

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 09BEIJING2196, CHINA 2009 INVESTMENT DISPUTES AND EXPROPRIATION
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. #09BEIJING2196.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
09BEIJING2196 | 2009-08-03 08:33 | 2011-08-23 00:00 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | Embassy Beijing |
VZCZCXYZ0003
OO RUEHWEB
DE RUEHBJ #2196/01 2150833
ZNR UUUUU ZZH (CCY AD9780FE MSI9099-695)
O 030833Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY BEIJING
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 5445
INFO RUEHOO/CHINA POSTS COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
UNCLAS BEIJING 002196
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
C O R R E C T E D COPY CAPTION
STATE FOR EB/OIA - GOETHERT
STATE FOR EAP/CM - PENG
STATE FOR L/CID - MCDONALD
STATE PASS USTR - BAHAR, KATZ, WINTER
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CASC EINV KIDE OPIC PGOV
SUBJECT: CHINA 2009 INVESTMENT DISPUTES AND EXPROPRIATION
REF: A. A) STATE 049477
¶B. B) BEIJING 03072
¶1. (U) This telegram is sensitive but unclassified -- it
contains business proprietary information and is not for
distribution to the public.
¶2. (SBU) In response to ref A, this cable provides updated
information on investment and expropriation claims in China
and includes input from the Economic Section as well as other
mission elements, including Embassy Beijing USTR and FCS
offices and Consulates in Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenyang and
Chengdu.
3.(SBU) Begin Text:
Expropriation
----------------
Chinese law prohibits nationalization of foreign-invested
enterprises, including investments from Hong Kong, Taiwan,
and Macau, except under "special" circumstances. Officials
state that such circumstances would include national security
considerations and when an investment includes real property
or buildings that pose obstacles to large civil engineering
projects. However, the law does not explicitly define the
terms. Chinese law requires compensation of expropriated
foreign investments, but also does not specify how such
compensation is calculated or determined. The United States
has not formally determined that China has expropriated any
new investments since China's opening and reform policies
were initiated in 1979. However, the Department of State has
in past annual reports highlighted to Congress several cases
of concern.
The Embassy is generally aware that many United States
persons of Chinese descent, who were not United States
citizens at the time their claims arose, have outstanding
expropriation claims against the Government of the People's
Republic of China (PRC). The Act does not require a report
on these claims. The Department of State, however, does
provide appropriate assistance to all United States persons
with claims against the Government of the PRC.
The Embassy is aware of fifteen outstanding disputes that
involve United States persons and the Government of the
People's Republic of China or entities under its control.
These cases are outlined below.
Commercial Disputes
-------------------
Besides expropriation, the Embassy is also aware that a
number of United States nationals are engaged in commercial
disputes in China, including disputes with commercial
entities owned or controlled by the Government of the PRC.
Many commercial disputes include breach of contract claims by
United States persons against their Chinese joint venture
partners.
United States persons that become involved in commercial
disputes in China may encounter significant obstacles that
prevent a fair hearing of their claims. These may include
corruption, arbitrary enforcement of rules and regulations,
failure of the judiciary to act independently, and inadequate
domestic enforcement of foreign judgments against Chinese
parties. Chinese parties in commercial disputes may benefit
from personal relationships with or favoritism on the part of
law enforcement and the courts. The Embassy is aware of some
cases in which U.S. persons have lost control or ownership of
property to Chinese entities that appear to have colluded
with local authorities. While not expropriation by a foreign
government, these instances illustrate the risks to U.S.
investors posed by corruption and the inadequate rule of law
in China.
Protectionism via Regulation
----------------------------
In addition, Chinese agencies frequently adopt rules and
regulations intended to limit the ability of foreign firms to
compete with local companies. These rules often are adopted
primarily to protect local industry and promote China's
immediate economic development. While this activity does not
meet the definition of expropriation, and the government
rarely directly seizes assets, the result is a transfer of
value from foreign firms to local companies by excluding the
former from domestic market opportunities. Frequently such
protectionist regulations benefit state-owned firms, even
indirectly, or if they have been adopted at the prodding of
well-connected Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs), which
are closely linked to the government and may benefit from
financial and personal ties with their regulators.
These risks and obstacles are more fully outlined in the
Country Commercial Guide for China, published online by the
U.S. Department of Commerce. The Embassy regularly raises
these matters at high levels with the PRC government.
Despite these problems, the vast majority of U.S. individuals
and firms remain keen on the Chinese market. The 2008
American Chamber of Commerce (Amcham) White Paper reports
that 89 percent of its members who responded to an Amcham
survey had an "optimistic" or "cautiously optimistic"
five-year outlook.
