PRESS BRIEFING BY UNHCR ON EASTERN ZAIRE

7 May 1997

Press Briefing

PRESS BRIEFING BY UNHCR ON EASTERN ZAIRE

19970507 FOR INFORMATION OF UNITED NATIONS SECRETARIAT ONLY

At a Headquarters press briefing this afternoon, Soren Jessen-Petersen, Director of the New York Liaison Office of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), told correspondents that it was a good day when his agency faced no major obstacles on the ground. Today had been such a day. If the UNHCR was given complete cooperation and access in eastern Zaire, it could handle matters well. Today, 2,407 refugees had been flown from Kisangani to Rwanda aboard 10 flights. Since the beginning of the airlift, which had begun on 1 May after numerous obstructions and obstacles, 12,000 refugees had returned to Rwanda.

The UNHCR had today dispatched a train to Biaro to pick up additional refugees, he said. The UNHCR and other international humanitarian staff had been aboard the train, which had unfortunately broken down en route. The UNHCR had also sent trucks to Biaro, he added.

As of today, he continued, there were 1,798 refugees at the Kisangani transit centre awaiting transport to Rwanda. The UNHCR had received disturbing reports regarding the camp at Biaro, which accommodated 40,000 refugees of which 10,000 had now returned to Rwanda. Representatives of Médicins sans frontières had collected 97 dead bodies at the camp. Those people had died of the prolonged effects of malnutrition, disease and exhaustion. Some bore machete or gunshot wounds. In interviews with international humanitarian aid workers, refugees at Kisangani had said that those who had attacked the camps two or three weeks ago had been speaking Kinyarwanda. Yesterday, the Government of Rwanda had issued a note further to its note of 1 May charging the UNHCR with having blocked the repatriation of refugees, he said. The Rwandan Government claimed that the deaths of the 92 refugees on the train last Sunday had resulted from UNHCR mismanagement. The UNHCR had expressed shock over that incident.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Sadako Ogata had today written to the President of Rwanda welcoming the proposal agreement of the Rwandan Government to an independent, international inquiry into the treatment of refugees, he went on. But the UNHCR had also insisted that the inquiry should include investigation of the recent attacks on the refugee camps. Three or four weeks ago, there had been 80,000 refugees south of Kisangani. After fleeing the camp, 40,000 had re-emerged from the forest, of which 12,000 had been transported back to Rwanda. But another 40,000 were still missing, he added. Overall, some 250,000 Rwandan refugees were still missing in eastern Zaire.

The UNHCR letter had rejected as totally baseless and groundless the Rwandan Government accusation that the UNHCR was delaying the repatriation of refugees, he said. It was absolutely unacceptable to imply that the UNHCR had been responsible for the death of the 92 refugees. Those allegations were unjustified, unfair and demonstrably false, he stressed.

The whole situation had resulted from lack of cooperation and a violation of agreements by which the UNHCR should be given access to refugees and should coordinate their transport to Kisangani, he said. The UNHCR had not been present during that operation, had not been informed about it, and had been in no position to intervene. Now things had changed and since yesterday, the UNHCR had been directing the train and truck refugee transfers to Kisangani.

He said the UNHCR had yesterday identified 51 refugees from Burundi in Kisangani. Those refugees appeared to be from among 45,000 Burundians that had disappeared south of Uvira in October and November, and whose whereabouts were still unknown.

A correspondent asked whether the UNHCR was concerned that the attacks by the Rwandan Government were merely a pretext to take over the repatriation. Mr. Jessen-Petersen responded that the UNHCR was very concerned. The Government of Rwanda had said that if the UNHCR was incapable of managing the operation, they would bilaterally manage the return of refugees with the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire (ADFL). That proposal was totally unacceptable. The UNHCR had demonstrated its capacities over many years, provided that it had both cooperation and access.

The proposal to bilaterally manage the return of refugees might be a cover for "more sinister schemes", he said, adding that the UNHCR very much desired the cooperation of the Rwandan Government. As far as the reception inside Rwanda of returned refugees, matters had been managed in a reasonably good manner. Rwanda had already received more than 2 million returnees. There had been incidents, but they had been manageable and largely acceptable. Rather, it was worried about the way that Rwandan citizens were being treated in and around Kisangani, and about the constant delays in their return to Rwanda. Would a takeover of the Zairian Government by the Alliance make the work of the UNHCR easier or harder? a correspondent asked. Mr. Jessen-Petersen responded that, judging by the lack of cooperation offered by the Alliance thus far and by the treatment of refugees in territory controlled by the Alliance, they were worried. International governments expected the people at the head of a force with the ambition to take over a country to act as statesmen. The UNHCR hoped that a political resolution in Zaire would be the first step towards resolution of the problems of displacement throughout the region. Concerns over additional displacement were speculative, but if the political transition were to cause additional displacement, the UNHCR would be ready to respond.

