

Currently released so far... 12453 / 251,287
Browse latest releases
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
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Adana
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 Belmopan
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 Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Kolkata
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
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 St Petersburg
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
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
ASEC
AORC
AMGT
APER
AU
AF
AS
ACBAQ
AFGHANISTAN
AFIN
AR
AE
AJ
ADANA
AEMR
AG
ATRN
ADPM
APECO
AGAO
AMED
AX
AM
AL
ADCO
AA
AECL
AADP
ABUD
AMEX
ACAO
ANET
AODE
ASCH
AY
APEC
AID
AORG
ASEAN
AFSI
AFSN
AINF
AGR
AROC
AO
AMBASSADOR
AFFAIRS
ASIG
ABLD
ASUP
AND
ARM
ARF
AQ
ATFN
AC
ACOA
AORL
ADM
AUC
AGMT
ACABQ
ASEX
AFU
ALOW
AZ
APCS
AVERY
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AER
AN
AIT
AMG
AGRICULTURE
AMCHAMS
ACS
BR
BA
BD
BL
BO
BF
BU
BILAT
BEXP
BRUSSELS
BK
BN
BM
BT
BY
BX
BTIO
BIDEN
BG
BE
BP
BBSR
BC
BTIU
BWC
BB
BH
BMGT
CH
CY
CA
CU
CS
CO
CVIS
CPAS
CMGT
CE
COUNTER
CASC
COUNTRY
CJAN
COUNTERTERRORISM
CG
CI
CD
CIDA
CJUS
CDG
CBSA
CEUDA
CR
CM
CLMT
CAC
CBW
CODEL
COPUOS
CWC
CIC
CW
CBE
CHR
CFED
CT
CONS
CIA
CTM
CDC
CVR
CF
CLINTON
CITEL
CLEARANCE
COE
CN
CACS
CAN
CONDOLEEZZA
CB
CSW
CITT
CARSON
CNARC
CACM
CDB
CARICOM
COM
CROS
CAPC
CTR
CV
CKGR
CBC
CL
CICTE
CIS
ECON
EFIN
ELAB
ETRD
EIND
EC
EINV
EAGR
ENRG
ETTC
EAID
EPET
ELTN
EWWT
EAIR
EFIS
EMIN
EG
EU
ER
EUN
EPA
ENVI
EXTERNAL
ECPS
ENGR
ETRC
ECIN
EN
EI
ELN
ET
EINT
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ES
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
EZ
ETRO
EDU
ETRN
EFTA
EAIG
EK
EUREM
EURN
ECONCS
ECONOMICS
ENVR
ELECTIONS
EAP
ENIV
ECONOMY
ESA
EINN
ECONOMIC
EIAR
EXBS
ECA
ECUN
EINDETRD
EUR
EREL
EUC
ESENV
ECONEFIN
ECIP
ENERG
ENNP
EFINECONCS
EFIM
ENGY
EAIDS
EINVEFIN
EINVETC
EUMEM
ETRA
ETC
ERNG
ETRDECONWTOCS
EUNCH
ECINECONCS
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EXIM
ERD
EEPET
IR
IS
IZ
IAEA
IO
IAHRC
ID
IC
IT
IRAQI
IWC
IN
IL
ISLAMISTS
IV
ICAO
INDO
ITPHUM
ITPGOV
ITALIAN
IPR
ICRC
INTERPOL
IQ
IBET
IMO
INR
ITRA
INTERNAL
ICJ
ICTY
IRS
ILO
INRA
INRO
ISRAELI
IEA
INRB
ITALY
ITU
IBRD
IIP
ILC
INTELSAT
IZPREL
IMF
INMARSAT
IRAJ
IDA
ICTR
IA
IGAD
IF
IDP
ITF
ISRAEL
IEFIN
IRC
IACI
KN
KCRM
KOMC
KNNPMNUC
KIPR
KPAL
KWBG
KSCA
KFRD
KNNP
KUNR
KTIP
KWMN
KSTC
KFLU
KOLY
KISL
KPAO
KMDR
KJUS
KSTH
KDEM
KCOR
KIRF
KAWC
KU
KTFN
KWAC
KNPP
KERG
KSEO
KACT
KHLS
KZ
KGHG
