Cablegate: Procedures for Zimbabwe,S Sanctions Regime

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS HARARE 000911

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

AF FOR DAS T. WOODS
AF/S FOR B. NEULING
OVP FOR NULAND
NSC FOR DNSA ABRAMS, SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR C. COURVILLE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PGOV PREL PINR CVIS ZI
SUBJECT: PROCEDURES FOR ZIMBABWE,S SANCTIONS REGIME

--------
Summary
--------

1. (SBU) As the USG prepares to adjust the Zimbabwe sanctions
list, Post offers the recommendations below concerning
classification of the visa sanction list, notifications of
sanctioned individuals, and entry of names into the visa
lookout system. Post will send via septel suggested
additions/deletions from the visa sanctions list.

------------------------------
List Access And Dissemination
------------------------------

2. (SBU) Post recommends that the visa sanctions list be
de-classified from Secret to SBU. The Secret classification
complicates use of the list in the Consular Section, which is
outside the CAA, and appears at odds with our required
notification of each sanctioned individual. SBU designation
would still afford a degree of control and confidentiality.

3. (SBU) According to our records, AF notified many currently
sanctioned individuals of their status via letter signed by
the then Assistant Secretary. However, many other sanctioned
individuals were apparently not notified. We would propose
that the Bureau notify by letter the remaining sanctioned
individuals and also be responsible for notifying
subsequently designated individuals.

------------------------------------
List Maintenance And Implementation
------------------------------------

4. (SBU) The sanctions lists are currently not consistent
with one another, which we believe resulted from the entry of
sanctioned individuals by the Bureau or Post without full
consultation with or notification of each other. We propose
that henceforth either the Bureau or Post can propose
additions or deletions to the list but must receive
concurrence from the other before an individual is added or
deleted. Upon such concurrence, CA would be responsible for
entering relevant data on the sanctioned individual into the
Visa Lookout System.

5. (SBU) We would propose the same approach for the financial
sanctions list. We understand that this list must go through
additional vetting in an interagency process. However, we
would propose that any relevant agency can suggest an
addition or deletion to the list but that the change must be
agreed interagency before it is put into effect, and that one
agency, such as State/AF, be designated to make the changes.
We also understand that a pending new executive order will
allow greater flexibility in adjusting the list, which we
welcome.

---------------------------------
SAO Requests and Other Exceptions
---------------------------------

6. (SBU) Post has implemented procedures to handle sanctioned
individuals and others who may be sanctionable through the
SAO process in visa adjudications, allowing one-time travel
to, for instance, GOZ financial officials to attend IMF/World
Bank annual meetings, a practice that provides leverage with
the GOZ and that we plan to continue.
SCHULTZ

© Scoop Media