Cable Viewer

Currently released so far... 5283 / 251,287

### Articles

Brazil Sri Lanka United Kingdom Sweden Editorial United States Latin America Egypt Yemen Jordan

### Browse latest releases

2010/11 2010/12 2011/01 2011/02 2011/03
2010/11/28 2010/11/29 2010/11/30
2010/12/01 2010/12/02 2010/12/03 2010/12/04 2010/12/05 2010/12/06 2010/12/07 2010/12/08 2010/12/09 2010/12/10 2010/12/11 2010/12/12 2010/12/13 2010/12/14 2010/12/15 2010/12/16 2010/12/17 2010/12/18 2010/12/19 2010/12/20 2010/12/21 2010/12/22 2010/12/23 2010/12/24 2010/12/25 2010/12/26 2010/12/27 2010/12/28 2010/12/29 2010/12/30
2011/01/01 2011/01/02 2011/01/04 2011/01/05 2011/01/07 2011/01/09 2011/01/10 2011/01/11 2011/01/12 2011/01/13 2011/01/14 2011/01/15 2011/01/16 2011/01/17 2011/01/18 2011/01/19 2011/01/20 2011/01/21 2011/01/22 2011/01/23 2011/01/24 2011/01/25 2011/01/26 2011/01/27 2011/01/28 2011/01/29 2011/01/30 2011/01/31
2011/02/01 2011/02/02 2011/02/03 2011/02/04 2011/02/05 2011/02/06 2011/02/07 2011/02/08 2011/02/09 2011/02/10 2011/02/11 2011/02/12 2011/02/13 2011/02/14 2011/02/15 2011/02/16 2011/02/17 2011/02/18 2011/02/19 2011/02/20 2011/02/21 2011/02/22 2011/02/23 2011/02/24 2011/02/25 2011/02/26 2011/02/27 2011/02/28
2011/03/01 2011/03/02 2011/03/03 2011/03/04 2011/03/05 2011/03/06 2011/03/07

### Browse by creation date

66 72 73 75 79 86 88 89 90 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
1966/12
1972/02 1972/08
1973/04
1975/03
1979/08
1986/05
1988/01
1989/12
1990/01 1990/07 1990/08
2000/06 2000/09 2000/11
2001/02 2001/03 2001/07 2001/10
2002/02 2002/03 2002/11
2003/03 2003/04 2003/05 2003/06 2003/07 2003/08 2003/09 2003/10 2003/11 2003/12
2004/01 2004/02 2004/03 2004/04 2004/05 2004/06 2004/07 2004/08 2004/09 2004/10 2004/11 2004/12
2005/01 2005/02 2005/03 2005/04 2005/05 2005/06 2005/07 2005/08 2005/09 2005/10 2005/11 2005/12
2006/01 2006/02 2006/03 2006/04 2006/05 2006/06 2006/07 2006/08 2006/09 2006/10 2006/11 2006/12
2007/01 2007/02 2007/03 2007/04 2007/05 2007/06 2007/07 2007/08 2007/09 2007/10 2007/11 2007/12
2008/01 2008/02 2008/03 2008/04 2008/05 2008/06 2008/07 2008/08 2008/09 2008/10 2008/11 2008/12
2009/01 2009/02 2009/03 2009/04 2009/05 2009/06 2009/07 2009/08 2009/09 2009/10 2009/11 2009/12
2010/01 2010/02

