VZCZCXYZ0006
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHLP #1651/01 1701935
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 191935Z JUN 06
FM AMEMBASSY LA PAZ
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9627
INFO RUEHAC/AMEMBASSY ASUNCION 5927
RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 3244
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 7091
RUEHBU/AMEMBASSY BUENOS AIRES 4344
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 1635
RUEHPE/AMEMBASSY LIMA 1629
RUEHMN/AMEMBASSY MONTEVIDEO 3850
RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO 4269
RUEHSG/AMEMBASSY SANTIAGO 8817
RUEHRC/USDA FAS WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS LA PAZ 001651 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WHA/AND L.PETRONI 
TREASURY FOR SGOOCH 
ENERGY FOR CDAY AND SLADISLAW 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR ECON ETRD USDA USTR BL
SUBJECT: AGRICULTURE MINISTER ON APHIS AND LAND REFORM 
 
REF: A. STATE 95277 
 
     ¶B. LA PAZ 1517 
     ¶C. LA PAZ 1337 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  Econoff delivered talking points from ref 
A on APHIS regulatory changes to Minister of Agriculture 
Salvatierra on June 16.  Salvatierra claimed that the MAS and 
its land reform program had capitalist, not socialist, goals 
promoting production and efficient land use.  He indicated 
that the GOB would seek to redistribute land held by cattle 
ranchers in the East, as well as land held by Brazilians who 
were violating Bolivian regulations.  He demonstrated his 
western/highlander bias by arguing that migrants from the 
western highlands and foreigners developed Santa Cruz, rather 
than eastern natives, and blamed the GOB-business dialogue 
failure (ref B) on the businesses' lack of unity and 
direction.  Although the 2.2 million hectares of government 
land being distributed to indigenous communities does not 
include national parks and protected areas, it does include 
forestry concessions owned by businesses that employ 5,000 
people.  Salvatierra concluded that the GOB's next steps 
would be redistributing privately-held idle land and 
implementing expedited titling procedures.  End summary. 
 
Talking Points on Proposed APHIS Changes Delivered 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
¶2. (U) Econoff delivered talking points from ref A along with 
additional information from APHIS' website to Minister of 
Agriculture Hugo Salvatierra on June 16.  The Minister said 
that the Ministry would review the proposed changes and 
respond prior to the June 26 deadline if they had comments. 
 
Minister Claims MAS Has Capitalist Goals 
---------------------------------------- 
¶3. (SBU) Salvatierra told Econoff that the President's 
political party, the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS), had a 
capitalist program, not a socialist one (despite the name). 
He claimed that the GOB's agrarian reform plan (ref B) was 
aimed at promoting production and efficient use of land, and 
that the large landholders in the eastern departments of 
Santa Cruz, Pando, and Beni were not capitalists.  He added 
that because many of these large landholders had received 
their vast estates for next to nothing and paid almost no 
land taxes, they had not invested in them and not utilized 
them as capitalists would.  He further stated that cattle 
ranchers, particularly in Beni and Pando, needed to modernize 
their production.  He explained that these ranchers claimed 
they needed 22 hectares per head of cattle, which the GOB 
viewed as excessive, unproductive use of land -- implying 
that the GOB would attempt to redistribute rancher lands. 
 
The East-West Divide 
-------------------- 
¶4. (SBU) Salvatierra argued that Santa Cruz natives were not 
productive, but merely held monopoly power over markets and 
commerce.  He said that 40 percent of agricultural production 
in Santa Cruz was by peasant farmers that had migrated from 
the highlands, and another 40 percent was by foreigners 
(Mennonites, Brazilians, Russians, etc.).  He demonstrated 
his western/highlander bias by arguing that these people were 
responsible for the development of the East, not Santa Cruz 
natives.  He said that the dialogue with large agriculture 
business associations had broken down because the businessmen 
"did not know what they wanted" and were not unified. 
 
Brazilian Soy Farmers 
--------------------- 
¶5. (U) Salvatierra explained that many Brazilians had 
purchased or were renting Bolivian land, because land in 
Bolivia was five times less expensive than in Brazil.  (The 
Brazilian Embassy told us previously that 115 Brazilian-owned 
farms produced 60 percent of Bolivia's soy (ref C).)  Many of 
these Brazilians, he said, were harming the environment or 
violating regulations and would thus be subject to losing 
their lands.  He assured us that those Brazilians who were 
following Bolivian laws and regulations would not have their 
lands taken away. 
 
Redistributed Government Land Includes Forestry Concessions 
--------------------------------------------- -------------- 
¶6. (U) Salvatierra said that the 2.2 million hectares of 
government lands that were being distributed to farmers and 
indigenous communities (ref B) did not include land from 
national parks or protected areas, but did include land being 
used in certified forestry production.  He recognized the 
importance of maintaining environmentally-sound practices in 
these areas.  The Bolivian Forestry Chamber told us that the 
National Agrarian Reform Institute (INRA), the government 
body in charge of titling, recently issued five resolutions 
ceding eight forestry concessions to indigenous communities. 
The eight affected forestry businesses, which employ 5,000 
people, claim that the resolutions violate their legal rights 
under the Constitution and Forestry Law, putting into danger 
all forestry concessions, respect for the rule of law, and 
local employment. 
 
The Next Steps in Land Reform 
----------------------------- 
¶7. (U) Salvatierra told us that in addition to distributing 
government-owned land, the GOB intended to redistribute idle 
privately-owned land to the landless under the current land 
law, a step likely to engender significant conflict.  The 
Constitutional Assembly would likely undertake a revision of 
the 1996 Agrarian Reform Law, he said.  He added that his 
office was working on updating land titling procedures, which 
should be completed within a week.  The expedited procedures 
would allow applicants to obtain title within six months, 
compared to more than two years under current procedures, he 
explained. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Comment: The GOB's recent land reform measures will 
surely boost its popularity among the masses, but are likely 
to generate increasing regional conflict, particularly as 
land redistribution begins.  The redistribution of land over 
which forestry businesses held concessions to indigenous 
communities without discussion or compensation is a bad omen 
for Bolivia's world-leading certified forestry sector and 
private property rights.  End comment. 
GREENLEE