

Currently released so far... 51122 / 251,287
Articles
Brazil
Sri Lanka
United Kingdom
Sweden
00. Editorial
United States
Latin America
Egypt
Jordan
Yemen
Thailand
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
2011/05/01
2011/05/02
2011/05/03
2011/05/04
2011/05/05
2011/05/06
2011/05/07
2011/05/08
2011/05/09
2011/05/10
2011/05/11
2011/05/12
2011/05/13
2011/05/14
2011/05/15
2011/05/16
2011/05/17
2011/05/18
2011/05/19
2011/05/20
2011/05/21
2011/05/22
2011/05/23
2011/05/24
2011/05/25
2011/05/26
2011/05/27
2011/05/28
2011/05/29
2011/05/30
2011/05/31
2011/06/01
2011/06/02
2011/06/03
2011/06/04
2011/06/05
2011/06/06
2011/06/07
2011/06/08
2011/06/09
2011/06/10
2011/06/11
2011/06/12
2011/06/13
2011/06/14
2011/06/15
2011/06/16
2011/06/17
2011/06/18
2011/06/19
2011/06/20
2011/06/21
2011/06/22
2011/06/23
2011/06/24
2011/06/25
2011/06/26
2011/06/27
2011/06/28
2011/06/29
2011/06/30
2011/07/01
2011/07/02
2011/07/04
2011/07/05
2011/07/06
2011/07/07
2011/07/08
2011/07/10
2011/07/11
2011/07/12
2011/07/13
2011/07/14
2011/07/15
2011/07/16
2011/07/17
2011/07/18
2011/07/19
2011/07/20
2011/07/21
2011/07/22
2011/07/23
2011/07/25
2011/07/27
2011/07/28
2011/07/29
2011/07/31
2011/08/01
2011/08/02
2011/08/03
2011/08/05
2011/08/06
2011/08/07
2011/08/08
2011/08/09
2011/08/10
2011/08/11
2011/08/12
2011/08/13
2011/08/15
2011/08/16
2011/08/17
2011/08/18
2011/08/19
2011/08/21
2011/08/22
2011/08/23
2011/08/24
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Antananarivo
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Alexandria
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embasy Bonn
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Brazzaville
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangui
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Belfast
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Cotonou
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chiang Mai
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Chengdu
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
DIR FSINFATC
Consulate Dusseldorf
Consulate Durban
Consulate Dubai
Consulate Dhahran
Embassy Guatemala
Embassy Grenada
Embassy Georgetown
Embassy Gaborone
Consulate Guayaquil
Consulate Guangzhou
Consulate Guadalajara
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Hong Kong
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kolonia
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Krakow
Consulate Kolkata
Consulate Karachi
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Lusaka
