In progress at UNHQ

GA/SHC/3558

REFUGEE COMMISSIONER TELLS SOCIAL COMMITTEE SECURITY NOW KEY ISSUE û- FOR STAFF, FOR COUNTRIES, FOR PEOPLE DISPLACED

12 November 1999


Press Release
GA/SHC/3558


REFUGEE COMMISSIONER TELLS SOCIAL COMMITTEE SECURITY NOW KEY ISSUE –- FOR STAFF, FOR COUNTRIES, FOR PEOPLE DISPLACED

19991112

Hazards from Internal Strife Said to Complicate Work of Agency; Stability, Post-Conflict Recovery Now Critical to Relief Efforts

Refugee issues today could not be discussed without reference to security, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Sadako Ogata, told the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) this morning as it began considering questions related to refugees.

The security of refugees, of States and of humanitarian staff were all jeopardized by crises in which mass movements were a mix of populations involved in crises touching on all dimensions of security. Mrs. Ogata said it was imperative to devise measures to address the problem. The security needed to be durable, which involved achieving stability and post-conflict recovery.

While hard options such as protective actions were the responsibility of States, she said, concerned States should consider assisting the effort by looking at “middle option” components of recovery, such as equipping the local police, providing training or deploying liaison officers. Those middle options could be implemented through collaboration between States and agencies.

After a question-and-answer dialogue with the High Commissioner, the question of protection was also the major theme stressed by the representatives addressing the Committee.

Protection was the starting point for refugee work, the representative of Finland said on behalf of the European Union and associated states. The international system for protecting human rights, and the protection work carried out by the UNHCR complemented each other. To handle today’s mass displacements of people, concerted and coordinated action was needed, along with more effective monitoring and the facilitating of objectives through partnerships with States.

On behalf of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the representative of Mozambique said more attention must be given to conflict-prevention mechanisms, to avoid the armed conflicts that resulted in large numbers of refugees. Also, refugees should be

Third Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/SHC/3558 44th Meeting (AM) 12 November 1999

treated equally, regardless of their location. Countries of origin and of asylum should receive assistance in creating conditions conducive for the safe return of refugees, and this should include the clearing of landmines.

The representatives of South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Guinea, United States, Libya, Tanzania, Benin, Austria, Mexico, Norway, Japan, Guatemala, Mexico, Canada, Sierra Leone and the Russian Federation also addressed the Committee.

The Committee meets again at 3 p.m. today to take up and conclude its consideration of issues related to women.

Committee Work Programme

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this morning to begin its consideration of the Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, as well as questions relating to refugees, returnees and displaced persons, along with humanitarian questions.

The Committee had before it the Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. It also had before it three reports of the Secretary- General: one on assistance of unaccompanied refugee minors; one on follow-up to the Regional Conference addressing displacement-related issues in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) area; and one on assistance to those displaced in Africa.

Documents

The report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNHCR(document A/54/12) states that there was relative stability in 1998 in terms of the global numbers of refugees and persons of concern to that Office. By the end of the year, the global figure stood at 21.4 million, as compared to 22.4 million the previous year. Close to half of that number (11.4 million) were refugees, while the remainder comprised internally displaced persons, returnees, asylum-seekers and stateless people. Most of the persons of concern to the UNHCR Office were found in Africa, Asia and Europe.

There were no massive movements in 1998 or in the early months of 1999, the report states. However, in the last week of March 1999, there was a massive emergency in Kosovo in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Also, movements in and across borders were particularly alarming in Sierra Leone and Guinea Bissau. The fighting in the Democratic Republic of the Congo not only provoked new movements of refugees an displaced persons but also made it very difficult for UNHCR and other humanitarian organizations to continue with their operations.

As 1998 drew to a close, the armed conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia led to a new spate of displacement and mass expulsions in the Horn of Africa. In West Africa, the repatriation of Tuareg refugees to Mali and Niger was completed, while sizeable numbers of Liberians went back to their homeland either spontaneously or with UNHCR assistance. In Central America, the long-standing Guatemalan refugee problem moved towards a successful conclusion, owing to a combination of voluntary repatriation and local integration in Mexico.

