in response to 
the EU's prisoner list.  However, a British diplomat said 
separately that that the dialogues have been relatively 
disappointing: discussions have been unfocused, the GVN was 
represented by relatively low-level officers from the MFA 
only, and the impression was that the Vietnamese were "just 
going through the motions." 
 
¶7. (SBU) According the British diplomat, EU member countries 
consider advancing human rights in Vietnam a "real 
priority," pointing out that Foreign Minister Straw had also 
raised the issue with Foreign Minister Nien during their 
September bilateral meeting in London.  Some EU member 
embassies in Hanoi hope to revitalize the dialogue in its 
upcoming session, by trying to raise the GVN representation 
to the department director general-level, and to include 
representatives from a number of different GVN ministries. 
The EU is also planning better to structure the talks, and 
will present the MFA with a list of topics ahead of time; 
what will be on the list is still being hashed out in 
working groups.  According the British diplomat, the EU 
nonetheless hopes to keep the dialogue "non-threatening" for 
the GVN.  Rather than confront the GVN with a list of 
accusations, the goal is to frame EU concerns in positive 
terms such as "promoting religious tolerance" in lieu of 
"ending religious oppression." 
 
Switzerland 
----------- 
 
¶8. (U) One likely additional participant in human rights 
dialogues with the GVN is Switzerland.  The Swiss held 
bilateral dialogues in 1998 and 1999, but discontinued them 
due to a lack of resources.  On a visit in late August, 
Deputy Prime Minister Vu Khoan proposed restarting of the 
human rights dialogue.  The Swiss Department of Foreign 
Affairs is currently studying the issue, and diplomats here 
have indicated it is likely Switzerland will agree to resume 
the exchanges.  Switzerland has some fears that the GVN has 
sought the renewed dialogue only because Switzerland has 
limited interests in Vietnam.  At the same time, the Swiss 
view themselves as neutral and free of the biases they 
believe Vietnamese see in other countries - notably the U.S. 
and Australia.  Any new dialogue would have to involve a 
range of GVN ministries - not just the MFA - and deal with 
specific and controversial issues to satisfy the Swiss, 
according to a diplomat in Hanoi.  At the same time, 
Switzerland is prepared to look for a "longer-term" and 
broad range change in attitudes rather than immediate 
results.  The dialogue would also likely be twinned with a 
development strategy of technical programs and exchanges, 
developed around two or three issues identified in the 
dialogue. 
¶9. (SBU) Comment: Vietnam remains committed to the process 
of dialogue, even on issues like human rights when they know 
full well they will face criticism - direct or indirect - 
from all of their interlocutors.  Most third country 
participants in these dialogues share U.S. frustrations with 
a lack of specific results, but nonetheless claim to value 
the exchanges as one of the few conduits in which they can 
get information from the GVN, and make clear their concerns 
while not expecting overnight change. 
BURGHARDT