REPATRIATION TO CAMBODIA (UNHCR, 19

[uneoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Subject: REPATRIATION TO CAMBODIA (UNHCR, 1993)

/* posted 1 Apr 6:00am 1997 by drunoo@xxxxxxxxxxxx in igc:reg.burma */
/* -----------------" Repatriation to Cambodia "----------------- */

REPATRIATION TO CAMBODIA
------------------------
(pp- 104, The State of the World's Refugees, 1993)

Between 30 March 1992 and 30 April 1993, more than 365,000 Cambodians
returned home - a rare of nearly 1,000 a day. Most of them had spent
between 10 and 14 years in refugee camps in Thailand. About 2,000 of those
who returned came from other countries in South East Asia.

The repatriation was one of the largest logistical operations ever
undertaken by UNHCR, and was carried out under particularly difficult
circumstances: the Cambodian infrastructure had been devastated by 22 years
of war, and the situation in the country as a whole was far from secure.
Yet despite the question marks that still hang over the future of Cambodia,
many observers consider the repatriation programme a success.

In Thailand, Cambodian refugees were housed in seven camps. Three of these
- Site 8, O'Trao and Site K - were controlled by the Democratic Party of
Kampuchea(DPK), better known as the Kahmerhmer Rouge; a further two - Site 2 and
Sok Sann - were affiliated to the Khmer People's National Liberation
Front(KNPLF); Site B was under the control of the Sihanoukist faction,
FUNCINPEC; and finally, there was the UNHCR camp at Khai-I-Dang which had,
since the early 1980s, served as the staging post for resettlement
overseas.

Preparations for repatriation began with the Paris Peace Accords of 23
October 1991. Shortly afterwards, UNHCR commissioned the French
organization, Spot Image, to carry out satellite surveys of arable land in
Cambodia. there appeared to show large, uncultivated area. As the great
majority of returnees were of peasant stock, it was decided to offer them
between one and two hactres of arable land each. However, it soon became
clear that this was impractical. Land had been redistributed after the war
and much of that which remained unoccupied had either been mined or was
inaccessible as a result of frequent cease-fire violations.

>From 20 May 1992, less than two months after repatriation began, UNHCR
started to diversify the options available to those returning. While
continuing to offer them arable land as Option A, it added Option B (a
smaller plot of land and a house) and Option C( a $50 cash grant for each
adult and $25 for each child under 12). In addition, each repatriating
family received a 400-day supply of food, as well as household utensils and
agricultural tools.

This vast operation reached full momentum in the late summer of 1992, when
the average monthly rate of return exceeded 30,000, despite difficulties
caused by the monsoon season. MOre than 450 convoys of buses and trucks
crossed the frontier, ferrying returnees to the six temporary reception
centres that had been built in Cambodia. Those wishing to head east or
south travelled by train. Between 30 April 1992  and 24 March 1993, the
so-called Sisophon Express made 71 journeys, carrying 90,000 returnees in
all, from Sisophon to the Phnom Penh reception centre. From there, they
proceeded by truck, bullock cart, boat or even helicopter, depending on
their destination and the state of the roads.

The great majority (87 per cent) of the returnees chose to take a cash
grant because it offered greater freedom, notably the possibility to change
their minds about where they wished to live after they returned to
Cambodia. Contrary to expectations, most repatriates managed to find
relatives whom they had believed dead or lost, and decided to settle down
with them.

In accordance wit the terms of the Paris Peace Accords, returnees were
completely free to choose where they settled. Despite UNHCR warning, some
even opted for insecure areas. More than 77,000 refugees from the Khmer
Rouge camps in Thailand spread out all over Cambodia without, initially at
least, any serious signs of friction. Many other chose to settle in areas
held by factions other than the State of Cambodia. Approximately 36,000
returned to KPNLF areas, some 4,000 to the FUNCINPEC zone and a similar
number to areas controlled by the KHmer Rouge, all with the assistance of
UNHCR.

The top priority following repatriation has been to promote the successful
reintegration of returnees. In addition to negotiating the allocation of
land by local authorities, UNHCR had by June 1993 committed $7.8 million for
some 50 quick impact development projects (QUIPs), which are being
implemented in collaboration with UNDP. these are designed to help
returnees reintegrate and reach self-sufficiency, while simultaneously
benefiting the local population. Projects include the repair of 220
kilometers of roads and the construction of 355 schools, 1,300 water points
and 32 health centres. Agricultural programmes have also been launched to
rehabilitate 8,000 hectres of land and provide seeds for 60,000 families.

Since becoming involved in Cambodia, UNHCR has, for the first time in its
history, tried to organize mine clearance in areas receiving large numbers
of returnees. De-mining operations have been carried out in collaboration
with military personnel from UNTAC and an NGO called Handicap
International.

In accordance with its traditional protection role, UNHCR, together with
UNTAC's civilian police contingent and all its other partners, is closely
monitoring the situation inside Cambodia to try and ensure that returnees
do not suffer political reprisals.

The repatriation operation itself may have contributed to the process of
national reconciliation in Cambodia. As it drew to a close, "refugees" and
"returnees" were increasingly referred to simply as "Cambodians": citizens
who, like the others, would soon exercise their right to vote.
Nevertheless, the run-up to the national elections in June 1993 was fraught
with tension: peace-keeping troops, election monitors and civilians were
murdered; bomb blasts rocked Phnom Penh; and important provisions the Peace
Accords continued to be violated by more than one party. The elections
themselves were an unexpected success, with Cambodians turning out
massively to vote. However, the ensuing difficult negotiations, which aimed
to persuade all the parties to live with the results of the elections,
indicate that the future of Cambodia still hangs very much in the balance.
*****