In Angola, the report goes on, implementation of the Lusaka Peace Accords suffered serious setbacks and caused a large number of displaced persons. Also, armed conflict in the southern Sudan ruled out plans for the repatriation of refugees from Ethiopia and Uganda; Somali refugees in Kenya were unable to go back to their country of origin. Furthermore, the repatriation of Afghan refugees from Pakistan and Iran was also impeded by the insecure situation in Afghanistan. Hundreds of thousands of Tamil refugees remained in India without being able to return to Sri Lanka.

According to the report, UNHCR has intensified activities under its protection mandate, giving prominence to those of an advocacy and promotional nature, such as the global campaign to promote States’ accession to international instruments for the protection of refugees and the conventions on statelessness. Also, the UNHCR has sought to encourage regional initiatives such as the Regional Meeting on Refugee Issues in the Great Lakes region in Africa. In Europe, there has been follow-up to the CIS Conference. In Asia, ties with the Asia-Pacific consultations have been strengthened.

Another important initiative, the report says, has been to engage in a more intensive dialogue with international development and financial actors on the “reintegration gap”, as well as the broader issue of post-conflict reconstruction. The goal is to ensure a smoother transition from relief to development in situations of fragile peace and economic devastation to which refugees so frequently return. A landmark in this process was a round table in the first week of 1999, convened at the Brookings Institution in Washington by UNHCR in association with the World Bank. The UNHCR has also pursued a number of “change management initiatives,” some of them with far-reaching implications in terms of new processes and technology. It has also undergone a major restructuring at the Headquarters level in the early months of 1999. In 1998, the UNHCR received a total some of $769 million (US) dollars in voluntary contributions towards its general and special programmes.

The report contains information on operational activities, which includes the types of assistance given by the UNHCR such as emergency preparedness, response and assistance; care and maintenance; voluntary repatriation; local settlement; and resettlement. Those activities also include the UNHCR’s programme themes and priorities, relating to refugee women; refugee children and adolescents; environment; and refugee/returnee aid and development. The activities also include the UNHCR’s programme management and delivery.

The report includes information on the UNHCR’s regional developments in Africa, the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, South West Asia, North Africa and the Middle East. Furthermore, it contains information on the financing of its operations as well as on its cooperation/coordination activities with other United Nations members and non-governmental organizations. Attached to the report are three tables. The first contains information on the UNHCR expenditure in 1998 by operations bureau/country and type of assistance activity; the second on contributions to UNHCR operations -– situation as at 31 March 1999, and the third on indicative numbers of refugees and others of concern to UNHCR as of the end of 1998.

An Addendum contains the report of the Executive Committee of the Programme of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (document A/54/12/Add.1) on the Committee’s fiftieth session held last month in Geneva (4 to 8 October). It describes steps taken by the Executive Committee in guiding and supporting the UNHCR in achieving efficiency and rationalizing its structure and budgetary procedures. In addition to matters referring to procedure, the report contains the conclusions and decisions reached by the Executive Committee on international protection and follow-up to the regional conference on displaced persons in the CIS countries. Annexes to the report contain the decisions adopted by the Standing Committee in 1999; the opening statement of the High Commissioner at the fiftieth session; and the Chairman's summary of the annual theme, which was on strengthening partnership to ensure protection.

Also, before the Committee was a report of the Secretary-General on assistance to unaccompanied refugee minors (document A/54/285), which contains information on action taken by the United Nations and other agencies and organizations in response to General Assembly resolution 53/122 of 9 December 1998. According to the report, the risk of children being separated from their families and caregivers increases in the turmoil of conflict and flight. Boys and girls living on their own are easy targets for recruitment into armed groups as combatants, porters and servants, and are at high risk for exploitation and abuse. Involuntary separation thus increases the risks faced by displaced, refugee and other war-affected children.

Such risks include exposure to violence, physical or sexual abuse, exploitation and even death. The goal of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and other agencies is, where possible, to prevent separations, to identify children who have become separated from their families, to ensure that they receive the protection and assistance they need and to reunify them with their families in a timely manner.