Had the return of 40,000 refugees to Biaro resulted from the work of the UNHCR? he was asked. He responded that those refugees had returned as a result of the presence of numerous humanitarian agencies on the ground, the UNHCR central among them. That was a major reason for the UNHCR outrage over the accusations of the Rwandan Government; international humanitarian staff had risked their lives daily for four or five months. Their work had been described by the Security Council as "heroic".

The refugees had returned to the camps because of the UNHCR presence, he said. They had made clear that after six months on the move, they wanted to return to Rwanda. They were not absolutely sure that they would be safe in Rwanda, but return to Rwanda was better than certain death in Kisangani.

Were Rwandan refugees now making their way towards the Congo veterans of the former Rwandan Army? a correspondent asked. Mr. Jessen-Petersen said that the UNHCR believed that many refugees had fled into the forests and died there. Reports from refugees emerging from the forest seemed consistent and credible. There were other groups moving towards the Congo, but they did not appear to be from the 80,000 that had formerly been located at Biaro. Rather, they seemed to be from among the some 200,000 refugees located elsewhere in Zaire. One group of 50,000 seemed to be moving towards the Congo and the Central African Republic. The UNHCR and the World Food Programme (WFP) were attempting to look into their situation with the cooperation of local churches. Another group of 7,000 to 20,000 refugees was heading towards Angola and were located some 10 kilometres from the border. He said UNHCR staff from Luanda would look into that situation. There might be two groups re-emerging in Zaire, he added. The UNHCR would try to gain access to see what could be done. It seemed as though some of the refugees from those two groups were men of military age and were likely former fighters.

Asked whether the latter group was trying to contact the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), he said that they appeared to be fleeing for their lives. They had been chased for six months and evidently did not feel safe around Kisangani. One group was moving towards the Congo and the Central African Republic, and the other was heading for Angola.

Was the UNHCR worried about "hate radio" broadcasts in Zaire? a correspondent asked. Could the radio broadcast be shut down?

Mr. Jessen-Petersen responded that the UNHCR was very concerned because broadcasts were inciting local villagers against both Rwandan refugees and against the UNHCR and other humanitarian organizations. He did not know who was behind the broadcasts. It appeared to be very similar to the broadcasts of Radio Mille Colines (the Rwandan radio station which had urged violence against Rwandan Tutsis in 1994). "It reminds us painfully of the propaganda broadcasts of those days", he said.

The UNHCR seemed to be involved in a dispute over State sovereignty, a correspondent said. Could he define the source of the UNHCR mandate? Mr. Jessen-Petersen said that the mandate derived from the General Assembly, which had established the agency to protect refugees who crossed international borders. That was why when governments impeded the work of the UNHCR, they were acting against the mandate of the community of nations.

Asked why the situation of refugees in eastern Zaire had not been referred to the General Assembly for a decision, he said that the Assembly had mandated the UNHCR to carry out a task and the agency believed that it could carry out that task. It could not go running to the General Assembly every time that it had a problem, but the UNHCR had annually reported to the General Assembly on the progress of its work for 47 years.

Asked about the treatment of refugees in Rwanda once they returned, Mr. Jessen-Petersen said that the recent history of that country should be borne in mind, as should the fact that it would be enormously difficult for any country -- especially a developing country with little space, few resources and an unresolved history of genocide -- to take in 2 million returning refugees. Returning refugees in Rwanda had been received reasonably well. Rwandan authorities had made a fine effort to welcome them back. There had been incidents, but not of an unacceptable nature. The UNHCR was undertaking a major rehabilitation programme in Rwanda. Other agencies such as the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and many non-governmental organizations were working to provide for medium- and long-term recovery. The international community was working with the Government of Rwanda, which had made a commendable effort on behalf of returning refugees. "This has been a very difficult task and we have no problem with the way matters have been conducted in Rwanda", he said.

* *** *