Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 251287 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 09ASHGABAT202, TURKMENISTAN: DIPLOMATIC POUCH ISSUE RESOLVED

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
09ASHGABAT202 2009-02-09 13:10 2011-08-30 01:44 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Ashgabat
VZCZCXRO6271
PP RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHAH #0202 0401310
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 091310Z FEB 09
FM AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2296
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE
RHMFISS/CDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 3327
C O N F I D E N T I A L ASHGABAT 000202 
 
SIPDIS 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR SCA/CEN 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/09/2019 
TAGS: PREL AGMT ADPM TX
SUBJECT: TURKMENISTAN: DIPLOMATIC POUCH ISSUE RESOLVED 
 
REF: A. STATE 9696 
     B. ASHGABAT 162 
 
Classified By: Charge Richard Miles for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
1. (C) On February 5, the Embassy was able to resolve a 
contretemps regarding the diplomatic pouch that had started 
two weeks before when the Customs Department at the Ashgabat 
airport started to insist that the Embassy send diplomatic 
notes in order to receive or send the diplomatic pouch.  L 
determined that this requirement by the Turkmenistan 
Government was in contravention of Article 27(3) of the 
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (Ref A).  Charge 
urged quick resolution to the problem during his February 2 
meeting with Foreign Minister Meredov (Ref. B).  Meredov 
promised to go over the issue with the MFA Protocol 
Department and seemed to understand the seriousness of the 
matter. 
 
2. (SBU)  It was after this meeting that we started to see 
some movement, although not "officially."  The Acting Head of 
Customs at the airport indicated to an Embassy FSN that "he 
had never said that a diplomatic note was required" for the 
Embassy to send and receive diplomatic pouches, even though 
that was his position just a few days before.  When we did 
not get official confirmation from MFA February 5 that the 
problem was solved (MGT called the Chief of Protocol, but he 
claimed that no one had talked to him about resolution of the 
issue), we sent over the diplomatic note (Ref A) that 
outlined the U.S. position.  Separately, IMO and an FSN went 
out to the Customs Office at the airport to see if they could 
get our mail.  During the meeting, the Acting Head of Customs 
at the airport called his superiors in the Central Customs 
Office.  Apparently, during the ten-minute phone call, he was 
instructed to sign and stamp the way bills and release the 
bags.  The next day, the Embassy was able to send out a pouch 
without a problem. 
 
WHAT HAPPENED? 
 
3. (C) COMMENT:  It appears that a typically Turkmen problem 
was solved in a typically Turkmen fashion.  The new Acting 
Head of Customs decided that the U.S. Embassyneeded to send 
diplomatic notes to pick up their large bags, just like some 
embassies (France, India, South Korea), but not others (UK, 
Germany, UN).  When queried,the Chief of Protocol sent word 
to the DCM (with whom he is friendly) that the Customs Chief 
was wrong and the Embassy did not have to send a note, but 
reversed himself the next day after a meeting with an Embassy 
officer, whom he does not know well.  It took a meeting with 
the Foreign Minister to get beyond the Chief of Protocol and 
possibly to override the Acting Head of Customs at the 
airport, who appears to have been told to release the bags by 
his superiors.  In the end, both the Acting Head of Customs 
at the airport and the Chief of Protocol took stands that 
allowed them not to lose face, but were irrelevant.  The 
Customs official swore he had never said a diplomatic note 
was necessary, and the MFA Chief of Protocol insisted the 
rule requiring dip notes still stood.  Both were incorrect. 
 
4. (C) COMMENT CONTINUED: Yet, after all this, the Chief of 
MFA's America's Department warned us that this resolution was 
probably only good until new people replace the current ones 
(like the Head of Customs at the airport).  Then the issue 
could surface again.  Given the fact that we have seen 
(presumably) long-resolved issues pop up again, sometimes 
with the same players in place, we don't doubt this problem 
could yet again resurface down the road.  END COMMENT. 
MILES