VZCZCXRO3596
RR RUEHHM
DE RUEHHI #1862/01 3040341
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 310341Z OCT 07
FM AMEMBASSY HANOI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6622
INFO RUEHHM/AMCONSUL HO CHI MINH 3880
RUEHBK/AMEMBASSY BANGKOK 6017
RUEHPH/CDC ATLANTA GA
RUEAUSA/DEPT OF HHS WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC//USDP/ISA/AP/ES//
RHMFIUU/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI//J00/J005/J006/J01LA/J06/J5//
RHEHNSC/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HANOI 001862 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP/MLS, EAP/EP, EAP/RSP, EAP/PD, OES/PCI 
STATE PASS TO USAID FOR ANE, G/ENV 
STATE PASS TO EPA/OIA (DENNIS CUNNINGHAM AND MARK KASMAN) 
STATE PASS TO EPA/ORD (KEVIN TEICHMAN) 
STATE PASS TO OGHA/HHS (STIEGER/VALDEZ/HICKEY) 
CDC FOR OGHA (BLOUT/MCCALL) AND NCEH (THOMAS SINKS) 
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (THOMAS SHUBERT AND WILLIAM VAN HOUTEN) 
HHS PASS TO FIC/NIH (GLASS) AND NIEHS/NIH 
BANGKOK PASS TO RDMA 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL SENV TBIO KPAO VM
SUBJECT: CHANGING VIETNAMESE ATTITUDES ON AGENT ORANGE/DIOXIN 
 
REF: HANOI 1476 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  Changes in Vietnam and U.S.-Vietnam relations, 
combined with a maturing Vietnamese approach to public health, are 
leading to positive shifts in Vietnamese attitudes on the issue of 
Agent Orange (AO) and its contaminent dioxin.  While long-standing 
Government of Vietnam (GVN) propaganda continues to allege U.S. 
responsibility for millions of disabled Vietnamese, AO/dioxin no 
longer plays the principal role in the bilateral relationship it 
once did.  Interactions with GVN officials responsible for AO/dioxin 
continue to grow more collegial and high-level GVN officials now 
publicly acknowledge positive U.S. and multinational efforts to 
address the issue.  While the Vietnamese press continues to publish 
articles focusing on "Agent Orange victims" - and Vietnamese 
officials still wield the issue when "pressured" on human rights, 
etc. - we now also see articles that focus on disseminating general, 
practical information about disabilities, as well as some reports 
noting U.S. skepticism of the scientific basis for many AO claims. 
Past and present U.S. engagement with a more forthright and 
independent public health sector are setting the stage for more 
fundamental shifts over the medium-term, which will help "normalize" 
the issue and encourage greater multilateral efforts to address 
environmental and humanitarian issues.  End Summary. 
 
More Factual Reporting 
---------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) Changes are in the wind with regard to public discourse 
about AO in Vietnam.  While remarks about "Agent Orange victims" can 
still be found in the press almost daily, they have become less 
pervasive and judgemental, with many fewer references to "crimes 
caused by U.S. chemical warfare."  For the first time, the English 
and Vietnamese language local media are printing articles quoting 
American officials refuting the scientific basis for linking dioxin 
with specific disabilities, instead of letting the most expansive 
claims of responsibility remain unanswered.  With increasing 
frequency, major Vietnamese newspapers, such as Tuoi Tre or Saigon 
Giai Phong, publish less politically-inspired general reporting on 
he plight of the disabled without mentioning AO/dioxin - a distinct 
break from past practice.  Senior Vietnamese officials and 
scientific experts with responsibility for AO/dioxin issues are now 
often quoted on ways to assist the disabled or remediate the 
environment, moving beyond the prior focus on liability and 
responsibility. 
 
GVN Acknowledgement of Benefits of U.S. Engagement 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
 
¶3. (SBU) Media outlets are also publishing articles favorably noting 
U.S. engagement.  The February 2007 joint press conference during 
which former Ambassador Marine and Dr. Le Ke Son, the Director 
General of the office in the Ministry of Natural Resources and the 
Environment that coordinates Vietnamese AO/dioxin policy, first 
announced joint cooperation on the AO/dioxin issue (including a 
$400,000 one-year State/EPA project) received widespread, positive 
domestic coverage.  Then-Ambassador Marine's July visit to Danang 
airport, the site of areas with high concentrations of dioxin in the 
soil, also received favorable press attention.  In newspaper reports 
on Ambassador Michalak's initial call on President Nguyen Minh Triet 
this August, Triet acknowledged the U.S. efforts to help "Agent 
Orange/Dioxin victims."  A short October 14 article in Thanh Nien 
newspaper again noted U.S. assistance to "AO victims" and implicitly 
criticized the Vietnamese government for not doing enough.   Media 
coverage of Ford Foundation and UNDP activities further highlight to 
the Vietnamese people U.S. and multilateral efforts to work with the 
GVN to resolve dioxin-related issues. 
 
