Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 03KATHMANDU2075 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 03KATHMANDU2075 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Kathmandu |
| Created: | 2003-10-24 10:14:00 |
| Classification: | CONFIDENTIAL |
| Tags: | PREF PREL NP BH Bhutanese Refugees |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KATHMANDU 002075 SIPDIS DEPT FOR SA/INS, PRM:MPITTOTI, LONDON FOR POL/GURNEY, NSC FOR MILLARD E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/24/2013 TAGS: PREF, PREL, NP, BH, Bhutanese Refugees SUBJECT: NEPAL: MIXED RESULTS FROM THE 15TH JOINT MINISTERIAL ON THE BHUTANESE REFUGEES Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Robert K. Boggs for Reasons 1.5 (b,d). 1. (C) Summary. On October 24, Nepal's de facto Foreign Minister, Bekh Bahadur Thapa, briefed the Charge on the results of the 15th Nepal-Bhutan Joint Ministerial, which concluded in Thimpu on October 23. Thapa generally was positive about progress made at the meeting, noting an increased flexibility on the part of the Bhutanese to discuss real solutions to the refugee problem. At the Ministerial, the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) reportedly agreed to receive Category I, II and IV refugees back to Bhutan, review again Category III appeals, begin repatriation of Khundunabari Camp residents in February 2004, and shortly thereafter begin verification of a second camp. According to Thapa, the two sides agreed unofficially that returning refugees will be placed in temporary camps inside Bhutan, that Bhutan's citizenship laws would be relaxed to accomodate returnees, and that Category II refugees would be issued residency permits, which will allow them access to social services and job opportunities. However, because these promises were not made official, some might question the RGOB's sincerity, especially as the RGOB rejected the GON proposal to allow third-party oversight over the repatriation process. End Summary. 2. (C) On October 24, Ambassador-at-Large and de facto Foreign Minister Bekh Bahadur Thapa invited the Charge d'Affaires for a briefing on the results of the 15th Joint Nepal-Bhutan Ministerial, which concluded in Thimpu on October 23. Thapa had briefed the heads of the U.N. bodies in Nepal on October 22 and was conducting one-on-one briefs for selected diplomatic representatives today. Thapa's general description of the Ministerial was positive. Both sides were "inching forward to a solution," he said. Thapa explained that there were certain factors leading to the 15th Ministerial that he had feared would have a negative impact on the meeting, such as UNHCR Lubber's remarks at the UNGA in New York. He also had been concerned that the arrival of Bhutanese human rights activist Tek Nath Rizal in Kathmandu and his meetings with political parties just days before the Thimpu meeting would politicize the issue within Nepal. 3. (C) On the other hand, Thapa explained, his meetings with certain political party leaders who had been involved in bilateral negotiations over the refugee issue and with representatives of all seven Bhutanese refugee camps prior to departing for Thimpu had a positive effect on the Ministerial. Thapa also noted that, in his meeting with Bhutanese Foreign Minister Wangchuk at the UNGA, he had made it clear to the Bhutanese that Nepal's agenda at the 15th Ministerial would reflect the concerns of the international community. Thapa believed this had provided the RGOB with a six-week window of opportunity to develop a more forthcoming position. Thapa was pleased to see that Bhutan's five donor governments, through their embassies in Thimpu, had also exerted some influence on the RGOB not to delay repatriation of the refugees. He concluded that all of these efforts resulted in more flexibility and better results at the Ministerial. 4. (C) Thapa then outlined the official results of the Ministerial as follows: -- The RGOB has committed to repatriate refugees in Category I, II, and IV, who represent between 75 and 80 percent of the population. -- Category IV refugees who did not have current criminal charges against them in Bhutan, e.g. innocent family members, would be treated as if they were in Category II. -- The Joint Verification Team will review appeals made by Category III refugees and reach decisions in January 2004. -- On February 14, 2004, the first truck of refugees will depart Nepal for Bhutan. -- Verification of Sanischare Camp will begin after the Khundunabari Camp repatriation starts. Although it was not decided officially, Thapa said that both governments had noted the need to quickly complete verification of all the camps, suggesting that within 2 years the process would be completed. -- Category II refugees will be allowed to apply for citizenship after a two year probationary period. 5. (C) Thapa then outlined results of the meeting that were not mentioned in the Joint Ministerial Press Release (copy will be faxed to SA/INS) as follows: -- The RGOB said the returnees will be held in temporary camps until they can be moved to places where there are jobs for them. -- The RGOB promised verbally to relax citizenship laws relating to the cultural qualifications of the returnees. (Note. According to the Bhutan Citizenship Act of 1985, any person applying for citizenship must be able "to speak, read and write Dzongkha proficiently" and must have "good knowledge of the culture, customs, traditions and history of Bhutan." Additionally, the person must have resided in Bhutan for 20 years, must have "good moral character" and "must have no record of having spoken or acted against the King, Country and People of Bhutan in any manner whatsoever." End Note.) -- The RGOB said it would issue temporary residency permits to Category II refugees, which will allow them access to medical and education services as well as the right to work. 6. (C) Thapa explained that he had also pressed the need for third-party verification of conditions inside Bhutan. However, the RGOB said it could not accept third-party involvement. A rather vague notion that the Nepal-Bhutan Joint Ministerial Committee would act as a watchdog over conditions in Bhutan was agreed to instead. According to Thapa, the RGOB asked the GON to trust them, admitted that its image with the international community had been tarnished, and expressed a desire to burnish that image. 7. (C) When asked about the refugees who decide not to return, Thapa replied that all of those not willing to return to Bhutan would be able to apply for Nepali citizenship. However, he admitted that Nepal's citizenship laws are even more restrictive than Bhutan's, implying that it is unlikely any refugees would be granted citizenship. (Note. According to Nepal's citizenship laws, any foreigner seeking Nepali citizenship must reside in Nepal at least fifteen years before they can apply. End Note.) Thapa suggested that without Nepali citizenship, refugees who decide to stay would be given asylum status and allowed to work in Nepal with full access to social services. Thapa concluded the briefing with an appeal to the international community to support the results of the 15th Ministerial and to "give credit where progress was made." He worried that the refugees would react negatively to the results of the Ministerial, believing that a negative reaction would hurt the repatriation process. The Minister reacted positively to the Charge's recommendation that the GON explain the restults of the recent ministerial to the refugees, but made no commitments as to how or when this might be done. 8. (C) Comment. The 15th Joint Ministerial appeared to yield few new commitments by the RGOB. On the positive side, a new timetable for repatriation was decided and the RGOB officially agreed to accept all Category I, II and IV refugees. However, the most significant achievements, such as the issuance of residency permits for Category II returnees, were not publicized, leaving some to question the sincerity of the RGOB's promises. Of particular concern is the continuted rejection of any third party involvement to ensure that conditions in Bhutan are in accordance with international norms and basic human rights. This may be particularly important if, as the RGOB appears to have indicated, some refugees end up in temporary camps inside Bhutan. The plan for temporary camps appears also to reject the refugees' demand that they be returned to their original homes and towns from which they were expelled. Having said that, the GON seems cognizant of these problems and ready to continue this dialogue with the RGOB over coming months. End Comment. BOGGS
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04