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 001837 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR CA/OCS/CI, CA/OCS/ACS/EAP, CA/OCS/PRI, 
CA/VO/F/P, CA/VO/L/C, EAP/BCLTV, AND L/CA 
BANGKOK FOR DHS/DD 
HO CHI MINH CITY FOR CONS AND DHS OIC 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: CVIS CASC KOCI PREL PTER VM CTERR HUMANR
SUBJECT:  Vietnam - DCM Meeting with Consular Department 
 
1.(U) Summary.  The Deputy Chief of Mission's introductory 
call on Bui Dinh Dinh, Director of the MFA's Consular 
Department, on June 29 provided both sides an opportunity to 
raise a number of substantive bilateral consular issues. 
The GVN highlighted repatriation of deportable aliens, 
reopening of humanitarian resettlement programs, and 
Consular access and notification as significant consular 
issues to be worked on by our two governments.  DCM 
requested the Consular Department focus on the recent death 
penalty case of AmCit John Nguyen and requested a response 
to our latest draft of the Protocol concerning adoptions. 
He also highlighted USG concerns over a recent GVN decision 
to suspend issuance of visas to USG officials because the 
travel of a GVN official was delayed due to clearance 
procedures and requested that GVN officials submit visa 
applications in advance to allow time for necessary 
clearances.  The GVN also flagged a number of political 
issues, including the cases of two individuals in the U.S. 
who the GVN believes are involved in "inciting terrorism" 
and the display of the flag of the former Republic of South 
Vietnam, as obstacles to trust in the U.S.-GVN relations. 
 
¶2.  (U) On June 29, 2004, newly arrived Deputy Chief of 
Mission John Boardman paid a courtesy call on the Director 
of the Consular Department at the Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs, Bui Dinh Dinh.  The discussion went beyond simple 
courtesies and touched on a number of substantive bilateral 
consular and political issues. 
 
Key Bilateral Consular Issues and Consular Access and 
Notification 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶3.  (U) After initial introductions, DCM Boardman asked Dinh 
to outline his priority bilateral consular issues.  Dinh 
listed repatriation of deportable aliens, reopening the 
humanitarian resettlement programs, and consular access and 
notification.  (Comment:  Dinh appeared unprepared for the 
question.  While his response seemed to be off-the-cuff and 
may not represent an official GVN prioritization, it is 
notable that the GVN recognizes the importance we place on 
these three issues and would include them in such an 
impromptu listing. End Comment.) 
 
¶4.  (U) DCM pursued the issue of Consular Access and 
Notification, particularly as they relate to dual 
nationality.  Dinh explained that since dual nationality is 
not recognized in Vietnam, the GVN refers to U.S./Vietnamese 
nationals as "Vietnamese citizens holding American 
passports."  He noted that since the Agreed Minute of 1994 
regarding consular relations was signed at "lower levels" 
(by the Director of the Americas Department, rather than at 
the Minister-level or higher), other ministries such as the 
Ministry of Public Security do not view the Agreed Minute as 
binding. 
 
Visa Wars 
--------- 
 
¶5.  (U) DCM raised his concerns about the recent GVN 
decision to "embargo" visas for official USG travelers in 
direct response to the delayed travel of a GVN official (due 
to the necessity of Visas Eagle clearance.)  He explained 
the role played in visa policy establishment played by the 
Department of Homeland Security and the role played by other 
USG agencies in the visa clearance procedures.  DCM also 
clarified that withholding visas for USG officials has no 
impact on DHS or other agencies involved in the clearance 
process, and thus is not an effective response.  DCM 
strongly reiterated the request that visa applications for 
GVN officials be submitted early enough to allow for the 
required clearances.  He also invited the GVN to contact us 
any time a delay in clearance causes difficulties. 
 
¶6.  (U) Dinh described the pressure he was under from other, 
more senior officials every time the issuance of a U.S. visa 
for a GVN official was delayed.  He asked for more specific 
details on when clearances are required, and when they can 
be waived.   ConOff briefly described the categories of 
applicants for which Visas Eagle is required in Vietnam. 
(Note: The GVN has repeatedly requested that GVN officials 
be exempted from clearance and US VISIT fingerscanning 
procedures.  Consular section will follow up to provide 
clarification of the clearance process and urge that a 
spirit of cooperation between the two sides  --GVN 
submitting applications sooner and USG explaining and 
expediting clearances where possible -- is the best road 
forward. End Note.) 
 
Adoptions 
--------- 
 
¶7.  (U) When reminded of the adoptions Protocol and asked 
when we might expect a response, Dinh responded that the 
Protocol was still under consideration by the Ministry of 
Justice. 
 
John Nguyen Death Penalty Case 
------------------------------ 
 
¶8.  (U) Regarding American Citizen John Nguyen, who was 
sentenced to death in Ho Chi Minh City for drug trafficking 
on June 16, 2004, Dinh was unaware of the details.  DCM 
flagged the USG interest in the case and asked that requests 
for leniency from Mr. Nguyen and his family be given 
appropriate consideration.  DCM also asked for clarification 
of the specific charges under which Mr. Nguyen was found 
guilty and stated that the Embassy planned to send a 
diplomatic note to the Consular Department regarding this 
case. 
 
Political Issues - Kok Ksor, Nguyen Huu Chanh, and Flags 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
 
¶9.  (U) Dinh commented that consular relations and the 
broader relationship between the United States and Vietnam 
were going "quite well."  However, he highlighted two 
"obstacles to trust" and the furtherance of that 
relationship.  The GVN has raised Kok Ksor, as reported in 
ref A, and Nguyen Huu Chanh, ref B, previously.  Dinh 
claimed that Kok Ksor's efforts to organize the Montagnard 
uprising in the Central Highlands in April amounted to 
"inciting terrorism." He also claimed that Nguyen Huu Chanh, 
as leader of the Free Vietnam Movement (a.k.a. Free Vietnam 
Alliance) worked to "incite terrorist acts" in Vietnam, 
Thailand, and the Philippines.  Dinh argued that the U.S. 
speaks out often against terrorism, but does nothing to stop 
terrorists living in the U.S. from conducting terrorist 
acts.  He said this issue affected  "trust" between our two 
governments.  DCM responded that the USG does not support 
terrorism in any form and assured Dinh that the USG would 
follow up if presented with evidence that these two 
individuals had committed acts of terrorism or otherwise 
violate US law. 
 
¶10.  (U) Finally, Dinh highlighted GVN concerns regarding 
the decision of some local U.S. authorities to allow display 
of the flag of the former Republic of South Vietnam.  He 
noted that display of this flag provokes animosity against 
the GVN within the U.S.  DCM responded that the GVN should 
not give too much importance to this issue.  Private 
individuals and local authorities in the U.S. can act 
independently, but it is the federal government that 
conducts foreign relations and establishes official USG 
policy.  He added that it is the responsibility of the GVN, 
not the USG, to improve relations and reduce any sense of 
animosity in the ethnic Vietnamese communities in the U.S. 
and elsewhere. 
BURGHARDT