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

210941Z Jun 05

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 RANGOON 000749 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP/BCLTV; PACOM FOR FPA 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/20/2015 
TAGS: EAID PGOV PHUM PREF PREL BM NGO
SUBJECT: BURMA: UNHCR AND WORLD VISION ASKED TO CURTAIL 
ACTIVITIES 
 
REF: RANGOON 730 AND PREVIOUS 
 
Classified By: CDA, a.i. Ronald K. McMullen for Reasons 1.4 (b,d) 
 
¶1. (C) Summary: The GOB has asked the United Nations High 
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Burma to curtail its 
activities on the eastern border with Thailand.  UNHCR is not 
sure why.  The Minister of Home Affairs (MOHA) told UNHCR 
that in the future the Ministry of Progress of Border Areas 
and National Races and Development Affairs (NaTaLa) would be 
its coordinating ministry.  UNHCR told MOHA that if its 
activities are curtailed that its budget may likely be 
reallocated to other countries.  UNHCR has misgivings about 
working with NaTaLa and has requested to maintain the status 
quo until the end of the year.  INGOs, and World Vision in 
particular, have been warned not to work in certain areas. 
Local authorities have encouraged them to continue their 
programs, but to be careful.  End Summary. 
 
KEEP AWAY FROM THE THAI BORDER 
 
¶2. (C) In a recent meeting with Mr. Shivanka Dhanapala, 
officer-in-charge of UNHCR Myanmar, he told poloff that the 
MOHA contacted UNHCR in mid-May and orally requested it to 
curtail travel to areas along the eastern border with 
Thailand where UNHCR has only recently been given permission 
to operate (ref B) in Karen State, Mon State, and Tanintharyi 
Division.  The MOHA did not give any specific reasons for its 
request but UNHCR feels it may be a direct result of the May 
7 bombings.  (Note: INGOs that have MOUs with the Ministry of 
Health were informed in a meeting in early June that 
restrictions are in effect for travel to five ethnic states 
and Tanintharyi Division for at least another month (ref A). 
End Note.)  UNHCR responded that it had already done detailed 
trip planning, so the GOB relented at the last minute and let 
UNHCR carry out its trips.  However, the fate of future trips 
is uncertain.  UNHCR said that the GOB seems satisfied with 
UNHCR's long-standing program in northern Rakhine State and 
so far, the GOB has made no restrictions on its activities 
there. 
 
¶3. (C) On May 31, Mr. Dhanapala had a meeting with Maj. Gen. 
Maung Oo, the Minister of Home Affairs.  The minister said 
that in the future NaTaLa would be the coordinating ministry 
for not only UNHCR, but also "all 210 foreign organizations" 
currently working in Burma.  (Note: UNHCR is astonished at 
the figure of 210, because it is not aware of even half that 
number of foreign organizations working in Burma, unless this 
includes businesses as well.  NaTaLa is one of the ministries 
that is involved with community development, not just in the 
border areas, but in practically the whole country, excluding 
Rangoon and Mandalay.  End Note.) 
 
¶4. (C) UNHCR is concerned about working with NaTaLa, because 
this ministry has been focusing on establishing 
industrial/economic zones in border areas where people are 
relocated to work in factories that the Thais may set up and 
UNHCR feels this is outside their mandate.  UNHCR is also 
worried that NaTaLa may lack sufficient experience in working 
with foreign organizations and it may not have sufficient 
influence within the government. 
 
¶5. (C) Dhanapala told the minister that if UNHCR had to 
curtail its projects in the eastern border areas its project 
funds designated for Burma might be reallocated to UNHCR 
programs in other countries.  The minister seemed to be 
concerned about the possible loss of funds for Burma.  In the 
meantime, UNHCR has forwarded its action plans for the next 
three months to the MOHA and has requested that the status 
quo be maintained at least until the end of this year to 
complete their ongoing projects.  To date the MOHA has not 
responded to this request and all of its communications to 
UNHCR have been oral, despite UNHCR's request for written 
instructions. 
 
BEWARE OF WORLD VISION 
 
¶6. (C) The Country Director of World Vision Myanmar told 
poloff that on February 22, World Vision Myanmar staff were 
holding a routine community meeting in Kengtung, eastern Shan 
State to discuss setting up small, community-based medical 
emergency funds.  World Vision proposed offering the 
communities small grants of 5,000 kyats ($5).  A government 
official who was observing the meeting erroneously reported 
that World Vision was going to hand out grants of $5,000. 
 
¶7. (C) When the report reached Vice-Senior General Maung Aye, 
he wrote a letter on March 3 to all regional military 
commanders and told them that INGOs are not permitted to work 
with communities and instead the community development funds 
should be handed over to the government authorities and they 
would do the work.  The letter mentioned World Vision in 
particular.  World Vision was not given the letter, but local 
officials have let World Vision staff read their copies.  The 
official who originally filed the erroneous report has 
apologized to World Vision and local officials in several 
townships have appealed to World Vision to continue its 
activities in their communities, but just "be careful." 
World Vision reports that the Ministry of Social Welfare has 
told Save the Children - UK to cease operations in Shan 
State, but World Vision's coordination ministry, the Ministry 
of Health, has not issued the same instructions.  In order to 
"be careful," for the past month World Vision has not 
permitted its foreign staff to travel to projects in border 
areas. 
 
WE WANT TO CLIP YOUR WINGS 
 
¶8. (C) Comment: Dhanapala feels that the delay in obtaining a 
written response from MOHA reflects a reticence of most 
ministries to make important decisions without clearance from 
the senior leadership.  He thinks that Vice-Senior General 
Maung Aye may be behind the move to have all foreign 
organizations report to NaTaLa.  Moreover, it is widely known 
that Maj. Gen Maung Oo is uncomfortable working with foreign 
organizations so he may also favor shifting the 
responsibility to NaTaLa. 
 
¶9. (C) Based on both UNHCR's and World Vision's experiences, 
it appears the GOB is evaluating the future role of aid 
agencies in Burma and the extent to which the GOB is willing 
to permit them to work at the grassroots level.  The GOB may 
be thinking of turning NaTaLa into an NGO coordinating 
agency, similar to the People's Aid Coordination Committee 
(PACCOM) in Vietnam, and possibly trying to limit NGOs' 
access to people at the community level.  End Comment. 
McMullen