The report covers family-tracing and reunification, the Separated Children in Europe programme, action for the Rights of Children training and capacity-building, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, internally displaced children, child soldiers, strengthening the field network of the Office of the UNHCR, the girl child and adoption of separated children.

The report concludes that despite the progress recorded in some areas by UNHCR, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, UNICEF, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and other non-governmental organizations, many challenges remain. One such challenge concerns the criteria for selecting foster families and systematic follow-up, for which resources are often limited. Community-based strategies go some way in addressing this issue, but separated children, in gives particular, remain at risk for some form of exploitation.

Solutions, like the issues, are complex, the report continues. Until civilians in general are protected from the impact of warfare and from serious violations of human rights, increasing numbers of children will continue to be exposed to the additional trauma and danger of separation. Member States are urged to adhere to and to promote the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to support programmes, financially and otherwise, aimed at avoiding involuntary family separation and to facilitate family reunification.

Also before the Committee was a report of the Secretary-General on follow-up to the Regional Conference to Address the Problems of Refugees, Displaced Persons, Other Forms of Involuntary Displacement and Returnees in the Countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States and Relevant Neighbouring States (document A/54/286). The report is submitted pursuant to General Assembly resolution 52/123 of 9 December 1998, in which the Assembly called upon Governments of the CIS countries, in cooperation with the Office of the UNHCR, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to strengthen their efforts and mutual cooperation relating to the follow-up of the Conference, held at Geneva on 31 and 31 May 1996.

The report describes progress made on the implementation of the Conference Programme of Action. There was a consensus among the participants in the Steering Group, established to monitor follow-up to the Conference, that while the results so far have been impressive, they remain somewhat fragile and require additional effort and vigilance, greater political attention at the highest levels in CIS countries and continued strong international engagement and support. The participants encouraged States in the region to implement fully international norms relating to the treatment of asylum-seekers and refugees, displaced persons and other categories of concern, in conformity with international and regional standards, as set out in the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol, as well as more recent recommendations formulated by the Council of Europe.

According to the report, a broad consensus emerged that the consultative and networking process launched by the CIS Conference and its follow-up needed to continue in some form beyond 2000. Several Governments encouraged the strengthening of subregional approaches focusing on particular themes and concerns of common interest as a means of rendering implementation of the Programme of Action even more effective. To pursue discussions on the establishment of a post- 2000 follow-up formula, a working group to address the issue of follow-up to the 1996 CIS Conference was established and will be convened by UNHCR, IOM and OSCE. The working group will summarize the accomplishments of the Programme of Action, review those priority goals that cannot be achieved before 2000 and identify the principal strategic objectives and modalities for work after 2000. On the basis of this assessment, it will formulate proposals for presentation to the Steering Group in 2000.

The Committee also has before it a report of the Secretary-General on assistance to refugees, returnees and displaced persons in Africa (document A/54/414). According to the report, problems caused by human displacement in Africa continue to be a source of concern for the United Nations, requiring coordinated action by UNHCR and other agencies concerned. This is particularly true at a time when major emergencies elsewhere have tended to draw the world's attention and to make heavy claims on available resources.

While acknowledging the serious situation of refugees, returnees and displaced persons in Africa, the report continues, there have been some encouraging signs in recent months that problems could be solved. The 1999 summit of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) witnessed a spirit of openness and determination to find such solutions. The ceasefire agreements in Sierra Leone, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, as well as the Framework Agreement in the dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia are all important indicators of that trend.

Yet the lasting success of such agreements, the report states, as well as solutions in other conflict situations that continue to be a major cause of population movements, will require a renewed commitment by African Governments to take their future, and the future of their peoples, more resolutely into their own hands. Lasting solutions to problems, including refugee problems, can come through negotiations rather than force. This determination is only a fundamental precondition for international support. The international community, for its part, must do all in its power to back such efforts.

Statement by High Commissioner

SADAKO OGATA, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, said conflicts were still on the increase. Civilians in many parts of the world continued to be forced to flee, mostly by internal wars. The root causes of conflict and displacement often lay in the failure to give due recognition to the aspirations and rights of ethnic minorities, or various social groups.

