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 02 KATHMANDU 000565 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR SA/INS 
LONDON FOR POL - GURNEY 
GENEVA FOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/27/2013 
TAGS: PREF PREL PHUM NP BT
SUBJECT: NEPAL'S FOREIGN SECRETARY REPORTS BILATERAL 
AGREEMENT ON BHUTANESE REFUGEES 
 
REF: A. (A) KATHMANDU 0228 
     ¶B. (B0 KATHMANDU 0287 
     ¶C. (C) NEW DELHI 1470 
 
Classified By: DCM ROBERT K. BOGGS.  REASON:  1.5 (B,D). 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
-------- 
 
¶1.  (C) Foreign Secretary Madhu Raman Acharya told the 
Ambassador and DCM on March 28 that the Governments of Nepal 
and Bhutan have reached agreement on a formula for the 
repatriation or resettlement of an initial tranche of 12,000 
Bhutanese refugees living in eastern Nepal.  Under the 
agreement, more than half of the refugees will be repatriated 
to Bhutan and offered a chance to reapply for citizenship, 
while one-third will be offered the option of remaining in 
Nepal and applying for Nepali citizenship.  Acharya admitted 
that many important modalities of the agreement remain to be 
worked out and said that the Government of Nepal (GON) is 
relying to a large degree on Bhutan's "good faith" for 
implementation.  He asked friendly foreign governments to 
maintain pressure on Bhutan to ensure it fulfills its 
commitments under the agreement.  End summary. 
 
--------------------------- 
MINISTERIAL YIELDS RESULTS 
--------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (C) On March 28 Foreign Secretary Madhu Raman Acharya 
provided the Ambassador and DCM with a confidential briefing 
on the outcome of the ministerial meeting that began March 24 
in Thimpu.  (Note:  Acharya said he had briefed the Indian 
Ambassador the previous day.)  The two governments have 
reached agreement on the eligibilty of an initial batch of 
12,000 Bhutanese refugees (out of a total 100,000) for 
repatriation to Bhutan, Acharya reported.  (Note:  The two 
governments had previously agreed to classify the refugees 
according to four categories:  those forcibly evicted from 
Bhutan; those who left voluntarily; non-Bhutanese; and 
criminals.  Bhutan had agreed to accept back all those who 
had been forcibly evicted from Bhutan.  Disagreement 
persisted, however, over the kind of evidence needed to 
establish forcible eviction.  End note.)  The Government of 
Nepal (GON), in order to spare Bhutan the embarrassment of 
acknowledging that most of the refugees interviewed so far 
would qualify as having been forcibly evicted, agreed to 
apply only the strictest standards of evidence (i.e., 
official GOB documents ordering individuals to leave the 
country) for inclusion in the first category.  In return, 
however, the GOB agreed to accept those who left Bhutan 
"voluntarily" for repatriation, with the proviso that they 
must reapply for Bhutanese citizenship after they return. 
Significantly, the Bhutanese pledged in writing to provide 
undefined "means of livelihood" to the returning refugees. 
 
¶3.  (C)  Of the 12,000 Bhutanese refugees interviewed for 
categorization in December 2001, Acharya said the two 
governments agreed that only .50 percent will qualify as 
members of Category I (those forcibly evicted).  On the other 
hand, 66.5 percent will qualify as members of Category II 
(those who left voluntarily) and will thus be eligible for 
repatriation, if desired, to Bhutan.  Members of Category III 
(non-Bhutanese) will comprise 30.5 percent and will be 
offered the option of applying for Nepali citizenship and 
resettling in Nepal.  Criminals will constitue the remaining 
2.5 percent.  The GOB stipulated that it will not accept any 
"political" criminals for repatriation (which, we understand 
from refugee groups, means virtually everyone in this 
category).  Acharya did not specify whether the GON had 
agreed to allow members of the fourth category to apply for 
citizenship.  He added that GOB and GON representatives would 
travel to the refugee camp in eastern Nepal to advise the 
residents of the results of the categorization exercise and 
to distribute applications for Bhutanese citizenship to those 
who qualify for repatriation.  Those not accepted for 
repatriation will be allowed to appeal the determination, 
Acharya said.  (Note:  Acharya did not/not mention possible 
resettlement in the U.S. as an option for members of any 
category.  End note.) 
 
¶4.  (C)  Another ministerial will be held on May 11 in 
Kathmandu to validate formally the categorization results, 
Acharya said.  Thereafter, the same procedure used for 
categorization in this initial tranche will be replicated in 
the remaining camps, Acharya said.  Left unresolved, he 
cautioned, is the role of the UNHCR in 
resettlement/repatriation.  The GON has no problem with UNHCR 
involvement, he stressed, and expects its support in 
resettlement activities within Nepal, but the GOB does not 
want the UNHCR involved in repatriation.  Acharya added that 
he suspects Bhutan will seek foreign funding to help defray 
repatriation costs, but would not welcome foreigners' 
involvement in actual repatriation efforts. 
 
------------------------------- 
RELYING ON BHUTAN'S "GOOD FAITH" 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶5.  (C) The DCM and Ambassador both welcomed the progress. 
The DCM noted that many unresolved questions remain, however, 
a point Acharya readily acknowledged.  If, for example, the 
initial batch of returnees to Bhutan is treated poorly, the 
DCM suggested, word will certainly filter back to the camps, 
thereby possibly discouraging the remaining refugees' 
decisions from applying for repatriation.  Acharya agreed, 
adding that the GON was relying to a large degree on the 
"good faith" of the GOB that the agreement will be implemened 
as envisioned.  He noted that the Bhutanese King had assured 
the Nepali delegation to the recent ministerial in Thimpu 
that the agreement has his full support and that he expects 
the first camp to be emptied by the end of 2003. 
Nonetheless, Acharya said, the GON is counting on friendly 
nations to maintain pressure on the GOB to fulfill its 
commitments as agreed.  Indian National Security Advisor 
Brajesh Mishra is traveling to Thimpu soon, Acharya added, to 
give the Bhutanese "a little push" in the right direction. 
 
-------- 
COMMENT 
-------- 
 
¶6.  (C) After such a long hiatus, the two governments' final 
agreement on the nettlesome question of categorization is 
indeed welcome.  Besides the matter of the UNHCR's role, many 
important (and potentially divisive) questions remain, 
however, such as where in Bhutan the refugees will be 
resettled and what will happen to repatriated refugees if the 
GOB denies them citizenship.  Like the GON, we believe it 
crucial that the international community, especially those 
with strong regional ties (like India) or a significant aid 
program (like the EU) maintain pressure on the GOB to ensure 
the agreement is properly implemented. 
MALINOWSKI