Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 5408 / 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
QA
YM YI YE

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 73TEHRAN2077, AUDIENCE WITH SHAH APRIL 5

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. #73TEHRAN2077.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
73TEHRAN2077 1973-04-02 08:08 2011-01-18 21:09 SECRET Embassy Tehran
P 020834Z APR 73
FM AMEMBASSY TEHRAN
TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 1692
INFO AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD PRIORITY
S E C R E T TEHRAN 2077 
 
Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 30 JUN 2005 
 
C O R R E C T E D C O P Y ( FIRST PARAGRAPH AND PARA. 2.) 
 
E. O. 11652: GDS 
TAGS: PFOR IR PK XF
SUBJECT: AUDIENCE WITH SHAH APRIL 5 
 ...


50133  2006-01-19  06THEHAGUE131  Embassy The Hague  CONFIDENTIAL    C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 000131   SIPDIS   SIPDIS   STATE FOR EUR/UBI, EUR/RPM, SA   E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/19/2016  

TAGS: PFOR IR PK XF

SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS/ISAF: PARLIAMENTARY TRIP CANCELED;  LABOR PARTY SHIFTING (SLOWLY)    

Classified By: Charge D'Affaires Chat Blakeman,  reasons 1.4 (b,d)   

1. (C) Summary: The Dutch parliament on January 18 called off  a fact-finding mission to Afghanistan citing security  concerns and time constraints. The decision is not expected  to have a significant impact on the upcoming debate on Dutch  participation in ISAF III. The opposition Labor Party (PvdA)  continues to raise questions about the proposed mission, but  support for the mission within the party appears to be  growing. PvdA Faction Leader Wouter Bos told Charge January  19 that the PvdA is not yet -- but could be -- convinced to  support the mission.   

Parliamentary Trip Canceled  
----------------------------   

2. (C) MFA Deputy Head for Conflict Prevention Joop Nijssen  told Polmiloff January 19 that Parliament opted to cancel the  proposed fact-finding trip to Afghanistan because it would  have little added value in the upcoming parliamentary  debate. Nijssen said the MFA and MOD had arranged a  whirlwind schedule involving one day in Kabul and another in  Kandahar, and were prepared to fly interlocutors from Uruzgan  to discuss the security situation. Nijssen said several  parliamentarians insisted on physically visiting Uruzgan, to  which the GONL declined due to logistical problems.  Nijssen acknowledged the MFA was not particularly upset the  trip had been canceled; security concerns played a key role  in turning down the request to visit Uruzgan.   

3. (C) Parliament hopes to invite experts from NATO and  Afghanistan to participate in the January 30 hearing, thereby  obviating the need for the trip. Moreover, parliamentarians  could use the additional time to prepare for the debate,  Nijssen said. Several parliamentarians -- including Labor  Party (PvdA) spokesman Koenders and CDA spokesman Ormel --  said during a January 17 dinner that they were not enthused  about a trip unless they could visit Uruzgan, and were  confident they could receive the requisite information during  the hearing to make an informed decision.   

Support Building in PvdA  
------------------------
   
4. (C) Several members of the opposition Labor Party (PvdA)  have expressed their willingness -- with caveats -- to  support the ISAF III mission. In an interview with the  left-of-center Amsterdam daily newspaper Parool on January  18, Michiel van Hulten (the newly elected party chairman)  described the ISAF III deployment as the kind of mission  that the PvdA supports but cautioned that questions remain  about whether the significant reconstruction would be  achievable given the security situation and the degree of  separation between ISAF and OEF. According to van Hulten,  the PvdA will gladly go if the mission is sound.   

5. (C) In a meeting with Polcouns on January 18, PvdA Defense  Spokesman Frans Timmermans assessed that support for the  mission within active PvdA membership currently stood at  about 80 percent. (Note: This is much higher than we have  heard from other sources. End note.) Timmermans stressed  that this support was fragile, and could quickly evaporate if  it appeared that the Dutch would not be able to conduct  significant reconstruction work in Uruzgan and/or if the  mission could not be disentangled from OEF. While many in  the party, including those in the traditional left, could  support the deployment on moral and humanitarian grounds,  some also saw the current debate as an opportunity to  embarrass and possibly bring down the current government and  would argue against the deployment for that reason.  Timmermans added that PvdA Parliamentary Faction Leader  Wouter Bos had not yet made up his mind on the issue; once he  did, the rest of the party would fall in line.   

6. (C) Charge and Polcouns met with Wouter Bos and Koenders  on January 19. After hearing Charge's arguments in favor of  the Dutch deployment, Bos expressed sympathy for the  principles of the mission and noted that there was  significant support for it within the party. The PvdA,  however, would not rush to make a decision until all views  had been aired and questions answered. Bos described himself  as not yet convinced about the mission but did not rule out  possible PvdA support. Koenders also expressed support for   the principles of the mission, but reiterated the PvdA's  concerns about keeping OEF and ISAF operations distinct.    

Comment  
-------   

7. (C) PvdA has played the Stage III question cautiously, but  continues to keep an open mind. While the news of their  possible receptivity to the mission is encouraging, PvdA is  not yet sold and we still expect an uphill battle in  Parliament.   BLAKEMAN