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Lome
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy Libreville
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Leipzig
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Mission Geneva
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Mogadishu
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maseru
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Merida
Consulate Melbourne
Consulate Matamoros
Consulate Marseille
Embassy Nouakchott
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Nuevo Laredo
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Consulate Nagoya
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Praia
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Moresby
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Podgorica
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Hillah
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Surabaya
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy Tirana
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
Consulate Thessaloniki
USUN New York
USMISSION USTR GENEVA
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Mission CD Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
UN Rome
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vientiane
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AMGT
ASEC
AEMR
AR
APECO
AU
AORC
ADANA
AJ
AF
AFIN
AMED
AS
AM
ABLD
AFFAIRS
AMB
APER
ACOA
AND
AA
AE
AADP
AID
AO
AL
AG
AORD
ADM
AINF
AINT
ASEAN
AORG
ABT
APEC
AY
ASUP
ARF
AGOA
AVIAN
ATRN
ANET
AGIT
ASECVE
ABUD
AODE
ALOW
ADB
AN
ADPM
ASPA
ARABL
AFSN
AZ
AC
AIAG
AFSI
ASCE
ASIG
ACABQ
ADIP
AFGHANISTAN
AROC
ADCO
ACOTA
ANARCHISTS
AMEDCASCKFLO
AK
ARABBL
ASCH
ANTITERRORISM
AGRICULTURE
AOCR
ARR
ASSEMBLY
AORCYM
AFPK
ACKM
AGMT
AEC
APRC
AIN
AFPREL
ASFC
ASECTH
AFSA
AINR
AOPC
AFAF
AFARI
AX
ASECAF
ASECAFIN
AT
AFZAL
APCS
AGAO
AIT
ARCH
AEMRASECCASCKFLOMARRPRELPINRAMGTJMXL
AMEX
ARM
AQ
ATFN
AMBASSADOR
AORCD
AVIATION
ARAS
AINFCY
ACBAQ
AOPR
AREP
AOIC
ASEX
ASEK
AER
AGR
AMCT
AVERY
APR
AEMRS
AFU
AMG
ATPDEA
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AORL
ACS
AMCHAMS
AECL
AUC
ACAO
BA
BR
BB
BG
BEXP
BY
BRUSSELS
BU
BD
BTIO
BK
BL
BE
BMGT
BO
BM
BX
BN
BWC
BBSR
BTT
BC
BH
BILAT
BUSH
BHUM
BT
BTC
BMENA
BOND
BAIO
BP
BF
BRPA
BURNS
BUT
BBG
BCW
BOEHNER
BOL
BASHAR
BIDEN
BFIN
BZ
BEXPC
BTIU
CPAS
CA
CASC
CS
CBW
CIDA
CO
CODEL
CI
CROS
CU
CH
CWC
CMGT
CVIS
CDG
CTR
CG
CF
CHIEF
CJAN
CBSA
CE
CY
CB
CW
CM
CHR
CD
COE
CV
COUNTER
CT
CN
CPUOS
CTERR
CVR
CVPR
CDC
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
