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 000977 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR SA/INS AND PRM 
LONDON FOR POL - GURNEY 
GENEVA FOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/26/2013 
TAGS: PREF PREL NP BT
SUBJECT: NEPAL:  MINISTERIAL MEETING FAILS TO RESOLVE 
TROUBLING QUESTIONS FOR BHUTANESE REFUGEES 
 
REF: A. NEW DELHI 2592 
     ¶B. NEW DELHI 2591 
     ¶C. GENEVA 1277 
     ¶D. STATE 93923 
     ¶E. KATHMANDU 0565 
 
Classified By: CDA ROBERT K. BOGGS.  REASON:  1.5 (B,D). 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
-------- 
 
¶1.  (C) Summary and Action Request:  The 14th bilateral 
meeting between the Foreign Ministers of Nepal and Bhutan 
concluded on May 22 without clarifying a number of crucial 
issues, including the status of thousands of Bhutanese 
refugees who must reapply for citizenship upon their return, 
and the role of UNHCR in the repatriation process.  The two 
governments plan to publish the results of the joint 
verification report at the first refugee camp in June. 
Although "logistical details" concerning repatriation are to 
be addressed at the next ministerial, scheduled to be held in 
August in Thimpu, key questions like where the refugees will 
be resettled in Bhutan or what happens to those who do not 
qualify for citizenship, do not appear to be on the agenda. 
A rather optimistic timeline has the first refugees 
repatriated to Bhutan in September.  The Government of Nepal 
(GON) is relying--we think somewhat naively--upon Bhutanese 
"flexibility" and donor pressure to ensure that repatriation 
proceeds smoothly.  Action Request:  Embassy requests that 
the Department consider instructing embassies in Bhutanese 
donor capitals to demarche their host governments to urge 
Government of Bhutan to meet its commitments and engage the 
UNHCR in repatriation.  A parallel demarche could be made 
directly to Bhutanese officials in New Delhi.  End summary 
and action request. 
 
------------------------------------- 
GON HAILS 14TH MINISTERIAL A SUCCESS 
------------------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (U) The 14th Ministerial Joint Committee Meeting between 
the Foreign Ministers of Bhutan and Nepal to address the 
Bhutanese refugee issue was held in Kathmandu from May 19 to 
¶22.  The Ministerial adopted the findings of the Joint 
Verification Team (JVT), which categorized the first 12,000 
refugees to be considered for possible repatriation to 
Bhutan.  The Ministerial directed the JVT to verify the 
status of 600 "absentee" refugees, to inform the 12,000 
residents of the first verified camp of the findings by 
mid-June and to allow a two-week appeals process thereafter. 
A 15th Ministerial, to be held in Thimpu from August 11-14, 
will formally approve the JVT report.  Local press reports 
quoted an unnamed Government of Nepal (GON) source 
participating in the Ministerial as lauding the "significant" 
progress toward resolution of the 13-year-old issue achieved 
during the meeting. 
 
------------------------------------------ 
MOST RETURNEES MAY FACE CITIZENSHIP LIMBO 
------------------------------------------ 
 
¶3.  (SBU) On May 23 poloff, accompanied by the First 
Secretary from the UK Embassy, met with Dr. Madan Kumar 
 
SIPDIS 
Bhattarai, MFA Spokesman and Joint Secretary for South Asian 
Affairs, for a readout on the Ministerial.  Bhattarai 
sketched out a timeline for eventual repatriation of the 
first tranche of verified returnees.  (Note:  Refugees were 
"verified" to be in one of four categories: (i) those 
forcibly evicted; (ii) those who voluntarily migrated; (iii) 
non-Bhutanese; and (iv) criminals.  End note.)  The JVT will 
announce the results of the first verification exercise in 
Khundanabari Camp from June 8 to July 17 and will attempt to 
verify the 600 refugees not present when the exercise was 
conducted.  From June 18 to July 7, the JVT will accept 
appeals from refugees disputing their categorization, 
although only new "material evidence" will be reviewed.  From 
July 8-31 the JVT will review the appeals and make 
recommendations.  The 15th Ministerial (August 11-14) 
meeting will be held in Thimpu to endorse the JVT's final 
report and to address "logistical details" concerning 
repatriation.  On August 25 the JVT will begin distributing 
citizenship application forms and other documents to those 
refugees in the second category who must reapply for 
Bhutanese citizenship upon return.  If all goes according to 
schedule, repatriation of the first tranche of returnees 
could begin by September 25. 
 
