Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
03KATHMANDU2345
2003-12-02 07:15:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Kathmandu
Cable title:  

PROMOTING DURABLE SOLUTIONS FOR THE BHUTANESE

Tags:  PREF PREL PHUM BH NP 
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.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 002345 

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

DEPT FOR SA/INS, PRM/ANE:MPITOTTI, PRM/A: CHILL; LONDON FOR
POL/GURNEY; NSC FOR MILLARD

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREF PREL PHUM BH NP
SUBJECT: PROMOTING DURABLE SOLUTIONS FOR THE BHUTANESE

REFUGEES IN NEPAL

REF: STATE 326211

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 002345

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

DEPT FOR SA/INS, PRM/ANE:MPITOTTI, PRM/A: CHILL; LONDON FOR
POL/GURNEY; NSC FOR MILLARD

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREF PREL PHUM BH NP
SUBJECT: PROMOTING DURABLE SOLUTIONS FOR THE BHUTANESE

REFUGEES IN NEPAL

REF: STATE 326211


1. (SBU) Post welcomes reftel's proposals regarding a durable
solution for the Bhutanese refugees in Nepal. We concur that
U.S. objetives for the refugees are first, to ensure that
basic protection and assistance needs of the refugees are met
and second, to advance efforts by the Government of Nepal
(GON) and Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) to achieve a
durable solution to the Bhutanese refugee problem.

--------------
LOCAL INTEGRATION IN NEPAL
--------------


2. (SBU) Reftel suggests that Post look for progress by the
GON to integrate refugees into Nepal. Post supports the
principle of local integration and will encourage and support
GON plans to settle a number of refugees in Nepal. However,
settlement in Nepal will be difficult politically and legally
and may not lead to a stable or secure situation for a large
number of refugees. In any case, settlement in Nepal should
not be pressed on the GON until it becomes clearer how
sincere the Bhutan Government is about repatriation, which,
we believe, is still the first choice of most refugees.


3. (SBU) Local integration is a politically-charged topic for
a number of reasons and may prove too controversial for any
government, much less this interim government, to implement.
A UNHCR Protection Officer in Kathmandu estimated that there
are over 400,000 people in Nepal (mostly undocumented
immigrants from India) waiting for Nepali citizenship and
roughly 2 million ethnic Nepalis waiting for land
distribution from the GON. Offering citizenship and land to
the refugees could, therefore, cause significant political
backlash. Moreover, Eastern Nepal, where the refugee camps
are located, is more densely populated and richer in natural
resources than other parts of Nepal. As a result, it is
unlikely that the refugees would be resettled in or near the
communities with which they have been co-located for the past
13 years.


4. (SBU) Thousands of Tibetan refugees currently work and
live in Nepal, but do not have citizenship status and cannot
obtain travel documents or other official papers without
paying hefty bribes to GON officials. Any Bhutanese refugee

who decides to stay in Nepal will likely be accorded the same
quasi-legal status. It may be difficult, therefore, for the
USG to support local integration in Nepal if that means that
the Bhutanese are left in the same legal limbo as the
Tibetans.

--------------
PROGRESS OF JOINT VERIFICATION TEAM
--------------


5. (SBU) Reftel also suggests that Post report on the results
of a Joint Verification Team (JVT) meeting. The team arrived
in Khudunabari Camp the week of December 1 to begin its
review of appeals submitted by Category III refugees.
According to Nepal's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA),the
JVT will complete the appellate review prior to the January
2004 Joint Ministerial meeting. Post will report on the
JVT's findings at that time. The MFA has indicated that
verification of the second refugee camp, Sanischere, will
begin after Khudunabari camp refugees are repatriated. Under
the most optimistic timeline, the JVT will start verification
of Sanischere in late February/early March and complete the
process roughly four months later, perhaps by July 2004.
Verification of the second camp may take longer than
anticipated because of international advocacy to treat men
and women equally. If verification procedures are revised so
that women refugees are granted separate interviews, rather
than interviewing only heads-of-household, the process could
take twice as long.

--------------
OTHER USG EFFORTS
--------------


6. (SBU) Post agrees that it is important to monitor closely
and report on progress made by the Joint Verification Team
and the Government of Nepal. We also agree that joint
demarches with the Friends of Bhutan and Nepal, given our
approaches are aligned, would have a positive impact on the
process. However, in order to ensure the basic protection
and assistance needs of all Bhutanese refugees, including
those in Khudunabari Camp, Post believes more immediate
action is necessary. Post recommends that a high-level visit
from Washington to New Delhi, Thimpu, and Kathmandu could
have an immediate and positive impact on the issue. Such a
visit would send the message that the USG is serious and
engaged about this important human rights issue.


7. (SBU) A visit to New Delhi also could emphasize that
India's support for repatriation is absolutely critical to
its succses. It would be important to highlight to the
Government of India, as well as to the RGOB, the importance
of resolving the refugee problem to avoid further insecurity
in the region. The continuing education of girls and boys in
the refugee camps in Dzongka language, culture and traditions
demonstrates the refugees' commitment to Bhutan and their
desire to return as loyal subjects and upstanding citizens.
However, if they are not able to return to Bhutan with
citizenship and other basic rights, these groups might grow
increasingly radical. The young men and women in the camps
have already become more vulnerable to solicitation by
anti-monarchical political movements supporting the
"liberation of Bhutan - Nepal". We fear that if the
refugees' needs are ignored, the Bhutan-India border region
may witness further instability.


8. (SBU) A senior visit to Thimpu could emphasize these
security concerns, but also focus on third-party monitoring
(other than UNHCR),citizenship for the refugees and property
rights -- the three key issues identified by the refugees
themselves as being most critical for their successful
repatriation. Another important issue will be the freedom to
seek employment commensurate with their relatively high
levels of education. A visit to Nepal could focus on the
importance of resettling some refugees locally with provision
of land and relaxed requirements for citizenship. We believe
it is important to address these issues quickly, before
repatriation begins.


MALINOWSKI