CONS
COM
CACS
CR
CONTROLS
CAN
CACM
COMMERCE
CAMBODIA
CFIS
COUNTERTERRORISM
CITES
CONDOLEEZZA
CZ
CTBT
CEN
CLINTON
CFED
CARC
CTM
CARICOM
CSW
CICTE
CYPRUS
CBE
CMGMT
CARSON
CWCM
CIVS
COUNTRYCLEARANCE
CENTCOM
CAPC
COPUOS
CKGR
CITEL
CQ
CITT
CIC
CARIB
CVIC
CAFTA
CVISU
CDB
CEDAW
CNC
CJUS
COMMAND
CENTER
COL
CAJC
CONSULAR
CLMT
CBC
CIA
CNARC
CIS
CEUDA
CHINA
CAC
CL
DR
DJ
DEMOCRATIC
DEMARCHE
DOMESTIC
DISENGAGEMENT
DB
DA
DHS
DAO
DCM
DAVID
DO
DEAX
DEFENSE
DEA
DTRO
DPRK
DOC
DTRA
DK
DAC
DOD
DRL
DRC
DCG
DE
DOT
DEPT
DOE
DS
DKEM
ECON
ETTC
EFIS
ETRD
EC
EMIN
EAGR
EAID
EFIN
EUN
ECIN
EG
EWWT
EINV
ENRG
ELAB
EPET
EIND
EN
EAIR
EUMEM
ECPS
ES
EI
ELTN
ET
EZ
EU
ER
EINT
ENGR
ECONOMIC
ENIV
EFTA
ETRN
EMS
EUREM
EPA
ESTH
EEB
EET
ENV
EAG
EXIM
ECTRD
ELNT
ENVIRONMENT
ECA
EAP
EINDIR
ETR
ECONOMY
ETRC
ELECTIONS
EICN
EXPORT
EARG
EGHG
EID
ETRO
EINF
EAIDHO
ECIP
EENV
EURM
EPEC
ERNG
ENERG
EIAD
EXBS
ED
EREL
ELAM
EK
EWT
ENGRD
EDEV
ECE
ENGY
EXIMOPIC
ETRDEC
ECCT
EUR
ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID
EFI
ECOSOC
EXTERNAL
ESCAP
ETCC
EENG
ERA
ENRD
ECLAC
ETRAD
EBRD
ENVR
ECONENRG
ELTNSNAR
ELAP
EPIT
EDUC
EAIDXMXAXBXFFR
EETC
EIVN
EDRC
EGOV
ETRA
EAIDRW
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ESA
ETRDGK
ENVI
ELN
EPRT
EPTED
ERTD
EUM
EAIDS
EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM
EDU
EV
EAIDAF
EDA
EPREL
EINVEFIN
EAGER
ETMIN
EUCOM
ECCP
EIDN
EINVKSCA
ENNP
EFINECONCS
ETC
EAIRASECCASCID
EINN
ETRP
ECONOMICS
ENERGY
EIAR
EINDETRD
ECONEFIN
EURN
ETRDEINVTINTCS
EFIM
ETIO
EATO
EIPR
EINVETC
ETTD
ETDR
EIQ
ECONCS
ENRGIZ
EAIG
ENTG
EUC
ERD
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EEPET
EUNCH
ESENV
ECINECONCS
ETRDECONWTOCS
ECUN
FR
FI
FOREIGN
FARM
FIR
FAO
FK
FARC
FAS
FJ
FREEDOM
FAC
FINANCE
FBI
FTAA
FM
FCS
FAA
FORCE
FDA
FTA
FT
FCSC
FMGT
FINR
FIN
FDIC
FOR
FOI
FO
FMLN
FISO
GM
GERARD
GT
GA
GG
GR
GTIP
GH
GZ
GE
GB
GY
GAZA
GJ
GEORGE
GOI
GCC
GMUS
GI
GLOBAL
GV
GC
GL
GOV
GKGIC
GF
GWI
GIPNC
GUTIERREZ
GTMO
GANGS
GAERC
GUILLERMO
GASPAR
HR
HA
HYMPSK
HO
HK
HUMAN
HU
HN
HHS
HURI
HUD
HUMRIT
HUMANITARIAN
HUMANR
HL
HSTC
HILLARY
HCOPIL
HADLEY
HOURANI
HI
HUM
HEBRON
HUMOR
IZ
IN
IAEA
IS
IMO
ILO
IR
IC
IT
ITU
ID
IV
IMF
IBRD
IWC
ICAO
ICRC
INF
IO
IPR
ISO
IK
ISRAELI
IQ
ICES
IDB
INFLUENZA
IRAQI
ISCON
IGAD
IRAN
ITALY
IRAQ
ICTY
ICTR
ITPGOV
ITALIAN
IQNV
IADB
INTERNAL
INMARSAT
IRDB
ILC
INCB
INRB
ICJ
ISRAEL
INR
IEA
ISPA
ICCAT
IOM
ITRD
IHO
IL
IFAD
ITRA
IDLI
ISCA
INL
INRA
INTELSAT
ISAF
ISPL
IRS
IEF
ITER
INDO
IIP
IND
IEFIN
IACI
IAHRC
INNP
IA
INTERPOL
IFIN
ISSUES
IZPREL
IRAJ
IF
ITPHUM
ITA
IP
IRPE
IDA
ISLAMISTS
ITF
INRO
IBET
IDP
IRC
