UPDATE ON PETCHABOON HMONG SITUATION

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BANGKOK 005146 SIPDIS GENEVA FOR RMA E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREF PREL TH SUBJECT: UPDATE ON PETCHABOON HMONG SITUATION REF: A. BANGKOK 4430 ¶B. CHIANG MAI 173 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED, PLEASE HANDLE ACCORDINGLY. ¶1. (SBU) Summary. A Thai National Security Council official stated on August 8 that the Thai government believed the cause of the Petchaboon Hmong situation was the pull factor created by the Wat Tham Krabok resettlement program, exacerbated by the activities of Hmong-Americans who were encouraging Hmong to go the site and collecting money for arranging passage there. The population at the site is now about 5,700 persons. The Thai are conducting a survey of the group to determine why, when, and how they entered Thailand. The NSC official said the Hmong were illegal immigrants under Thai law. The Thai government would have to enforce its immigration law, but had so far shown forbearance and was not rushing to resolve the problem. The official said that if the Hmong were deported, it would be done in a manner that was not dangerous to them. Lao government approval or cooperation was not necessary. The Thai government accepted that some of the Hmong might be refugees in need of UNHCR protection. However, it would be difficult, the official said, to identify and screen such persons without drawing even more Hmong to the site. End summary. ¶2. (SBU) Refcoord met August 8 with Tawin Pleansri, Director of the Bureau of Defense and Border Security Affairs of the Thai National Security Council, to discuss the situation of the Petchaboon Hmong. ¶3. (SBU) Refcoord told Tawin that the USG was watching this issue carefully and believed that the Thai government should act according to international norms and permit persons with refugee claims to have access to UNHCR representatives. Tawin responded by noting that Hmong-American groups had sent letters expressing concern about the Petchaboon Hmong to Secretary Rice, and the Thai king, Prime Minister, and SIPDIS Foreign Minister. He said that the Thai government believed a significant cause of the situation was the pull factor created by the Wat Tham Krabok resettlement program. Hmong had begun to congregate in Petchaboon in early 2004 and the latest Thai government count of the group, taken the previous week, was about 5,700 persons split evenly between men and women. The number was not increasing at this point. ¶4. (SBU) Tawin continued that some in the group claimed they had recently come from Laos and worked for the United States during the Vietnam War. Others said they had fled Laos because of persecution. Another part of the group were ethnic Hmong who had Thai citizenship, though Tawin stated that these persons had now all returned to their homes elsewhere in Thailand. Tawin said that some of the people from Laos had paid 5-10,000 Baht (USD 122-244) to people smugglers to get to Thailand. The Thai government believed Hmong-Americans were encouraging Hmong to go to the Petchaboon site and were involved in arranging transport there for payment. ¶5. (SBU) Tawin continued that under Thai law, all of the Petchaboon group were illegal immigrants and therefore subject to deportation. He said that the Thai government did not believe there was fighting occurring in Laos. The Lao government stated the same. So the Petchaboon Hmong were not fleeing fighting. Tawin stated that the Thai government had to enforce its immigration law but had so far shown forbearance. Not one Hmong had been returned to Laos. The government had permitted NGOs and UNHCR to provide basic assistance. The government was also conducting a survey of the group, taking pictures and names of families, and trying to determine why, when, and how they had gone to the Petchaboon site. ¶6. (SBU) Tawin said that the Thai government accepted that some in the group might need protection from UNHCR and was considering how to identify and treat such persons. It expected to have discussions with UNHCR on this issue. However, Tawin stated, it would be hard to screen the Hmong in a way that would not draw more people to the site and reward or send the wrong signal to the people smugglers. Side-effects needed to be considered carefully. ¶7. (SBU) Tawin asked for understanding of the Thai position, noting that Thailand was facing waves of illegal immigrants from its neighbors. This created problems. The Thai government had to enforce its immigration law to try and maintain some control over the situation. He said that other countries, including the United States, deported illegal immigrants. It was also important to send a signal that the government would not tolerate people smuggling. ¶8. (SBU) Tawin said that if the Hmong were deported to Laos, it would be done in a manner that was not dangerous to them. Efforts would be made not to separate families. The Hmong would be sent back to Laos along the same routes they entered. The Thai government, Tawin continued, did not now have a date for returning the Hmong. It was still in the planning stages and was not rushing to take action. The Thai government did not want to make the problem worse. ¶9. (SBU) The Lao government, Tawin stated, refused to work with Thailand on this issue. However, it was not always necessary to have the approval of neighboring country governments to carry out deportations. Thai authorities deported illegal immigrants every day, taking such persons to the border and telling them to return home. This was done without the cooperation or knowledge of neighboring governments. The difference was that the Petchaboon Hmong were a larger group than normal. ¶10. (SBU) In closing, Tawin said that it would be useful if Refcoord went to Petchaboon and personally told the leaders of the Hmong group that there would be no new resettlement program. He also asked for USG help in curbing the activities of Hmong-Americans involved in encouraging and moving Hmong to the Petchaboon site. What they were engaged in was creating problems for the Thai, U.S., and Lao governments. ¶11. (SBU) Comment. The Thai government is convinced that the combination of the Tham Krabok pull factor and Hmong-American activities are responsible for the Petchaboon situation. The Embassy cannot confirm that any Hmong-Americans are involved. As Consulate Chiang Mai has reported, persons in Thailand may also have a hand in this complex situation. While the Thai have so far not acted precipitously, it seems that they will move at some point to deport the Petchaboon Hmong. How they would do this is unclear. The current Thai practice of deporting illegal immigrants from Laos is to take them to points on the border where there are no Lao officials with the knowledge that many will likely turn around and re-enter Thailand. End comment. ARVIZU