Dispute Resolution
------------------
Commercial disputes are heard in China's civil courts, which
include national "Supreme" courts and local courts at the
provincial, city, and county or district levels. These civil
courts have jurisdiction over contract and commercial
disputes involving foreign parties. They do not adjudicate
criminal offenses, like theft and tax evasion. In many
jurisdictions, a separate system of IP courts cover civil
intellectual property disputes in lieu of civil courts.
Foreign lawyers cannot act as attorneys in Chinese courts,
but may observe proceedings. China also maintains an
extensive administrative legal system to adjudicate minor
criminal offensives.
Chinese officials typically urge firms to resolve disputes
through informal conciliation. If a formal mediation is
necessary, Chinese parties and the authorities promote
arbitration over litigation. Most foreign investors consider
arbitration a last resort, as they generally find it
time-consuming and unreliable.
Most contracts propose arbitration by the China International
Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC). Some
foreign parties have obtained favorable rulings from CIETAC,
but difficulties in other cases have led other participants
and panelists to question CIETAC's procedures and
effectiveness. In CIETAC arbitration involving at least one
purely foreign entity, a panel with a foreign arbitrator is
possible. (Foreign joint ventures established in China are
considered Chinese legal persons.) Provinces and
municipalities also have their own arbitration institutions.
For contracts involving at least one foreign party, offshore
arbitration may be adopted. Contracts stipulating foreign
arbitration should name the arbitration body.
While China is a member of the International Center for the
Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and has ratified
the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the "New York
Convention"), in fact, United States persons have experienced
difficulty in their efforts to have Chinese courts recognize
and enforce arbitral awards rendered in their favor against
Chinese parties.
Case One
--------
a. Claimant A
b. 2009
c. East Star Airlines had leased Claimant A-owned planes, ran
into financial difficulties, and now reportedly owes the
Baiyuan Airport Authority in Guangzhou, a State Owned
Enterprise, unpaid fees and other money. The now-bankrupt
East Star Airlines terminated its lease with Claimant A in
accordance with PRC bankruptcy proceedings, but the airport
authority has refused Claimant A access to claimant A's
planes, which are still located at the airport. Claimant A
needs to service the planes and retake possession of them,
but the airport authority appears to be using the planes as
leverage to recoup funds owed to them by the bankrupt
airline, even though the court has ruled that the leased
planes were not part of the East Star bankruptcy proceedings.
The U.S. Consul General in Guangzhou, in concert with FCS
offices in Guangzhou and Beijing, sent a letter on May 22 to
the Baiyuan Air Authority urging swift resolution of this
dispute in accordance with local law.
Case Two
--------
a. Claimant B
b. 2006
c. Guangzhou-area American legal firm has struggled to
enforce an arbitration judgment in a Shenzhen court for
more than three years. Claimant B asserts this lack of
enforcement is in violation of the New York Convention on
international enforcement of binding arbitration. U.S.
Consulate General Guangzhou has regularly contacted the court
to request status updates, which it occasionally provides,
but the case remains unresolved. (Note: The IPR community in
Guangzhou, i.e., U.S. law firms, rights holders, and other
interested parties, seems to suffer disproportionately from
China's poor implementation of the New York Convention.
Mission contacts frequently highlight how unattractive
arbitration remains for U.S. firms involved in commercial
disputes in South China. End Note.)
Case Three
----------
a. Claimant C
b. 2007
c. Claimant C, enmeshed in arbitral proceedings in Hong Kong
against its joint venture Chinese partner, requested USG
assistance in persuading the State Administration of Foreign
Exchange (SAFE) to not penalize Claimant C for its alleged
illegal USD to RMB conversions. While this case (described in
following paras) remains unresolved, Claimant C places even
higher priority on getting about $9 million of its investment
out of China via a "capital reduction" that requires SAFE
approval.
The potential assessment of a fine of 1.76 million RMB by
Shenyang's SAFE branch would be for allegedly illegal USD to
RMB conversions related to Claimant C's Shenyang investment.
Claimant C asserts the allegations are wholly baseless, and
notes that about a year ago, national-level SAFE officials in
Beijing had ordered SAFE/Shenyang to put a hold on issuance
of any penalties. However, after Claimant C lifted its "stay"
on the Hong Kong arbitration process against its Chinese JV
partner on April 1, Shenyang SAFE reportedly re-started the
process of assessing the fine. Shenyang SAFE was poised to
make a decision on the issue on June 19. We have not yet
determined whether a decision has been forthcoming.
