US embassy cable - 05QUITO1635

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 QUITO 001635 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/10/2015 
TAGS: PREL, PGOV, SNAR, PTER, EC, CO, Regional 
SUBJECT: BORDER SECURITY DOMINATES PALACIO-URIBE DISCUSSION 
 
REF: QUITO 1534 
 
Classified By: CDA Kevin Herbert, Reasons 1.4 (b), (d) 
 
1.  (C) SUMMARY:  Amidst a perception of frayed bilateral 
relations -- due mainly to GoE leaders' anti-Colombia 
outbursts -- Presidents Alfredo Palacio and Alvaro Uribe 
briefly met July 7 in Costa Rica.  Media here claimed the 
session was substance-lite and lasted only fifteen minutes; 
an MFA contact confirmed that account.  Colombia's charge 
d'affaires in Quito offered a differing version of the San 
Jose summit, however, revealing the presidents' conversation 
included visas, trade issues, coca eradication, and the 
FARC's recent attacks near the frontier.  Regardless of 
substance, the fact Palacio kept the date, combined with 
reduced rhetoric of late, makes us hopeful that bilateral 
dialogue is ongoing.  We are not so optimistic regarding a 
July 25 meeting of foreign ministers, unfortunately.  END 
SUMMARY. 
 
2.  (SBU) Numerous factors and actors deserve blame for the 
recent downturn in Ecuador-Colombia relations.  Three weeks 
ago, Government Minister Mauricio Gandara, Ecuador's 
preeminent Plan Colombia-basher, floated the idea of 
demanding visas of Colombians, a measure aimed at reducing 
growing insecurity and criminality along Ecuador's northern 
frontier.  In response to claims that a recent FARC attack in 
Putumayo originated in Ecuador, FM Parra dragged out a tired 
refrain -- the GoE would not involve itself in the Colombian 
conflict -- but enfuriated the neighboring nation in claiming 
Ecuador was "neutral" between the GoC and FARC, the latter 
"enjoying some legitimacy" in its anti-government efforts. 
Local media initially supported the Palacio team's 
get-tough-with-Colombia policy statement. 
 
3.  (U) Great anticipation therefore accompanied the run-up 
to the summit of banana producing countries held in Costa 
Rica July 7.  Press speculated that Palacio would focus on 
the planks of his Colombia "policy:"  insistence that Bogota 
halt coca eradication near the border, provide assistance to 
help attend to Colombia's displaced in Ecuador, and augment 
its military and police forces in Narino and Putumayo 
departments.  Uribe would demand a return to Ecuador's 
earlier, "submissive" posture, commentators ventured. 
 
4.  (U) July 8 coverage of the gathering was surprisingly 
sparse.  Ecuador's largest-circulation newspaper, 
Guayaquil-based El Universo, asserted the presidents avoided 
in-depth interchange, although their conversation was 
"positive, cordial and constructive."  Other outlets focused 
on the meeting lasting only fifteen minutes.  In public 
comments, Parra revealed the leaders discussed coca 
eradication, Palacio maintaining a firm position:  until 
scientific studies proved irrefutably that glyphosate posed 
no danger to humans, Colombia should halt spraying within ten 
miles of Ecuadorian territory.  Gandara's visa proposal never 
came up, the FM claimed. 
 
5.  (C) In a meeting with Poloffs July 12, MFA Subsecretary 
for Bilateral Affairs Susana Alvear noted the July 7 
gathering was positive but brief -- FMs Barco and Parra would 
tackle substantive issues at their July 25 ministerial in 
Quito.  Colombian Embassy Charge d'Affaires Salvador Escobar 
offered a different take July 11, however, arguing the 
Uribe-Palacio pull-aside was meatier than the press (or 
Alvear) portrayed.  Four pillars dominated the presidential 
discussion:  visas, fumigation, terrorism/border security, 
and bilateral trade. 
 
6.  (C) Uribe insisted a visa regime ran counter to Andean 
Community of Nations (CAN) precepts and would have no effect 
on narcoterrorist and/or criminal incursions, Escobar 
revealed, owing to a plethora of clandestine border 
crossings.  On aerial eradication, his president was 
steadfast:  every inch of Colombian territory was fair game 
for spraying.  Escobar had little detail on the trade 
discussion, offering only that a deal looked possible to 
release a northbound shipment of rice, currently 
"quarantined" in Ecuadorian border town Tulcan. 
 
7.  (C) Terrorism and frontier security had dominated the 
quarter-hour, however.  Palacio was reluctant to sign off on 
a summit declaration condemning that day's London bombings, 
Escobar claimed, and acquiesced only after Uribe pressured. 
The Colombian next raised the July 25 FARC attacks in 
Putumayo, focusing on the confrontation in Puerto Asis (Ref 
A).  That municipality's mayor's allegation the attack had 
originated in Ecuador was correct, Uribe argued.  He provided 
Palacio a Colombian Army intelligence report to back the 
assertion. 
 
8.  (C) Editorializing, Escobar believed the GoE had 
manufactured recent bilateral saddle burrs.  The reason?  To 
galvanize public opinion behind the new administration by 
alleging perilous external threats.  Such bluster also helped 
divert the public's attention from a so-far dubious domestic 
record, the Colombian charge added.  GoC leaders, especially 
FM Barco, shared his views and were prepared to endure 
anti-Plan Colombia words as long as Ecuador's counter-terror 
stance remained firm. 
 
8.  (C) COMMENT:  While we doubt the left-leaning Palacio 
will ever consider close Ecuador-Colombia ties politically 
beneficial, we are optimistic that bilateral relations have 
hit bottom (with the Parra/Gandara comments) and begun to 
improve.  Palacio could have dodged the Uribe meeting or 
worse, "declared victory" to a home media warm to such 
bravado.  He did not.  Rather, his team was muted and 
positive in its public commentary.  Further, in a meeting 
with Codel Thomas (Ref B), Palacio walked back Parra,s 
"neutrality" nonsense )- Colombia's was not a civil war, he 
asserted, but a conflict between narcoterrorism and a 
democratically elected, allied government.  Last, we have no 
indication Ecuador's police and military contingent along the 
frontier, buttressed in recent years, might soon downsize. 
Like Escobar and (purportedly) Barco, therefore, we should 
steel ourselves to obstinate GoE talk, as long as there's no 
accompanying walk, away from the border.  END COMMENT 
HERBERT