### 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
Embassy Athens Embassy Asuncion Embassy Astana Embassy Asmara Embassy Ashgabat Embassy Ankara Embassy Amman Embassy Algiers Embassy Addis Ababa Embassy Accra Embassy Abuja Embassy Abu Dhabi Embassy Abidjan Consulate Amsterdam American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura Embassy Buenos Aires Embassy Budapest Embassy Bucharest Embassy Brussels Embassy Bridgetown Embassy Bratislava Embassy Brasilia Embassy Bogota Embassy Bishkek Embassy Bern Embassy Berlin Embassy Belgrade Embassy Beirut Embassy Beijing Embassy Banjul Embassy Bangkok Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan Embassy Bamako Embassy Baku Embassy Baghdad Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen Embassy Conakry Embassy Colombo Embassy Chisinau Embassy Caracas Embassy Canberra Embassy Cairo Consulate Curacao Consulate Casablanca Consulate Cape Town
Embassy Dushanbe Embassy Dublin Embassy Doha Embassy Djibouti Embassy Dhaka Embassy Dar Es Salaam Embassy Damascus Embassy Dakar Consulate Dubai
Embassy Freetown
Embassy Guatemala Embassy Gaborone Consulate Guadalajara
Embassy Helsinki Embassy Harare Embassy Hanoi Consulate Hermosillo Consulate Hamburg
Iran RPO Dubai Embassy Islamabad Consulate Istanbul
Embassy Jakarta Consulate Jerusalem Consulate Jeddah
Embassy Kyiv Embassy Kuwait Embassy Kuala Lumpur Embassy Kinshasa Embassy Kigali Embassy Khartoum Embassy Kampala Embassy Kabul
Embassy Luxembourg Embassy Luanda Embassy London Embassy Ljubljana Embassy Lisbon Embassy Lima Embassy Lilongwe Embassy La Paz Consulate Lagos
Mission USNATO Embassy Muscat Embassy Moscow Embassy Montevideo Embassy Monrovia Embassy Minsk Embassy Mexico Embassy Mbabane Embassy Maputo Embassy Manama Embassy Managua Embassy Malabo Embassy Madrid Consulate Munich Consulate Montreal Consulate Monterrey Consulate Milan
Embassy New Delhi Embassy Nassau Embassy Nairobi Consulate Naples
Embassy Ouagadougou Embassy Ottawa Embassy Oslo
Embassy Pristina Embassy Pretoria Embassy Prague Embassy Port Au Prince Embassy Phnom Penh Embassy Paris Embassy Paramaribo Embassy Panama Consulate Peshawar
Embassy Quito
REO Basrah Embassy Rome Embassy Riyadh Embassy Riga Embassy Reykjavik Embassy Rangoon Embassy Rabat Consulate Rio De Janeiro Consulate Recife
Secretary of State Embassy Stockholm Embassy Sofia Embassy Skopje Embassy Singapore Embassy Seoul Embassy Sarajevo Embassy Santo Domingo Embassy Santiago Embassy Sanaa Embassy San Salvador Embassy San Jose Consulate Strasbourg Consulate Shenyang Consulate Shanghai Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis Embassy Tripoli Embassy Tokyo Embassy The Hague Embassy Tel Aviv Embassy Tehran Embassy Tegucigalpa Embassy Tbilisi Embassy Tashkent Embassy Tallinn
USUN New York USEU Brussels US Mission Geneva US Interests Section Havana US Delegation, Secretary UNVIE Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius Embassy Vienna Embassy Vatican Consulate Vladivostok
Embassy Windhoek Embassy Wellington Embassy Warsaw
Embassy Yerevan Embassy Yaounde
Embassy Zagreb

