CORE GROUP MEETS WITH FOREIGN MINISTER ON

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KATHMANDU 000809

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/20/2017
TAGS: PREF PREL PGOV BT IN NP
SUBJECT: CORE GROUP MEETS WITH FOREIGN MINISTER ON
BHUTANESE REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT

REF: KATHMANDU 755

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

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


1. (C) In a meeting April 20 with Foreign Minister Sahana
Pradhan, members of the Core Group representing the U.S.,
Australia, Canada, Denmark and Norway laid out the basis for
technical discussions on third-country resettlement of
Bhutanese refugees. FM Pradhan emphasized the need to
repatriate at least some refugees to Bhutan, but ultimately
committed to moving forward simultaneously with a
resettlement program. She expressed concern that a residual
population of refugees, who either were uninterested or
unable to resettle abroad, would be left behind. All the
Core Group participants agreed to continue to press the Royal
Government of Bhutan to allow eligible refugees to repatriate.

Core Group Chair Briefs FM Pradhan on Activities
-------------- ---


2. (C) Representatives of the Core Group met April 20 with
Foreign Minister Sahana Pradhan, Acting Foreign Secretary
Gyan Chandra Acharya and other Foreign and Home Ministry
officials to reconfirm the Government of Nepal's (GON)
commitment to proceed with third-country resettlement.
Ambassador Moriarty and RefCoord attended the meeting along
with Core Group Chairman and Australian Ambassador Graeme
Lade, Norwegian Ambassador Tore Toreng, Danish Ambassador
Finn Thilsted, and Canadian Cooperation Office Director Ed
Doe. Lade told FM Pradhan that the Core Group had become
energized roughly two years ago because of growing concern
that resolution of the Bhutanese refugee situation was no
closer than when the problem began 16 years ago. Donor
fatigue had begun to set in, he added. Lade acknowledged
Nepal's contributions, particularly in conducting the census
and providing exit permits for vulnerable cases. He welcomed
Prime Minister Koirala's agreement, provided to the U.S.
Ambassador, to proceed with third-country resettlement. The
Core Group would continue to urge the Royal Government of
Bhutan (RGOB) to repatriate eligible refugees and to ensure
respect for the rights of Nepali ethnic groups living in
Bhutan, but would like to see repatriation and resettlement
proceed simultaneously. "We want the refugees to know there
is a light at the end of the tunnel," he concluded.

Bhutan Is Not Planning on Repatriation
--------------


3. (C) Ambassadors Toreng and Thilsted noted that Bhutan's
reaction at the South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (SAARC) Summit in New Delhi and to the Danish
demarche delivered in Thimpu in March had indicated that the
RGOB was not genuinely considering repatriation of the
refugees. Thilsted questioned whether the refugees
themselves still had an interest in returning to Bhutan
considering that the RGOB had not changed its attitude toward
ethnic Nepali groups.

Nepal Wants Continued Push for Repatriation
--------------


4. (C) The Foreign Minister agreed that the situation of
Bhutanese refugees in Nepal was a very serious and
long-standing problem that needed to be addressed. The GON's
first priority was to repatriate at least those refugees who
were forcibly evicted from Bhutan. On the other hand, she
said, if the Bhutanese refugees wanted to resettle to a third
country, they could. Pradhan worried, however, that
repatriation would never happen if resettlement moved forward
now. When the Bhutanese Foreign Minister had indicated in

KATHMANDU 00000809 002 OF 003


New Delhi that Bhutan was too busy constructing democracy to
discuss the refugees, Pradhan had questioned the validity of
democracy in Bhutan if Bhutanese citizens remained outside
the country, excluded from the process. Resettlement was a
secondary solution, Pradhan concluded.

