CONFIDENTIAL
B. THERE HAD ORIGINALLY BEEN ABOUT 3,000 PEOPLE IN THE FARM, BUT ̃ ONLY 1,008 REMAINED, THE REST HAVING ALREADY LEFT (PRESUMABLY FOR HONG KONG):
C. OTHER REFUGEES FROM VIETNAM, INCLUDING SOME RESETTLED IN FUJIAN
AND HUNAN PROVINCES, HAD COME TO CUANGDONG AND BOUGHT BOATS.
BOATS WERE ALSO STILL AVAILABLE IN GUANGXI PROVINCE.
4. APA SAID THAT IN VIEW OF THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM WHICH THIS
CASE REVEALED, IT WAS ESSENTIAL THAT THE PEOPLE ON THIS BOAT SHOULD BE QUICKLY RETURNED TO CHINA. THEY HAD ENTERED ILLEGALLY
AND HAD NO RIGHT TO REMAIN IN HONG KONG. HE NOTED THE NCNA'S
ASSURANCE THAT THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT DID NOT ENCOURAGE SUCH ILLEGAL DEPARTURES. HOWEVER, IF THESE PEOPLE WERE NOT RETURNED THIS WOULD, IN PRACTICE, ENCOURAGE THE OUTFLOW. THIS WOULD BE EXTREMELY DAMAGING FOR RELATIONS BETWEEN CHINA AND
HONG KONG, NCNA SAID THEY WOULD REPORT URGENTLY TO THE AUTHORITIES
IN CANTON AND PEKING. THEY WERE NOT OPTIMISTIC ABOUT A QUICK
RESPONSE.
5. OUR DILEMMA IS THAT IF WE FAIL TO IDENTIFY REFUGEES COMING FROM CHINA AND THIS IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT A HUGE FLOW COULD BUILD UP: BUT, HAVING DONE SO, WE CANNOT EXPECT UNHCR TO ACCEPT THEM. UNLESS CHINA TAKES THEM BACK WE MAY HAVE TO CONSIDER
PUBLICISING THE LACK OF CHINESE COOPERATION,
6. UNLESS YOU SEE OBJECTION, GRATEFUL IF PEKING WOULD PRESS THE
MFA FOR AN EARLY AND POSITIVE REPLY TO OUR PROPOSAL TO RETURN
THESE PEOPLE.
>
7. WE HAVE BRIEFED THE US CONSULATE GENERAL HERE IN GENERAL TERMS
ON THIS PROBLEM (ONE OF THEEIR INTERPRETERS HELPED TO INTERVIEW SOME OF THE REFUCEES). HOWEVER, AT THIS STAGE WE WOULD NOT WISH WASHINGTON TO RAISE THIS WITH THE AMERICANS: NOR SHOULD UKMIS GENEVA
DO SO WITH UNHCR.
!
2
| 8