CONFIDENTIAL
though for the time being they recognised that there was no alternative but to accept it. They were, however, worried about its
consequences: they were not sure that it was an effective deterrent
and after four years in the Camps, the refugees would find it increasingly difficult to reintegrate into an open society.
7. Mr Layden then raised the question of involuntary repatriation, mentioning Hong Kong's well-established practice of sending Chinese
illegal immigrants back across the land border to China.
The Hong Kong Government might consider ending the closed camp system if they
could be sure of a reduction in the rate of arrivals from Vietnam.
Why should Vietnam be an exception to the normal practice of returning those not accepted as refugees?
8.
M.
Hocké said UNHCR could not agree to this. It would cut
across accepted standards. There was a risk of violence or threat
to life for those who returned to Vietnam. Great hardship was
imposed on ordinary Vietnamese by the policies, including the economic policies, of the Vietnamese Government. The regime was
producing outcasts; UNHCR's analysis of outflow since 1984 indicated
people under pressure. It was not correct to ascribe purely
economic motives to those fleeing Vietnam.
9.
M.
Those
Hocké said that it was necessary to narrow not the
definition of a refugee, but the concept. Only those fleeing from persecution were refugees as defined by the 1951 Convention. fleeing from violence, (international or civil wars) or from natural
disasters, were economic migrants or immigrants. They were not
UNHCR's responsibility, (though they might qualify for assistance
from other organisations.)
10. Mr Layden said that this appeared to leave Hong Kong in an impossible situation, obliged to treat all Vietnamese arriving in Hong Kong as refugees, but faced with increasing discrimination on the part of resettlement countries. M Hocké said that difficult political decisions had to be made by governments.
UNHCR's efforts
would be eased if resettlement countries would widen their criteria slightly, rather than restricting themselves to the principle of family reunion. But other solutions would have to be pursued as
CONFIDENTIAL