### 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
AF ASEC AR AORC AJ AM AMGT AE AU AGMT AG AS AFIN APER ABUD ATRN AL AEMR ACOA AO AX AMED ADCO AODE AFFAIRS AC ASIG ABLD AA AFU ASUP AROC ATFN AVERY APCS AER ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG AEC APECO
BM BR BL BA BILAT BTIO BEXP BH BE BK BRUSSELS BX BU BO BIDEN BY BG BF BB BC BBSR BMGT BTIU
CU CO CH CDG CIA CACM CDB CI CS CVIS CA CBW CASC CD CV CMGT CLINTON CE CJAN CG CF CN CAN COUNTER CIS CM CONDOLEEZZA COE CR CY CTM COUNTRY CLEARANCE CPAS CWC CT CKGR CB CACS COM CJUS CARSON CL COUNTERTERRORISM
DJ DEAX DR DA DHS DOE DEA DK DISENGAGEMENT DS DTRA DOD
EG ECON ETTC EFIN EZ ETRD EUN ELAB EU EINV EAID EMIN ENRG ECPS EN ER ET ES EPET EUC EI EAIR EAGR EIND EWWT ELTN EREL ECIN EFIS EINT EC ECONEFIN ENVR ECA ELN EFTA EXTERNAL EINVETC ENIV EINN ENGR EUR ESA ENERG EK ENGY ETRO ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS ETRDEINVTINTCS ENVI ESENV ELECTIONS ECUN EINVEFIN ECIP EINDETRD
FR FINR FAO FTAA FREEDOM FI FARC FBI FJ FMLN
GM GG GV GH GA GE GT GR GTIP GOI GCC GAZA GZ GTMO
HU HR HA HILLARY HUMAN HO HYMPSK HURI HK HSTC
IV IR IS IZ IAEA IN IT ICTY IQ ICAO INTERPOL IPR INRB IRAJ INRA INRO IO IC ID IIP ITPHUM IWC ISRAELI IRAQI ICRC IMO IF ILC IEFIN INTELSAT IL IA IBRD IMF INR IRC ITALY ITALIAN
JAMES JO JA JOSEPH JP JOHNNIE JUS
KGIC KDEM KTIP KOMC KNNP KWBG KU KPAL KGHG KAWK KISL KPAO KHLS KSUM KSPR KJUS KCRM KGCC KPIN KDRG KTFN KG KBIO KHIV KSCA KN KS KCOR KZ KE KFRD KIPR KPKO KNUC KMDR KPLS KOLY KUNR KIRF KIRC KACT KRAD KCOM KMCA KV KHDP KVPR KDEV KWMN KMPI KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KCFC KTIA KPRP KAWC KCIP KCFE KOCI KTDB KMRS KLIG KBCT KICC KGIT KSTC KPAK KNEI KSEP KPOA KFLU KNUP KNNPMNUC KO KTER KHUM KRFD KBTR KDDG KWWMN KFLO KSAF KBTS KPRV KNPP KNAR KWMM KERG KFIN KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KTBT KCRS KRVC KSTH KREL KNSD KTEX KPAI KHSA KR KPWR KWAC KMIG KSEC KIFR KDEMAF
LE LG LH LY LU LI LO LOG LT
MOPS MARR MNUC MX MASS MCAP MO MIL MTCRE ML MR MZ MPOS MOPPS MTCR MAPP MU MY MA MG MASC MCC MEPP MK MTRE MP MDC MAR MEPI MRCRE MI MT MQADHAFI MD MAPS MUCN MASSMNUC MERCOSUR MC
NATO NL NU NIPP NI NPT NG NO NE NS NAR NZ NPG NK NSG NA NT NASA NGO NP NSF NATIONAL
OVIP OPDC OPRC OIIP OFFICIALS OSAC OAS OEXC ODIP OREP OFDP OTRA OSCE OPIC OECD OPCW OSCI OIE OIC OTR OVP
PARM PREL PTER PHUM PGOV PINR PINS PREF PK PE PBTS POGOV PROP PINL PL POL PBIO PSOE PHSA PKFK PO PGOF PA PARMS PORG PM PMIL PTERE PF PALESTINIAN PY PGGV PNR POV PAK PAO PFOR PHALANAGE PARTY PRGOV PNAT PROV PEL PINF PGOVE POLINT PRL PRAM PMAR PGOVLO PHUMBA PHUS PHUMPREL POLITICS PEPR PSI PINT PU POLITICAL PARTIES PECON
QA
RS RO REGION RU RW RP RIGHTS RICE ROBERT RF RFE
SOCI SY SENV SA SP SNAR SG SCUL SR STEINBERG SF SW SU SL SMIG SO SN SHUM SZ SYR ST SANC SC SAN SIPRS SK SH SI
TS TU TX TBIO TW TSPA TH TIP TI TRGY TC TR TT TERRORISM TO TFIN TD TSPL TZ TPHY TK TNGD TINT TRSY TP
UK UN US UNGA UNSC UNO UNMIK UV UY UP UG USEU USUN UZ UNESCO UE UAE UNEP USTR UNHCR UNDP UNHRC USAID UNCHS UNAUS UNCHC
VE VZ VN VT VM VTPREL
WTO WTRO WA WI WZ WMO WTRQ WHO WWARD WB WBG WEU WHA
XG XT XM XF XR XS XL XK XH XA XY XC XZ XW XD XE
YE YM YI
ZB ZI ZF ZP ZK ZANU ZOELLICK ZR ZU ZA ZO ZJ

