Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
03KATHMANDU1237
2003-07-01 09:06:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Kathmandu
Cable title:  

NEPAL: UNHCR BRIEFING ON BHUTANESE REFUGEES

Tags:  PREF PREL NP BH 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 KATHMANDU 001237 

SIPDIS

STATE FOR SA/INS, PRM: RMACKLER
LONDON FOR CGURNEY

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/01/2013
TAGS: PREF PREL NP BH
SUBJECT: NEPAL: UNHCR BRIEFING ON BHUTANESE REFUGEES

REF: (A) KATHMANDU 1219 (B) KATHMANDU 1139

Classified By: Ambassador Michael E. Malinowski for Reasons 1.5 (b, d).

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 KATHMANDU 001237

SIPDIS

STATE FOR SA/INS, PRM: RMACKLER
LONDON FOR CGURNEY

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/01/2013
TAGS: PREF PREL NP BH
SUBJECT: NEPAL: UNHCR BRIEFING ON BHUTANESE REFUGEES

REF: (A) KATHMANDU 1219 (B) KATHMANDU 1139

Classified By: Ambassador Michael E. Malinowski for Reasons 1.5 (b, d).


1. (C) Summary. In a briefing to the donor community in
Nepal on June 30, UNHCR Country Director Abraham Abraham
expressed strong concern over the results of the verification
of the first camp of Bhutanese refugees. These results, he
said, present "serious difficulties" for some refugee
families. Refugee demonstrations against the verification
report continued through June 23; Abraham confirmed Maoist
student wing involvement in the protests. A majority of the
camp's residents are expected to file appeals by the July 2
deadline. UNHCR has no indication of how many Khundunabari
camp residents will choose to return to Bhutan voluntarily,
although Abraham expected that preliminary numbers would be
available by late-August, one month before repatriation
occurs. Abraham confirmed that UNHCR is not inclined to
support continued funding of the Khundunabari camp after
repatriation even if refugees remain for local resettlement.
Abraham has approached the Government of Nepal (GON) on
developing a strategy to resettle refugees who do not wish to
return to Bhutan, but GON responses have been noncommittal.
UNHCR will continue to seek approval for its involvement in
verification and repatriation and hopes that donor
governments will do the same. End Summary.


2. (U) UNHCR Country Director Abraham Abraham invited all
diplomatic mission representatives for a briefing on June 30
regarding the Bhutanese refugee situation, the status of the
19 Tibetan refugees detained June 24 (Ref A),and an update
on UNHCR's protection program against gender-based violence
(septel). Along with Ambassador Malinowski, the German,
French and Danish Chiefs of Mission, UK Charge and
representatives from the EU, Japan, Canada and the World Food
Program attended the briefing.

--------------
Khundunabari Camp Verification Report
--------------


3. (SBU) Abraham reported that UNHCR has agreed to meet with
GON and Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) officials to
discuss implementation of the bilateral program despite the
absence of UNHCR involvement in the verification process.

Abraham expressed "deep concern" about inconsistencies in the
Joint Verification Team's (JVT) Khundunabari Camp report
released June 18 (Ref B). The results present "serious
difficulties" for refugee families, he said. Abraham
confirmed reports that families have been split between
categories. In some cases, parents are in Category III
(non-Bhutanese) and therefore ineligible for repatriation
whereas their children are in Category II (Bhutanese who
voluntarily departed) and are eligible for repatriation.
There are also cases where children as young as three years
old have been categorized as criminals (Category IV) along
with their parents. (Note. Category III refugees
(non-Bhutanese) are expected to return to their home country
while those in Category IV (Bhutanese criminals) can return
to Bhutan, but would face criminal charges. End Note.) The
Nepalese Foreign Ministry Secretary Madhu Raman Acharya later
admitted to Abraham that categorizing children as criminals
had been a mistake. Although Acharya did not detail how this
would be prevented, Abraham was hopeful that future
verifications would be more sensitive to the issue. Abraham
cited the need to conduct a complete and simultaneous
verification of the remaining six camps. A complete
verification is necessary to allow the GON and other donor
countries to move forward with other resettlement options, he
said.

--------------
Refugee Staged Protests, But Now All Is Calm
--------------


4. (SBU) Following the release of the JVT report on June 18,
camp residents were calm, perhaps in a state of shock,
Abraham said. However, the following morning, demonstrations
involving almost the entire 12,000 residents of Khundunabari
Camp and significant numbers in other camps occurred
throughout the day of June 19. On June 20, refugee students,
complaining that the camp's organizing committee was not
doing enough to promote the refugees' cause, attempted to
take over the World Refugee Day celebrations. However, camp
security stayed away from the students and allowed the
refugee leaders and UNHCR officials to defuse the situation.


5. (SBU) On June 21, approximately 300 adult refugees left
the camp to demonstrate in the nearby community. Hundreds
more refugee students also left the camps to demonstrate in
front of the JVT building in nearby Damak. Threatening to
arrest the refugees, security forces called upon the UNHCR
and other NGOs to talk to the protesters and encourage them
to return to the camps. (Note: Although the tenor of the
demonstrations were non-violent, the refugees were breaking
two Nepali laws, one requiring refugees to obtain permission
before leaving the camps and the other requiring permission
before staging a public protest. End Note.) Demonstrations
continued on June 22 and 23 with reports of only small
skirmishes between students and security forces. Refugee
students reportedly threatened refugee leaders in the camp
and accused them of selling-out to the JVT. However, after a
meeting with UNHCR officials on June 23, most refugees turned
their attention to filing appellate applications.


