DANGEROUS CROSSING: - International Campaign for Tibet

INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR TIBET
The Situation for the Long-staying Tibetan Refugees in Nepal
a) Legal status
Although Nepal is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its
1967 Protocol, it is bound by customary law to respect the principle of nonrefoulement
or forcible repatriation. Until 1989 Tibetans who had escaped
from Tibet into Nepal were able to legally reside in Nepal, enjoying many of
the rights of citizens. This came to an abrupt end in 1989. While no official
reason was given at the time for Nepal to stop offering Tibetans refuge, the
timing of the sudden cut-off speaks volumes.
Throughout the 1980s, the situation in Tibet had become increasingly tense.
Chinese government reforms on the Tibetan plateau encouraged “thousands
of unemployed [Chinese] migrants” to “drift into Tibet looking for work.” 151
So started what became a population transfer policy designed to drastically
change the demographics inside the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR). In
1987, the Dalai Lama released his 5-Point Peace Plan that called in part for
the cessation of such population transfer. As tensions rose in Tibet, a series
of non-violent Tibetan protests were staged in Lhasa in 1987, ‘88 and ‘89,
led by monks from the Drepung and Ganden monasteries. These were violently
crushed by Chinese state security forces and, after a protest on March
4, 1989, the Chinese Party Secretary in the TAR, Hu Jintao, declared martial
law in Lhasa. The severity of the post-protest crackdown forced thousands of
Tibetans to cross the Himalayas into exile in Nepal – the largest number since
the initial refugee exodus in the early 1960s. Although the Nepal government
may well have been concerned about being able to cater to increasing numbers
of refugees, it is highly likely that significant pressure from the Chinese
government kept them from doing so. This apparent capitulation to Chinese
demands was to set a precedent for the political relationship between the two
governments.
Tibetan refugees who had been living in Nepal were allowed to continue to
do so but, after 1990 and for each subsequent year, the thousands of refugees
who left Tibet seeking freedom in exile were denied refuge in Nepal. At
this point, the UNHCR and the Nepal government entered into an informal
Gentlemen’s Agreement providing for the safe passage of Tibetans through
Nepali territory onward to India. Incidents or threats of refoulement at the
Tibet-Nepal border, and a lack of access or monitoring of the border by the
UNHCR, has increased concerns that Chinese pressure could be outweighing
Nepal’s commitment to the Gentleman’s Agreement. Such concerns have led
to calls from the international community, in particular certain western em-
57