CONFIDENTIAL
1
which reaffirms the civilian and humanitarian nature of
refugee camps and condemnɔ̃ military attacks on them).
The West, in particular the US and the Netherlands,
wanted to leave open the possibility of taking
retaliatory action against refugee camps if it could be
shown that people living there were involved in
terrorist activities. Countries of asylum such as
Tanzania, on the other hand, felt that there could
never be any justification for an attack on a refugee
UNHCR had access to them and would see for
themselves whether any illegal activities were taking
place.
camp.
6. In July 1986, the Group of 5 host countries
involved in this exercise (Tanzania, Nigeria, Sudan,
Thailand and Algeria) drafted the two draft conclusions
attached at Annex A, which to them represented a sound
but minimal basis for discussion. We are content with
these but should prefer to amend draft Conclusion No 1
(Annex B gives details). However, while the
Australians, Japanese and Swiss are also content with
the conclusions as amended by the UK, the USA sees no
hope for constructive action on the two conclusions.
They consider existing international law adequate,
especially the Fourth Geneva Convention, and that the
rights of protection of refugees are well-defined in
existing doctrine and law. Their concern is that the
draft Conclusions could undermine existing law, such as
CONFIDENTIAL
Page 30Page 31