Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06KATHMANDU3126
2006-11-29 12:18:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Kathmandu
Cable title:  

TIBETAN REFUGEE UPDATE: NOVEMBER 29

Tags:  PREF PGOV PREL CVIS SOCI CH NP 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO1271
PP RUEHCI
DE RUEHKT #3126/01 3331218
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 291218Z NOV 06
FM AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4041
INFO RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA PRIORITY 0499
RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO PRIORITY 5333
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 4705
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING PRIORITY 5074
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD PRIORITY 3333
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI PRIORITY 0601
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL CALCUTTA PRIORITY 2877
RUEHGZ/AMCONSUL GUANGZHOU PRIORITY 0155
RUEHCN/AMCONSUL CHENGDU PRIORITY 0317
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA PRIORITY 1343
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 2185
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 003126 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/29/2016
TAGS: PREF PGOV PREL CVIS SOCI CH NP
SUBJECT: TIBETAN REFUGEE UPDATE: NOVEMBER 29


KATHMANDU 00003126 001.2 OF 002


Classified By: Ambassador James F. Moriarty for reasons 1.4 (b/d).

Summary
-------

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 003126

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/29/2016
TAGS: PREF PGOV PREL CVIS SOCI CH NP
SUBJECT: TIBETAN REFUGEE UPDATE: NOVEMBER 29


KATHMANDU 00003126 001.2 OF 002


Classified By: Ambassador James F. Moriarty for reasons 1.4 (b/d).

Summary
--------------


1. (SBU) On November 27, 28, and 29, RefCoord met with the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Country
Representative Abraham Abraham, Office of Tibet
Representative Jigme Wangdu, and the Director and Deputy
Director of the Government of Nepal,s National Unit for the
Coordination of Refugee Affairs (NUCRA) to discuss the
current state of play regarding the Tibetan community and
Tibetans transiting Nepal to India. Our interlocutors noted
that, under Nepal,s new Citizenship Law approved on November
26, between 1/2 and 1/3 of Tibetans in Nepal might be
eligible to apply for Nepali citizenship. The more than 200
Tibetan asylee following-to-join cases pending at Post
continue to await travel documents from the Government of
Nepal (GON). Home Ministry officials claimed that they were
ready to issue travel documents to these individuals, but
first required written concurrence from the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. Although the Tibetan community feels
somewhat slighted by the USG,s offer to resettle 5,000
Tibetans versus 60,000 Bhutanese refugees, the Office of
Tibet is willing to consider a joint effort with Bhutanese
refugee leaders to lobby the GON for a resettlement program.
Tibetans continue to transit Nepal without difficulty,
although two recent groups of Tibetans were kept in detention
longer than usual.

Tibetan Community in Nepal
--------------


2. (SBU) Nepal's House of Representatives passed a
Citizenship bill on November 26 making all persons residing
in Nepal prior to April 13, 1990 eligible for Nepali
citizenship. According to Joint Secretary Bhesh Raj Sharma
at the Ministry of Law and Justice, Tibetans who were
registered as refugees and hold a refugee identity card (RC)
are not eligible to apply for citizenship under the new law.
However, Sharma claimed that Tibetans who had resided in

Nepal without legal status could apply for citizenship.
These individuals must be able to prove that they had lived
in Nepal since April 1990, he added, although it was unclear
what type of proof would be required. RefCoord shared this
information with Jigme Wangdu, who noted that the new law,
therefore, would benefit only the Tibetans who were most
likely eligible for resettlement abroad. Wangdu queried
whether Tibetans would still be able to apply for
resettlement if they obtained Nepali citizenship. RefCoord
responded that this would be unlikely. Of the total Tibetan
population in Nepal, estimated at between 16,000 and 20,000,
Wangdu believed that roughly 10,000 currently held RCs. If
so, between 1/3 and 1/2 of the Tibetan population in Nepal
might be eligible to apply for Nepali citizenship. Wangdu did
not appear interested in pursuing this possibility.