In early 2008 Consulate General Shenyang wrote a letter and
made phone calls to Shenyang government officials on behalf
of Claimant C. A meeting was organized between Claimant C and
the Bureau of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation, which
has regulatory oversight of the investment activities of the
Shenbei Economic Development Zone. At the meeting, Claimant
C's CEO argued that Claimant C was innocent and had been
assured by local parties that all its currency conversions
were legal.
About one week later, Claimant C advised the Consulate
General that Shenyang SAFE would indeed rule that Claimant C
was in violation of foreign exchange regulations and would
recommend to Beijing SAFE that it impose a penalty fine of 30
percent of total conversions. Claimant C said it would not
accept that decision, and wrote appeals to the
then-Ambassador, U.S. Members of Congress, and China's
Ambassador in Washington.
In October 2008, the Shenyang government foreign affairs
office requested a meeting with U.S. Foreign Commercial
Service (FCS) officers to emphasize that (1) Mayor Li Yingjie
and Deputy Mayor Yang Yazhou were committed to a fair and
quick resolution of this case; (2) the mayor's office had
conducted its own investigation of the events leading up to
the alleged forex violation and found that all local parties
involved were operating within guidelines; (3) Deputy Mayor
Yang Yazhou had called a mediation meeting a few years
earlier attended by Claimant C, SAFE, Shenbei Development
Zone and China Merchant Bank; and (4) Shenyang government
mediation led to SAFE's decision to decrease Claimant C's
fine to 2 percent of total conversions.
FCS communicated the above to the CEO of Claimant C, who
replied that the 2 percent proposal was not new, that
Claimant C could not accept being cast as a scapegoat for the
behavior of certain Shenyang officials, and that Claimant C
would not accept the penalty.
In November 2008, the U.S. Consul General in Shenyang and FCS
met with Deputy Mayor Yang Yazhou to discuss Claimant C's
case. Present were representatives from Shenyang SAFE, China
Merchant Bank, and Shenbei Economic Development Zone. Mayor
Yang reiterated the points made to FCS officers the month
before and urged the Consul General to persuade Claimant C to
bring this case to a speedy closure. The Consul General
replied that he was not in a position to advise Claimant C on
this matter.
(Note: Over the past 2-3 years, there has been a small but
growing number of reports about U.S. companies invested in
China alleging improper China or unfair treatment in an
administrative review process or denial of a fair hearing in
court. End Note.)
Case Four (ref B)
---------
a. Claimant D
b. 2001
c. Claimant D learned from a January 2002 newspaper report
that the area in Tianjin where its construction materials
joint venture factory was located was slated for a new
university campus. The claimant had signed a 50-year land use
agreement with the city when it established its JV in 1997;
the Claimant owns 79 percent of the roughly $8.5 million
project. The claimant requested compensation of more than $6
million, based on its assessment of the value of the plant.
Upon inquiring through its JV partner (the Tianjin Building
Material Group, a city-level state-owned enterprise (SOE)),
the Claimant was told that it was expected to vacate by the
end of May. However, at that point it had received neither a
formal notice-to-quit nor an offer of compensation. The
claimant sought meetings directly with municipal officials,
who responded with a letter deputizing the Claimant JV
partner to negotiate for the municipality.
Embassy Beijing's Economic Minister-Counselor sent a letter
to the Tianjin Government in late January 2002 urging fair
treatment. The Embassy's Deputy Senior Commercial Officer
also contacted Tianjin trade officials repeatedly over the
succeeding months.
On April 29, 2005, the claimant sent a letter, through the
Chairman of the U.S.-China Business Council, to the Mayor of
Tianjin proposing a new solution. In the letter, claimant D
sought the Mayor's assistance and approval to merge with an
existing plant in Tianjin and receive USD 8 million in
compensation. Embassy Beijing's Senior Commercial Officer met
with Tianjin officials regarding this case in the fall of
¶2006. Since late 2005, following encouragement from then-
Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, Chinese Ambassador to
the United States Zhou Wenzhong told the Department of State
that he has engaged the Tianjin municipal government to press
for a satisfactory resolution.
In June 2006, China's Ambassador to the U.S. said he raised
the case with the Mayor of Tianjin, who said the claimant had
agreed to vacate, and the only remaining issue was the amount
of compensation. The Mayor said compensation should be based
on the value of the land before construction, which had
raised the value of the land substantially. The Mayor
appointed his Secretary General to coordinate among municipal
agencies to resolve the case.
In February 2008, the claimant told Embassy officials that it
had accepted an offer by the city of Tianjin to reimburse
costs to move to a new location and re-install its equipment.
