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

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRASILIA 000745 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR CA, WHA/BSC, DHS LIAISON 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/16/2015 
TAGS: PGOV CVIS BR US
SUBJECT: BRAZILIAN SENATORS SUPPORT REINSTITUTING VISA 
REQUIREMENT FOR BRAZILIAN TRAVELERS TO MEXICO 
 
 
Classified By: POLOFF RICHARD REITER, REASONS 1.4B AND D. 
 
¶1. (C) On March 16, Ambassador Danilovich met in the embassy 
with Brazilian Senators Cristovam Buarque and Marcelo 
Crivella to discuss the issue of Brazilians attempting to 
enter the US illegally via the southern land border.  Senator 
Buarque (PT-Brasilia) is a former Minister of Education who 
now chairs the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee.  He lived 
for four years in Washington in the 1970s while working at 
the IDB; his two daughters are US citizens.  Senator Crivella 
(PL-Rio de Janeiro) chairs the Senate Sub-Committee on 
Protection of Brazilians Abroad.  He is an evangelical 
minister who travels frequently to the US in connection with 
his church duties.  For several years Crivella has worked 
closely with the embassy to discourage Brazilians from trying 
to immigrate illegally to the US and in facilitating the 
repatriation of Brazilians detained in US immigration 
facilities. 
 
MINUTEMAN PROJECT 
----------------- 
¶2. (C) Crivella expressed concern about "The Minuteman 
Project" (www.minutemanproject.com), a group in the US 
enlisting members to confront illegal immigrants.  While the 
group's website describes an effort to patrol the US southern 
border and report illegal immigrants to DHS, Crivella 
expressed concern that members of the group appear to have 
military training and equipment.  This, the Senator noted, 
creates the potential for violence against immigrants in an 
already dangerous region.  Ambassador Danilovich responded 
that while the group's freedom of expression is protected by 
law, the use of violence or vigilantism is not acceptable, 
and US authorities will fully prosecute such activities. 
 
MEXICAN VISA WAIVER FOR BRAZILIANS 
---------------------------------- 
¶3. (C) The Ambassador pointed out that one part of the 
problem is that for the past four years, Mexico has not 
required visitors' visas for Brazilians, making Mexico an 
attractive staging point for Brazilians wishing to enter the 
US illegally.  The Ambassador noted that this is an issue of 
importance to the USG, and we have raised it with the 
Mexicans on several occasions.  The Ambassador added that the 
number of Brazilians detained by DHS so far this year (9,000) 
is running nearly double the number detained in 2004. 
 
¶4. (C) Crivella agreed, saying he would like to see Mexico 
reinstate its visa requirement for Brazilians.  Crivella said 
he will meet with Mexican President Fox next week (and will 
carry a letter from President Lula) and plans to raise this 
topic.  He added that he recently wrote to Brazilian Foreign 
Minister Amorim, but was rebuffed.  Amorim, said Crivella, 
responded that the visa agreement with Mexico had recently 
been extended for six more months so the timing was bad, and 
that the visa waiver was useful for "Brazilian tourists 
visiting Cancun".  Both Senators seemed puzzled by Amorim's 
response, in that it seems to put the interests of a few 
hundred well-heeled Brazilian vacationers over that of the 
thousands of Brazilians detained by DHS each year.  Both 
Senators appeared interested in revisiting the issue with the 
Brazilian Foreign Ministry, possibly raising it publicly in 
the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee.  Crivella suggested 
that his hand would be strengthened in his discussions with 
the Foreign Ministry if the US offers the GoB an incentive 
(e.g., increasing the number of work visas available to 
Brazilians) in return for Brazil giving up its visa waiver 
agreement with Mexico. 
 
COMMENT - WELCOME ALLIES 
------------------------ 
¶5. (C)  Brazil's Foreign Ministry often leaps at 
opportunities to demonstrate that its foreign policy is 
independent of the US, and Amorim's reluctance to revisit the 
Mexican visa waiver may be part of his occasional penchant to 
take positions that are deliberately unhelpful to US 
concerns.  Thus our efforts in this area may be impeded as 
much by this sentiment as by any realistic cost-benefit 
analysis of the visa waiver itself.  However, in the recent 
past, Amorim has been directly involved in bilateral consular 
issues (i.e., during the tensions linked to US fingerprinting 
requirements at POEs followed by the GOBs retaliation in kind 
against US visitors), and we can use that history to 
re-engage with him.  The Senators' still-evolving idea to 
raise the issue publicly in their committee is one tactic to 
bring pressure to bear on the Foreign Ministry.  And while 
this approach is not guaranteed of success, the Senators make 
welcome allies in our cause, and post will explore with the 
Senators and with Washington agencies ways to approach the 
GoB on the issue. 
DANILOVICH