¶4. (SBU) In contrast to prior exchanges, U.S. and Vietnamese 
scientists at the second annual meeting of the U.S.-Vietnam Joint 
Advisory Committee on the health and environmental effects of 
AO/dioxin in Hanoi this August worked cooperatively and diligently 
to find mutually agreeable environmental, health and capacity 
building recommendations (reftel).  Over the past year, a 
significant number of Vietnamese officials have sought out their 
American counterparts to praise this commitment.  In an October 
 
HANOI 00001862  002 OF 003 
 
 
visit to USAID-funded disabilities programs in Quang Nam province, 
Head of the Vietnam Association of Business for Employment of 
Persons with Disabilities (VABED) Tran Vinh Quang (a former 
Vice-Minister of Labor) responded to comments from the district head 
regarding the high number of "Agent Orange victims" in the locality 
by asking local officials to spend more time concentrating on 
preventable causes of diseases "instead of focusing on the past." 
These statements and actions reflect increased professionalism in 
the Vietnamese approach to public health issues generally, but also 
result from U.S. engagement with senior officials, public diplomacy, 
technical dialogues and joint activities focused on environmental 
assessments. 
 
Less of an Organized Press Campaign 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) While maintaining a system of post-publication censorship, 
GVN propagandists are gradually moving away from instructing the 
press on what it must publish.  Newspapers now run more articles 
explaining what can be done to prevent birth defects and other 
congenital health conditions, instead of repeating AO claims. 
Perhaps reflecting greater pragmatism among the Vietnamese political 
leadership, the mass media has not pursued an organized AO-related 
press campaign since late 2006, just after APEC.  The leadership 
seems to have abandoned attempts to cajole the United States into 
confessing guilt, which it realizes is unlikely to happen and could 
jeopardize continued U.S.-Vietnamese foreign assistance, 
particularly in areas of health cooperation, economic growth, and 
trade.  Instead, the Vietnamese media has begun to reflect the 
public understanding of the benefits of maintaining the status quo, 
under which Vietnam continues to accept assistance from the United 
States for environmental mitigation and for disabled people. 
However, from time to time and undoubtedly at the urging of some 
camps within the GVN, the press writes about "Agent Orange victims" 
to indicate to the general public and certain advocates that the 
issue has not disappeared. 
 
Attitudes Will Not Shift Overnight 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) While we have witnessed an evolving approach towards 
AO/Dioxin reporting, the GVN has invested tremendous resources and 
credibility into a 30-year-old propaganda campaign.  Despite 
increased focus on scientific and medical discussions of public 
health issues, AO/dioxin remains an important issue in bilateral 
relations.  Progress will be incremental.  Some GVN officials will 
continue to raise the issue at inappropriate times and in an 
improper manner, especially when "pressured" on issues like human 
rights.  The media has featured the lawsuit by Vietnamese plaintiffs 
in U.S. courts against the U.S. companies that produced Agent Orange 
(and other tactical herbicides) and will do so as long as the GVN 
remains hopeful that the litigation could lead to payments to 
individuals. 
 
¶7. (SBU) In addition, though Vietnamese censors have loosened press 
controls somewhat, officials cannot quickly reverse this campaign 
without raising serious questions among the Vietnamese citizens 
subjected to overtly biased reporting for so many years.  Some 
international reporting, notably the Christopher Hitchens piece in 
the August 2006 issue of Vanity Fair, reinforce Vietnamese 
predispositions and make it more difficult to address local 
attitudes solely through bilateral interactions. 
 
Responses to Prior USG Actions Suggest Changes Will Continue 
--------------------------------------------- ------ 
 
¶8. (SBU) Nevertheless, greater U.S.-Vietnamese cooperation on the 
issue gives GVN propagandists a face-saving way out.  Due to our 
current efforts, they can highlight scientific cooperation and 
environmental remediation, gradually expand and rationalize the 
definitions and causes of disabilities, and begin to phase-out more 
incendiary and non-factual claims.  Indeed, we see parallels to the 
AO/dioxin issue in the GVN's treatment of the U.S. experience in the 
Central Highlands.  The GVN viewed USAID's initial programs in that 
sensitive region with great suspicion and, at times, hostility. 
 
HANOI 00001862  003 OF 003 
 
 
After several years of success and ongoing collaboration with their 
Vietnamese counterparts, USAID's ongoing projects now enjoy broad 
GVN support and positive media coverage. 
 
Our Continuing Public Diplomacy Efforts 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶9. (SBU) To achieve our goals of "normalizing" this issue and 
removing it as an impediment to U.S-Vietnam relations, we will 
continue our public diplomacy efforts to educate contacts through 
interviews, press releases, and scientific engagement.  We will work 
to ensure that AO/dioxin assistance is seen as part of broader 
humanitarian program, including the well-publicized U.S. Leahy War 
Victims disability assistance.  To better measure our contributions 
to changing Vietnamese attitudes, we plan to more systematically 
examine press coverage of the dioxin issue and compare the 
frequency, content, and location of reporting on different aspects 
of the issue over different time points. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶10. (SBU) Engaging the GVN on AO/dioxin is transformational 
diplomacy, by its nature difficult and time-consuming.  Changing 
attitudes, hardened by a generation of anti-U.S. publicity and 
allegations that AO/dioxin causes widespread disabilities, will take 
time.  However, we now are seeing the fruits of our initial 
technical assistance and public diplomacy efforts.  We do not 
suggest a shift in basic U.S. positions.  U.S. officials should 
continue their focus on the need for sound science to guide joint 
efforts on AO/dioxin.  While statements and actions by U.S. 
officials skeptical of broad Vietnamese claims often provoke 
pushback in the Vietnamese media, we can expect these reactions to 
further diminish as our technical and humanitarian engagement 
increases and Vietnamese public health reporting becomes more 
professional.  Successfully implementing the USD 3 million in 
Economic Support Funds will better enable us to change Vietnamese 
attitudes on AO/dioxin and will encourage multilateral efforts to 
address environmental and health concerns. 
 
MICHALAK