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

221051Z Mar 05

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HANOI 000686 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR EAP/BCLTV 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PHUM PREF VM
SUBJECT: VIETNAM'S AGENT ORANGE CAMPAIGN CONTINUES TO GROW 
 
Ref: A) 04 HCMC 1077, B) HCMC 55 
 
This is a joint Hanoi - Ho Chi Minh City reporting cable. 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary and Action Request:  The GVN's Agent Orange 
(AO) propaganda campaign reached fever pitch in the lead up 
to, and now wake of, the March 10 dismissal of the U.S. 
lawsuit by alleged Vietnamese victims of AO against chemical 
companies that produced the defoliant.  Before the hearing, 
newspapers ran daily accounts of the suffering of alleged 
victims of AO and printed calls for justice.  After the 
dismissal, the campaign has continued unabated, with claims 
of USG political manipulation of the courts and hypocrisy 
and racism leveled at the court's decision.  The media blitz 
has had some effect:  there is some popular concern about 
the issue and sentiment that the United States should aid 
the alleged victims.  The GVN has not raised the issue 
directly with us, but officials have suggested that the 
campaign has reached such a level that it cannot be easily 
turned off.  We recommend the Department develop a public 
diplomacy strategy both for Vietnam and for a broader 
international audience to mitigate the impact of these 
biased and negative reports.  End Summary and Action 
Request. 
 
Press Campaign Revs Up Again 
---------------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) The Vietnamese press campaign on AO began in August 
2004 as the discovery period of the case drew to a close 
(Ref. A).  The press effort died down slightly as the 
initial hearings were delayed, but picked up again as the 
February 28 court hearing approached.  After the March 10 
dismissal of the case, the press has continued to be 
inundated with reports, with many newspapers running 
multiple AO articles each day. 
 
¶3. (SBU) The government-controlled media's reports generally 
focus on allegations that AO caused irreversible damage to 
the environment and adversely affected the health of 
civilians.  The articles also demand compensation from the 
U.S. government or the chemical companies or both.  Many of 
the articles turn on statistics about the amount of AO and 
toxic chemicals sprayed during the war; allegations of high 
dioxin residue levels in the soil of sprayed areas and high 
dioxin residue levels found in people living in sprayed 
areas; and research results by foreign scientists concluding 
that AO/dioxins cause certain severe illnesses.  Detailed 
accounts of spraying that began in 1961 and "escalated to 
chemical warfare" through July 1971 are common features. 
Media reports also claim there are currently "three to four 
million AO victims" still alive in Vietnam. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Some stories have raised the question of why the 
USG presses Vietnam on human rights issues but ignores the 
plight of people affected by AO.  These reports further 
question why AO is not considered a human rights issue as 
well.  Some papers have called for "moral and spiritual 
responsibility" from the USG and the "legal responsibility" 
from the companies in question.  In a media environment 
where the lines between factual news stories and editorials 
are blurred, the overall tone has been extremely negative 
towards the United States. 
 
¶5. (SBU) The press has often focused on international 
support to the Vietnamese cause.  Interviews with American 
veterans groups, scientists and social activists who have 
supported the Vietnamese demands for compensation, including 
the Vietnam Friendship Village Committee, the British and 
French-Vietnam Friendship Associations, Red Cross, Ford 
Foundation, the Paris-based Association for Dioxin-infected 
Children in Viet Nam (ADCV), Veterans for Peace and Action 
Aid Vietnam have offered support in the press for the 
Vietnam plaintiffs' case.  In addition, the U.S. Fund for 
Reconciliation and Development is organizing at the Hanoi 
Opera House an Agent Orange fundraising concert event next 
week with 1960's folksinger Peter Yarrow. 
 
¶6. (SBU) The March 10 dismissal ruling triggered a series of 
articles expressing outrage.  For example, police-run 
newspaper An Ninh The Gioi ("World Security") denounced the 
ruling as "erroneous" and a "crime."  A number of articles 
noted the USG's amicus brief and interpreted this as a 
political intervention to control the decision.  While some 
papers had muted headlines such as Hanoi Moi's ("New Hanoi") 
"The U.S. Department of Justice is worrying," others like 
Quan Doi Nhan Dan ("People's Military") were more blunt with 
"They try everything to avoid responsibility" or Tien 
Phong's ("Vanguard") "The Weinstein ruling stains the face 
of the U.S."  Lao Dong ("Labor") Daily, among other papers, 
have special segments on their websites about AO (www.vn- 
agentorange.org).  These articles continue unabated, most 
recently focusing on the U.S. National Institute of 
Environmental Health Studies' cancellation of funding for 
research on AO in Vietnam. 
 