This year’s highest profile crisis had been Kosovo, she said. People there did not flee, they were expelled from their homes. The Kosovo crisis was not over. Almost a million people had their houses destroyed or damaged. One of the United Nations priorities there was to help those people throughout the winter. “We are trying to persuade ethnic Albanian leaders that the past suffering of Albanian people is no justification for renewed ethnic cleansing, that violence exhorts violence and that any failure to speak out and to act will lessen the international community’s sympathy and support”.

The most immediate concern in East Timor, she said, was the situation of people who had fled to West Timor, originally more than over 200,000, of whom about 55,000 had returned home in a UNHCR-coordinated operation by air, land and sea. Some progress had been made and the UNHCR could now operate in field locations. Many people had been forced by militias to leave East Timor. There were reports of some who were being kept as hostages in West Timor. “Whatever option refugees will choose, it will be free and informed, impartially ascertained, respected and fulfilled”, she said.

She expressed her concern about the situation in West Africa, especially in Liberia where there had been attacks by rebel groups in areas to which Liberian refugees had been returning, and where Sierra Leonean refugees were hosted. Also, the extremely complex pattern of interlinked wars in Central Africa was worrisome, especially in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

She said the serious humanitarian situation in the southern border of the Russian Federation was of great concern. There were well over 200,000 displaced people from Chechnya. Winter in the North Caucasus was extremely cold and there were many vulnerable refugees among those who had left. Other areas of concern were Afghanistan, Colombia, Angola and the Horn of Africa. In spite of those situations, the successful ending of the Guatemalan refugee crisis was an example for resolving other refugee situations.

She said refugee issues could not be discussed without reference to security -- security of refugees; the security of States, which was jeopardized by mass population movements of a mixed nature, and the security of humanitarian staff. Today’s refugee crises involved all dimensions of security. Measures to address that problem had become an imperative necessity.

She stressed the importance of “middle” options -- equipping the local police, or providing training; or deploying liasion officers. “Hard” options were essentially the responsibility of States, “soft” ones were that of humanitarian agencies. “Middle” options, she said must be implemented through a collaborative effort between States and agencies. Providing security was not enough, it needed to be durable. Also, stabilization and post-conflict recovery were essential in order to address the consequences of many conflicts, including situations in which people remained displaced or returned under precarious conditions.

She said the mandate's UNHCR was not simply humanitarian, because it was rooted in the protection nature of refugee work. The operating space of UNHCR and of its partners in ensuring protection was at times threatened. Whenever international crises had a refugee component, the mode of response must be based on the principles of refugee protection.

Question and Answer Dialogue

The representative of South Africa said he regretted the growing militarization of humanitarian aid and asked how the conflict resolution mechanism in Africa would work. Would the office in Addis Ababa coordinate peace negotiations on the continent?

The representative of Spain asked how safety in the refugee camps could be assured. Also, what lessons had been learned by UNHCR regarding the military factor in humanitarian crises? How could forgotten conflicts on the African continent be recognized?

How would the problem of returning refugees be handled on a regional level? the representative of Sudan asked. What kind of training did those working with returning refugees receive? What could be done about children being used in situations of armed conflict? Why had Mrs. Ogata not visited Sudan, which housed many refugees?

Mrs. Ogata said the issue of parity of resources had been picked up by many representatives, as something that she needed to request. The UNHCR’s cooperation with the OAU would be more systematic. Her Office would strengthen its cooperation with regional organizations. Also, the issue of safety in camps was of concern to all. Negotiations had taken place in that regard with the Department of Peace- Keeping operations. Safety in camps at the middle level was important. It was the obligation of the host country to collaborate but the international community also had a responsibility. For greater middle level options, better trained policemen could be brought. The Sudan had hosted and was hosting refugees. The UNHCR was helping Sudanese in neighbouring countries. She thanked the representative from that country for his invitation.

The representative of Guinea said peace and security was still fragile in Africa. However, it was important to avoid new crisis situations. The following were crucial in doing so: cooperation between different United Nations agencies; the involvement of all parties to the conflict; and the effective cooperation between United Nations agencies and countries involved in the conflict.

