APPARENT BREAKTHROUGH IN BHUTANESE REFUGEE DEADLOCK

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KATHMANDU 000228

SIPDIS

STATE FOR SA/INS AND PRM
LONDON FOR POL - RIEDEL
GENEVA FOR RMA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/06/2013
TAGS: PREF PREL EAID BT NP
SUBJECT: APPARENT BREAKTHROUGH IN BHUTANESE REFUGEE DEADLOCK

REF: A. (A) KATHMANDU 0170


B. (B) STATE 16356

C. (C) GENEVA 0253

D. (D) KATHMANDU 0128

Classified By: DCM ROBERT K. BOGGS. REASON: 1.5 (B,D).

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


1. (C) Summary and Action Request: Meeting in Kathmandu on
February 6, Nepali Foreign Minister Narendra Bikram Shah and
Bhutanese Foreign Minister Lyonpo Jigmi Y. Thinley reportedly
reached agreement on criteria for the resettlement and
repatriation of more than 100,000 Bhutanese refugees in
Nepal. According to a senior Nepali participant in the talks,
the Government of Bhutan (GOB) agreed to take back those who
left "voluntarily" and those who have been convicted of
crimes, as well as those forcibly evicted from Bhutan. The
GOB committed to apply a "liberal" interpretation of its
citizenship law to voluntary emigres, who must reapply for
Bhutanese citizenship upon return to their homeland. The
Government of Nepal (GON) has agreed to offer refugees the
"option to return"; implicit in such an offer, according to
the MFA, is an option to remain and be resettled in Nepal.
The Joint Verification Team, which has not met since December
2001, will reconvene on February 24 in Thimpu to begin
categorizing the 12,000 refugees interviewed from one of
seven refugee camps. Another ministerial meeting is
scheduled for March 24 in Thimpu. The GON is prepared to
give the GOB "the benefit of the doubt" that it will fulfill
its commitments, according to a Nepali MFA official, but
believes continued donor pressure will be necessary to keep
up the momentum. Rudiger Wenk, EU CDA in Kathmandu, told the
DCM that his headquarters has already agreed to send a letter
to the GOB urging quick movement on resolving the 13-year-old
refugee issue, and suggested the USG contact Commissioner
Chris Patton to coordinate efforts. Department is requested
to review sending such a communication to Commissioner
Patton. End summary.

--------------
GOB AGREES TO TAKE "VOLUNTARY" EMIGRES
--------------


2. (SBU) After languishing more than one year without
progress, bilateral talks on resolving the plight of more
than 100,000 Bhutanese refugees in Nepal moved a significant
step forward in Kathmandu on February 6 when the Foreign
Ministers of both countries "harmonized" their countries'
definitions of four different categories of refugees and
reportedly agreed on which may qualify for repatriation to
Bhutan. (Note: The four categories are: a) those forcibly
evicted from Bhutan; b) those who left Bhutan voluntarily; c)
criminals; and d) non-Bhutanese. Progress toward
repatriating an initial 12,000 refugees whose status had been
"verified" by a biltaral team in 2001 had been stalled by the
Government of Bhutan's refusal to readmit anyone from the
second and third categories. Because many refugees
apparently signed documents before their departure stating
they were leaving of their own free will--documents that most
now claim were signed under duress--the Government of Nepal
feared that the majority of refugees would fall into the
second category. End note.) During talks this week, the
Government of Bhutan (GOB) reportedly agreed to accept for
repatriation refugees classified under the first three
categories. The Government of Nepal (GON) agreed to offer
refugees "the option to return" to Bhutan, which, according
to Nepali MFA Joint Secretary and Spokesman Gyan Chandra
Acharya, who participated in the talks, offers the implicit
option not to return and to be resettled in Nepal.


3. (C) "Voluntary" emigres accepted for repatriation must
reapply for Bhutanese citizenship. Acharya said the GOB had
agreed to extend a "liberal" interpretation of its
citizenship law to such applications. The prickly question
of whether the GON will extend the possibility of citizenship
to those refugees electing resettlement in Nepal--a point the
GOB had earlier demanded--will be "sorted out" later, Acharya
said. (Note: Citizenship issues are politically sensitive
in Nepal, primarily because of the large volume of
undocumented residents of Indian parentage, particularly in
the southern plains, pressing for citizenship. End note.)

