NATIONAL 2 (Spotlight Weekly)]

The Christmas Talks

As both sides engage in the tenth round of talks, hopes are high. But it might still take quite long before the refugees return home

By BHAGIRATH YOGI

As Bhutanese Foreign Minister Jigme Y. Thinley landed at the Tribhuvan International Airport leading a 12-member delegation on Christmas eve, hopes were high in Nepal. "We are engaged in a very constructive dialogue to resolve the common problem of two neighbors. We believe that through this endeavor we would be able to find a mutually satisfying solution," Thinley told reporters upon his arrival. Added his Nepali counterpart, Chakra P. Bastola, " I am expecting a'Christmas breakthrough' and hope this meeting would be able to find a lasting solution to the problem of Bhutanese refugees."

As the talks progressed for the second day till the writing of this story (on Tuesday) there were indications that it was not going to be an easy task. As expected, the bone of contention in this round, too, was the issue of a mutually acceptable modality for verifying refugees.

Bhutanese refugee : Long way to go

During the eighth ministerial-level talks last year, both countries agreed to start a verification process in the seven refugee camps in eastern Nepal to establish if all the people residing there were Bhutanese citizens. In the ninth meeting held in May this year, both sides, however, came up with different proposals. While Nepal insisted that the verification process be carried out on the basis of the family as a unit, Bhutanese side maintained that the verification be done taking an individual above 18 years of age as a unit.

Analysts see it as a 'delaying tactics' on part of Bhutan to avoid the formation of a verification committee. "The identity and verification must be done through the head of a family and not on an individual basis. There is no justification in interviewing every refugee when the census record, that is maintained in Bhutan, is not in his name but in the name of the head of the family," said Rakesh Chhetri, a Bhutanese political analyst.

"If Bhutan gets its way, then more than half of the refugees will be disqualified from going home. Bhutanese children under five years of age, who were evicted along with their parents before 1995, will not find their names recorded in the census record of Bhutan, and hence automatically disqualified." Over 17,000 children born in the camps will also be disqualified, he said.

Despite such differences, the tenth round of talks were being held in Kathmandu in a changed atmosphere. "This meeting is taking place in a totally different environment. A number of activities have taken place over the last eight months since the ninth round of talks," said Ratan Gazmere, a Bhutanese human rights leader.

During this period, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Sadako Ogata visited Nepal and Bhutan and assured that the Bhutanese government was quite "positive" in taking back its people. The European Parliament passed a second resolution urging the governments of both Nepal and Bhutan to find an early and peaceful solution to the problem. Interestingly, a donor consortium meeting in Thimpu in November this year discussed the issue for the first time.

US Assistant Secretaries of State Julia Taft and Karl Inderfurth visited Nepal and Bhutan early this month and floated their own proposal. And, finally, there was a "farewell letter" from the outgoing US President Bill Clinton exhibiting his interest in the refugee issue.

With all this, the Bhutanese government seemed to have few alternatives to coming to terms with Nepal on the verification process.

But considering the track record of past rounds, analysts ask us to be "cautiously optimistic". Three years after the influx of Nepali-speaking Bhutanese people started in eastern Nepal, both Nepal and Bhutan agreed to set up a joint ministerial-level committee (JMLC) to discuss the problem and find a mutually acceptable solution.

Over the last seven years, nine round of talks were held, but to no avail. During each meeting, Bhutanese officials were shrewd enough to find one "excuse" or another to postpone the issue further. (See: Box)

Analysts say the major stumbling block in the bilateral talks is the classification of the refugees into four categories, which the JMLC agreed upon during its first meeting in October 1993. The categories include -- Genuine Bhutanese who have been forcibly evicted; Bhutanese who have migrated; non-Bhutanese people; and Bhutanese who have committed criminal acts.

During all these rounds of talks, Bhutan's position has been that the refugee verification should be based only on citizenship and emigration law of Bhutan. The 1985 Citizenship Act of Bhutan stipulates forfeiture of citizenship in case of a citizen leaving the country voluntarily. Bhutanese have, hence, said they would not take people falling under category II, that is, people who have migrated. Nepal's official position, however, has been that since the refugees are not Nepali citizens, if Bhutan refuses to take them back, there will be thousands of stateless people which is a violation of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.

During the eighth round of talks, the Nepali side proposed that field verification of refugees should begin from one of the camps and move on to other camps. The Bhutanese team rejected the proposal and insisted that the verification should begin on the basis of the list of 3,000 people prepared by an UNHCR official. Nepal rejected the proposal, saying that the list was not authentic.

As the UNHCR later supported the Nepali proposal, Bhutan was left with little to make further excuses. In the meantime, the US officials' proposal to validate the refugees on the basis of the families before the actual verification begins had not surfaced in the talks till Monday, reports said.

Meanwhile, nearly 200 Bhutanese refugees and human rights activists staged protests in front of the Shital Niwas Monday demanding representation of the refugees in the bilateral talks. "Any decision that is going to affect the fate of more than 90,000 refugees must involve their representatives. They have the right to accept or not accept any conclusion reached out of such negotiations," said Gazmere. (See: Interview)

While the refugees' demand is least likely to be met, there is growing frustration among the refugee community about their early repatriation.

Bhutanese refugees say they were forced to flee their homeland because of the ethnic-cleansing policy of the Bhutanese government toward the people of Nepali origin living in southern Bhutan, also known as Lhotsampas. There are about 100,000 refugees seeking asylum in seven refugee camps in eastern Nepal, which is more than one-sixth of the total population of Bhutan. Another few thousand are said to be living on the own in different parts of Nepal and India. Bhutanese refugees started crossing into Nepali territory in December 1990. As a state party to all major international human rights conventions, Nepal could not refuse shelter to the fleeing refugees, who are granted that status in keeping with the well-known international norms and standards.

Although relations between the refugees and the local people have by and large been amicable, the presence of a large number of refugees in densely populated eastern districts has created some serious problems. As the government imposes no restriction on travel and economic activities of the refugees, this has created a situation of competition for scarce jobs available locally. The buildings of camps in densely forested areas together with illegal logging by the refugees have created serious environmental problems. There is mounting pressure from the local people on the government to find an early and lasting solution to the problem. Similarly, there are also signs of what they call'donor fatigue' of late.

The problem of Bhutanese refugees in Nepal is by definition international that people originating in one country have crossed the international borders and sought refuge in a third country which does not share a contiguous border with Bhutan. Solution to the problem thus entails taking recourse to the established international norms and practices.

As the international community has started showing concern about their fate, refugees have not allowed their hopes to die. But, what is certain is that the actual repatriation is still a long way off.

Nepal-Bhutan Talks: Going Nowhere

First Round, Kathmandu, October 1993: The JMLC agreed to classify refugees into four categories.

Second Round, Thimpu, February 1994: Nepal presses for the involvement of a third party.

Third Round, Kathmandu, April 1994: The JMLC agreed to constitute five members each from both Bhutan and Nepal in the refugee verification team.

Fourth Round, Thimpu, June 1994: Disagreement between Bhutan and Nepal on their positions on the four categories.

Fifth Round, Kathmandu, February-March 1995: The JMLC continue to discuss the category issue.

Sixth Round, Thimpu, April 1995: The JMLC exchanged names of five members of the joint verification team.

Seventh Round, Kathmandu, April 1996: The talks end in deadlock.

Eighth Round, Kathmandu, September 1999: Talks focused on the fate of the refugees under Category II.

Ninth Round, May 2000: Fails to make any breakthrough.

Tenth Round, Kathmandu, December 2000 (on-going): discusses the modalities of the verification.