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