NEPAL: BHUTANESE REFUGEES CRITICIZE REPATRIATION

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 000286

SIPDIS

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

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREF PREL EAID BT NP IN
SUBJECT: NEPAL: BHUTANESE REFUGEES CRITICIZE REPATRIATION
PLANS

REF: A. KATHMANDU 228


B. KATHMANDU 90


1. Summary: On February 12, PolOff met with respresentatives
of the Bhutan National Democratic Party (BNDP),a political
group composed of Bhutanese refugees living in
UNHCR-administered camps in Nepal, to discuss the results of
the 12th round of ministerial talks on the refugee issue (ref
A). While reiterating the desire of the majority of the
refugees to return to Bhutan, the representatives voiced
concerns about possible post-repatriation complications.
They also expressed suspicion that Bhutan might be "behaving
properly" only as a tactic to polish its image just before
donor meetings in Geneva, and encouraged the US to pressure
India and other donors to help find a lasting solution to the
crisis. Recent editorials and reports in the local press
have echoed the skeptical tone, contending that "Nepal has
been duped once again." End summary.


2. In a Feburary 12 meeting with PolOff, representatives
from the Bhutan National Democratic Party, Dr. Das Dhakal and
Chhabi Lal Timilsina, warned that even if refugees currently
residing in eleven UNHCR-administered camps in Eastern Nepal
are allowed to return to Bhutan, problems would continue to
arise after repatriation. The representatives expressed
concern that no assurances have been forthcoming about
citizenship for the refugees in their former homeland, nor
any guarantees that their human rights would be protected,
and suggested that an international monitoring body would be
necessary for an indefinite period following the return of
any refugees to Bhutan.


3. Despite possible problems, the representatives said that
90 percent of the refugees would go back to Bhutan if offered
the chance. Even though most are aware that their homes and
farms likely will not be waiting for them, "if Bhutan makes
them eligible," Timilsina said plainly, "all but a few of
them will go in a minute. And if the king (of Bhutan) has had
a real change in his heart, it will be no problem at all."
However, regardless of the GOB's recent apparent cooperation
with the GON in finding a solution, the GOB is unlikely to
agree to the return of large number of refugees, they
insisted.


4. Both representatives attributed Bhutan's current attitude
to a desire to "look good for the donors," rather than any
intention to allow the refugees to return in large numbers,
and encouraged the US to exert whatever pressure it can on
the GOB. Without international pressure, according to
Dhakal, "Bhutan will try to make as many people as possible
ineligible." The representatives singled out India as the
best target for US influence, stressing that India could
easily make up any shortfalls in other international
assistance. "India is key, because it can bail out Bhutan,"
Dhakal said.


5. Reaction by other refugee groups to the outcome of the
12th round of ministerial talks, reported in the local press,
echoed the Dhakal's skepticism. The Bhutan Peoples Party
said that the GON had "demonstrated inferior diplomatic
skills," while the Association of Human Rights Activists -
Bhutan accused the GON of "playing into the hands of the
Bhutanese regime." The Druk National Congress said that the
Bhutanese government is continuing the talks as part of a
plan to deceive donor countries, and the Bhutanese
Repatriation Committee demanded "the internationalization of
issues relating to the refugees."


6. The reaction of the Bhutanese Refugees Repatriation
Support Group, whose members include several former GON
ministers (ref B),was split. While one member stated that
the agreement reached between the GOB and GON "can be taken
positively," former foreign minister Shailendra Kumar
Upadhyay was entirely less sanguine in his comments to
reporters, saying "Nepal has been duped once again." In a
commentary printed in the English daily The Himalayan Times,
Upadhyay called for a definite timeline for verification and
repatriation, as well as international pressure on Bhutan.
"The Bhutanese government has chosen to baffle Nepal once
more by agreeing to start veriication ahead of the donors'
meeting in Geneva this month," Upadhyay wrote. "It wants to
create the impression on the international community that it
is willing to accommodate bona fide Bhutanese by cooperating
with Nepal." Bhutanese sincerity, he added, can be measured
by the GOB's willingness to take back the refugees within a
prescribed timeframe. "If the 13th ministerial meeting can
agree upon such a time-table... it could be welcomed by all.
Otherwise, the international community must reject and expose
Bhutan's dilatory tactics."


7. Comment: Post shares much of the refugee community's
skepticism about the sincerity of Bhutan's agreement to start
moving toward large-scale repatriation of refugees. Similar
statements have been made by the GOB in the past, only to be
forgotten when the world is no longer watching. While the
apparent positive outcomes of the 12th ministerial talks are
encouraging, continued international pressure will be
necessary to ensure that the GOB lives up to its promises.
MALINOWSKI