### Browse by classification

CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN SECRET SECRET//NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

### Community resources

Follow us on Twitter Check our Reddit Twitter this Digg this page Contact us on IRC

courage is contagious

### Viewing cable 10BRASILIA156, BRAZIL: FOREST CODE PROVOKES HEATED DEBATE BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND FARMERS

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
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:

- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #10BRASILIA156.

Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
10BRASILIA156 | 2010-02-10 19:07 | 2010-12-14 15:03 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | Embassy Brasilia

`

    VZCZCXRO0760
    RR RUEHAST RUEHDH RUEHHM RUEHLN RUEHMA RUEHPB RUEHPOD RUEHSL RUEHTRO
    DE RUEHBR #0156/01 0411903
    ZNR UUUUU ZZH
    R 101901Z FEB 10
    FM AMEMBASSY BRASILIA
    TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0463
    INFO ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE
    RUEHC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHINGTON DC
    RUEHRG/AMCONSUL RECIFE
    RUEHRI/AMCONSUL RIO DE JANEIRO
    RUEHSO/AMCONSUL SAO PAULO

` `

    UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BRASILIA 000156

    SENSITIVE
    SIPDIS

    E.O. 12958: N/A
    TAGS: SENV EAGR KGHG KSCA BR
    SUBJECT: BRAZIL: FOREST CODE PROVOKES HEATED DEBATE BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND FARMERS

    REF: 2009 BRASILIA 123; 2009 BRASILIA 893 (U) THIS CABLE IS SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED AND NOT FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION.

    ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY. The Brazilian Forest Code's requirement that a rural landowner in the Amazon maintain 80 percent of the native forest as a legal reserve has produced a heated dispute between the agriculture and environmental communities. Environmentalists see it as a potentially powerful tool to prevent deforestation, and the agriculture sector views it as economically ruinous for millions of ranchers and farmers. As a practical matter, that legal reserve requirement has never been effectively implemented, and President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has decided, once again, to postpone implementation till June 2011 - after the upcoming national elections. While the debate continues over the Forest Code, the Government of Brazil's other policies have contributed to a sharp decline in the rate of Amazon deforestation from 21.5 thousand square kilometers in 2002 to 7.0 thousand last year. END SUMMARY

    FOREST CODE'S CONTROVERSIAL RESERVE REQUIREMENT

    ¶2. (SBU) The Brazilian Forest Code (Law 4,771 from Sept. 15, 1965) began its life as much a tool for sound soil and water resources management as to promote forest conservation. The law required maintenance of forests in strategic areas, such as along rivers, streams and lakes, on tops of hills and mountains, and on steep hillsides, to protect water quality and prevention erosion. At the time of its enactment in 1965, the Brazilian Government supported policies to clear the Amazon for agricultural production. The Constitution still includes a provision requiring a landowner to make productive use of the land, which is commonly read to mean that landowners must clear some forests for agriculture purposes or risk losing the land. The Forest Code initially required rural properties in the Amazon Region to maintain 50 percent of the native forest on the property. This area is called the "reserva legal" (or legal reserve). The legal reserve was 20 percent for rural areas in the savannah (or "Cerrado") region and also 20 percent for the rest of the country.