The representative of Finland, also speaking for the European Union, said the UNHCR had emphasized the importance of a smooth transition from relief to development, as discussed at the Brookings Institute round table. Could she elaborate?

The representative of Guatemala said the UNHCR experience in his country had a successful conclusion. He asked whether there was another programme similar to the one in his country.

The representative of the United States said the UNHCR’s work with refugee- hosting countries was essential. It was an international responsibility. The situation in Kosovo and East Timor had demonstrated that refugee crises could be taken care of. A study on how best to meet the challenge with the search capacity requirements was necessary. The ongoing conflict in Chechnya was of great concern. Her country had collaborated in helping during many refugee crises. Refugee camp security was very important; there had been serious cases in that regard. Also, the problem of women and children was of great concern; their protection was of paramount importance. She welcomed the UNHCR’s input in how to better deal with their situation. Also, internally displaced persons needed assistance. Mrs. OGATA said coordination between her Office and other bodies assisting displaced persons was being improved. There was clearly a vacuum between concept and conditions on the ground, but that was being addressed. For example, there would be a high-level mission to Sierra Leone to link programme approaches with coordinating and consulting plans already in place. Once that preliminary mission had been completed, States would be brought in to underwrite the approach that had been chosen as most appropriate.

With regard to the Guatemalan refugees in Mexico, Mrs. Ogata said the solution had been unique. In most situations her Office concentrated on simply returning as many refugees as possible. In Mexico’s case, the residuals were given an option to accept “lateralized citizenship”. Those who were undecided were allowed to stay. It was a three-pronged solution that could also be used elsewhere.

Concerning situations in which a mix of refugees and internally displaced persons created an overlap in mandates and jurisdictions for protection, the High Commissioner said her Office now assumed responsibility for all the displaced in such instances. It was useful to separate responsibility for protection purposes, but otherwise it was not useful to categorize them. The division of work with regard to helping those displaced should be seen from the angle of finding a solution. One thing that should be noted was that the United States, in addition to providing funding for refugees, was also a strong promoter of refugee returns.

The representative of Libya commented on conditions in her country and asked what programme would be set up for situations in which local authorities could not care for unaccompanied minors.

The representative of Tanzania asked for a clarification of “people of concern”.

The representative of Benin asked what provisions were being implemented for the return home of Liberian refugees and why the programme had been suspended.

The representative of Austria asked for clarification on compensation to victims of persecution in connection with the outflows of refugees mentioned in the Executive Committee’s report.

The representative of Mexico referred to Mrs. Ogata’s mention of the “three- pronged solution” to the problem of Guatemalan refugees in his country.

Mrs. OGATA said her Office was concerned over the situation of unaccompanied children in refugee situations. Family reunion attempts were the most important in that regard. Also, the recruitment of children for military purposes was a serious issue. In reference to the 1998 ‘state of the age’ publication, she could not say anything about it. The publication had come out two years ago, and was not an official document. There were many contributors to that document. However, if there were obvious mistakes, she would like to correct them. A “2000 historical document” which was readable and interesting would be published soon.

In response to another question, Mrs. OGATA explained that people of concern were asylum seekers and internally displaced persons. The reason for stopping Liberians from returning was the state of insecurity in certain areas of Liberia. Also, many preferred not to go back because of the lack of development there. That country did not have enough health services and education for children. With regard to the legal interpretation of the agents of persecution, she said that referred to States. Today, however, there were many non-State agents of persecution. It was important to figure out how to complement measures that would protect victims of persecution in a wide range of countries.

In reference to the option for returnees to stay or return, Mexico’s situation was unique; that country was large and refugees there had already become productive elements in society.

Ms. OGATA informed the Committee that a World Food Programme (WFP) plane taking staff through Kosovo had come down. It was going from Skopje to Pristina. Twenty three people were on board. Details of the accident were not known.

Statements

LEENA LIIRA (Finland), speaking for the European Union and associated countries, said the starting point for refugee work was protection. The international system for protecting human rights and the protection work carried out by the UNHCR complemented each other. A well-functioning human rights policy was a precondition for preventing refugee movements. Persons belonging to national, ethnic or linguistic minorities often faced discrimination.