--------------
AFTER CATEGORIZATION, REPATRIATION
--------------

4. (SBU) The Joint Verification Team (JVT),which last met
in December 2001, will reconvene in Thimpu on February 24. A
13th ministerial meeting is also scheduled to be held in
Thimpu on March 24. The JVT, which will be headed by Joint
Secretaries from the respective Home Ministries, will begin

SIPDIS
the long-deferred work of categorizing the 12,000 residents
whose status was "verified" during JVT interviews at one of
the seven refugee camps in 2001. Acharya said the GOB has
assured the GON that categorization will proceed more
expeditiously than the verification exercise, which took nine
months to complete. Once the categorization of the initial
12,000 refugees is finished, repatriation will begin, Acharya
said, although no specific time frame has been established.



5. (C) Acharya said the GON insisted that repatriation of
the initial 12,000 "verified" refugees at the first camp be
completed before interviews are undertaken at the remaining
six camps. He said he is fairly confident that once a
successful sequence of verification, followed by
repatriation/resettlement is established, the work of
interviewing and categorizing the remaining 88,000 refugees
should proceed less laboriously.

--------------
GON GIVES GOB "BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT"
--------------


6. (C) While acknowledging several previous false starts
over the 13 years of efforts to resolve the refugee problem,
Acharya said his government is encouraged by the GOB's
apparently accommodating stance. The GOB might quibble later
about definitions, question the veracity of refugee
documents, or employ other delaying tactics, Acharya said;
nonetheless, for now the GON must give Bhutan the "benefit of
the doubt" that it will live up to its commitments. He
credited donor nation pressure for convincing the GOB to make
the concessions it has, and suggested that the conclusion of
such an important agreement just ten days before the
beginning of the Bhutan aid consortium meeting in Geneva was
more than coincidental. Acharya, who was speaking at a
luncheon attended by the U.S., British, French, and German
Ambassadors, urged that donors continue such pressure lest
Bhutan "backslide" and once again begin stalling the process.



7. (U) The actual joint press release signed by the two
Foreign Ministers (copy faxed to SA/INS) commits the GOB to
substantially less than what Acharya said was verbally agreed
upon. The press statement notes in general terms that "the
two Ministers expressed their firm resolve and commitment to
arrive at a lasting solution" to the refugee issue without
stipulating what such a solution might entail. It further
states that the two sides "harmonized their positions on the
four categories" without defining the categories or referring
to any commitments by the GOB to take back any emigres.

--------------
EU TO SEND LETTER TO BHUTAN
--------------


8. (C) EU CDA Rudiger Wenk told the DCM on February 6 that,
as promised, he had consulted with his headquarters about the
refugee issue (Ref D). He reported that Brussels had agreed
to send a letter to the GOB pressing for progress in
resolving the long-standing problem. Wenk said he remains
skeptical that the GOB will follow through on its
commitments, noting pointedly that the JVT meeting that will
begin addressing the nettlesome problem of categorization is
not scheduled until after the donors meeting. He suggested
that the Department communicate with Commissioner Chris
Patton on how best to send a strong message to the GOB before
the February 17 donor consortium.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


9. (C) Nepali Foreign Minister Narendra Bikram Shah
identified the 13-year-old refugee problem to the Ambassador
weeks ago as one key area in which the apolitical interim
government appointed by King Gyanendra might make some
important headway. For right now at least, Shah may have
succeeded. The imminent donors conference on Bhutan, coupled
with the growing chorus of donor voices urging the GOB to
take action, likely were critical to reactivating the
negotiating process. That those who have dealt the longest
with the GOB on this issue--Joint Secretary Acharya and the
EU's Wenk--both express a cautious skepticism that Bhutan
will follow through on its commitments--is noteworthy. We
note with some concern that the joint press statement
released after the recent ministerial says nothing about
Bhutan's reported commitments regarding repatriation. We
hope that the vague, generic wording in the statement was
employed in order to allay possible political sensitivities
in either or both capitals, rather than to allow yet further
evasive and delaying tactics by the Bhutanese. It is thus
important that donors at the February 17 conference continue
to press the GOB to implement these promises in a timely
fashion. We welcome the Department's plan to demarche
Bhutan's donor capitals (Ref B) and recommend that it enlist
the help of EU headquarters in implementing this strategy.

MALINOWSKI