GUANTANAMO: SPECIAL ENVOY FRIED AND UNHCR ON NEXT

C O N F I D E N T I A L GENEVA 000383

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/20/2019
TAGS: PHUM PREF PREL KDRG PGOV PTER MOPS KAWK KISL
SUBJECT: GUANTANAMO: SPECIAL ENVOY FRIED AND UNHCR ON NEXT
STEPS FOR RESETTLING DETAINEES

REF: GENEVA 263

Classified By: Peter Mulrean, RMA Counselor, Reasons 1.4 b and d

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


1. (U)Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure Fried and Acting
PRM A/S Witten, accompanied by S/GC Williams, Mission RMA
Counselor and Legal Adviser, met on May 18th with UNHCR,s
Assistant High Commissioner for Protection, Erika Feller, and
her staff to discuss USG progress towards GTMO closure and to
explore options for UNHCR assistance in support of the USG,s
GTMO detainee resettlement efforts.

2. (U) Fried and Feller had a useful exchange regarding
possible forms of UNHCR support for detainee resettlement.
Feller stressed that UNHCR wants to be supportive and is
prepared to consider various levels of engagement and
assistance. She outlined three main options: 1) a letter from
UNHCR to the USG expressing general support for USG
resettlement efforts (note: UNHCR has already produced an
initial draft for USG reaction) which the U.S. could share
with other governments; 2) UNHCR "good offices" in support of
USG efforts to transfer specific individuals or groups of
individuals; 3)a process toward potential formal UNHCR
referral of some detainees for resettlement as refugees.
Following a discussion of possible hurdles (most notably
sharing information on detainees) and downside risks, Fried
and Witten expressed interest in further exploration of the
first two options, especially "good offices." USG officials
undertook to get back to UNHCR on several points, including
follow-up thinking about how specifically UNHCR could use its
good offices and what information about detainees could be
shared. End summary.

Overview of USG Resettlement Efforts and Challenges
-------------- --------------

3.(SBU) Fried provided a brief summary of the January 22
Executive Orders and Task Force work proceeding under them.
Wih respect to USG efforts to close GTMO, Fried said
candidly that the USG doesn,t know how many of te remaining
240 detainees will require resettlement, given the need in
every case, to assure the sfety of the individual being
transferred (i.e., umane treatment concerns) and the safety
of the orld community (i.e., security concerns).


4. (C Fried noted that in discussions with EU counterparts
the Swedes have said they will only consider accepting
detainees if tey have been referred as refugees by UNHCR. To
date no other EU counterpart has specified such a condition.
Feller noted that Sweden had also recently approached UNHCR
and that Finland had also expressed interest in a UNHCR role
in retransfers, although the extent of desired involvement is
unclear.

Feller Outlines Assistance Options
--------------


5. (C) Feller said that she saw options ranging from
"minimalist" to "maximalist." (reftel) Specifically, in the
minimalist approach, UNHCR would write a letter to the USG
expressing support for the decision to close GTMO and for the
overall effort to find resettlement solutions where possible.
Such a letter (which UNHCR has already offered a first draft
of for USG consideration) could be shred with other
governments and help create a "conducive environment" for
European and other countries to favorably consider accepting
detainees. The maximalist approach meanwhile, would involve
formal referrals for resettlement of some detainees as
refugees. In the referral process,UNHCR determines whether
individuals meet its rfugee definition and whether they areexcludable from protection for reasons that could include,
inter alia, serious reasons for considering that the
individual has committed serious non-political crimes or war
crimes. Feller noted that UNHCR retained some discretion in
exclusion decisions based on an assessment of proportional
harms, i.e., if exclusion would expose an individual to great
danger associated with repatriation to his country, UNHCR
might be able to forgo exclusion. Witten asked whether
prolonged "limbo" might factor into the assessment of
exclusion. Feller said she wasn,t sure, as there was no
precedent for that. Finally, Feller said the middle
assistance option would be something in between the first
two, namely some form of "good offices" intervention short of
formal referrals.

Pros and Cons of Options Discussed
--------------


6. (C) Fried and his staff said they looked positively on the
draft letter that UNHCR had provided and expected to provide
concrete feedback on that very soon. In principle, a letter
would be welcome. With respect to the maximalist option of
referrals, both Fried and Witten expressed concern that the
process could result in individuals being determined
"excludable" from protection, which could in turn make any
transfer much more difficult. In addition, Witten noted that
if one country, such as Sweden, was able to say that it was
taking only those identified by UNHCR based on a merits
assessment for protection as refugees, others might suddenly
find themselves in a less flexible position. Finally, Feller
noted that referrals would require in-depth case information
and review. Fried noted that the information governments are
receiving about case files is substantially the same as what
he and other U.S. decision-makers see in making
determinations, and he would need to look further into what
information could be provided to UNHCR, as a multilateral
entity.

Way Forward
--------------


7. (C) Given downside risks and potential hurdles with
respect to the maximalist option, a combination of the letter
and good offices approach might be most workable. Fried
explained that he would meet with EU officials in Brussels
the next day and could explore further what approaches might
be best. If Sweden insists on formal referrals, it might be
setting too high a bar to meet.


8. (C) Fried promised to look further into what the USG would
envision with respect to good offices, and also what
information sharing would be possible to support such a role.
Finally, Fried also promised to get back to UNHCR on the case
of Mohammad Barre, a Somali whom UNHCR designated as a
refugee before he was detained on GTMO. UNHCR would like to
know his eligibility for transfer to Somalia. Williams
explained that his case was going through the process of
review, and Fried noted that he expected such reviews to
conclude before the summer break, and would get back to UNHCR
on Barre's case.
STORELLA