KTIA
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KCRCM
KE
KPKO
KCIP
KDRG
KVPR
KV
KIDE
KICC
KPRP
KBIO
KSUM
KGIT
KCFE
KG
KBTS
KFLO
KMPI
KS
KGIC
KPAI
KHSA
KTLA
KSEP
KTEX
KFSC
KOCI
KHDP
KPLS
KTDB
KHIV
KCSY
KSAC
KTRD
KID
KMRS
KOM
KSAF
KRVC
KR
KMOC
KNAR
KIRC
KBCT
KSPR
KFIN
KBTR
KJUST
KNEI
KAWK
KGCC
KMCA
KREL
KMFO
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFTFN
KVRP
KCOM
KO
KLIG
KAID
KVIR
KNSD
KHUM
KSEC
KRAD
KPRV
KCMR
KPWR
KCHG
KIFR
KCFC
KICA
KPIN
KSCI
KESS
KDEV
KTBT
KCRS
KCGC
KOMS
KRIM
KTER
KREC
KPOA
KWWMN
KRGY
KPAK
KWNM
KMIG
KDDG
KRFD
KWMM
KWMNCS
KX
KRCM
KPAONZ
KNUC
KDEMAF
KNUP
MARR
MOPS
MASS
MCAP
MTCRE
MNUC
MIL
MX
MEDIA
MO
MPOS
MU
ML
MA
MP
MY
MERCOSUR
MG
MD
MW
MK
MAS
MEETINGS
MR
MT
MI
MOPPS
MASC
MTS
MLS
MILI
MAR
MTRE
MEPN
MAPP
MTCR
MEPI
MQADHAFI
MAPS
MARAD
MASSMNUC
MEPP
MCC
MZ
MILITARY
MDC
MRCRE
MC
MV
MIK
MUCN
NATO
NL
NZ
NPT
NI
NAFTA
NU
NDP
NIPP
NP
NPA
NG
NRR
NO
NSC
NEW
NE
NH
NR
NA
NS
NSF
NZUS
NATIONAL
NSG
NC
NT
NAR
NK
NGO
NV
NSFO
NSSP
NASA
NW
NPG
NORAD
NATOPREL
OTRA
OAS
OPRC
OIIP
OVIP
OREP
OPDC
OEXC
OSCE
OFFICIALS
OMIG
ODIP
OFDP
OECD
OPIC
OBSP
OPCW
OFDA
OTR
OSAC
OSCI
ON
OCII
OES
OVP
OIC
OPAD
OIE
OHUM
OCS
PREL
PGOV
PK
PHUM
PINS
PARM
PA
PTER
PINR
PREF
PHSA
PBTS
PBIO
PO
POL
PE
PARMS
PM
PROG
PL
PAK
POLITICS
PORG
PTBS
PNAT
PUNE
POLICY
PDOV
PCI
PROP
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PBT
PP
PS
PAO
PG
PY
PTERE
PGOF
PALESTINIAN
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PPA
PINT
PMAR
PRELP
PSEPC
PREFA
PGOVE
PINF
PHUMPGOV
PNG
PMIL
PGOC
PFOR
PCUL
PLN
PSA
PGIV
POLINT
PAS
POGOV
PHUMPREL
PHUMBA
PEL
PGGV
PNR
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PGOVLO
PRAM
PHUS
PDEM
PECON
PF
POV
PROV
PRL
PREO
PAHO
PHUH
PSI
PINL
PU
PRGOV
PAIGH
POLITICAL
PARTIES
POSTS
RS
RU
REACTION
REPORT
REGION
RIGHTS
RO
RW
RCMP
RF
RM
RFE
RSP
RP
RICE
ROBERT
ROOD
RELATIONS
RIGHTSPOLMIL
RUPREL
RSO
SU
SNAR
SO
SOCI
SW
SENV
SMIG
SCUL
SP
SZ
SENVKGHG
SR
SY
SA
SYRIA
SF
SI
SC
SWE
SARS
STEINBERG
SN
SG
SIPRS
ST
SEVN
SL
SPCE
SNARIZ
SSA
SNARCS
SYR
SK
SPCVIS
SHUM
SIPDIS
SHI
SH
SOFA
SEN
SNARN
SAARC
SAN
SANC
SCRS
TRGY
TBIO
TU
TF
TERRORISM
TI
TSPL
TPHY
TH
TIP
TSPA
TC
TO
TW
TX
TZ
TNGD
TT
TL
TV
TFIN
TS
TRSY
TINT
TN
TURKEY
TBID
TD
TK
TR
THPY
TP
TAGS
UNGA
UN
UK
US
UNC
UNSC
USUN
UG
UP
UY
USEU
UNESCO
USPS
USTR
UZ
UNHRC
UNO
UNMIK
UNAUS
UNHCR
UNCHR
USAID
UNVIE
UAE
USOAS
UNFICYP
UV
UNEP
UNODC
UNCHS
UNIDROIT
UNDESCO
UNDC
UNCHC
UNDP
UNCND
USNC
UNPUOS
UNICEF
UNCSD
UE
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 08BRASILIA504,
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.
