105
104
CONFIDENTIAL
UK EYES ALPHA
FM HANOI 11020OZ NOV 81
TO IMMEDIATE FCO
CONFIDENTIAL
TELEGRAM NUMBER 204 OF 11 NOVEMBER.
INFO IMMEDIATE HONG KONG AND UKMIS GENEVA.
HICK 243/2
1 1 NOV 1981
DBOK UPFICER
YOUR TELMO 139 TO UKMIS GENEVA VIETNAMESE UNACCOMPANIEDPA MINORS IN HONG KONG.
NO
31
BROTATHY
cre
12/1
18/11
122
See Hink 243/1
1982
1. I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS CASE INFORMALLY AND IN THE STRICTEST CONFIDENCE WITH CLARANCE, UNHCR REPRESENTATIVE IN HANOI. CLARANCE HAS ASKED THAT HE SHOULD ON NO ACCOUNT BE QUOTED TO ANY UNHCR
AUTHORITY. I HAVE ACCORDINGLY MADE THIS TELEGRAM UK EYES A.
2. CLARANCE SAID THAT DURING THE RECENT MEETING IN GENEVA HE HAD BEEN PRESENTED MORE OR LESS WITH A FAIT ACCOMPLI BY THE UNHCR AUTHORITIES THERE, WHO SEEMED DETERMINED TO PUSH THIS REPATRIATION THROUGH AS A TEST CASE. HIS OWN RECOMMENDATION, MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS KNOWN TO HIM, HAD BEEN TO ADVISE AGAINST REPATRIATION. BUT HE HAD BEEN OVERRULED.
3. CLARANCE SAID THAT HE HAD ENDEAVOURED LAST YEAR TO ESTABLISH CONTACT WITH THE FAMILY CONCERNED. BUT THERE HAD BEEN NO RESPONSE AT ALL FROM THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES. HE REGARDED IT AS A WASTE OF TIME IN TRYING TO SECURE ACCESS NOW. HIS OWN INTERPRETATION OF THE EVIDENCE WITH HE HAS SEEN IS THAT THE FAMILIES (ALL RELATED) HAVE BEEN HINTING AS GENTLY AS THEY COULD THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THE CHILDREN TO STAY ABROAD. BUT THEY DARE NOT SAY SO IN OPEN CORRESPONDENCE, WHICH MIGHT BE CENSORED. IT WOULD IN ANY CASE 3E IMPOSSIBLE NOW TO ASCERTAIN THE PARENTS' WISHES FREELY. THEY COULD BE MAINIPULATED TO WRITE ALMOST ANY LETTER THAT THE AUTHORITIES WISHES.
4. MY BEST GUESS, ON THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE, IS THAT THE PARENTS WOULD PROBABLY PREFER THEIR CHILDREN TO STAY ABROAD IN THE HOPE OF BECOMING PROSPEROUS AND SO BETTER ABLE TO SUPPORT THEIR PARENTS, BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN THE YEARS TO COME. I CONSIDER THAT IT WOULD IN ANY CASE BE UNUSUALLY DIFFICULT TO PRESENT TO THE CHILDREN THE FACTS ABOUT VIETNAM TODAY, PARTICULARLY ABOUT THE LIFE WHICH THEY COULD EXPECT TO LEAD ON THEIR RETURN TO VIETNAM, WHERE CONDITIONS ON THE WHOLE ARE SLIGHTLY WORSE THEN WHEN THEY LEFT. ALL THREE WOULD BE LIKELY TO HAVE TO UNDERGO SPECIAL SUPERVISION ON RETURN TO VIETNAM. THE 16 YEAR OLD IN PARTICULAR COULD BE SUSPECT FOR SOME YEARS, PARTICULARLY IF THERE WAS A SHADOW OF A DOUBT ABOUT HIS WILLINGNESS TO RETURN. THERE WOULD BE NO QUESTION OF SIMPLY LETTING THE CHILDREN RESUME THE IR STUDIES AT THE LOCAL SCHOOL. IF THEY HAD BEEN RETURNED SHORTLY AFTER THE IR ARRIVAL, WHEN THEY WERE 14, 10 AND 8 YEARS OF AGE, THEN THIS WOULD PROBABLY HAVE BEEN ALL RIGHT. BUT TWO YEARS ABROAD AT THIS FORMATIVE STAGE OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE
CONFIDENTIAL
/BOUND