CONFIDENTIAL
}
2
}
observed. He asked whether the Governor had brought up the question of resettlement on Guam with the US, and the Governor said he had.
He
3. The Governor said that he understood that the High Commissioner's resettlement plans were based on funds and pledges which had been made prior to the Conference and that if the Conference produced results there would be a more favourable situation. Was the paper on Hong Kong based on the pre-Conference plans? Mr Hartling said it was. Even if 200,000 places were secured this would be a major step forward and it would enable UNHCR to move 20,000 a month from the region, which was about as much as they could cope with. Although governments were prepared to increase their contributions to UNHCR they would baulk at the High Commissioner's request for 100% increase which was what was needed. The Governor stressed that unless a credible programme with pledges of resettlement places was forthcoming within a measurable period then tolerance in Hong Kong would snap. asked if Hong Kong's indicative figure was based on a one-year pledge. Mr Hartling explained that if 240,000 were,resettled out of the present case load of 300,000 then the region could be expected to resettle the rest. Thailand would in any case have to keep the hill tribesmen. idea of telling governments that they had a quota (from 1 June 1979 to 31 May 1980) was a new departure and if more refugees came it would be easier in subsequent years to ask governments to keep up the level of this year's commitments. He had even asked Iceland to take a quota of refugees. He reminded the Governor that the UK had not so far answered the questionnaire. Mr Dayal said that only the US, Canada and France had on-going refugee programmes although Mr Hartling added that Switzerland had agreed to take a thousand in 1979 and a thousand in 1980.
4.
The
The Governor said he was concerned about the mounting anxiety and hysteria in the host countries; there was a need to make pledges on a two-year basis. Mr Dayal noted that UNHCR had always asked for on-going commitments and indeed this was one of the conclusions of the December consultations. The Governor said that UNHCR had a chance of dealing with the whole problem which was manageable if only they would seize it. Vietnam intended to remove their entire ethnic Chinese community. Originally there were 1.5 million ethnic Chinese of whom 230,000 had gone to China, increasing now at a rate of 10,000 per month.
A large number would not be able to buy their way out and would end up in the new economic zones. Many would drown, which left perhaps another 800,000, including those already in the countries of first asylum, to be settled. Mr Hartling said that if a determination emerged from the Conference to resettle a quarter of a million a year over three years then the end of the problem was in sight. But a number of governments had been shocked by the indicative number he had put to them. The Governor commented that Hong Kong had already permanently settled 14,000 Vietnamese refugees and what was eventually decided on further resettlement would be subject to the advice of his Executive and Legislative Councils. Even so, he did not exclude the possibility of Hong Kong agreeing to the High Commissioner's indicative figure, but he would need assurances that if this number were resettled the rest would then be removed and that Hong Kong was not being asked to resettle a greater proportionate share than any other country in the region. What proportion of their population, for example, was Malaysia being asked to take? Mr Dayal said that UNHCR had been trying to tell the
CONFIDENTIAL
/Thais