NEPAL: GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL NONCOMMITTAL ON

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 000466

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SA/INS, EAP/CM, PRM/ANE, G:MFRIEDRICH,
LONDON FOR POL/GURNEY
NSC FOR MILLARD
BEIJING PLEASE PASS TO CHENGDU

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/17/2014
TAGS: PREF PREL CVIS CH NP
SUBJECT: NEPAL: GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL NONCOMMITTAL ON
IMPROVING TIBETAN REFUGEE RECORD

REF: KATHMANDU 350

Classified By: DCM Robert K. Boggs for Reasons 1.5 (b,d).


1. (C) Summary. On March 15, DCM and PolOff called on Home
Ministry Joint Secretary U.P. Mainali to discuss Tibetan
refugee issues as raised reftel. The DCM thanked Mainali for
his effort in processing exit permits for Tibetans who were
eligible for U.S. immigrant visas. The DCM expressed concern
that deportations of undocumented Tibetans continue near the
Nepal-China border and suggested that border officials should
be provided with written instructions on the appropriate
treatment of Tibetan asylum seekers. Moreover, the DCM urged
Mainali to issue a letter to UNHCR detailing the procedures
for handling Tibetans and authorizing UNHCR to determine
their refugee status. Mainali was noncommittal on both
issues and claimed that the Government of Nepal continues to
cooperate with UNHCR and the international community on
Tibetan refugees, but prefers to do this on an informal
basis. He asserted that the occasional deportation occurs
due to pressure on Nepali immigration officials by Chinese
authorities at border posts. End Summary.

-------------- --------------
Travel Documents for Tibetans Immigrating to the U.S.
-------------- --------------


2. (SBU) On March 15, DCM and PolOff met with Home Ministry
Joint Secretary U.P. Mainali to discuss Tibetan refugee
issues as raised reftel. Mainali is also the National
Coordinator for Refugees and the primary liaison on both
Tibetan and Bhutanese refugee issues. The DCM began the
meeting by thanking the Joint Secretary for his efforts to
obtain Cabinet approval for the issuance of exit permits and
travel documents for 107 Tibetan refugees who were eligible
to receive U.S. immigrant benefits. He noted that 38
individuals had thus far been issued the necessary papers
allowing them to depart for the United States. The DCM
requested that the GON regularize the procedure so that
Cabinet-level approval is not required each time a Tibetan
refugee is eligible for U.S. immigrant benefits. Mainali
agreed to explore with more senior officials the possibility
of adopting a more systematic approach for issuing travel
documents to these individuals.

--------------
Continued Deportations: Pressure from Chinese
--------------


3. (SBU) The DCM then raised U.S. concerns over reports that
undocumented Tibetans arrested near the Nepal-China border
continue to be deported, particularly since deportees
commonly are subject to mistreatment by Chinese officials.
As reported by UNHCR officials who recently visited two
border areas, the DCM commented that Nepali immigration and
police officials in border areas are not aware of the
Government of Nepal's (GON) refugee policy provided to the
Embassy in writing in August 2003. (Note. The GON refugee
policy supports the principle of non-refoulement and permits
UNHCR access to all asylum seekers. End Note.) Recognizing
earlier suggestions by Mainali that communication problems
between Kathmandu and border officials might be the cause of
the deportations, the DCM urged Mainali to issue instructions
in writing informing all border officials of the GON refugee
policy.


4. (SBU) Mainali responded that the GON continues to
cooperate with UNHCR the international community in the
treatment of Tibetan asylum seekers. He noted that the GON
has issued over 30,000 exit permits to Tibetan refugees over
the past 10 years. Mainali asserted, however, that all
Tibetans in Nepal are not asylum seekers. He explained that
the government has encountered problems with undocumented
Tibetans entering Nepal from India, some of whom may have
already transited Nepal from Tibet, seeking either to reside
illegally in Nepal or to transit back to Tibet. "In this
case, they should not be considered refugees," he said.
Indicating that his ministry preferred to implement its
non-refoulement policy on an informal basis, Mainali would
not commit to providing border officials with written
instructions on the appropriate handling of undocumented
Tibetans.

5. (C) Mainali did not deny that deportations sometimes occur
near the border. He commented, however, that pressure on
Nepali immigration officials by Chinese authorities was too
strong, in some cases, to resist. "When the Chinese see that
we are holding Tibetans at a border post, they demand we turn
them over," Mainali said. Nepali officials sometimes make
arrests in error, he acknowledged, because of confusion over
the existing agreement between Nepal and China that allows
inhabitants of border districts in both countries free
movement in areas within 30 kilometers from the border.
PolOff noted, however, that Nepali authorities should be able
to distinguish between these "legal" Tibetans, who usually
carry photo identification, and Tibetan asylum seekers, who
typically leave identification cards behind for fear of
arrest and persecution. PolOff also suggested that since
undocumented Tibetans are usually arrested at some point
beyond the 30-kilometer limit, perhaps GON authorities could
detain those Tibetans at outlying District Headquarters
rather than near the border in order to keep them below the
Chinese radar screen. Mainali replied that this might be a
possible solution.

--------------
UNHCR's Role Regarding Tibetans
--------------


6. (C) The DCM also requested the GON formally to empower
UNHCR with exclusive authority to determine undocumented
Tibetans' refugee status. He asserted that UNHCR has the
unique expertise and training and would base its decisions on
acceptable international standards concerning refugees.
PolOff added that Senator Dianne Feinstein, in her July 2003
letter to Prime Minister Thapa, had requested that the GON
give a letter to UNHCR detailing the procedures for handling
undocumented Tibetans. Mainali responded noncommittally, but
agreed to discuss this issue with the Home Secretary and
Foreign Secretary.

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


7. (C) Mainali was distinctly uncomfortable with discussing
Tibetan refugee issues. This was the first time that Mainali
explicitly has attributed periodic deportations to pressure
from the Chinese Government. Previously, Mainali has
attempted to excuse these incidents as problems of
miscommunication between Kathmandu and the remote border
posts. He clearly was not in a position to make decisions on
issuing written instructions to border officials or to
formalize arrangements with UNHCR. Post will continue to
raise this issue with GON officials as appropriate. Nepal's
local press reported on March 15 that the governments of
Nepal and China will meet in Beijing on March 25-26 to
negotiate a new "border protocol," last updated in 1988.
According to the press article, the meeting will identify
border problems and form a committee to resolve them.
Considering the acute Chinese sensitivity regarding Tibetan
refugees, Post suspects that this milestone is likely to
focus on this issue. This prospect probably reinforces the
GON's reluctance to convey its non-refoulement policy in
writing and thus reduce its flexibility in negotiating with
the PRC. End Comment.
MALINOWSKI