¶4.  (C) Bhattarai said that 75 percent of the refugees from 
the first camp were determined to be Bhutanese eligible for 
repatriation as members of either Categories I or II, which, 
he indicated, is higher than what the GON had originally 
anticipated (Ref E).  Because the overwhelming majority of 
that number, he acknowledged, were determined to have 
"voluntarily" migrated from Bhutan, they must reapply for 
Bhutanese citizenship upon return.  Returnees from both 
Categories I and II will go to "some camp for some 
unspecified time," Bhattarai said; the questions of where and 
for how long were not addressed in the latest Ministerial or 
in any previous meeting.  The Government of Bhutan had 
pledged in writing that returned refugees would be provided 
some sort of "livelihood," Bhattarai confirmed, but no 
further discussion of arrangements for their accommodation, 
employment, or education has taken place.  Also not 
discussed, apparently, was what might happen to Category II 
returnees--the bulk of those to be repatriated--whose 
reapplication for Bhutanese citizenship is ultimately turned 
down.  Finally, the Ministerial did not take up the sticky 
topic of UNHCR involvement in the repatriation process, 
Bhattarai conceded.  When asked if these difficult questions 
might be addressed in the August Ministerial, Bhattarai did 
not seem hopeful. 
 
-------------------------------- 
"TICKLISH" PROBLEM:  WHAT TO DO 
WITH THOSE WHO WON'T GO BACK 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶5.  (C) Because all repatriation must be voluntary, the GON 
is prepared to allow those refugees not wishing to return to 
Bhutan to apply for Nepali citizenship, Bhattarai reported. 
Poloff asked on what basis citizenship might be granted, 
since under current law only the children of Nepali citizen 
fathers qualify. (Note:  Even children born in Nepal of 
Nepali citizen mothers do not qualify for citizenship if 
their fathers are foreign.  End note.)  Bhattarai 
acknowledged the legal hurdle, but reiterated that the GON 
nonetheless has offered to allow the refugees to apply for 
citizenship to address this "ticklish" problem. 
 
------------------------------------ 
SUPPORT FROM DONORS, INDIANS NEEDED 
TO ENSURE BHUTANESE "FLEXIBILITY" 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶6.  (C) Poloff and the representative from the British 
Embassy expressed concern that so many details, certain to be 
important to refugees contemplating returning to Bhutan after 
more than a decade, had been left unanswered.  They 
speculated that the refugees would surely want information on 
where they would be living, what they would be doing for a 
living, whether their children would be educated, and some 
assurance of international oversight of the repatriation 
process before making a final decision.  Delegations from the 
camps already have raised these questions and others in a 
number of meetings with the diplomatic community in 
Kathmandu, the emboffs noted.  If members of the first 
tranche find inhospitable conditions upon their return to 
Bhutan, word will get back to the rest of the camps, possibly 
discouraging others from applying for repatriation and 
leaving Nepal with a greater number of refugees to absorb, 
they cautioned.  Poloff suggested that the international 
community might find it difficult to support a repatriation 
process that did not make provision for such oversight, a 
role best performed by UNHCR.  (Note:  UNHCR in Kathmandu 
confirmed to the Embassy on May 28 that the Government of 
Bhutan has still not extended an invitation to special envoy 
Jahanshah Assadi to visit.  End note.)  Bhattarai responded 
that the Bhutanese had "privately assured" the GON of their 
good faith in providing for returnees, as well as their 
"flexibility" in applying their generally rigorous standards 
for citizenship to refugees.  The Bhutanese Foreign Minister 
had expressly asked his Nepali counterpart that questions 
about the resettlement process in Bhutan "be left to the 
Bhutanese side," Bhattarai said.  Pressure from the donor 
community and the Government of India will be critical to 
ensuring that Bhutan keep to its commitments, he concluded. 
(MFA Foreign Secretary Madhu Raman Acharya urged the same 
point to CDA on May 26.) 
 
-------- 
COMMENT 
-------- 
 
¶7.  (C)  After more than a year of no progress, the GON seems 
pleased to have an agreement that, at least in theory, allows 
for the repatriation of most of the refugees.  It seems 
doubtful to us, however, that the refugees will feel 
reassured by a repatriation process the implementation of 
which is left exclusively to the same government that 
expelled them 13 years earlier.  Our views are shared by our 
colleagues in the diplomatic community, including the 
British, the Germans, and the EU.  Given the number of 
unknowns confronting prospective returnees--especially the 
majority who are deemed to have forfeited Bhutanese 
citizenship by "voluntarily" migrating--it seems difficult to 
believe that a significant number will agree to go back.  We 
are especially concerned that both governments seem prepared 
to initiate a process that appears to exclude UNHCR.  The GON 
is clearly looking to the international community (including 
the Indians) to use its influence to hold the Bhutanese to 
their commitment to conduct a good-faith repatriation effort. 
 At a minimum, we believe that effort must include a role for 
UNHCR. 
 
 
¶8.  (C)  Demarche Request:  Embassy requests that the 
Department instruct embassies in Bhutanese donor capitals to 
demarche host nation governments to urge the Government of 
Bhutan (GOB) to fulfill its bilateral commitment to 
repatriation.  The GOB should be further encouraged to permit 
full UNHCR involvement in the process, starting with a visit 
by the UNHCR special envoy, to ensure compliance with 
international human rights standards.  Embassy further 
requests that the Department consider a parallel demarche to 
GOB officials in New Delhi. 
BOGGS