KMDR
KPAO
KOMC
KNNP
KFLO
KDEM
KSUM
KIPR
KFLU
KE
KCRM
KJUS
KAWC
KZ
KSCA
KDRG
KCOR
KGHG
KPAL
KTIP
KMCA
KCRS
KPKO
KOLY
KRVC
KVPR
KG
KWBG
KTER
KS
KN
KSPR
KWMN
KV
KTFN
KFRD
KU
KSTC
KSTH
KISL
KGIC
KSEP
KFIN
KTEX
KTIA
KUNR
KCMR
KCIP
KMOC
KTDB
KBIO
KBCT
KMPI
KSAF
KACT
KFEM
KPRV
KPWR
KIRC
KCFE
KRIM
KHIV
KHLS
KVIR
KNNNP
KCEM
KLIG
KIRF
KNUP
KSAC
KNUC
KPGOV
KTDD
KIDE
KOMS
KLFU
KNNC
KMFO
KSEO
KJRE
KJUST
KMRS
KSRE
KGIT
KPIR
KPOA
KUWAIT
KIVP
KICC
KSCS
KPOL
KSEAO
KRCM
KSCI
KNAP
KGLB
KICA
KCUL
KPRM
KFSC
KQ
KPOP
KPFO
KPALAOIS
KREC
KBWG
KR
KTTB
KNAR
KCOM
KESS
KINR
KOCI
KWN
KCSY
KREL
KTBT
KFTN
KW
KRFD
KFLOA
KHDP
KNEP
KIND
KHUM
KSKN
KOMO
KDRL
KTFIN
KSOC
KPO
KGIV
KSTCPL
KSI
KPRP
KFPC
KNNB
KNDP
KICCPUR
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KDMR
KFCE
KIMMITT
KMCC
KMNP
KSEC
KOMCSG
KGCC
KRAD
KCRP
KAUST
KWAWC
KCHG
KRDP
KPAS
KTIAPARM
KPAOPREL
KWGB
KIRP
KMIG
KLAB
KSEI
KHSA
KNPP
KPAONZ
KWWW
KGHA
KY
KCRIM
KCRCM
KGCN
KPLS
KIIP
KPAOY
KTRD
KTAO
KJU
KBTS
KWAC
KFIU
KNNO
KPAI
KILS
KPA
KRCS
KWBGSY
KNPPIS
KNNPMNUC
KNPT
KERG
KLTN
KPREL
KTLA
KO
KAWK
KVRP
KAID
KX
KENV
KWCI
KNPR
KCFC
KNEI
KFTFN
KTFM
KCERS
KDEMAF
KMEPI
KEMS
KBTR
KEDU
KIRL
KNNR
KMPT
KPDD
KPIN
KDEV
KFRP
KTBD
KMSG
KWWMN
KWBC
KA
KOM
KWNM
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KRGY
KNNF
KICR
KIFR
KWMNCS
KPAK
KDDG
KCGC
KID
KNSD
KMPF
KWMM
MARR
MX
MASS
MOPS
MNUC
MCAP
MTCRE
MRCRE
MTRE
MASC
MY
MK
MG
MU
MILI
MO
MZ
MEPP
MCC
MEDIA
MOPPS
MI
MAS
MW
MP
MEPN
MV
MD
MR
MC
MCA
MT
MIL
MARITIME
MOPSGRPARM
MAAR
MOOPS
ML
MA
MN
MNUCPTEREZ
MTCR
MUNC
MPOS
MONUC
MGMT
MURRAY
MACP
MINUSTAH
MCCONNELL
MGT
MNUR
MF
MEPI
MOHAMMAD
MAR
MAPP
MNU
MFA
MTS
MLS
MEETINGS
MERCOSUR
MED
MNVC
MIK
MBM
MILITARY
MAPS
MARAD
MDC
MACEDONIA
MASSMNUC
MUCN
MQADHAFI
MPS
NZ
NATO
NI
NO
NU
NG
NL
NPT
NS
NA
NP
NASA
NSF
NEA
NANCY
NSG
NRR
NATIONAL
NMNUC
NC
NSC
NAS
NARC
NELSON
NATEU
NDP
NIH
NK
NIPP
NR
NERG
NSSP
NE
NTDB
NT
NEGROPONTE
NGO
NATOIRAQ
NAR
NZUS
NCCC
NH
NAFTA
NEW
NRG
NUIN
NOVO
NATOPREL
NV
NICHOLAS
NPA
NSFO
NW
NORAD
NPG
NOAA
OPRC
OPDC
OTRA
OECD
OVIP
OREP
ODC
OIIP
OAS
OSCE
OPIC
OMS
OFDP
OFDA
OEXC
OPCW
OIE
OSCI
OM
OPAD
ODPC
OIC
ODIP
OPPI
ORA
OCEA
OREG
OMIG
OFFICIALS
OSAC
OEXP
OPEC
OFPD
OAU
OCII
OIL
OVIPPRELUNGANU
OSHA
OPCD
OPCR
OF
OFDPQIS
OSIC
OHUM
OTR
OBSP
OGAC
OESC
OVP
ON
OES
OTAR
OCS
PREL
PGOV
PARM
PINR
PHUM
PM
PREF
PTER
PK
PINS
PBIO
PHSA
PE
PBTS
PA
PL
POL
PAK
POV
POLITICS
POLICY
PO
PRELTBIOBA
PKO
PIN
PNAT
PU
PGOVPREL
PALESTINIAN
PTERPGOV
PELOSI
PAS
PP
PTEL
PROP
PRELAF
PRHUM
PRE
PUNE
PIRF
PVOV
PROG
PERSONS
PROV
PKK
PRGOV
PH
PLAB
PDEM
PCI
PRL
PRM
PINSO
PERM
PETR
PPAO
PERL
PBS
PETERS
PRELBR
PCON