    ¶3. (SBU) In response to massive deforestation in the Amazon, then-President Fernando Henrique Cardoso sought to turn the Forest Code into a central tool to conserve the Amazon. In 1996 he issued a "Provisory Measure" to amend the Forest Code to raise the legal reserve requirement in the Amazon to 80 percent and in the Cerrado to 35 percent. Opposition from the powerful rural bloc in Congress, however, ensured that this measure was not brought up for a vote. Instead, the Presidency reissued the measure 67 times to keep it in effect, until 2001 when the rules governing Provisory Measures were changed. Today, although the Congress never voted on it, the 2001 Provisory Measure is generally viewed as having the effect of law.

    ¶4. (SBU) The Government of Brazil (GOB) has not pursued violators of the legal reserve requirement in the Amazon, whether using the 50 percent or the 80 percent standard. It looked as though this was about to change on December 11, 2009. That was the date when legislation on environmental crimes, including possible criminal sanctions and stiff fines for violating the Forest Code, was scheduled to enter into effect. Previously, the government lacked the authority to severely punish violators of the Forest Code's reserve requirement. (REFTEL A)

    A REPRIEVE UNTIL AFTER THE NATIONAL ELECTIONS

    ¶5. (SBU) On December 10, 2009, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva signed Presidential Decree number 7029, which postponed the  criminal and stiffer penalties for violations of the Forest Code. This new Decree creates the Program Mais Ambiente (or "More Environment") that provides a three year period for all land owners to register their lands with the competent government authority. In order to become legal, the landholder will need to register the size of the legal reserve with appropriate documentation and in case the reserve size is under the 80 percent, the landholder must enter an agreement with the government, committing to correct this problem. To calm the environmental sector, President Lula decided that there will be fines and criminal penalties for those landholders who do not register their holdings under the program and those who are not in compliance with the Forest Code's reserve requirements starting June 11, 2011, giving errant landholders at least an 18 months' reprieve. 6. (SBU) Agriculture Minister Reinhold Stephanes supported the decision by saying that if Presidente Lula hadn't set a new deadline over three million agricultural producers would have become criminals. Out of that total, one million farmers and ranchers would have likely been in a position to lose their land. Environment Minister Carlos Minc sought to make the best of the decision. He stated that "The [Mais Ambiente] Program will help those producers who want to protect the environment to make their property legal. The Program gives a hand to those who want to protect the environment, which is mandatory."

    COMMENT. It is no surprise that the government stepped away from turning millions of farmers and ranchers into criminals who could potential lose their land; especially in light of the upcoming October 2010 national elections.

    END COMMENT.

    ¶7. (SBU) The vocal environmental community had foreseen the GOB's lack of support for the Forest Code. Back in October 2009, a group made of fifteen important environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs) wrote an open letter criticizing the GOB's efforts to make, what they considered one of Brazil's most important environmental legislation, less stringent. These NGOs contended that the Forest Code is not as draconian as painted by the rural lobby. The fines and penalties are supposed to be implemented in a flexible way. For example, sanctions for violations of the Code are to be imposed after a determination that a violation has taken place and the landholder has been officially notified. After notification, a landholder would normally have 180 days to solve any pending issues with the authorities.

