REDD-Monitor is requesting your help to find the best REDD stories contained in the US Embassy Cables that WikiLeaks released last week. WikiLeaks started releasing edited versions of the cables in November 2010, since when the cables have been trickling out. On 31 August 2011, WikiLeaks released 251,287 US Embassy cables. Unredacted.
WikiLeaks’ media partners The Guardian (UK), The New York Times (USA), Der Spiegel (Germany), El Pais (Spain) and Le Monde (France) put out a statement distancing themselves from the release of the documents:
“We deplore the decision of WikiLeaks to publish the unredacted state department cables, which may put sources at risk. Our previous dealings with WikiLeaks were on the clear basis that we would only publish cables which had been subjected to a thorough editing and clearance process. Today’s decision to publish by Julian Assange was his, and his alone.”
Perhaps not surprisingly there are several versions of exactly how and why WikiLeaks released the unedited cables. “A series of unintentional though negligent acts by multiple parties,” is how Glenn Greenwald describes it, writing on salon.com. The Spiegel website has an excellent timeline of what happened (in English).
To cut a long story short, seven months ago, Guardian journalist David Leigh published a password that Assange gave to Leigh. The password allowed access to a file containing all 251,287 unedited cables. Unknown to Leigh, the encrypted file was available on a torrented mirror of WikiLeaks. That information became public last week, prompting WikiLeaks to release the cables.
REDD-Monitor has found more than 100 cables that mention the word “REDD”. There are some fascinating insights into the way the US government views REDD, as well as interesting opinions on tropical country governments’ view of REDD. For example, on 8 November 2006 (06GEORGETOWN1182), the US Embassy in Georgetown, Guyana sent a cable with the subject, “Jagdeo: Conservation, if the price is right“. The cable points out that:
Jagdeo’s motivation is not preservation for preservation’s sake, and Guyana may ultimately offer its forests to the highest bidder. Currently, logistics, rather than policy, have insulated most of Guyana’s rainforest from development.
(Thanks to nelly avila for posting this cable and alerting REDD-Monitor to it via a comment.)
From Chiang Mai, Thailand, came a 2009 cable (09CHIANGMAI114) titled “Going ‘Green’ to Earn Green: Conservation policies used to displace hill tribes and bring in money.” The cable gives a concise overview of the impacts of government conservation policies on indigenous peoples in Thailand and notes NGO concerns that REDD could make things worse:
“[S]everal NGOs based in northern Thailand are worried that REDD could create further incentives for the RTG to displace highlanders from valuable forests. These NGOs also noted that there is no guarantee that REDD profits will be used to help highland people evicted from their forest homes.
There are some fascinating comments about REDD and the Copenhagen Accord. For example, from Cambodia, came this cable (10PHNOMPENH65) in February 2010:
Post expects that the RGC [Royal Government of Cambodia] will eventually associate itself with the Accord; as a least developed country, Cambodia will not jeopardize its chances at accessing pledged assistance for issues like adaptation and Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) projects.
REDD-Monitor is requesting your help in dealing with this source of information on REDD. While some of the content of the US Embassy cables on REDD is predictable, some include well written summaries of the political situation surrounding REDD in the country.
Please provide links to any interesting REDD and/or forest related stories from the US Embassy Cables in the comments below. Thanks!
UPDATE – 4 September 2011: Several search engines of the cables are available, including these two: cablegatesearch and cables.mrkva.eu.
A series of cables reveal the background to the emergence of REDD on the negotiating table at COP13 in Bali.
Indonesia’s interest in rainforests is set alongside its desire to expand biofuels (see also here ):
“Indonesia has particular interest in seeking financial mechanisms (such as carbon trading) to protect rainforests and expanding biofuels.”
A report on INDONESIA’S TOP COP-13 PLAYERS notes that introducing carbon-market funding mechanisms for REDD is a priority. At the same time as promoting REDD, however, Minister M.S. Kaban (Minister of Forestry) “has also emphasized protecting and nurturing Indonesia’s timber and logging industry.”