POLITICAL
PMIL
POLM
PKPA
PNUM
PLO
PTERM
PJUS
PARMP
PNIR
PHUMKPAL
PG
PREZ
PGIC
PAO
PROTECTION
PRELPK
PGOVENRG
PATTY
PSOC
PARTIES
PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ
PMIG
PAIGH
PARK
PETER
PHUS
PKPO
PGOVECON
POUS
PMAR
PWBG
PAR
PGOVGM
PHUH
PTE
PY
POLUN
PDOV
PGOVSOCI
PGOVPM
PRELEVU
PGOR
PBTSRU
PHUMA
PHUMR
PPD
PGV
PRAM
PARMS
PINL
PSI
PKPAL
PPA
PTERE
PGOF
PINO
PREO
PHAS
PAC
PRESL
PORG
PS
PGVO
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PINT
PRELP
PREFA
PNG
PTBS
PFOR
PGOVLO
PHUMBA
PREK
PHJM
POLINT
PGOVE
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PECON
PEACE
PROCESS
PLN
PEDRO
PF
PGPV
PCUL
PGGV
PSA
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PGIV
PHUMPREL
POGOV
PEL
PBT
PAMQ
PINF
PSEPC
POSTS
PAHO
PHUMPGOV
PGOC
PNR
RS
RP
RU
RW
RFE
RCMP
RIGHTSPOLMIL
REFORM
RO
ROW
ROBERT
REACTION
REPORT
REGION
RELATIONS
RAY
ROBERTG
RIGHTS
RM
RATIFICATION
RREL
RBI
RICE
ROOD
REL
RODHAM
RGY
RUEHZO
RELIGIOUS
RELFREE
RUEUN
RELAM
RSP
RF
REO
REGIONAL
RUPREL
RI
REMON
RPEL
RSO
SCUL
SENV
SOCI
SZ
SNAR
SO
SP
SU
SY
SI
SMIG
SYR
SA
SW
SF
SR
SYRIA
SNARM
START
SPECIALIST
SG
SNIG
SCI
SGWI
SE
SIPDIS
SANC
SELAB
SN
SETTLEMENTS
SCIENCE
SENVENV
SENS
SPCE
SPAS
SECURITY
SENC
SOCIETY
SOSI
SENVEAGREAIDTBIOECONSOCIXR
SEN
SPECI
ST
SL
SENVCASCEAIDID
SC
SECRETARY
STR
SNA
SOCIS
SADC
SEP
SK
SHUM
SYAI
SMIL
STEPHEN
SNRV
SKCA
SENSITIVE
SECI
SCUD
SCRM
SGNV
SECTOR
SAARC
SENVSXE
SWMN
STEINBERG
SOPN
SOCR
SCRS
SWE
SARS
SNARIZ
SUDAN
SENVQGR
SAN
SM
SFNV
SSA
SPCVIS
SOFA
SCULKPAOECONTU
SENVKGHG
SHI
SEVN
SH
SNARCS
SNARN
SIPRS
TBIO
TW
TRGY
TSPA
TU
TPHY
TI
TX
TH
TIP
TSPL
TNGD
TZ
TS
TC
TK
TURKEY
TERRORISM
TPSL
TINT
TRSY
TERFIN
TPP
TT
TECHNOLOGY
TE
TAGS
TRAFFICKING
TJ
TN
TO
TD
TP
TREATY
TR
TA
TIO
TECH
TF
TRAD
TNDG
TWI
TPSA
TWL
TAUSCHER
TRBY
TL
TV
THPY
TSPAM
TREL
TRT
TNAR
TFIN
TWCH
THOMMA
THOMAS
TERROR
TRY
TBID
UK
UNESCO
UNSC
UNGA
UN
US
UZ
USEU
UG
UP
UNAUS
UNMIK
USTR
UY
USUN
UNEP
UNDC
UV
UNPUOS
UNSCR
USAID
UNODC
UNRCR
UNHCR
UNDP
UNCRIME
UA
UNHRC
UNRWA
UNO
UNCND
UNCHR
USAU
UNICEF
USPS
UNOMIG
UNESCOSCULPRELPHUMKPALCUIRXFVEKV
UR
UNFICYP
UNCITRAL
UNAMA
UNVIE
USTDA
USNC
UNCSD
USCC
UNEF
UNGAPL
USSC
UNMIC
UNTAC
UNCLASSIFIED
USDA
UNCTAD
USGS
UNFPA
UNSE
USOAS
UE
UAE
UNCHS
UNDESCO
UNC
UNSCS
UKXG
UNGACG
UNHR
UNBRO
UNCHC
UNFCYP
UNIDROIT
WHTI
WIPO
WTRO
WHO
WTO
WMO
WFP
WEET
WS
WE
WA
WHA
WBG
WILLIAM
WI
WSIS
WCL
WEBZ
WZ
WW
WWBG
WMD
WWT
WMN
WWARD
WITH
WTRQ
WCO
WEU
WB
WBEG
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 09BRUSSELS41, EU TERRORISM FINANCE LISTINGS: TROUBLE AHEAD
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.