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. #08BRASILIA504.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
08BRASILIA504 | 2008-04-11 19:07 | 2011-04-10 00:12 | CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN | Embassy Brasilia |
Appears in these articles: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1364384-el-temor-oculto-del-gobierno-a-nuevos-actos-terroristas |
VZCZCXRO0361
RR RUEHRG
DE RUEHBR #0504/01 1021934
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 111934Z APR 08
FM AMEMBASSY BRASILIA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1427
INFO RUEHAC/AMEMBASSY ASUNCION 6707
RUEHBU/AMEMBASSY BUENOS AIRES 5428
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ 6101
RUEHMN/AMEMBASSY MONTEVIDEO 7307
RUEHSG/AMEMBASSY SANTIAGO 0255
RUEHRG/AMCONSUL RECIFE 7908
RUEHRI/AMCONSUL RIO DE JANEIRO 6017
RUEHSO/AMCONSUL SAO PAULO 1888
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RHMCSUU/FBI WASHINGTON DC
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 BRASILIA 000504
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
FOR WHA, WHA/BSC, AND S/CT
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/18/2018
TAGS: PTER PGOV PREL KCRM ETTC EFIN ASEC AR BR
REF: A. BRASILIA 000440 B. BRASILIA 000579 C. SAO PAULO 000991 D. SAO PAULO 000532
Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Phil Chicola.
Reasons 1.4 B and D
¶1. (C) Summary: In November of last year the Government of Brazil announced that it was backtracking on its effort to introduce counterterrorism (CT) legislation after a years-long effort by a working group within the Presidency's Institutional Security Cabinet (GSI) to coordinate the drafting of the initiative within the government. Although they now seek to downplay the importance of having such legislation, prior to the reversal GOB officials claimed that new anti-terrorism legislation was necessary to improve its legal regime--which currently does not treat terrorist activities, terrorism financing, or support of terrorism as crimes. Some news reports have suggested that President Lula's powerful chief of staff quashed the proposed legislation, which had been attacked by some social activists and advocacy groups who feared it could be used against them and compared it to military era repression. The media and political silence that greeted the government's reversal has exposed a vacuum on matters pertaining to terrorism among the elites whose support would be required to overcome GOB resistance. As a result, our efforts to put this legislation back on Brazil's agenda will be an uphill climb. End Summary.
¶2. (U) This cable is the second of two that looks at the Brazilian government's latest actions to counter terrorist activities. The first touched on Brazil's reform of its intelligence and counterterrorism structure.