3. (SBU) Wangdu raised his concern that roughly 200 Tibetans,
who were eligible for U.S. immigration benefits, continued to
await issuance of travel documents from the Home Ministry.
RefCoord raised this issue in a subsequent meeting with NUCRA
Director Baman Prasad Neupane and Deputy Director Shanker
Koirala, reminding them of U.S. efforts to reunify these
Tibetan families and asking what more the Embassy needed to
do to effect their departure. Koirala informed RefCoord that
the Home Ministry was ready to proceed with the issuance of
travel documents, but had not yet received written
concurrence from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA).
Koirala, in an aside, requested RefCoord to send a letter to
the Foreign Secretary requesting the MFA's written
concurrence. Post will follow up with a letter as soon as
possible.


4. (SBU) When asked about the U.S. offer to resettle 5,000
Tibetans and 60,000 Bhutanese refugees, Wangdu wondered why
the U.S. seemed to care more about the Bhutanese refugees
than the Tibetan community (septel). RefCoord assured Wangdu

KATHMANDU 00003126 002 OF 002


that was not the case and urged the Office of Tibet to form
an alliance with the Bhutanese leaders pushing for
resettlement as the two communities could jointly lobby the
GON more effectively together. Initially reticent, Wangdu
later became convinced that commonalities existed between the
two groups and welcomed an introduction with a group of
Bhutanese refugee leaders.


5. (C) Separately, NUCRA Director Neupane avoided the issue
of Tibetan resettlement altogether. Deputy Director Koirala,
however, suggested that because Nepal desired to maintain
good relations with China, it would be hard-pressed to
support a large resettlement program for the Tibetans. He
said that if the U.S. could propose small numbers, e.g. 200
at a time, perhaps Nepal could allow them to depart quietly
on the basis of humanitarian interest.

Transiting Tibetans
--------------


6. (SBU) Two groups of Tibetans recently were apprehended
near the China-Nepal border: one group of 4 Tibetans on
November 13 at the Kodari border and another group of 13
Tibetans on November 25 in Sindupalchowk. Unlike previous
instances, the Department of Immigration (DOI) required both
groups to report to the DOI detention facility in Kathmandu
rather than proceeding directly to the Tibetan Reception
Center (TRC) under the protection of UNHCR. Immigration
authorities allowed UNHCR access to the Tibetans, but
required the first group to remain in detention until their
departure to India while the second group was released on
"bail" and permitted to stay at the TRC. UNHCR expects the
group of 13 Tibetans to depart the evening of November 29.


7. (SBU) According to Wangdu, there are currently 303
Tibetans at the reception center awaiting processing and
permission to depart for India. Two buses with a total of
between 80 ) 90 Tibetans typically depart each week with an
approximate stay at the TRC of between 3 ) 4 weeks. Wangdu
was pleased that the new facility at the TRC would be opened
formally on December 6 and voiced no complaints over the
current processing of transiting Tibetans.

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


8. (C) The first group of recent transiting Tibetans left
without difficulty and the second group is expected to leave
today. The longer the Tibetans are required to remain in DOI
detention without UNHCR protection, the great the potential
for Chinese pressure for refoulement. On the positive side,
however, the DOI did not impose immigration fines on these
two groups -- a frequent problem in past detentions. Chinese
Vice Minister Liu Hongcai,s November 23 statement that
"foreign forces trying to play a role by splitting Tibet in
the land of Nepal is unacceptable to China", was a clear
warning to the GON not to move forward with the U.S.
resettlement offer. This continuing pressure from the PRC
dims prospects for a large scale resettlement program.
Similarly, with the 200 asylum following-to-join cases still
pending, Koirala,s suggestion to resettle small groups of
Tibetans seems hollow, although we remain hopeful that the
200 individuals may be allowed to leave soon.
MORIARTY