The World Bank’s Indonesia office was also active in preparing the FCPF to “kick-start the forest carbon market”.
A cable on Guyana’s Great Carbon-based Hope points out that “Contacts in Guyana’s conservation, development and diplomatic communities shared near unanimous skepticism about Jagdeo’s commitment to a fair consultative process; many opined that it is only cosmetic, a hallmark of Jagdeo’s approach to appeasing donor concerns.”
The cables also shed light on the lack of “additionality” in CDM verification. In particular, a seminar with the US Consulate General Office (Congenoff) and analaysts from the Government Accountability office (which later released a skeptical study on offsets) had the following to say about Verification in India:
Most Indian CDM projects are initiated without foreign backing, and
Although all of the CDM project developers spoken to claim that their projects have sustainability benefits, the cable concludes that
@Oscar – thanks for this – post coming soon about REDD in Indonesia, based on the wikileaks cables.
Not specifically about REDD, but fascinating cable about why Conservation International pulled out of Venezuela (09CARACAS511). Here are some highlights:
Here’s one from Kinshasa: “Greenpeace, Rainforest Foundation, Global Witness Blast World Bank over DRC Forest Policy” (09KINSHASA1095):
As well as the rather astute US Embassy observations on the reality of President Jagdeo’s so-called Low Carbon Development Strategy, as linked to above, there was also this one – again, not directly related to REDD, but following on only 2 months after the risible LCDS launch, clearly relevant to it.
Evidently, the well-meaning folk from the Norwegian government were suitably beguiled by Jagdeo “smiling nicely for the cameras”, as only two months after this, they agreed to put $250m into the LCDS (which has still generated zero results, whilst deforestation in Guyana has actually increased).
Given that the entire diplomatic community in Georgetown seemed to be well aware of the declining state of law and order in Guyana, and that Jagdeo was purely intent on doing everything to secure subsequent further election for his party (or himself) and that he and his cronies were on a charm offensive with donors, and that all power was being centralised in Jagdeo’s hands, it hardly seems credible that the Norwegians were unaware of what would be the fate of their generous REDD fund offering to Jagdeo.
In which case, what exactly *did* the Norwegians think they were going to achieve?
@A Witness – Thanks! It’s interesting that while Jagdeo is trumpeting his Low Carbon Development Strategy, he’s also promoting off-shore oil exploration, as this cable notes (09GEORGETOWN547). The last sentence, below, is also interesting:
And here’s another gem from Guyana (06GEORGETOWN1303). Most of the cable is about transfer pricing in the logging industry in Guyana. The US is (predictably) in favour of carbon trading as a way that the country can “benefit from its forest resources in a more equitable and sustainable way”, and towards the end of the cable comes this:
Indonesia’s support for the draft version of UNDRIP is explained in this 2006 cable (06JAKARTA12541). Jonny Sinaga, deputy director in the Department of Foreign Affairs’ Directorate for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs explained to representatives of the US, Australian and New Zealand Embassies (none of whose governments initially signed on to UNDRIP) that Indonesia supported the draft UNDRIP for the following reasons:
The cable concludes with the following comment:
glad to see the american embassy like propaganda press knows that bharrat jagdeo is a money hungry fraud
you guys would be glad to know that peter persaud who’s a Guyana govt hatchet man masquerading as an indigenous person is the presidential candidate of a party the Guyana govt took over via the courts. this party was a traditionally indigenus party. the candidate hounded down and forced out the party presidential candidate slot is an actual amerindian woman [valerie garrido-lowe] quite unlike peter persaud
just an update on what’s going on in Guyana…and Guyana has not received one cent from norway as more fraud is uncovered daily
This article gives an interesting overview of US government attitudes to indigenous peoples, as revealed by the Wikileaks cables: Wikileaks revealed US espionage of Indigenous Peoples in 2011.