Miss Stativ
x) below. I spoke with a Rey, CONFIDENTIAL and ay maid that we need not den age or thickig muhi
HKD 243/10 4x4 (PA)
Reference......
either (a) Hocke wames buil with some Velnamese it as in and, for our considrotu for
NOTE FOR THE FILE (the next ky meets.
* keep her in he pichm.
JMS
UN 243751871
Could you Heligolane Mill Walter Tyesty M/BR5/7
MAY
no reason to think A about it till now
ICG CONTACT GROUP MEETING: WASHINGTON: '11 MAY AND RELATED ISSUES
ICG Contact Group
1.
called her
sus
Ms Pearce, Australian Mission, acting without instructions, briefed me informally on 1 June on the meeting of the ICG Contact Group in Washington on 11 May. She said that the UK and UNHCR had not been represented at the meeting.
2.
The main topic had been the UNHCR paper on assistance to Vietnam which had been discussed at the April Ottawa ICG meeting. On 11 May, the Canadians had said, without formal instructions, that the issue was politically sensitive in Ottawa; several sensitive policy issues needed to be resolved before the Canadians could respond to the paper: therefore an early Canadian response should not be expected.
3. The US position remained as at the Ottawa meeting (ie they could not provide assitance to Vietnam but would not stop UNHCR from seeking funds from other governments for this purpose).
The US were preparing specific comments on the paper (not yet circulated)
4.
The Japanese repeated their reservations, especially concerning signals that might be given to the Cambodian issue. The UNHCR paper was useful. Japan had prepared specific comments (not yet
circulated).
5.
The Australians gave their preliminary reaction and said that they would circulate a short paper of specific comments (not yet received by the Australian Mission in Geneva). The paper would be positive: the Australians were the only ones so far to have given serious thought to the question. (See para 10 below.)
6. Ms Pearce said that the ICG Contact Group then discussed the next step to be taken. They agreed that the High Commissioner should expect a response to the paper before UNHCR held further discussions with the Vietnamese (ie in Geneva at the end of May). There would be no need to integrate responses for a consensus ICG reply, but the timing of the responses should at least be co-ordinated. Individual comments could be forwarded to the High Commissioner. In the event, no comments had been forwarded before the talks in Geneva at the end of May: the Australians decided not to stand out in front by submitting theirs this early.
7. Ms Pearce asked if we could let her know when our response would be ready, so that the Australians could time their reply accordingly.
UNNER P you
la
issue of milence to victor
18.
Ms Pearce
CODE 18-77
CONFIDENTIAL
Page 195Page 196