VZCZCXYZ0000
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #1303/01 1601210
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 091210Z JUN 06
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5980
INFO RUEHKT/AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU PRIORITY 0099
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI PRIORITY 0535
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY 0322
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 4109
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA PRIORITY 1327

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 001303 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR PRM/ANE (L BARTLETT) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREF PHUM PREL BT IN NP NL
SUBJECT: DONOR COUNTRIES COALESCE ON BHUTANESE REFUGEE 
STRATEGY 
 
 
¶1. (U) SUMMARY: On June 1, 2006, seven members of the Core 
Group on Bhutanese Refugees, the UNHCR and the European 
Commission met in The Hague to set a near-term strategy to 
break the impasse in resolving the 16-year-old Bhutan 
refugee problem.  Representatives agreed to lobby both Nepal 
(to take the initial steps of registering camp residents 
and allowing the most vulnerable cases to resettle to third 
countries) and Bhutan (to make good on the pledge to enable 
the voluntary return of Category One and Four refugees to 
Bhutan).  Participants asked the USG to give India a 
read-out of the results of the meeting and supported USG 
plans to provide a joint briefing to Nepal, Bhutan, and India 
in New York in July.  Additional strategies were also 
discussed, including a special envoy, linking development 
aid to progress on resolution of the refugee problem, and 
resettlement of Bhutanese refugees in third countries. 
END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. (U) The Netherlands hosted a meeting on June 1, 2006, of 
members of the Core Group on Bhutanese Refugees to discuss 
the current impasse in resolving the Bhutan refugee issue. 
In addition to the Netherlands, representatives from 
Australia, Canada, Denmark, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, 
the United States, and UNHCR attended.  The European 
Commission, though not a Core Group member, also 
participated.  PRM/ANE Deputy Director Lawrence Bartlett 
and poloff represented the United States. 
 
RESETTLE REFUGEES BUT DO NOT LINK DEVELOPMENT AID TO PROGRESS 
--------------------------------------------- ---------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) Core Group members shared information on their 
ability to accept Bhutanese refugees for voluntary 
resettlement 
in their countries.  The USG and Canadian offers, 50,000 and 
5,000 respectively - each over a multi-year period - far 
outstrip those of all other members combined, who offered to 
absorb refugees in the hundreds.  In discussing the immediate 
needs of extremely vulnerable refugees, who may have been 
subjected to violence or are single female-headed families, 
most countries agreed their resettlement programs could 
accept refugees immediately.  The USG, Canada, and UNHCR 
shared their recent unsuccessful experiences in trying to 
get 16 urgent cases out of Nepal as evidence that firm 
resettlement offers to a small group of refugees have not 
been sufficient to persuade the Nepalese government to issue 
exit permits.  The USG noted the urgency of using resettlement 
as a tool in negotiations, since Maoist influence in the 
camps, should it increase, might prevent refugees from 
passing security screening required for third country 
resettlement. 
 
¶4. (U) Members also shared information on their development 
budgets in Nepal and Bhutan, with all noting an unwillingness 
to withhold or decrease development program funding to either 
country to leverage a resolution of the refugee issue. 
Denmark, 
Norway, New Zealand, and the European Commission all 
suggested 
using assistance as a carrot to encourage the two parties to 
resolve the situation satisfactorily. 
 
FIRST STEPS FIRST, THEN PUSH FOR A COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION 
--------------------------------------------- ------------ 
 
¶5. (SBU) Denmark opened discussion on the way forward by 
asking that a comprehensive solution be orchestrated to 
resolve the status of the over 100,000 refugees before 
pushing for immediate action by either Nepal or Bhutan. 
The USG, supported by Canada, pushed back, noting that 
getting Nepal and Bhutan to take smaller, first steps 
might better pave the way for an eventual comprehensive 
solution:  Nepal should allow a smaller number of 
extremely vulnerable refugees (up to the 7,500 UNHCR had 
previously identified) to resettle to third countries 
and should allow UNHCR to register camp residents (or 
conduct a "census" of the camp population) to ascertain 
population numbers and the interest of refugees in returning 
to Bhutan; Bhutan must make good on its promise to allow 
Categories One and Four refugees from Khundunabari Camp to 
voluntarily return to Bhutan after offering detailed 
information about the terms and conditions that would face 
returning refugees and commencing a voluntary return program. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Other countries, eventually including Denmark, 
 
agreed 
to this approach.  Australia reiterated an agreement made at 
the previous meeting that Core Group countries demarche Nepal 
and Bhutan with a common message, emphasizing that these 
initial steps begin immediately and detailing how Core 
Group countries might assist.  The USG plans to again 
deliver its message in advance of the planned July 14 
briefing with Nepal, Bhutan, and India (see para 9) and 
will ask that other countries do the same. 
 
¶7. (SBU) The Netherlands raised the issue of appointing a 
special envoy to facilitate communication between Core Group 
countries and Nepal and Bhutan.  Core Group members expressed 
only mild interest in the suggestion, noting that the mandate 
of the position would first need to be known before they could 
confirm interest.  The USG noted we would consider the value 
of such a position.  The Netherlands agreed to draft a short 
job description for others to consider at the June 22-23, 
2006, Annual Tripartite Consultation (ATC) meeting in Geneva. 
Members did not raise any possible candidates for such a 
position. 
 
MAKING INDIA A FULL PARTNER, FOLLOWING UP WITH NEPAL, BHUTAN 
--------------------------------------------- --------------- 
 
¶8. (SBU) Canada suggested that the USG, as the most 
influential 
Core Group member, brief India on the outcomes of the Hague 
meeting and invite them to become a full partner of the 
group.  All participants agreed.  Members suggested that 
the USG provide this briefing in Delhi and report back at 
the June ATC meeting.  The Department will convey points 
to Embassy Delhi via septel. 
 
¶9. (SBU) The USG tabled a proposal to conduct a joint meeting 
with Nepal, Bhutan, India and a small group of Core Group 
countries in New York in July.  The purpose of the meeting 
would be to receive information from both Nepal and Bhutan 
on their bi-lateral process and reiterate USG and Core Group 
interest in both countries taking the first steps noted 
above in advance of a more comprehensive solution.  The 
date of this briefing, if accepted by invitees, is 
tentatively set for July 14.  Participants agreed to 
the USG initiative and asked that only two Core Group 
members join the USG in the meeting, in part to deliver 
a united message but not overwhelm Nepal and India with 
a larger group.  The USG offered to share talking points 
for the meeting with Core Group members and feed their 
points, if acceptable, into the meeting.  The USG would 
envision following up in the region with additional 
demarches from Kathmandu and Delhi and is considering 
a mission to the region by PRM Assistant Secretary 
Sauerbrey. 
ARNALL