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. #09BRUSSELS41.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
09BRUSSELS41 | 2009-01-13 10:59 | 2011-08-24 01:00 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | USEU Brussels |
VZCZCXRO5462
OO RUEHAG RUEHBC RUEHDE RUEHDF RUEHDIR RUEHIK RUEHKUK RUEHLZ RUEHROV
RUEHSR RUEHTRO
DE RUEHBS #0041/01 0131059
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 131059Z JAN 09 ZDK
FM USEU BRUSSELS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY
INFO RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC
RHMFIUU/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC
RUEAORC/US CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION WASHINGTON DC
RUEADRO/HQ ICE DRO WASHINGTON DC
RHMFIUU/FBI WASHINGTON DC
RHMFIUU/HOMELAND SECURITY CENTER WASHINGTON DC
RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE
RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
RUCNIRA/IRAN COLLECTIVE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/DOD WASHDC
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 BRUSSELS 000041
SENSITIVE, FOR INTERNAL USG USE ONLY
SIPDIS
STATE FOR NEA/IR, EEB/ESC/TFS, S/CT, L, EUR/ERA, INL, AND TRANSITION
TEAM
TREASURY FOR TFFC, TFI
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETTC KTFN PTER EFIN KCRM KJUS KHLS EUN UNSC IR
PREF, PINR, PHUM, FR
SUBJECT: EU TERRORISM FINANCE LISTINGS: TROUBLE AHEAD
------------------------
SUMMARY AND INTRODUCTION
------------------------
¶1. (SBU) EU and Member State courts are rendering judgments that
may hinder our ability to secure EU-wide designations of terrorist
entities. The new problem for us is higher standards of evidence,
and judicial review of the sufficiency of that evidence, that will
make the EU and its Member States less responsive to our requests
for terrorist designations and accompanying asset freezes. As we
pursue the valuable foreign and security policy tool of terrorist
designations, we may need to ramp up our intelligence sharing on
terrorist entities against which we seek EU action. These cases are
already having some spillover effect on Council decision-making for
all sanctions programs, not just counter-terrorism.
¶2. (U) Terrorist designations in the EU framework can follow along
several possible paths. All are important to us. First is the
UNSCR 1267 process, by which UN-level terrorism sanctions stemming
from UNSCR 1267 and related resolutions regarding Usama bin Laden,
al-Qaeda, and the Taliban are implemented directly on an EU basis.
(This process is legislated by the EU's May 2002 Common Position
2002/402/CFSP, February 2003 Common Position 2003/140/CFSP, and May
2002 Council Regulation 881 2002.) The second is the UNSCR 1373
process, by which the EU makes autonomous designations of terrorists
for EU-wide sanctions. Some individual EU Member State designations
follow from national laws. Others rely on the EU-wide authorities
cited above to stand in for a lack of corresponding national
authorities.
¶3. (SBU) On December 4, 2008, the EU's Court of First Instance in
Luxembourg struck the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) from the EU's
terrorist designation list for asset freezing. This marked the
third time the court has annulled an EU Council decision freezing
the funds of the MEK. The Court found that the EU Council had
violated the rights of the MEK by adopting the decision without
first informing the MEK of the new information or new material in
the file which, according to the Council, justified maintaining it
on the EU list of terrorist organizations. The Court further found
that the Council violated the rights of the MEK by refusing to
communicate to the Court certain information about the case, and
that in doing so, the Council had also infringed upon the MEK's
fundamental rights to judicial protection.
¶4. (SBU) The MEK decision comes in the context of other judicial
decisions on the terrorist financing designation programs, including
the UNSCR 1267-related Kadi and al-Barakaat cases. The latter
turned in part on the principle that terrorism-related UN Security
Council Resolutions do not preempt the EU judiciary's own
interpretations of due process and fundamental rights. Further, the
EU judiciary will determine whether the EU Member State national
laws comply with Community law. The court in the MEK case also
announced that in order to ensure the protection of fundamental
rights of any listed person or entity, the court would need to
determine the sufficiency of evidence supporting the designation by
reviewing certain materials, including classified materials, upon
which the Council had relied. Taken together, the strands of these
decisions suggest that: (a) EU terrorist designations will be
subject to higher standards of proof of terrorist-related activity,
and (b) courts, and not simply national governments, may demand to
see this evidence. Most importantly, when the U.S. wants the EU to
designate given terrorist entities, we need to understand that we
may not succeed unless our follow-up action meets these newly
evolving, and tougher, standards for terrorist asset freezes. End
Summary and Introduction.
------------
The MEK Case
------------
¶5. (SBU) On December 4, 2008, the European Union's Court of First
Instance (CFI) annulled the EU Council's July 15, 2008 designation
of the organization under the Council Decision 2008/583/EC. The
BRUSSELS 00000041 002 OF 004
Court's decision will in effect remove MEK from the EU's autonomous
terrorist designations list for asset freezing, as it is highly
unlikely the EU will find a new basis for listing when the
designations are due for renewal by end the of January. The court
declined to issue guidance on the effective date of the annulment of
the MEK's asset freeze, leaving it to each Member State to decide
for itself when to release funds. The court ruled that:
--The Council had violated the MEK's rights of defense (for failing
to communicate the new information that justified its listing), and
the Council's refusal to share with the Court "certain information
about the case" had infringed the MEK's "fundamental right . . . to
effective judicial protection."