As of August 2008, the claimant said it was operating in the
new location. The city of Tianjin had paid many, but not yet
all, of the claimant's moving expenses. Tianjin had also
established a fund to compensate the claimant for other
losses, like the value of its original leases. That fund is
controlled by the claimant's JV partner and no money has yet
been paid. The claimant reported a good relationship with its
JV partner, but observed that as a municipal SOE, the line
between its interest and the city's is not always clear. The
claimant is also in the process of renegotiating loans
secured by the original property.
Case Five (ref B)
-----------------
a. Claimant E
b. 2001
c. Local officials reportedly sought to evict the claimant
from its factory on short notice and without adequate
compensation in May - June 2002. The claimant in 1998
established a factory to produce cast-iron furniture in
Tongzhou District on the outskirts of Beijing and signed a
26-year lease with a local government-owned corporation for
land and buildings at a rate of approximately $56,000 a year.
The lease was notarized by the Tongzhou District Government.
Since then, real estate prices in the area have apparently
skyrocketed as builders have erected luxury residences. At
the end of 2001, the Tongzhou District Planning
Administration Bureau notified the claimant in writing that
the building it had rented was not in conformity with the
future development of a new section of Tongzhou and should
therefore be demolished. On May 10, 2002, both the claimant
and the state-owned firm that had leased the property to the
claimant were notified by Tongzhou District that some of the
buildings were illegally constructed and had to be torn down
by May 25.
On June 7, 2002, approximately 100 workers with hand tools
and a bulldozer reportedly appeared and dismantled the
facility's gatehouse, administration building, and employees'
dormitories, as well as cutting off the company's power and
water supplies. The claimant's attorneys contacted the
Embassy while the demolition was in progress, whereupon the
Commercial Section telephoned the head of Tongzhou District,
the Beijing Municipal Foreign Investment Service Center, and
several other officials, but the demolition continued. After
meeting with the claimant's American owners, the Commercial
Section sent a letter to the head of Tongzhou District urging
fair compensation. The District raised its compensation offer
from RMB 200,000 (approximately $24,000) to RMB 500,000
(approximately $60,000) but then inexplicably returned to the
lower offer of RMB 200,000. Congressman Waxman raised the
case in a letter to the then-Ambassador on June 25, 2002.
By 2006, it appeared the Claimant had abandoned the case.
Neither the Claimant nor officials acting on its behalf had
any further contact with the Embassy until June 2009, when
the Embassy contacted the claimant's majority shareholder in
the United States. The shareholder informed the Embassy that
the claimant has left China as a result of unsatisfactory
resolution of the case ("the owner left pretty bitter") in
which claimant estimates claimant was paid less than one
tenth of what claimant it was owed.
Case Six
--------
a. Claimant F
b. 2009
c. Claimant F owns and operates a restaurant in Beijing. On
May 12, 2009, the claimant was given notice by the Jiang Tai
Xiang Government and Chaoyang District Construction
Department Project Office that the land occupied by the
street upon which claimant's restaurant operates had been
taken over by what claimant called "eminent domain
proceedings," and that the claimant should negotiate with the
landlord for a commercial settlement as compensation for
breaking claimant's lease and the imminent destruction of
claimant's business.
As of June 2009, the landlord has apparently refused to meet
with claimant or to negotiate in good faith. There have been
reports of violence inflicted by the landlord's security
staff against another tenant on the street and claimant has
been issued notices and threats that claimant's business
would be destroyed without a settlement.
Claimant has been to two police stations - Beijing Police
Bureau and the Police Station of Chaoyang District - to
discuss the violence and security concerns. Claimant has been
to Jiang Tai Xiang Government (which is in charge of and owns
the area) to discuss settlements and compensation. Claimant
has been to the Conflict Resolution Center of Chaoyang
District three times for meetings and to request fair
treatment. During these meetings, claimant's landlord sat on
the same side of the table as the government. Claimant went
to the Conflict Resolution Center of Beijing and obtained its
agreement to urge the landlord to meet with claimant to
discuss settlement. Claimant has been to the Conflict
Resolution Bureau of Central Government to try to pressure
the local government and claimant's landlord to negotiate.
Claimant has also retained local counsel and has contacted
FCS at Embassy Beijing for help.
Apparently as a results of the meetings with various
government agencies, the police seem to keep a presence
nearby which has quelled any issues of conflict with the
landlord's additional security staff. The mayor's office
reportedly forced the landlord to "hear" claimant's claim for
damages. The central government conflict resolution center
appears to have forced the Chaoyang conflict center into
action - it met with claimant in June and together with the
landlord issued a "take it or leave it" offer. The offer came
with a threat: destruction slated for June 11, 2009, which
has since taken place.