Comprehensive Solution Needs To Include Residual Population
-------------- --------------


5. (C) The Foreign Minister appreciated the U.S. offer to
accept 60,000 refugees with perhaps another 10,000 refugees
to be resettled in other countries. "But what about the
other 35,000 refugees?" she asked. FM Pradhan said that the
Government of India (GOI) had agreed at the SAARC Summit to
"think about" the problem of a residual refugee population.
Acting Foreign Secretary Acharya suggested that Nepal, Bhutan
and the international community needed to view the issue in
its entirety and focus on a comprehensive solution that met
the needs of all the refugees. He feared that the RGOB would
regard third-country resettlement as a comprehensive solution
when it was not. Acharya said not all refugees would be able
to participate in or be interested in resettlement. Nepal
needed to find a way to repatriate those who wanted to return
home. Acharya hoped the Core Group would continue to help
Nepal push Bhutan on this issue. Ambassador Lade
acknowledged that a residual population could remain, but he
believed the number would be small. FM Pradhan replied that
the refugee issue was truly Bhutan's problem and Bhutan
needed to accept responsibility. Resettlement was a good
solution, she added, but not the only solution. Lade agreed
and said that the Core Group was determined not to allow the
RGOB off the hook. Ambassador Moriarty also agreed that the
Core Group would continue to press Bhutan on repatriation,
but he did not believe that the RGOB, after sixteen years,
had any intention of repatriating the refugees. The
Ambassador suggested that, if Nepal were to tie resettlement
to progress on repatriation, then no refugee would see a
solution to their problem.

A Second Wave of Expulsions?
--------------


6. (C) Secretary Acharya worried, however, that third-country
resettlement could result in a second wave of expulsions from
Bhutan. Danish Ambassador Thilsted noted that his government
had raised this concern with the RGOB, which had indicated
further expulsions would not happen. Thilsted suggested that
the donor community would not continue funding assistance to
the refugees forever and urged Nepal to move ahead now with
resettlement. Acharya again said that the offer of
resettlement was positive, but that not all the refugees
would be able to resettle. He stated that the GON needed to
discuss this further.

The Prime Minister Gave His Commitment
--------------


7. (C) Ambassador Moriarty said forcefully that Prime
Minister Koirala had committed on three separate occasions,
most recently on April 13, to allow third-country
resettlement to proceed. On that basis, he said, the U.S.
was choosing an implementing partner that would set up a
processing center in Kathmandu in July and begin processing
cases in September. The Ambassador asked whether the GON
bureaucracy was suggesting that it would not implement the
PM's commitment. Ambassador Thilsted said that his
understanding of the PM's commitment was the same. The
Foreign Minister replied that Nepal only wanted assurances
that the Core Group would continue to press for repatriation
while pursuing resettlement. The Ambassador agreed.

The Way Forward
--------------

KATHMANDU 00000809 003 OF 003




8. (C) Ambassador Moriarty suggested that the focus should
now be on discussing procedural and operational issues for
resettlement. The U.S. wanted UNHCR to initiate an
information campaign about resettlement in the refugee camps
as soon as the census was finished. He noted that the U.S.
would resettle the refugees in family groups and would not
discriminate on the basis of age, gender or education.
Certain exclusions would apply, such as specific communicable
diseases or a criminal record. Secretary Acharya noted that
the GON might soon request a ministerial meeting with the
RGOB in Thimpu to push for a comprehensive solution. All of
the Ambassadors agreed to continue to press the RGOB to
repatriate eligible refugees, but in the meantime all wanted
to initiate technical discussions on resettlement procedures
and regulations. Ambassador Moriarty noted that a technical
team from the State Department's Bureau of Population,
Refugees and Migration would be on the ground the week of
April 23 to begin this dialogue for the U.S.

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


9. (C) Opposition within the Foreign Ministry to
third-country resettlement is unsurprising considering that a
series of Foreign Ministers have tried repeatedly since the
1990s, without success, to hold Bhutan accountable for its
actions. The GON is rightfully concerned about finding a
solution for those refugees who are either not able to
participate, or not interested, in resettlement. It is also
only appropriate that Foreign Minister Pradhan is pressing
the Core Group to keep pushing Bhutan on repatriation. But
now is the time to start preparing for something that Nepal
and the donors can accomplish, namely resettlement. With the
Foreign Ministry's agreement to initiate technical
discussions on resettlement, we look forward to PRM's visit
next week.
MORIARTY