VZCZCXRO7409
PP RUEHDBU
DE RUEHNT #0345/01 0460206
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 150206Z FEB 06
FM AMEMBASSY TASHKENT
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5176
INFO RUEHTA/AMEMBASSY ALMATY 7621
RUEHDBU/AMEMBASSY DUSHANBE 2150
RUEHAH/AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT 1733
RUEHEK/AMEMBASSY BISHKEK 2258
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 6544
RUEHBUL/AMEMBASSY KABUL 1293
RUEHKB/AMEMBASSY BAKU 0460
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 0663

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TASHKENT 000345 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR SCA/CEN, PRM, AND DRL 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/14/16 
TAGS: PREF PHUM PREL PGOV UZ
SUBJECT: UNHCR PRESSING FOR UZBEK RATIFICATION OF REFUGEE 
CONVENTION 
 
CLASSIFIED BY AMB. JON R. PURNELL, FOR REASONS 1.4 (B, D). 
 
REF: 05 TASHKENT 602 
 
¶1. (C) Summary:  UNHCR's Deputy Country Representative 
asked for U.S. support in encouraging the GOU to sign the 
1951 Convention on Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. 
Uzbekistan is the only CIS state not to have signed the 
documents.  There are currently 1,816 refugees, mostly 
Afghan, registered with UNHCR in Uzbekistan.  In lieu of 
signing the UN instruments, the GOU has so far abided by a 
"gentleman's agreement" on non-refoulement.  The GOU 
reportedly declined to send delegates to a UNHCR refugee 
law training seminar in St. Petersburg in November.  It is 
hard to believe that the GOU would seriously consider 
signing either document now, especially as it blames UNHCR 
for helping to remove Uzbek refugees from Kyrgyzstan 
following May events in Andijon.  End summary. 
 
¶2. (C) In a meeting with poloff, UNHCR's deputy country 
director, Asako Nozawa, asked that the U.S. encourage the 
GOU to ratify the 1951 Convention on Refugees and 1967 
Protocol on the Status of Refugees.  To date, 143 states 
have signed the Convention, which defines the legal status, 
rights, and obligations of refugees.  The 1967 Protocol 
removes geographical and time limitations from the 
Convention.  Uzbekistan is the only former Soviet state 
that has not signed the instruments.  Instead, in 1999, the 
GOU and UNHCR reached an unwritten "gentleman's agreement" 
under which the GOU has agreed not to refoule mandated 
refugees on Uzbek territory (i.e., repatriate them to a 
country where they fear persecution).  Nozawa added that in 
2005, the UNHCR did not succeed in an effort to formalize 
the agreement in writing.  The GOU does not legally 
recognize refugees, who are treated as illegal aliens under 
Uzbek law and cannot legally hold jobs in the country.  In 
2000, however, the Ministry of Education agreed to provide 
free primary education to refugee children.  According to 
Nozawa, the GOU lacks administrative structures and 
legislation for determination of refugee status. 
 
¶3. (C) According to UNHCR figures, 1,816 refugees are now 
registered in Uzbekistan, of whom 1,808 are from 
Afghanistan, seven from Azerbaijan, and one from 
Turkmenistan.  (Note: Most of the Afghans have been in 
Uzbekistan for over ten years, and fear to return home 
because of their connection to Afghanistan's former 
Communist government.  End note.)  Nozawa said that the GOU 
restricts freedom of movement for refugees, requiring them 
to inform UNHCR of any travel plans.  The GOU requires 
UNHCR to provide the Foreign Ministry and Office for Visas 
and Registration (OVIR) with a list of registered refugees. 
UNHCRQs Tashkent office has registered 381 asylum seekers, 
who are awaiting a determination of refugee status.  The 
number of asylum seekers in Uzbekistan has been on a 
downward trend in recent years.  (Comment: This may be 
because Uzbekistan is now a less attractive destination for 
asylum seekers, particularly as the situation in 
Afghanistan improves and that in Uzbekistan declines.  End 
comment.) 
 
¶4. (C) Nozawa said that over the past five years UNHCR has 
participated in a working group drafting a law on 
migration.  Others in the group include the OSCE, Ministry 
of Labor, and the Institute for Monitoring Active 
Legislation, an NGO that was shut down in 2005.  She said 
that UNHCR strongly pushed for including provisions on 
refugee rights, using language from the 1951 Convention, 
but without success. 
 
¶5. (C) UNHCR supports a network of six local NGO 
implementing partners located in Tashkent (reftel), Termez, 
Nukus, and Kokand, which provide support, training and 
counseling to refugees.  In 2005 UNHCR conducted training 
on refugee law for GOU officials, journalists and students. 
UNHCR is awaiting an EU decision on whether to fund further 
training in 2006.  Nozawa told poloff that the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs had declined a UNHCR invitation to send GOU 
officials to an international refugee law training seminar 
in St. Petersburg in November 2005.  Also, Nozawa said that 
the Head of the GOU's Human Rights Center, Senator Akmal 
Saidov, strongly criticized UNHCR during its annual 
 
TASHKENT 00000345  002 OF 002 
 
 
Executive Committee meeting in Geneva in October 2005. 
Saidov specifically denounced UNHCR's handling of the 
Andijon refugees by its Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan offices. 
 
¶6. (C) Nozawa told poloff that there had been disagreement 
between UNHCR's Tashkent office and Geneva headquarters 
over whether to monitor the Andijon trials.  Tashkent-based 
staff were reluctant to monitor the trials, believing it 
fell outside their mandate.  However UNHCR management in 
Geneva insisted that its staff monitor the trial after it 
became apparent that one of the defendants had been 
returned from Kyrgyzstan. 
 
¶7. (C) Comment: In the current environment it is impossible 
to believe that the GOU would even consider signing on to 
the document, much less entertain any representations from 
the U.S. on the subject.  The government is still smarting 
from UNHCRQs role in removing Uzbek refugees from 
Kyrgyzstan following the Andijon events.  The irony of 
asking the GOU to sign an agreement not to refoule refugees 
to countries where they might face persecution is palpable 
as Uzbeks in Russia, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan fight 
extradition back to an uncertain future here. 
 
PURNELL