The judgment upheld three of the MEK's six pleas in law, as
plaintiff contesting the asset freeze. These pleas were that the EU
Council violated the MEK's rights in:
--breaches of two national statutes and a failure to discharge
burden of proof;
--breach of the plaintiff's right to judicial review;
and
--breach of the rights of the defense and of the obligation to give
reasons for a decision.
(We note here that the Mujahideen-e Khalq or MEK is also known as
the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran or PMOI, and other names
as well. We refer to the organization in this message by the
U.S.-recognized initials of "MEK." In fact, the text of the Court's
decision referred to the organization as the PMOI.)
¶6. (SBU) The December 4 MEK decision was a lengthy and complex set
of rulings by the Court of First Instance. The decision drew on
interpretations of both fact and law. It addressed not only the EU
Council designation process, but also some underlying designation
actions by the UK and French governments taken on the basis of their
own national laws. The decision spoke to the interplay between EU
member state national laws and EU law on terrorist designations. We
highlight below what we see as the most substantively important
rulings from a counter-terrorism policy standpoint.
-- Perhaps most significantly, the CFI ruling asserts that "the
Council is not entitled to base its funds-freezing decision on
information or material in the file communicated by a Member State,
if the said Member State is not willing to authorize its
communication to the Community judicature whose task is to review
the lawfulness of that decision." Thus, EU courts may ask to see
the evidence, however classified, of terrorist linkages before
upholding any designation.
-- The CFI judges expressed concern over the information taken from
the French prosecutor, questioning whether it qualified as a
decision by a competent national authority. Embedded in this and
other cautions in the MEK decision were repeated assertions that EU
listings based on flawed national listings would not be upheld in an
EU court.
-- The CFI's Presiding Judge Nicholas Forwood focused on the
difference between group versus individual behavior. The MEK, not
being a legal person, could not be subject to criminal proceedings.
He questioned the freezing of assets of all alleged MEK associates,
given that individuals may act differently than the intentions of
the group. Forwood noted that MEK had declared a ceasefire in 2002,
and questioned whether any other European investigations and
prosecutions had been initiated, or convictions had been entered
against either the MEK or its alleged members. (Comment: We find
such detailed judicial consideration of what constitutes involvement
in terrorism an ominous sign for future EU listings, particularly in
looking for prosecutions or convictions, which of course require a
very high burden of proof, to test the sufficiency of a terrorist
designation. The decision noted that the Court cannot substitute
its own assessment for that of the Council on what constitutes
BRUSSELS 00000041 003 OF 004
terrorism, but the Court can decide whether the evidence at hand
substantiates the conclusion, i.e., involvement in terrorism, drawn
from that evidence. End Comment.)
-- The decision held that the MEK's rights of defense, or due
process, were breached when the EU Council retained the MEK on its
asset-freeze list without offering the MEK an opportunity to contest
recently-developed information that was used by the Council in its
decision.
¶7. (SBU) The EU Council must decide by early February (simple
majority) whether to appeal the CFI ruling to the higher court, the
European Court of Justice (ECJ). France may decide on its own
whether to appeal. The Council, in deciding whether or not to
appeal, must weigh the risks of tempting the higher court to go even
further than the lower court to find the Council had in fact abused
its powers (as warned by the CFI judgment) and that the terrorist
designation process is fundamentally flawed. EU Member States will
need to discuss their views on EU court judicial review of
nationally-designated classified information. The EU is already
concerned with implications for future designations, and their
concern is not limited to just the counter-terrorism sanctions
regimes.
¶8. (SBU) No EU court case has ever fully examined the substantive
merits of a terrorist designation -- only the decision-making
process. The CFI's December 4 decision on the MEK clearly signals
this court's interpretation that it has an obligation to undertake
substantive reviews. The court in MEK, however, does not define the
standard by which the Council's decision will be tested. As one EU
legal expert explains, their best guess on the court's standard
derives from the first and original MEK case judgment of December
12, 2006. (The MEK case decision discussed here is actually the
third to have come before an EU court.) If the U.S. and EU courts
ultimately take different approaches to the legal standard for our
respective designations, we can expect some divergence in our
overall sanctions policy and implementation, and thus some
complications for promoting an effective multilateral sanctions
regime.
