US embassy cable - 05PARIS1001

UNCLAS PARIS 001001 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR EB/IFD/OFD (GARBER & WARD), WHA/CAR AND EUR/WE 
STATE PASS USAID/LAC 
PORT-AU-PRINCE FOR ECON (REIMER) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAID, PREL, EFIN, HA, FR 
SUBJECT: HAITI: FRENCH UNLIKELY TO CHANGE VIEWS ON HAITI 
MINISTERIAL 
 
REF: A. A) MERTEN-WARD E-MAILS 15 FEBRUARY 05 AND PREVIOUS 
 
     B. B) STATE 25099 
 
1.  (SBU) SUMMARY AND COMMENT:  French MFA and Cooperation 
(USAID-equivalent) officials report that any decision to 
change the venue or date of the proposed ministerial meeting 
on development assistance for Haiti would have to be taken by 
Foreign Minister Barnier or even President Chirac.  If we 
hope to turn around the GOF on the details of this proposed 
ministerial, the GOF will have to receive similar strong 
messages about the impracticability of Cayenne as a venue and 
the conflicts regarding the date from other key countries. 
End Summary and comment. 
 
2.  (C) On 15 November Poloff called on DAS-Equavalent for 
Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean, Gilles Bienvenu 
and Haiti Desk Officer Pierre Filatoff on the proposed 
Cayenne ministerial on Haiti development assistance 
coordination.  Bienvenu indicated that the U.S. was not the 
only country with concerns as to the choice of location.  The 
Brazilians and others had also requested a change of venue 
for logistical reasons.  Nevertheless, Bienvenu highlighted 
what he saw as Cayenne's advantages, saying it was not a bad 
place and that the attendees would be in and out within one 
day.  When Poloff questioned this, Bienvenu admitted that for 
a one-day meeting a more convenient location might be better. 
 Any decision on a change of locale would have to be made at 
either the Presidential or the Foreign Minister's level, he 
said. 
 
3.  (SBU) Regarding the meeting itself, Bienvenu explained 
that it would be small -- only a few countries and three or 
four representatives at a high level from each.  The purpose 
was communication between the important actors to discuss 
concrete actions that could be taken quickly.  The goal would 
be to choose a few projects (not too many, or it would get 
bogged down) and put them into action.  One example Bienvenu 
cited was a French-Mexican-US supported hospital in 
Port-de-Paix that could receive electricity from one country, 
supplies from another, and infrastructure from a third.  He 
also envisioned combining the meeting with press/radio 
coverage -- the people of Port-de Paix would hear the 
announcement on the radio and see the results, showing the 
Haitians that the international community didn't just promise 
money, but also followed through.  Bienvenu underlined his 
view that the whole process would be symbolic as well as 
substantive, although the goal would be to focus on high 
impact, short-term projects 
 in order to actually get them done. 
 
4.  (SBU) Bienvenu also questioned participating in a 
conference call before the 24 February meeting in Paris, but 
gave poloff a contact name and number "should someone want to 
talk to him before the 24th."  The meeting on the 24th is to 
lay out the objectives, methods, and projects for discussion 
on 18 March. 
 
5.  (SBU) At Cooperation (USAID-equavelent), Econ Chief heard 
a similar message.  Roland Navaro told Econ Chief that 
"France would be represented at the ministerial level, but 
each country would chose its own delegation."  He emphasized 
that aside from a minister, the GOF envisioned that "a 
technical person, familiar with the projects" in Haiti should 
also be part of any delegation.  This knowledge would be 
important as the discussion would involve concrete plans and 
projects.  He also indicated that he would be interested in 
participating in the conference call proposed for 22 
February.  He noted that any decision to modify the level or 
change the venue would have to be made at the Ministerial or 
even Presidential level.  He indicated that Minister Barnier 
was personally committed to doing this in Cayenne. 
 
6.  (SBU) Navaro also reported that he had just returned from 
Haiti and that he and his colleagues were very impressed by 
the French-U.S. coordination in Haiti.  He said that both 
countries should look at ways of making this cooperation more 
well known both within Haiti (to show the Haitians that the 
international community is unified in wanting to help them) 
and in our own countries (as an example of what can be 
accomplished by working together). 
Leach