VZCZCXRO6792
RR RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHVN #0787/01 2961010
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 231010Z OCT 07
FM AMEMBASSY VIENTIANE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1589
INFO RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 VIENTIANE 000787 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREF PREL KJUS CVIS PHUM LA TH
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE: HMONG "MATERIAL SUPPORT" EXEMPTION 
 
REF: A. STATE 146812 
     ¶B. VIENTIANE 780 
 
¶1.  (U)  This cable contains an action request.  See 
paragraph 10. 
 
¶2.  (SBU)  Summary:  The Ambassador met with Assistant 
Foreign Minister Alounkeo regarding the Hmong material 
support exemption (Ref A) on October 22.  Despite the 
Ambassador's reassurances that the waiver does not represent 
a departure from U.S. policy opposing violent action against 
the Lao government, Mr. Alounkeo expressed serious concern 
about the implications and potential effects of a waiver.  He 
said that this action by the USG represents a departure from 
its strong anti-terrorist stance.  He expressed concern that 
the waiver would result in renewed migration to Thailand by 
Lao Hmong hoping to go on to the U.S, dismissing the notion 
that the 2004 cutoff date or public clarifications would 
deter new migration.  End summary. 
 
¶3.  (U)  The Ambassador, accompanied by the DCM, called on 
Assistant Foreign Minister Alounkeo Kittikhoun on October 22 
to discuss the expected signature by the Secretary of an 
exemption determining that the material support 
inadmissibility provisions of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act do not apply to individuals who provided material support 
to Hmong groups before December 31, 2004.  (Note:  In fact, 
the Secretary had signed the waiver on October 20, but the 
Embassy did not receive word of this until October 23.  End 
note.) 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  After the Ambassador made the points provided in 
Ref A, Mr. Alounkeo said that the issuance of a waiver 
appeared to contradict the USG's stated opposition to any 
kind of terrorist activity.  "You are going against your own 
policy," he said.  The Ambassador responded that persons who 
had committed acts aimed at destabilizing the Lao government 
would continue to be barred from becoming citizens.  He said 
that the U.S. does not condone acts of violence against the 
Lao government. 
 
¶5.  (SBU)  Mr. Alounkeo asked how many people the waiver 
would apply to.  The Ambassador said that the number was 
uncertain.  The primary goal, he said, was to deal with those 
among the 15,000 persons resettled from Wat Tham Krabok in 
Thailand in 2004 who would not qualify for citizenship 
because of the material support provision.  Mr. Alounkeo 
expressed concern that the waiver would encourage other Lao 
Hmong to go to Thailand in the hope of being resettled in the 
U.S.  The Ambassador replied that that the USG would make it 
clear to the public that there will not be another 
resettlement program.  That, plus the December 31, 2004 
cutoff date, which would disqualify people who continue to 
provide material support, should limit the "pull factor." 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  Mr. Alounkeo expressed skepticism that this would 
discourage Lao Hmong from going to Thailand, asking, "How can 
you control them?"  He added that, because transfer of funds 
was one of the categories of material support cited in the 
legislation, the waiver could be interpreted by resettled 
Hmong in the U.S. as an implicit endorsement of funding to 
anti-government Hmong groups after resettlement in the United 
States.  Mr. Alounkeo reiterated that the background 
information provided by the Ambassador "does not allay our 
fear" that anti-government Hmong elements in Laos will think 
that the U.S. is condoning their terrorist activities. 
 
¶7.  (SBU)  Mr. Alounkeo asked whether the waiver would bring 
legislative initiatives on this issue to an end.  The 
Ambassador replied that individual members of Congress may 
continue to pursue legislation, but others may feel that it 
is not needed with the waiver in place. 
 
¶8.  (SBU)  Mr. Alounkeo said that his comments represented a 
preliminary GOL response pending discussions with Foreign 
Minister Thongloun Sisoulith, but appeared confident that the 
final GOL response would be similar to his own expressed 
views. 
 
¶9.  (SBU)  Comment:  Mr. Alounkeo's strong negative reaction 
to the waiver is not surprising and is consistent with 
comments made to the Ambassador by other senior MFA officials 
and the Prime Minister in prior discussion of the issue (Ref 
B).  Since the idea of a waiver first surfaced in the press 
several months ago, the GOL has made it clear that it views 
this issue as a litmus test of the sincerity of the USG's 
stated opposition to efforts to destabilize the Lao 
government.  Embassy anticipates that the Lao government will 
soon deliver a formal protest.  Whether the Lao will respond 
by curtailing our emerging areas of cooperation and dialogue 
is less certain.  What is certain is that the waiver will 
strengthen the voices of those who remain suspicious of U.S. 
 
VIENTIANE 00000787  002 OF 002 
 
 
intentions and opposed to improved cooperation with the U.S. 
End comment. 
 
¶10.  (SBU)  ACTION REQUEST:  One step we could and should 
take to send a clear signal of our intention, and bolster 
reformers in the government, would be to lift the current 
restrictions on Exim Bank programs for Laos (Ref B). 
HUSO