No Crime Without a Law to Define It
¶3. (U) In 2004, the GOB formed a working group within GSI, the Presidency's office in charge of coordinating intelligence, counternarcotics and national security, charged with examining Brazilian laws related to terrorism, as well as the way the government was structured to deal with the challenges posed by international terrorists (ref A). Prior to this effort, Brazilian government officials and outside observers had concluded that Brazilian laws dealing with terrorism were ambiguous and needed updating to account for modern realities (refs B and C). Under Brazilian law, terrorist acts, their financing, and activities supporting terrorist acts are not considered crimes. Both the Brazilian constitution and the National Security Act (Public Law 7.170 of 1983), which defines crimes against national security, criminalize acts of terrorism in general. However, because the National Security Act harkens back to the military regime, Embassy contacts have indicated that it is highly unlikely the government would ever use it to charge someone with a crime related to a terrorist activity (Ref B). In addition, because terrorism under that law is proscribed without being typified, even in the unlikely case someone attempted to test the prevailing wisdom on the applicability of a military-era national security law to charge someone with the crime of attempting to commit an act of terrorism, they probably would be unable to do so. The Act specifically proscribes criminal acts that could be considered acts of terrorism, such as sabotage and bombings, but only as distinct crimes from terrorism. Because of this, terrorist activities consisting of defined crimes under the law could not be charged explicitly as terrorism.
Domestic Politics to Blame
¶4. (U) As soon as news reports started surfacing in early 2007 that GSI was about to wrap up its work, the government started coming under fire from opponents of the bill. The BRASILIA 00000504 002 OF 004 influential Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil (OAB, the Brazilian bar association) criticized the government for pushing legislation that was, according to OAB's president Cezar Britto, in reality a thinly veiled move to criminalize the actions of social movements and those fighting for equality. Forced on the defensive, several high-ranking GSI officials publicly suggested that any anti-terrorism legislation would be rarely used and that judges would have discretion in applying it. Then in late November 2007, the government unceremoniously announced that it would not introduce the legislation to Congress.
¶5. (C) In a meeting with Poloff, Assistant Secretary Jose Antonio de Macedo Soares of the Secretariat for Monitoring and Institutional Studies, at GSI (and Ministry of External Relations representative to GSI, where he holds the rank of minister) and GSI advisor Janer Tesch Hosken Alvarenga explained that it was impossible to reach consensus within the government on how to define terrorism. Asked to confirm a news item in the daily newspaper Correio Braziliense noting that Minister Dilma Rousseff (chief of staff to President Lula in the Casa Civil) had quashed the proposal, Alvarenga equivocated, suggested that several "clients" had weighed in, including the Ministry of Justice. In the end, he did not deny the news report, stating that the decision had been a "political" one.
¶6. (SBU) A Brazilian War College analyst on strategic intelligence and author of numerous articles on counterterrorism topics, Andre Luis Soloszyn, went farther, asserting to poloff that the Correio story sounded very credible to him, and that the GSI working group was a smokescreen for the government to demonstrate to the US and the international community that it was taking the issue of counterterrorism seriously. Soloszyn noted that there was little chance that this particular government, stacked with leftist militants who had been the object of military dictatorship-era laws designed to repress politically-motivated violence, was going to put forth a bill that would criminalize the actions of groups it sympathizes with, such as the Landless Movement (MST), for "there is no a way to write an anti-terrorism legislation that excludes the actions of the MST".
An Idea Whose Time Has Come(and Gone
¶7. (C) Asked if there was a possibility the legislation could come back some time in the future, both Soares and Alvarenga were pessimistic. Commenting on the enormously complex nature of the issue, Alvarenga noted that discussions of terrorism within Brazilian society remain at an immature stage, with few experts on the topic and very few people interested. Soares added that people within and outside the government find the possibility of a terrorist attack taking place on Brazilian soil so improbable that they are incapable of giving the issue much attention.
¶8. (SBU) Soloszyn echoed these comments, indicating that he is one of the few individuals to focus on the issue of terrorism outside the government. Within the government, the story is not much different, he added, and virtually no one in Congress was focused on the issue. Most legislators and general public are so in the grip of the "it can't happen here" mentality that they lack any idea of terrorist tactics, the concept of support networks, the threat of homegrown terrorism, and exploitation of soft targets. According to Soloszyn, the issue of potential pockets of Islamic extremism among segments of Brazil's large Muslim community is likewise an unstudied subject among specialists, and unthinkable as a proposition among the public at large. The Brazilian mind even among the highest echelons of the government, he added, can't get past its own cliches about the multicultural paradise that is Brazil.