She recalled that the debate in the Executive Committee had focused this year on strengthening partnership to ensure protection as related to security, which had reinforced the growing recognition that concerted and coordinated action was needed for handling today’s mass displacements of people. Equally urgently needed was more effective monitoring and the facilitating of objectives through partnerships with States. In all partnerships, safeguarding the rights of minorities was a prerequisite for political stability; the neutrality and independence of humanitarian actions could not be compromised. Further, the international community must ensure safe conditions for humanitarian work, with the conditions for such arrangements defined by all relevant actors. In the Kosovo crisis, the humanitarian evacuation from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia had been a good example of international solidarity and burden-sharing.

Lasting solutions to the refugee problem must be urgently defined and promoted, she said. The primary responsibility of States for preventing involuntary displacements and creating conditions for voluntary return must be supported by improved human rights monitoring. When an individual’s rights could not be safeguarded in the country of departure, international protection had to be provided. Through a recently signed Treaty of Amsterdam, the European Union was deepening its cooperation in the field of asylum and migration at the Union level.

CARLOS DOS SANTOS (Mozambique), speaking on behalf of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), said more attention should be given to conflict- prevention mechanisms to avoid the eruption of armed conflicts resulting in large numbers of refugees. Also, refugees should be treated equally, regardless of their geographic origin. The increasingly noticeable disparity in providing support and funding for refugee programs worldwide, particularly in relation to Africa. Should not continue.

He said repatriation was the most durable solution to the problem of refugees, but because of fragile ceasefires or peace agreements, refugees were at times reluctant to return home for fear of renewed violence and of returning to refugee status again. The international community should help governments of countries of origin and of asylum to create conditions conducive for the safe return of both refugees and displaced persons. Similarly, countries of return should be assisted in clearing landmines so that returnees were not tragically sacrificed after all they had endured.

Of concern was the rise of new problems such as xenophobia due, among other factors, to the presence of refugees. The UNHCR “Roll-Back-Xenophobia” campaign launched in December 1998 was a commendable response to that. The UNHCR should urge the international community to fufil its obligations in formulating and implementing programmes and projects to bring about rapid rehabilitation and reconstruction in African countries after crises, so that development could resume as soon as possible. A lasting solution to the refugee problem was a precondition for the sustainable development of the African continent. Refugee-producing countries should find a peaceful means of solving their problems to avoid creating conditions that led to refugee outflows. In formulating strategies, he said, UNHCR should take into account the specific condition in countries of asylum, which often carried the burdens of hosting refugees without adequate resources.

OLE PETER KOLBY (Norway) said refugee protection and asylum were under considerable pressure. Breaches of fundamental principles of refugee and human rights law and international humanitarian law continued. It was refugees, displaced persons and civilians who bore the consequences. Efforts to reach out and consolidate the support for asylum was imperative. He encouraged the “Reach Out” process established by the UNHCR. Also, security for refugees and humanitarian workers was a matter of concern. If security were absent, it would be more difficult for post-conflict recovery, reconciliation and normalization to take root. He welcomed the new budget and managerial structure to the UNHCR.

RYUICHIRO YAMAZAKI (Japan) said the nature of conflict had changed by mostly taking place within the borders of a State. At the same time, civilians were increasingly involved. There was a greater need for humanitarian activities to be conducted in a neutral and impartial way.

His Government was determined to extend cooperation in the reconstruction of East Timor. At an early stage of the crisis, it had extended $1 million to the UNHCR, together with another million dollars to the World Food Programme. It had also provided the UNHCR with aid in kind valued at approximately $2 million. Furthermore, his Government was preparing for the provision of an airlift of aid materials from Surabaya to West Timor for UNHCR activities. His Government would continue its assistance towards refugees and displaced persons so that they could be fully integrated into their communities.

LUIS FERNANDO CARRANZA (Guatemala) recalled the conditions surrounding the refugees who had fled his country. A key element in the return process had concerned land. The UNHCR had been influential in the reintegration process, including through the insertion of a gender-perspective component. The repatriation work of UNHCR had been distinctive from a number of standpoints, including terms of agreement and local participation. Achieving the success of the repatriation programme had required coordination and cooperation between the Government and UNHCR.