    (NOTE: As a practical matter, identifying and notifying violators would be a slow process due to the size of the Amazon and the limited staff in the region, as well as the lack of information about particular landholdings. If the GOB becomes serious about penalizing the large number of landholders in violation of the Forest Code, the national government can expect stiff opposition and possibly even violent push back, like those that occurred in the municipality of Tailandia last year after government raids on illegal loggers or in Novo Progresso, where even Brazilian researchers viewed as "snooping" around were run off. END NOTE)

    LONG TERM SOLUTION NEEDED 8. (SBU) President Lula's postponement of the implementation of criminal penalties and fines for violation of the legal reserve only defers this controversial issue, but does not solve it. Currently, there are about thirty proposals in Congress to modify the Forest Code, most of which call for changing the legal reserve requirement. The National Agriculture Confederation (CNA) told Post that while they support efforts to reduce deforestation, they view the current 80 percent requirement as unworkable. There are a number of proposals to return the requirement to 50 percent, which would make it possible for large numbers of ranchers and farmers who couldn't economically sustain themselves at the 80 percent level to comply with the law. Environmental groups in Brazil are divided on this step too. Greenpeace calls reducing the requirement a sell-out, but Friends of the Earth consider it a pragmatic and constructive step. The head of the Special Commission in the Chamber of Deputies looking at amending the Forest Code, Aldo Rebelo (Communist Party-Sao Paulo), wants to bring the proposed amendments to a vote in April, including one heavily criticized by environmentalists that would allow each state to establish the applicable legal reserve. In a recent press interview, Rebelo complained that the GOB through the 2001 Provisory Measure the GOB had "altered the [1965 Forest Code] without listening to anyone."

    ¶9. (SBU) While the dispute over the 80 percent legal reserve requirement continues, a couple of practical solutions are coming into play. The Forest Code provides (Article 16) that an Economic-Ecological Zoning (ZEE) can reduce the legal reserve to 50 percent. The small western Amazonian state of Acre has a ZEE in place and is taking advantage of this option. Unfortunately, this is not a solution for the whole region because of the lack of ZEEs (it is an extremely complex and long study) and, as a political matter, the government doesn't want to use this exception to throw out the 80 percent requirement on a wholesale basis. Another possible solution is being pursued by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), which seeks to work with landowners to satisfy the 80 percent requirement by using compensatory land tracts. The concept is that the landholder instead of meeting the 80 percent requirement with its land would conserve the required amount of forests on other lands in the biome. This theoretically could work, but needs further development and approval by the government.

    MEANWHILE - REGISTERING TITLE

    ¶10. (SBU) While it remains an open question of when, if ever, and in what form the Forest Code will be enforced, Brazil is pursuing less controversial measures that may have a far greater impact on deforestation. These include establishing large protected areas and indigenous reserves, increasing law enforcement efforts against illegal land grabs, and cutting off financial credits for areas responsible for large amounts of deforestation. Moreover, the national and state governments have sought to clarify the murky question of land title in the Amazon. In a January 2010 presentation, the World Bank estimated that 85 percent of the land occupied by private interests (which is about 30 percent of the total) lacks documentation or are based on suspicious or fraudulent title documents. The government last year passed a law (REFTEL B) that creates a path for clear title for small parcels of land in the Amazon region. Further, by tying financial credits to a municipality's registration of land titles, the national government is giving an incentive for resolving the ownership question. For example, the municipality of Paragominas - previously one of the more prolific deforesters - should meet the registration requirement in a few months and its mayor has called for zero deforestation. Preliminary information suggests that when landholders obtain clear title they begin to behave more responsibly and reduce the rate of deforestation.

    ¶11. (SBU) COMMENT: The Forest Code's 80 percent legal reserve requirement in the Amazon Forest has generated much heated debate in Brazil since its proposal in 1996. Never having been implemented, it has served principally as a point of dispute between the agriculture and environmental communities, while others less controversial policies have been effective at reducing the deforestation rate in the Amazon. Since coming into office, the Lula Administration has overseen a decline in the rate of deforestation in the Amazon from 21.5 thousand square kilometers in 2002 to 7.0 thousand last year. If the deforestation rate continues to drop, then the environmentalist community may be willing to show more flexibility about a pragmatic compromise on the Forest Code when the issue comes up again in 2011. END COMMENT. SHANNON SHANNON

`