Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 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
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 06LIMA2039, THE GARCIA-HUMALA DEBATE: THE TWO TALK PAST EACH

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. #06LIMA2039.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
06LIMA2039 2006-05-23 22:06 2011-08-25 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Lima
VZCZCXYZ0013
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHPE #2039/01 1432206
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 232206Z MAY 06
FM AMEMBASSY LIMA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0619
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 3417
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 6758
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 9478
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ MAY QUITO 0357
RUEHSG/AMEMBASSY SANTIAGO 0540
RUMIAAA/CDR USCINCSO MIAMI FL
RHEHAAA/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
UNCLAS LIMA 002039 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PINR PE
SUBJECT: THE GARCIA-HUMALA DEBATE: THE TWO TALK PAST EACH 
OTHER TO THEIR TARGET AUDIENCES 
 
REF: A. LIMA 1974 
 
     B. LIMA 1887 
     C. LIMA 1852 
 
Sensitive but Unclassified.  Please protect accordingly. 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
1.  (SBU)  APRA's Alan Garcia and Union por el Peru's (UPP) 
Ollanta Humala talked past one another in their 5/21 
"debate," aiming their presentations at separate target 
audiences.  Garcia, addressing the fifty percent of the 
population who did not vote for either run-off  finalist, 
sought to portray himself as an elder statesman who stands 
for "responsible change" and has learned from his prior 
mistakes.  Humala concentrated on his base of support among 
Peru's marginalized majority, starting off by combatively 
challenging the debate format and the legitimacy of Peruvian 
democracy, and proceeding through an assemblage of populist 
declarations and accusations of misgovernment and corruption 
by Garcia's 1985-90 administration.  Garcia countered 
effectively at times, trying to link Humala to imprisoned 
former national security advisor Vladimiro Montesinos as well 
as to Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales and Fidel Castro, but Humala 
scored points too, particularly by highlighting the APRA 
candidate's failure to state a clear position on the Free 
Trade Agreement with the U.S. or on whether he would pardon 
Montesinos.  Two polls of Lima residents the day after found 
that most thought Garcia had "won" the debate, but it does 
not appear that the contest will change many voters' minds. 
END SUMMARY. 
 
--------------------------- 
HUMALA'S PRE-SHOW THEATRICS 
--------------------------- 
 
2.  (U)  The debate started nearly 20 minutes late due to 
Humala's tardiness.  Though Humala claimed that his arrival 
was delayed by APRA supporters, journalists observed that he 
was dropped off five blocks from the debate site at the 
National Archeological and Anthropological Museum and, in the 
course of a leisurely walk, he chose to stop off at a store 
to buy water.  His arrival at the museum led to a mob scene 
with the press, which caused further delay.  Upon reaching 
the podium Humala, dressed in an open-necked shirt and jacket 
(sans tie), placed a small Peruvian flag on the podium. 
Additional time was consumed as the moderator, "Peru 21" 
editor Alvaro Augusto Rodrich, insisted that both podiums be 
kept equally free of decorations.  When Humala refused to 
remove the flag himself, the moderator did so. 
 
------------------------------------ 
THE CANDIDATES' DIFFERENT APPROACHES 
------------------------------------ 
 
3.  (SBU)  When the debate finally began, it soon became 
clear that the two candidates were taking completely 
different approaches.  Garcia, who seemed to be addressing 
the fifty percent of the population who voted for candidates 
other than the two run-off finalists, sought to portray 
himself as an elder statesman who stands for "responsible 
change" and has learned from his prior mistakes.  His 
presentation concentrated on providing concrete examples as 
to how an APRA government would address the five topics 
chosen for discussion (democracy/human rights, economic 
policy, social policy/anti-corruption, decentralization, 
citizen security), all the while preaching cooperation with 
other political parties. 
 
4.  (SBU)  Humala, on the other hand, made a confrontational 
appeal to his disaffected base amongst Peru's marginalized 
majority.  He opened his first presentation by questioning 
the legitimacy of Peru's current democracy, claiming that it 
was controlled by powerful domestic economic interests and 
transnational companies.  By the time his closing statement 
came about, Humala (Humala who is less experienced as a 
speaker than Garcia) substituted volume for passion and 
shouted out a list of his commitments: setting a public 
example of austerity, overturning the 1993 Constitution, 
calling for a constitutional assembly, fighting corruption, 
 
reclaiming natural resources for the state, and promoting 
Latin American integration.  He concluded by awkwardly 
exclaiming his full name as if he were declaiming a 
proclamation. 
 
---------------------------- 
THE THRUST AND COUNTERTHRUST 
---------------------------- 
 
5.  (U)  Both candidates went after the other though no more 
so than is characteristic of U.S. Presidential debates. 
Humala questioned Garcia's integrity (citing a corruption 
prosecution that was foreclosed by the statute of 
limitations), the APRA candidate's prior government (reading 
from a World Bank report blaming some 17,000 infant deaths on 
the economic crisis brought about by Garcia's policies), and 
his cronies (imprisoned former Interior Minister Agustin 
Mantilla).  Humala also addressed Montesinos' recent claims 
that Humala's 2000 uprising was designed as a smokescreen to 
assist in the former national security advisor's escape 
(Septel) by turning it on its head, insisting that this 
demonstrated that Montesinos favored his opponent, and 
challenging Garcia to promise not/not to pardon Montesinos. 
(Comment: Given Garcia's weak record as President from 
1985-90, it was in fact surprising that Humala did not make 
more of that experience. End Comment.) 
 