------------------------------
The Kadi and al-Barakaat Cases
------------------------------
¶9. (U) On September 3, 2008 the European Court of Justice (ECJ)
issued a joint judgment on the appellant cases of Yassin Abdullah
Kadi and al-Barakaat International Foundation. Kadi and al-Barakaat
were two designations made under EU law pursuant to UNSCR
1267-related counterterrorism sanctions. The ECJ ruled that Kadi
and Al Barakaat's "rights of the defense, in particular the right to
be heard, and the right to effective judicial review of those
rights, were patently not respected." The Court in effect rejected
the idea that UN law had a "generalized immunity from jurisdiction
within the internal legal order of the Community."
¶10. (U) The ECJ found that, "the Community judicature must, in
accordance with the powers conferred on it by the European Community
Treaty, ensure the review, in principle the full review, of the
lawfulness of all Community acts in the light of the fundamental
rights forming an integral part of the general principles of
Community law, including review of Community measures which, like
the contested regulation, are designed to give effect to the
resolutions adopted by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the
Charter of the United Nations. The Court of First Instance erred in
law, therefore, when it held, in paragraphs 212 to 231 of Kadi and
263 to 282 of Yusuf and Al Barakaat, that it followed from the
principles governing the relationship between the international
legal order under the United Nations and the Community legal order
that the contested regulation, since it is designed to give effect
to a resolution adopted by the Security Council under Chapter VII of
the Charter of the United Nations affording no latitude in that
respect, must enjoy immunity from jurisdiction so far as concerns
its internal lawfulness save with regard to its compatibility with
the norms of jus cogens."
BRUSSELS 00000041 004 OF 004
¶11. (SBU) We anticipate that the December 2008 MEK ruling, combined
with the implications of the September 2008 Kadi and Al Barakaat
ruling, could lead EU courts to take up more substantive judicial
review of EU follow-up to UN sanctions decisions. Ample
opportunities for such an event may arise in the coming weeks to
months. On January 21 the CFI will hear the next UNSCR 1267-related
EU judicial challenge brought by Omar Mohammed Othman. Kadi and Al
Barakaat are expected to launch new challenges against their
November 28, 2008 re-designation by the EU. Other upcoming
1267-related cases include Al-Bashir Al-Faqih, Sanabel Relief Agency
Ltd., Ghunia Abdrabbah, Taher Nasuf, Faraj Hassan, and Chafiq Ayadi.
--------------------------------------
IMPLICATIONS AND QUESTIONS FOR THE USG
--------------------------------------
Spillover for Other Sanctions
-----------------------------
¶12. (SBU) The December 4 decision on the MEK is the first EU
terrorist financing ruling to flat-out require a sharing of
classified information in order to support the Court's substantive
judicial review of the basis for designation. The EU Council
$ecretariat will try to discourage drawing implied linkages to the
other sanctions regimes, but this is clearly in several Member
States' minds with regard to future designations related to Iran,
Zimbabwe, Burma, and other sanctions regimes.
Impact on U.S. Efforts to Fight Terrorism
-----------------------------------------
¶13. (SBU) If one assumes that the CFI's new requirements in the MEK
decision could extend to third party-proposed designations, not just
those proposed by EU member states, there are implications for USG
proposals to the EU for listings and terrorist sanctions. We must
confront the possibility that working with the Council on
designations may entail enabling the EU court to access unclassified
or even classified information to review the legality of the EU
listing by a standard yet to be fully determined. This ruling may
be construed to affect both the autonomous (UNSCR 1373) and UN-level
(UNSCR 1267) listings.
¶14. (SBU) One channel to explore for mitigating the above risks
would be the U.S.-EU classified information-sharing agreement. This
agreement is known formally as the "Security Arrangement between the
EU Council General Secretariat Security Office (GSCSO) and the
European Commission Security Directorate (ECSD) and the United
States Department of State for the Protection of Classified
Information Exchanged between the EU and the United States of
America." Assuming the U.S. classified material necessary to
support an EU designation decision is not amenable to
declassification, the agreement could perhaps be used to facilitate
information sharing and provision of evidence in the event of
anticipated EU judicial challenges. However, the Council itself
does not yet have a consensus view on whether its own classified
information can be shared with the EU courts.
¶15. (SBU) If the U.S. and EU courts ultimately take different
approaches to the legal standard for our respective designations,
and to the level of deference due the executive's decision, we can
expect some divergence in our overall sanctions policy and
implementation, and thus some complications for promoting an
effective multilateral sanctions regime. We are already sensing, as
reported elsewhere, some falling off in the aggressiveness of UK
prosecutors to seek terrorist designations.
SILVERBERG