He said reintegration of the population had begun with an agreement between the Government and a rebel group. It had proceeded on the basis of support on various aspects of the refugee situation. Components had included the encouragement of voluntary repatriation, creating a fund for the refugees, a programme for risk-reduction for those returnees who were faced with armed elements upon their return, deactivation of mines and minesweeping, as well as food compensation projects. The returnee process had been part of a comprehensive programme that would promote peace and democracy.

LUIS ALFONSO DE ALBA (Mexico) said that his country’s open-door policy towards people who needed asylum had given it much experience and insight in accommodating refugees, for example from Chile and Guatemala. The signing of a peace agreement in Guatemala during 1996 had opened up a new avenue of work for UNHCR in his country.

He said there had been three stages to his country’s experience with refugees from Guatemala. The first had been the emergency stage, lasting from 1981-1984 and marked by a massive arrival of Guatemalans in the country. At that point, Mexico had signed an agreement with UNHCR to provide assistance to handle the refugees. Next came the resettlement stage, which had lasted until 1996. It had included bilateral agreements for assistance, and a trust fund had been established for assistance to the Guatemalan refugees. The programme at that stage had contributed to the economic and cultural development of the area. The third stage, lasting from 1996-1999, had been the migration stage, which had given citizenship to those Guatemalans who wanted it. Twenty-two thousand refugees stayed in Mexico and acquired Mexican nationality. In May, Mexico had held a regional seminar in cooperation with UNHCR on promoting human rights for migrants. Legal and legislative reforms were being considered to reaffirm Mexico’s commitment to international and humanitarian law.

BRIGITTE DIOGO (Canada) said refugee protection was first and foremost a State responsibility. She supported UNHCR’s effort to encourage as many countries as possible to ratify the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol.

One of the main responsibilities of States was the non-refoulement of people fleeing their country in search of protection, she said. Another State responsibility was to facilitate the work of UNHCR in allowing access to displaced persons. States must put in place mechanisms to guarantee not only the security of the staff of the UNHCR and other humanitarian organizations, but also the physical security of the refugees.

“At a time when civilian casualties and displacement are increasingly manipulated as a tool of war by combatants, we must collectively improve our ability to enhance protection”, she emphasized.

IBRAHIM M. KAMARA (Sierra Leone) said the conflicts in his country, as well as in Liberia and Angola, had revealed that private motives rather than ideologies were dominant. War was the intensification of competition for wealth and control of valuable natural resources such as diamonds. Outsiders tried to achieve economic control by encouraging and arming rebel groups within the countries.

The nine-year brutal rebel war in his country had claimed at least 50,000 lives and had forced more than half a million people into exile. In addition, two and a half million people were displaced and thousands had been maimed at the hands of the rebels. “There is a need for strenous efforts to avert the occurrence of situations which force people to become uprooted and displaced”, he said. Africa had the largest number of refugees. However, donors had diminished services of UNHCR for African refugees in contrast to those living elsewhere. He appealed to the international community and donor countries to provide financial, material and moral support to African nations. The latter would ensure long-term security.

ANDREI NIKIFOROV (Russian Federation) said the fact that there was political will to solve problems was grounds for optimism. Political will should not lead to complacency, however, because the UNHCR statute had made clear its status as an impartial humanitarian organization. The problem of migrants in the CIS countries had been discussed at a conference in Geneva, which had suggested that the principle of "country of first refuge" arrival should be combined with the international protection programme. The amounts to be spent on that combined programme were unprecedented and the suggestion supported the conclusions of the UNHCR for further actions to be taken in the CIS countries with regard to migratory patterns. The Standing Committee had decided it would need the right kind of coordination between the IOM, the UNHCR and the OSCE.

He said the plan was of particular interest for his country, since it stood at the crossroads of so many migratory routes. It should be noted that the huge migrations to the west, which had been predicted, had not occurred. The international community should support the migratory programmes in the Russian Federation.

* *** *

For information media. Not an official record.