TNAG-1795-FCO40-2555-Hong-Kong-Vietnamese-refugees-repatriation--including-Opera-1988 — Page 278

*or:

PA

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London SW1A 2AH

MKD 243/8

243/85

RECEIVED IN REGIS

22 JUL 1988

Mr Paul

This looks very

No21/, halphit, I with monitor

Telephone 01270-2497

will Dertigments will IND

sso

21/7

CONFIDENTIAL

Miss D J Walker

N

UKMis Geneva

Muk

Your reference

43 Member body, some it wit

may be sympelutil, but dowsins by consensus - so could resist succesfity any more in that directin.

Dear Delia,

VIETNAMESE BOATPEOPLE IN HONG KONG

Our reference

Date21 July 1988

Mr Footman N2217

Isn't there a danger that language on and would get

tacked on

?

1. I attach a copy of a minute setting out a number of options for ways in which we could use the UN to maintain pressure on the Vietnamese to resolve the outflow of boatpeople.

2.

W the /2017

We would welcome your preliminary thoughts on option iv: a decision at EXCOM. Last year's plenary passed two decisions on geographical issues (paras 208 and 209 of the Report: A/42/12/Add.1) but they are both fairly bland and supportive of the efforts being made in Central America. Depending on your views, the outcome of the forthcoming talks in Hanoi and the state of play at the time with UNHCR we could work up a text that:

recognises the problem created by the outflow of boatpeople in S.E. Asia.

commends the generosity and fortitude of the countries of first asylum.

*

endorses the introduction of screening in the area to identify genuine refugees.

encourages UNHCR to take part in this process.

welcomes the willingness of the countries of the region to discuss the problem.

hopes that states will contribute to the resolution of the situation by allowing the repatriation of economic migrants and the orderly departure of refugees.

I should stress that these are very preliminary suggestions. Do you consider that such a text would be broadly acceptable? Would it stand a chance of securing the necessary consensus? Would it be less acceptable if it specified Hong Kong and Vietnam? Would it expose us to criticism of focussing too closely on one problem? (We would of course contribute interventions to the debate on other issues).

CONFIDENTIAL

refugee status determination procedures!

/3.