RWANDA URGES REFUGEES IN UGANDA TO RETURN HOME

C O N F I D E N T I A L KIGALI 000529

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/25/2019
TAGS: PREF PREL PGOV RW UG
SUBJECT: RWANDA URGES REFUGEES IN UGANDA TO RETURN HOME

Classified By: Ambassador W. Stuart Symington, Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).


1. (SBU) SUMMARY: Approximately 15,000 Rwandan refugees
remain in Uganda, despite Rwandan, Ugandan and UNHCR
agreement that they should return to Rwanda by August 31.
Most of these fled Rwanda after the 1994 genocide, although
some have been in Uganda for decades. They are located both
in camps and dispersed in local communities. Some refugees
have cited fear of persecution and scarcity of land as
reasons for remaining in Uganda. Local UNHCR officials have
not found a pattern of persecution in Rwanda, but land is
indeed scarce. The GOR, eager to normalize and to shed its
image as a war-torn country, is considering invoking the 1951
Refugee Convention's "cessation clause" that would end
refugee status for all Rwandan refugees worldwide as of
December 31. END SUMMARY.


2. (U) Earlier this year, the Governments of Rwanda (GOR),
Uganda (GOU) and the UNHCR, noting Rwanda,s stability and
willingness to accept returnees, agreed that all of the
approximately 20,000 Rwandan refugees in Uganda must return
to Rwanda by July 31. By that date, however, only an
estimated 5,385 had done so, prompting the GOR, GOU, and
UNHCR to extend the deadline to August 31. Per UNHCR, as of
August 13, only an additional 28 refugees had returned to
Rwanda. In response, the GOR has publicly acknowledged that
they are considering implementing the "cessation clause," of
the 1951 Refugee Convention, and ending refugee status for
all Rwandan refugees, effective December 31, 2009. (Note:
Although the GOR has formal authority to apply the cessation
clause, the Executive Committee of the UNHCR (Excom)
Conclusion 69, which dates from 1992, stipulates that the
"High Commissioner should be appropriately involved" and
stresses that States should make use of country of origin
information, "particularly" from UNHCR. End Note.) The UNHCR
Excom will discuss this issue in October at its next meeting.


3. (U) The GOR, GOU and UNHCR discussed these issues at the
August 6 tripartite meeting and share the view that there is
no justification for Rwandan refugees to remain in Uganda,
because Rwanda is stable and willing to take them back.
UNHCR and the GOU also cite the financial burden as an
additional reason to repatriate Rwandans. UNHCR provides
returnees with non-food items such as blankets and jerrycans,
while WFP provides them with three-month food rations.
According to Kigali-based UNHCR officials, these
refugees--most of whom are ethnic Hutus who fled Rwanda after
the 1994 genocide ended--have cited fear of persecution, lack
of available farmland, lack of freedom of expression, and
fear of possible genocide-related criminal charges. Many are
prospering as farmers in Uganda, where land is plentiful, and
are well aware that land is scarce in Rwanda. UNHCR
monitoring has determined that difficult living and economic
conditions, rather than persecution, are the most serious
challenges facing returnees.


4. (C) COMMENT: Rwanda, Uganda, and UNHCR have all agreed
that Rwandan refugees should return to Rwanda. Rwandan
officials are keen for their country--as it courts
international investment and seeks a stronger leadership role
in the region--to shed its image as a post-conflict state.
Also, the current GOR is itself the direct descendant of a
QAlso, the current GOR is itself the direct descendant of a
refugee-based insurgency, and is well aware of the potential
for diaspora and refugee populations to harbor or evolve into
threats. The reluctance of Hutu refugees in Uganda to return
to Rwanda may reflect some individuals' fears of facing
genocide charges, or simply opposition to living under the
current government. However, it is likely, given the
relatively abundant land in Uganda, that many hesitate to
return for economic reasons. END COMMENT.
SYMINGTON