¶9. (SBU) According to him, the only factor that could change this indifference is another wave of violence like that unleashed by the First Capital Command (PCC) in Sao Paulo in 2006 (ref D). Terrorism perpetrated by Islamic extremists is too remote for Brazilians to worry about. The only way they are going to move on this, he added, is when it affects them on a daily basis. (Comment: In the immediate aftermath of the PCC's violence in 2006, President Lula called their actions terrorism, and made noises about finally getting some anti-terrorism legislation on the books. End comment.)
"We have to Stop this Farce"
¶10. (C) In his conversation with poloff, Soares dismissed the importance of the government's reversal, arguing that the success of any potential terrorist attack against the Israeli Embassy in Brasilia is not going to be determined by whether there is a law on the books outlawing terrorism. Brazil, according to him, has excellent working relationships with other countries, he noted, including with the US and Israel. Soares added that he hoped to continue cooperating with the US, despite what he described as the "farcical" elements within the bilateral CT dialogue: Soares did not miss the opportunity to repeat the oft-heard complaint by GOB officials about comments on the part of USG officials suggesting the Triborder Area (TBA) remains a top concern with regard to potential terrorist activity, which then prompt the obligatory Brazilian demands for evidence of such activity. He called the exercise pointless, since, in his words, "we all know that your officials based their statements on information we provide the US". Soares also criticized Argentine officials for their comments linking the TBA to the 1994 AMIA bombing in Buenos Aires, calling their accusations "silly" and "baseless".
------------- Comment: -------------
¶11. (C) After various Brazilian government officials had warned of the flawed nature of the Brazilian legal system, it is unfortunate, though not surprising, to hear GSI officials now argue that there is no need for the GOB to improve Brazil's legal regime to make it illegal to commit, finance, plan, or support terrorist acts. Although we cannot confirm definitively that the Casa Civil quashed the initiative for political or ideological reasons, it is certainly plausible. Outside of some agencies focused on security issues, this government evinces very little interest in terrorism issues, much less on legislation its base has no interest in seeing enacted and that would require significant political capital to push through Congress. Likewise, with little knowledge or enthusiasm within Congress, there is no one to take up the mantle there either. As a result, the initiative has become an orphan of Brazil's current political realities. For the moment, any effort to suppress terrorism, its financing, or activities supporting terrorist activities will have to continue for the foreseeable future to follow the "Al Capone" approach of taking down terrorists based on customs violations, tax fraud, and other crimes that unfortunately also carry less jail time. While this approach can work, it is not a substitute for giving police and judges the additional legal tools that the international community has agreed are necessary in the fight against terrorism and nor is it a substitute for institutionalizing counterterrorism within the Brazilian legal system. Taking Brazil's reform of its CT structure (ref A) together with its backtracking CT legislation once again shows a mixed picture of Brazil's overall CT effort at the policy level. Furthermore, the low standing CT holds as an issue among Brazil's elite casts some doubt as to whether the potentially useful reform of ABIN will actually materialize. Over the next months, Mission will consult with Washington agencies as we review our strategy for increasing Brazilian attention to counter-terrorism.
¶12. (C) Comment, cont: On a separate note, we found Soares' admission that Brazil provides the bulk of the intelligence on matters related to CT to be highly atypical, although it sheds some light on a question that has long-puzzled the Mission. That is, whether policy-level officials, particularly at Itamaraty, where they tend to be most disinclined to accept the suggestion that there may be terrorist elements active in their territory, receive the same information from Brazil's intelligence elements as the U.S. receives. Although we cannot answer definitively, Soares comments would suggest that to be the case and that, despite their denials, they recognize the potential problems Brazil faces. Another possibility is that they have access to the same information but, either because the information would be inadmissible in a Brazilian court or because it does not meet a presumed higher threshold of what constitutes terrorist-related activity, they technically do not consider it evidence of such activity. This means they are either playing games or they are defining terrorism out of Brazil. Neither interpretation presents a flattering picture of the seriousness with which the senior levels of the Brazilian government treat the issue of terrorism, but both are consistent with what we have seen over the last several years from a government that considers CT a low priority. End comment. SOBEL