6. (C) UNHCR officials confirmed reports that the Maoist
student wing ANNISU-R was involved in motivating and
organizing the Bhutanese refugee student union protest. Two
ANNISU-R leaders, Govinda Thapa and Govinda Koirala, were
seen in front of the JVT building in Damak on the day of the
protest. Rumors abound that ANNISU-R bankrolled the refugee
students' transportation to and from Damak, but are
unsubstantiated. Security forces in Damak reported that the
next time any ANNISU-R leaders appear in front of the JVT
building, the police would arrest them.

--------------
Majority of Refugees File Appeals
--------------


7. (SBU) The UNHCR has made it clear to the GON that the
rules governing the appeal process are unacceptable. Abraham
specifically pointed to the fact that appeals must be made to
the original adjudication body. Such a body is not likely to
reverse its previous decision, he said. Abraham has raised
this problem with both Prime Minister Thapa, who agreed to
look into it, and the Indian Ambassador to Nepal, who agreed
to discuss the issue with both the GON and RGOB. In
addition, refugees must submit new documentation or
information in order to have their appeal heard. However,
few, if any, refugees will have new documentation to provide
the JVT.


8. (SBU) The appeal process is currently the issue of
greatest concern to the refugees. Many refugees had
boycotted the appeal process; only five appeals had been
submitted within the first week. However, after UNHCR
officials explained to the refugees that this was their one
chance to file a formal protest to the JVT, nearly all
Khundunabari camp residents rushed to complete the appellate
application before the July 2 deadline. At the refugees'
request, UNHCR has made a photocopier available to enable the
refugees to submit the application properly.

-------------- --------------
The Way Forward: UNHCR Involvement Remains Unlikely
-------------- --------------

9. (C) Abraham reported briefly on UNHCR Asia and Pacific
Director Fakhouri's June 24-26 visit to Bhutan. He said that
the RGOB has remained adamant against a UNHCR presence in
Bhutan and, therefore, UNHCR will not be involved in the
repatriation or resettlement program. Abraham also confirmed
that Fakhouri was able to dispel concerns that camps and
barracks under construction in southern Bhutan will be used
for refugee resettlement. However, Abraham seemed skeptical
that these camps had been built for displaced persons in
advance of a possible military crackdown on Indian
separatists in Southern Bhutan, as the RGOB has claimed.


10. (SBU) The UNHCR has received no indication on the numbers
of Khundunabari Camp residents who will return voluntarily to
Bhutan under existing conditions. Abraham said that the
refugees desire an international presence for their
protection in Bhutan, implying that without that protection,
some refugees may decide to apply for resettlement in Nepal
or abroad. UNHCR will continue to look for a window of
opportunity to become involved, he said. However, UNHCR will
support only a full, voluntary and monitored repatriation to
the refugees' home areas. Abraham expressed frustration with
the current situation, citing a 2-page long list of questions
submitted by refugees inquiring about conditions in Bhutan,
for which UNHCR has been unable to provide answers. Without
UNHCR oversight in Bhutan, Abraham said, residents of the
other six refugee camps will have to rely on repatriated
Khundunabari Camp refugees to provide information regarding
conditions in Bhutan.


11. (SBU) Abraham reported that he recently met with Foreign
Secretary Acharya on developing a local resettlement program

SIPDIS
for the refugees not returning to Bhutan. However, Acharya
was noncommittal, saying only that the GON would take up that
discussion after repatriation begins in September. The GON
does not want to bias refugees' decisions to return to Bhutan
by offering local resettlement, Abraham said. Abraham has
also raised this issue with Prime Minister Thapa, who
indicated that discussions on local settlement could begin
after the Fifteenth Nepal-Bhutan Joint Ministerial taking
place August 11-14. The August Ministerial will decide on
the logistical details of repatriation and resettlement,
including a final passenger manifest that will help determine
how many refugees might seek to stay in Nepal. Abraham
suggested that donor governments should consider assisting
the GON with a local resettlement program, especially since
UNHCR is not inclined to keep Khundunabari Camp open after
repatriation.


12. (SBU) Abraham concluded the briefing by saying that UNHCR
is making every effort to dispel the RGOB's suspicions of
UNHCR and to remain engaged in the process. But progress has
been slow and difficult, particularly since the RGOB contends
that UNHCR has encouraged the refugees to demonstrate against
the JVT results for Khundunabari Camp. The World Food
Program representative commented that WFP has a presence in
Bhutan and has offered the RGOB assistance for the
resettlement of the refugees. Although the RGOB has not
accepted the offer, it did not decline it outright, she
reported.

--------------
Comment
--------------


13. (C) Despite the political, social and economic
uncertainties, Post predicts that most Khundunabari Camp
residents in Category II (8,595 people or 70.5 percent) will
choose to return to Bhutan in hopes of resuming a normal
life. Post expects information from the returnees on current
conditions in Bhutan will begin trickling back to camps in
Nepal soon after repatriation. This information will
strongly influence the six remaining camp refugees' decisions
on whether to return to Bhutan or apply for resettlement
elsewhere. Without international monitoring, it will be
impossible to confirm or dispel negative impressions of
conditions in Bhutan, which could discourage further
repatriation to Bhutan. Although it remains unlikely that
the RGOB will allow UNHCR to play a role in the reintegration
of the refugees in Bhutan, Post will continue to press for
its involvement. Post believes it would still be useful to
demarche Bhutanese donor capitals on the need to pressure the
RGOB, prior to the 15th Joint Ministerial on August 11, to
allow for international participation in the repatriation
process. End Comment.
MALINOWSKI