TNAG-1279-FCO40-1630-Repatriation-of-Vietnamese-refugees-from-Hong-Kong-1983 — Page 87

Mr Smith

HMGD

WH 312

нкка 4315

RECEIVED IS AZANI

1 FEB 1983

INDR

NO. 51

MAY

<O

CH12

Reference ......... . . . . . .......

pa (Repatriation of VRS)

LORD BELS TEAD'S MEETING WITH THE GOVERNOR OF HONG KONG :

FRIDAY 28 JANUARY HIKKO27/2

1.

.O

I would suggest, if you agree, rephrasing para 6 of the points to make on Vietnamese refugees to bring out the distinction between involuntary and voluntary repatriation:

'Cannot forcibly repatriate if registered by UNHCR as refugees. May be able to encourage voluntary repatriations but this will need cooperation from UNHCR in Hong Kong and assurance of rehabilitation in Vietnam. Will be looking onto this with Vietnamese and UNHCR officials'.

The subheading might simply read 'Repatriation' (the reference in Legco was similarly unqualified). Para 7 and the essential facts may, of course, stand.

2.

Perhaps we should be wary of being tempted by Hong Kong's bold speculation about involuntary renatriation into taking too sanguine a view of the prospects for voluntary repatriation. You will recall Hanoi's reaction to Hong Kong's suggestion in November (Hanoi telno 35 to Hong Kong, attached) particularly para 2. It also occurs to us that if voluntary renatriations become established it might have a reverse effect on refugee outflows since those setting out for Hong Kong would feel they had nothing to lose (and this would be particularly true if Hong Kong is right in seeing current refugee levels as a reflec- tion of economic opportunism as much as political nersecution), No harm in exploring this with Co Thach if Hong Kong would like us to. But we must be realistic,

-

3. Involuntary repatriation could not be considered unless and until an international consensus emerged backed by UNHCR (who would thereby wash their hands of these cases) - that such - Land

such groups of boat people were economic migrants, not refugees (and therefore illegal immigrants, as presumably is the case with ECVlls). I cannot see that happening soon, and I have no idea how UNHCR would handle it.

-

4. However, if part of the problem for Hong Kong is that it is the American INS who are making precisely this distinction as a way of keeping down the numbers of Indochinese refugees they have to accept, and therefore leaving them on Hong Kong's hands, then I see no reason why Hong Kong (or we ourselves) should not challenge UNHCR to take their own view on the matter rather than leave Hong Kong as 'pig-in-the-middle'.

CODE 18-77

25 January 1983

cc:

Mr Roberts UND

SS 8/78

Mr Edwards Legal Advisers

субут.

CMJ Segar

South East Asian Department W 86A

233 5073