6.  (U)  Garcia, as noted, took a more calculating approach, 
ignoring most of Humala's charges and waiting for openings. 
Thus, when Humala asked Garcia whether he would liberate 
Montesinos, the APRA candidate responded that Humala had 
already done so via his 2000 "uprising," but Garcia did 
not/not reply to Humala's pointed question as to whether he 
would issue a pardon if elected.  Garcia countered Humala's 
attacks on his government (which were not followed up by the 
UPP candidate) by responding to the Comandante that most of 
Peru's problems are due to the fact that it has been governed 
for most of the past fifty years by military officers, adding 
that a prosperous future depended upon democratic, not 
authoritarian, leaders.  In addition, Garcia sought to tie 
Humala to the Chavez-Morales-Castro axis, as well as to 
Humala's brother Antauro's 2005 armed uprising in 
Andahuaylas, which resulted in the death of four policemen 
(Ref C). 
 
----------------------- 
POSITIONS ON THE ISSUES 
----------------------- 
 
7. (U)  The debate was organized around five themes: 
democracy, governability, and human rights; economic policy 
and fight against poverty; social policy and anti-corruption; 
decentralization; and citizen security.  Candidates took 
turns on the issues with a 3 minute presentation, 2 minute 
rebuttal, and one minute closing time each.  There 
presentations can be summarized as follows: 
 
Democracy, governability, and human rights: 
 
-- Garcia called for a new democracy that respects freedom 
and resists authoritarianism. He identified economic growth 
and investment as central to this democracy and noted that a 
constitutional assembly was not necessary. 
 
-- Humala said that Peru's current democracy does not/not 
represent the majority of Peruvians, and is beholden to 
domestic economic interests and transnational companies. He 
added that governability does not equate with social peace 
and that a majority of Peruvians were preoccupied with a lack 
of basic necessities (electricity and water).   Humala called 
for a new constitution, a new democracy, and a 
re-distribution of power.  He also called for implementing 
the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation 
Commission. 
 
Economic policy and poverty: 
 
-- Garcia said economic and social growth were necessary to 
transform Peru into a first world country and surpass Chile. 
He proposed building a mega-port in the south, promoting 
natural gas, increasing agricultural exports with help from 
an agricultural bank, and developing commerce, especially in 
 
 
the southern departments.  Garcia also advocated for strict 
adherence to legal requirements for overtime pay and respect 
for labor rights.  He emphasized the need for foreign 
investment, warning that otherwise these funds and technology 
would be snapped up by Chile. 
 
-- Humala claimed the country's macro-economic growth has led 
to increased inequality and exclusion.  He offered an 
alternative to the "neo-liberal" model that focused on 
building internal markets and promised growth for all, not 
just a few.  He was particularly critical of the emphasis on 
exploitation of natural resources, which he said belong to 
the State, and said his government would review contracts of 
mining companies that were not paying royalties.  Humala also 
said he would revise the Free Trade Agreement with the U.S. 
(challenging Garcia to take a position on this issue, 
something the APRA leader ignored) and proposed returning to 
the 1979 Constitution through a Constitutional Assembly. 
 
Social policy and anti-corruption: 
 
-- Garcia said his priorities were to create jobs, improve 
education by increasing teacher salaries and instituting 
longer class days, improve health care, and provide 
affordable housing.  Garcia called for a reduction in 
government salaries and for the money saved to be used for 
programs to end hunger and illiteracy, as well as to provide 
water for those without access.  He pledged to fight 
narcotrafficking by controlling precursor chemicals. 
 
-- Humala proposed increases in spending on child nutrition, 
water infrastructure, and police and doctor salaries. He also 
expressed strong support for labor rights. 
 
Decentralization: 
 
-- Both candidates were strong advocates of decentralization 
and empowering the regions.  Garcia called for increased 
delegation of fiscal management and decision making.  He 
criticized President Toledo's approach to regionalization as 
insufficient and blamed the Ministry of Economy and Financing 
for blocking regional governments' infrastructure projects. 
 
-- Humala said decentralization would help solve the 
education and unemployment problems. Humala called for a 
50/50 split of resources between the regions and the central 
government and said he would eliminate the prefect and 
sub-prefect positions. Humala also took the notion of 
decentralization a step further by backing the creation of 
regional and municipal police forces. 
 
Citizen security: 
 
-- Garcia emphasized order and stability if elected, 
distinguishing himself from Humala as the candidate who 
supports a unitary National Police.  Garcia proposed more 
police stations, more officers, increased sentences for 
repeat offenders, and the death penalty for child rapists. 
He also pledged to re-equip and strengthen the armed forces. 
 
-- Humala tried to connect Garcia with the terrorist activity 
that increased during the latter's presidency. He proposed 
empowering mayors to set citizen security policy tailoring it 
as appropriate to local needs.  Humala also distinguished 
himself from Garcia by proposing a greater role for local 
self-defense organizations (Garcia replied that informal 
vigilante groups smacked of Chavez- or Castro-style control 
mechanisms). 
------------------ 
COMMENT:  WHO WON? 
------------------ 
 
8.  (SBU)  Neither candidate scored a clear knockout blow 
during the debate, which is not surprising given that they 
mostly talked past each other and to their separate target 
audiences.  In polls taken in Lima the day after inquiring as 
to who performed better, Garcia came out ahead 57 to 22 
percent in the Apoyo survey, and by 61.8-20.1 percent in a 
CPI poll.  The Apoyo poll found that 10 percent have changed 
their voting intention, while CPI concluded that Garcia would 
gain slightly as a result of the debate.  In sum, the two 
candidates offered few surprises and their 90 minute verbal 
 
give-and-take probably will have only a marginal effect on 
the outcome of the election.  END COMMENT. 
STRUBLE