Case Seven
----------
a. Claimant G
b. date unknown
c. Claimant entered into a commercial relationship with the
Anshan Municipal Government in Liaoning Province. The local
government reportedly reneged on contractual obligations,
stalled in paying for services, and did not issue a land
permit for the development site. FCS is assisting, and the
local government recently demonstrated interest in resolving
the case before the U.S. Consul General in Shenyang visits
Anshan again later this year.
Case Eight
----------
a. Claimant H
b. date unknown
c. Claimant leased farm land from the People's Liberation
Army (PLA), which was then expropriated based on allegations
that the company mistreated workers. A district court
confirmed the company's rights under contract, overturning a
lower court decision, but the PLA apparently continued to
occupy the land, complicating enforcement. The Liaoning Court
of Appeals declined to hear the case; the company is now
appealing to the People's Supreme Court. Claimant requested
help from FCS and from Congressman Royce (CA).
Case Nine
---------
a. Claimant I
b. date unknown
c. Claimant had its factory vandalized, allegedly by its
local guard force, causing 1.3 million RMB of damages. FCS
supported claimant as it filed a case in district court
requesting damages. Claimant was advised by the district
court to settle for less than 10 percent of damages. Claimant
continues to receive threats and is considering arbitrated
disengagement from its contract. FCS is monitoring the
situation and providing assistance as appropriate.
Case Ten
--------
a. Claimant J
b. date unknown
c. Claimant signed a contract with the Chinese Medical
Education Association (CMEA) to provide education programs
for Chinese nurses. According to claimant, CMEA did not
fulfill its contractual obligations to market the program,
resulting in a failed launched effort. CMEA continues to
refuse to market the program, claiming it is not feasible.
FCS has met with claimant and written letters on its behalf.
Case Eleven
-----------
a. Claimant K
b. 2007
c. Claimant signed a contract in 2005 to build a light rail
link in Wehai, Shandong Province. Claimant prepared extensive
engineering designs but city officials have not supported the
project as promised, specifically by establishing a
one-ticket system. Since the installation of a new mayor in
2007, the project has not moved forward.
Case Twelve
-----------
a. Claimant L
b. date unknown
c. Claimant had a dispute with the landlord over rent
payments which quickly escalated into threats and seizure of
the store. Local police did not intervene. Consulate General
Shanghai contacted local authorities, including via a letter
from the Consul General to the Shanghai Vice Mayor. The
company contacted Congressman Ed Royce, who highlighted
claimant's case in a Congressional hearing in July 2008, at
which both claimant and then-Director General of FCS
Hernandez testified. The landlord's legal case against
claimant for back rent was rejected by the court. In order to
obtain damages from the landlord, claimant must file a claim
with the court, which claimant apparently has not yet done.
Case Thirteen
-------------
a. Claimant M
b. date unknown
c. A local township government threatened to condemn and
demolish claimant's manufacturing facility in Nanjing without
offering adequate compensation. FCS Shanghai contacted the
Nanjing Government Foreign Affairs Office to urge that
negotiations between the company and local government
officials resume. The local officials have agreed to open
negotiations.
Case Fourteen
-------------
a. Claimant N
b. date unknown
c. Claimant owns a manufacturing facility in Hangzhou.
Claimant's managers were reportedly held hostage and the
company was liquidated by "auction" by the Zhejiang
Provincial Foreign Service Corporation without consent from
the American owner. FCS Shanghai and the Consul General wrote
letters to the Hangzhou City Foreign Affairs Office (FAO) and
met Hangzhou FAO officials concerning the case. The FAO
officials have been generally unresponsive.
Case Fifteen
------------
a. Claimant O
b. date unknown
c. Claimant, a dental supply company, had a dispute with the
local government of Minhang District of Shanghai concerning
compensation for forced relocation of claimant's
manufacturing facility. FCS Shanghai has contacted Shanghai
government officials concerning this dispute, which is still
ongoing.
¶4. (SBU) Proprietary Information -- Identity of Claimants:
Claimant A: General Electric
Claimant B: Anderson and Anderson
Claimant C: EMG, an Indiana-based investment firm
Claimant D: SureBlock
Claimant E: Beijing Taico Industry Metal Products Co., which
is majority owned by Amco Metal Industrial Corporation of
City of Industry, CA, with the remainder owned by a
Taiwan-based firm.
Claimant F: Tim's Texas Roadhouse
Claimant G: American Pacific Homes
Claimant H: Shenyang Tigers
Claimant I: Shenyang Taidong Construction
Claimant J: Maricopa Community College
Claimant K: Aerobus
Claimant L: Nancy's Lifestyles
Claimant M: Jensen
Claimant N: LP Apparel
Claimant O: Dentsply International
GOLDBERG