INFO  LOG-00   AF-00    AID-00   CIAE-00  INL-00   DODE-00  PERC-00  
      DS-00    EUR-00   VCI-00   FO-00    H-00     TEDE-00  INR-00   
      IO-00    LAB-01   CAC-00   MOFM-00  MOF-00   VCIE-00  NSAE-00  
      OIC-00   NIMA-00  PA-00    PM-00    GIWI-00  FMPC-00  SP-00    
      T-00     SCRS-00  PMB-00   DSCC-00  PRM-00   DRL-00   G-00     
      NFAT-00  SAS-00   FA-00    SWCI-00  PESU-00    /001W
 
O 251042Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY VIENTIANE
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3014
INFO AMEMBASSY BANGKOK PRIORITY 
USMISSION GENEVA PRIORITY 
USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L VIENTIANE 000097 
 
 
DEPT FOR EAP (MARCIEL) AND PRM (SCHWARTZ) 
GENEVA FOR MULREAN 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/24/2020 
TAGS: PREF PHUM PREL UN LA
SUBJECT: UN SYG ENGAGEMENT ON PROTECTION OF HMONG POCS 
 
REF: A. VIENTIANE 068 
     ¶B. VIENTIANE 045 
     ¶C. VIENTIANE 029 
     ¶D. VIENTIANE 020 
     ¶E. VIENTIANE 009 
     ¶F. 09 VIENTIANE 595 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Ravic Huso for reasons 1.5 (b) & (d) 
 
¶1.  (C)  SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUEST:  The US, along with 
like-minded countries, has sought the cooperation of the Lao 
government to allow third-country resettlement of 158 
ethnic-Hmong Lao citizens identified as POCs by the UNHCR 
prior to their forced repatriation from Thailand on December 
28, 2009.  The Lao have both challenged the validity of the 
UNHCR's designation of these persons as refugees and rejected 
the argument that the UN and international community have the 
standing to insist that these persons be given the 
opportunity for resettlement.  To date, the UN has not been 
part of the dialogue between the GOL and the concerned 
countries and has left unchallenged the Lao assertions that 
the returnees are no longer subject to international 
protections. 
 
Embassy requests that the Department and USUN engage with the 
UN to secure a letter from the SYG to the Lao DPM/FM 
affirming that UN stands by its POC designations and that the 
GOL has an obligation to allow these POCs to avail themselves 
of the option of third-country resettlement. 
END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  (U)  On December 28, the Thai government returned to Laos 
approximately 4,500 ethnic-Hmong Lao citizens against their 
will.  Among the returnees were 158 Lao Hmong who had been in 
a Thai detention facility.  These 158 - including minors - 
had been designated by the UNHCR as POCs prior to their 
detention as illegal immigrants in 2006.  The UNHCR referred 
these cases to the US, Australia, Canada and the Netherlands. 
 On the same day that the 158 were returned, US refugee 
affairs officers from Embassy Bangkok - and officials from 
the other three resettlement countries - were given access 
for the first time and confirmed their intention to seek 
third-country resettlement. 
 
¶3. (C)  Subsequent to their involuntary return, the US and 
representatives of the resettlement countries and the EU have 
engaged in regular and frequent discussions/demarches with 
the Lao authorities to convince them to allow these POCs to 
avail themselves of the opportunity to resettle in 
third-countries.  The UN, however, has not been a participant 
in these interventions on behalf of the POCs.   The UN 
Resident Coordinator - who represents UNHCR in-country - has 
been a sympathetic listener and expressed interest but has 
not actively engaged the Lao on this protection issue. 
 
¶4. (C)  During several joint demarches and bilateral 
discussions (see reftels), senior Lao officials have directly 
challenged the right of the UN and members of the 
international community to request access to the 158 POC 
returnees and to offer resettlement.  The Lao argument goes 
as follows: 
 
a)  The UNHCR,s designation is invalid as it was based on a 
biased and false view of the human rights situation in Laos. 
In addition, the UNHCR has not been transparent regarding the 
criteria it used for making its determinations and has not 
sought to verify any claims that may have been made by the 
asylum-seekers. 
 
b)  There is no need to offer resettlement as a durable 
solution because the returnees have safely returned to Laos 
where they are being assisted to resume their lives and are 
not subject to any legal sanctions. 
 
c)  Finally, the UN has not affirmed to the Lao that it 
considers the POC status granted over three years ago to be 
still valid, and has not directly supported the arguments 
made by the resettlement countries that they are acting in 
conformity with a recognized obligation to the UN to continue 
to offer resettlement as an option to the returnees. 
Therefore, the interest of the resettlement countries is 
unfounded. 
 
¶5. (C)  In January, Ambassador discussed with the UN Resident 
Coordinator, who represents UNHCR, the Lao argument.  He 
asked her whether she would be willing to ask UN Headquarters 
for help in refuting the Lao argument and asserting the UN's 
continued interest in these POCs.  She said she would 
recommend that the UNSYG send a letter to the Lao Deputy 
PM/Foreign Minister, since the SYG carries significant weight 
with the Lao.  Ambassador also discussed the importance of 
having the UN take a stand with A/S Schwartz in PRM and with 
 
EAP. 
 
¶6.  (C)  The 158 have now been in Laos for almost two months, 
and there has been no sign that the Lao are moving in the 
direction of allowing any of them the option of resettlement 
- at least not in the near term.   Embassy believes that an 
intervention from the UN - preferably from the SYG - could 
sway the Lao from their current position.  The Lao are 
sensitive to their standing with the UN - far more than they 
are concerned with their image in the US or Europe.  Also, 
the Lao clearly appear to believe that the US and other 
like-minded countries have taken their positions based 
primarily on political considerations, not international law 
or practice.  The fact that the UN is not responding in any 
direct way to their challenge also makes them more confident 
that they can stay the course. 
 
¶7.  (C)  Consequently, the Embassy believes a letter from the 
SYG that reaffirms the UN's view that these individuals 
remain POCs and should be given the option of third country 
resettlement is necessary for two reasons:  to sustain 
important humanitarian principles; and, because it could have 
a significant positive impact in convincing the Lao to 
resolve this particular situation. 
 
 
HUSO