View from the South 
------------------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) Journalists from Ho Chi Minh City's leading dailies 
Thanh Nien ("Young People") and Tuoi Tre ("Youth") told 
ConGenOff that the heavy focus on AO came from Hanoi.  The 
Thanh Nien reporter said that the GVN finds it is 
politically and financially expedient to try and link as 
many medical ailments as possible to AO and to deflect 
responsibility for their treatment.  Tuoi Tre has assigned 
investigative journalist Lan Anh, who is facing prosecution 
for breaking a story on drug price gouging to favor GVN 
cronies (Ref. B), to cover the AO beat.  (Comment: Tuoi Tre 
management knows the importance of the AO story to Hanoi's 
political elite and wants Lan Anh to curry favor with 
hardliners prior to her indictment.  End Comment.) 
 
¶8. (SBU) Both of these Ho Chi Minh City press contacts said 
that they had read the court ruling and understood why the 
case was dismissed.  They also noted the reports that the 
White House intervened in the case, but attributed these to 
ignorance of the U.S. legal system and a propensity to cite 
anti-U.S. stories from third parties without analyzing their 
credibility.  The two said that they believed the Vietnamese 
media would fairly and accurately report on USG assistance 
to Vietnam or information on the U.S. legal system and 
separation of powers, even if such information were not 
linked directly to AO. 
 
Message Sinks In? 
----------------- 
 
¶9. (SBU) It is difficult to quantify with any precision the 
effectiveness of the campaign.  In Ho Chi Minh City, media 
contacts report that the AO story has resonance with the 
"man on the street."  For example, an on-line petition in 
support of the plaintiffs had over 500,000 endorsements. 
During an event at the Hanoi University of Foreign Studies, 
an Embassy officer was repeatedly questioned by students 
about AO.  Most people realize that the story is being 
pushed by the GVN, but it attracts attention and there is a 
general belief that the United States is responsible for 
environmental damage across large swaths of Vietnam and has 
a moral responsibility to compensate AO victims.  The AO 
issue is not at the top of most peoples' agendas, but the 
dismissal of the lawsuit is generally seen as unfair, even 
by people who are favorably inclined toward the United 
States. 
 
No Official Contact on AO 
------------------------- 
 
¶10. (SBU) The GVN has made no official representation to the 
Mission about AO, though the MFA's spokesman commented in 
the wake of the dismissal that "the Vietnamese people were 
disappointed" and that chemical companies should take 
responsibility for all victims of AO, both American and 
Vietnamese.  After news came out of the USG's cancellation 
of funding for research on AO in Vietnam, the MFA spokesman 
highlighted the funding cut, and said the GVN is "always 
ready to cooperate with international scientists" for 
research in this area.  (Note:  To date, there has been 
little information in public media on USG funding for people 
with disabilities, and none on the lack of GVN cooperation 
to get dioxin-related bilateral studies underway.  End 
Note.) 
 
¶11. (SBU) In a March 18 discussion with Poloff, Nguyen Ba 
Hung, Deputy Director of the MFA's Americas Desk, showed 
initial reluctance to engage on the issue, but then made a 
passionate explanation of his views on AO.  "The United 
States tells us that this should be a scientific research 
issue to be handled by specialists and doctors and asks for 
more research.  But the USG intervened in the lawsuit by 
Vietnamese victims, so clearly it believes there is a 
political dimension to the problem.  The U.S. was willing to 
compensate its own veterans according to a detailed schedule 
of diseases and compensation amounts, so clearly there is a 
link between Agent Orange and health problems.  Why is the 
U.S. so hypocritical that it pays compensation to U.S. 
veterans at the same time that it challenges the validity of 
the suffering of Vietnamese victims?"  Furthermore, DDG Hung 
explained domestic political elements to the issue. 
"Technically it is in within the Prime Minister's power to 
instruct the Ministry of Culture and Information to reduce 
the profile of these stories in the Vietnamese press.  But 
practically speaking, this would be received with outrage, 
and would be a political disaster for the Government.  The 
PM would be seen as putting the bilateral U.S.-Vietnam 
relationship ahead of the welfare of Vietnamese victims.... 
His opponents would destroy him." 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶12. (SBU) We recommend the Department develop a public 
diplomacy strategy both for Vietnam and for a broader 
international audience on the facts regarding Agent Orange, 
U.S. support for people with disabilities in Vietnam and, 
perhaps, the key elements of the Judge Weinstein's decision. 
The AO issue appears to have been seized upon by 
conservatives as a way to criticize the United States with 
impunity.  Given the ongoing jockeying for positions in 
advance of the 2006 Party Congress, the USG can expect the 
media drumbeat to continue and no allies in trying to calm 
this issue.  Nonetheless, even while the AO story runs, the 
Vietnamese media has reported on positives in our bilateral 
relationship.  We should be prepared to debunk the most 
spurious and inflammatory assertions on AO, such as that the 
White House intervened to fix the court case, and to 
highlight the significant and growing humanitarian and 
technical assistance that we have provided Vietnam since 
reestablishment of relations. 
 
BOARDMAN