NEPAL: TIBETANS VIEW RESETTLEMENT AS ZERO-SUM GAME

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 003184 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/08/2016 TAGS: PREF PHUM PGOV PREL CH NP SUBJECT: NEPAL: TIBETANS VIEW RESETTLEMENT AS ZERO-SUM GAME Classified By: Ambassador James F. Moriarty for reasons 1.4 (b/d). SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (C) In October 2006, Post's Tibetan-speaking staff conducted an informal survey of 18 Tibetans on the proposed resettlement of 60,000 Bhutanese refugees and about refugee resettlement generally. Generally, the reactions from the respondents indicated that some Tibetan refugees viewed U.S. resettlement programs as a zero-sum game, exposing a worry that U.S. attention toward the Bhutanese refugees could negatively impact Tibetan prospects for resettlement. METHODOLOGY -------------- ¶2. (C) In October 2006, Post's Tibetan-speaking staff conducted an informal survey of 18 Tibetans on the proposed resettlement of Bhutanese refugees and about refugee resettlement generally. Views of third persons were also sought through those who were interviewed. This is a summary of the findings, including views of leaders and activists gleaned from various media sources. REACTIONS MIXED -------------- ¶3. (SBU) Generally, the reactions were mixed on the proposed Bhutanese refugee resettlement program: a. While many respondents welcomed the news of a resettlement program for Bhutanese refugees, many also expressed confusion as to why the U.S. planned to resettle 60,000 Bhutanese refugees but only 5,000 Tibetans. A number of respondents opined that they wished the U.S. would resettle all of the refugees living in Nepal. Some lamented that this indicated a U.S. preference for the Bhutanese refugees over Tibetans. They felt they were being treated differently from the Bhutanese refugees, saying that the latter received significant aid and attention from the international community, while Tibetans do not. (Comment: The Tibetan refugee camps are in much better shape than the Bhutanese camps. For 15 years, the GON has maintained that the Bhutanese camps are temporary and has thus allowed neither electricity nor permanent housing. End Comment.) b. All respondents agreed that resettlement would bring those resettled a "better life," including freedom and the opportunity to contribute to democratic movements. c. Many Tibetans acknowledged that the Bhutanese refugee resettlement program would not face the same political obstacles as the resettlement of the 5,000 Tibetans, noting that tiny Bhutan could not bring the same political pressure on Nepal as China could. They hoped, however, that the U.S. would undertake the resettlement of the 5,000 Tibetans first. (Comment: Because of the political obstacles to Tibetan resettlement, it would be unwise to link the two resettlement programs. End Comment.) WHO IS MOST VULNERABLE? -------------- ¶4. (C) Most respondents believed that Tibetan refugees were more vulnerable than Bhutanese refugees in Nepal, arguing that the Government of Nepal withheld refugee status from Tibetans. They also pointed out that, while Nepal helped Bhutanese refugees in their struggle to return by initiating talks and pressuring the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB), Nepal mistreats Tibetans and bans Tibetan democratic demonstrations. They also raised incidents in which Maoists threatened Tibetans in refugee settlements, warning that the Maoists would "kick all of the Tibetans out of Nepal by setting their houses on fire." Interestingly, almost all of the respondents agreed with the RGOB in arguing that the Bhutanese refugees are Nepal's own people, implicitly KATHMANDU 00003184 002 OF 002 questioning their refugee status. COMMENT -------------- ¶5. (C) On average, Tibetans in Nepal are better off than the Bhutanese refugees. For example, those who hold Refugee Cards are able to work in Nepal and generally have freedom of movement and, to a large extent, freedom of religion. Many Tibetan Buddhist monasteries exist in Nepal allowing the continuation of Tibetan religious and cultural practices not permitted in Tibet. While their fears are unfounded, it comes as no great surprise that Tibetan refugees see themselves in competition with the Bhutanese refugees in Nepal when it comes to resettlement. The view that U.S. resettlement programs are a zero-sum game erodes possible solidarity among refugees more broadly, solidarity that could ultimately further the interests of all refugees in Nepal. MORIARTY