Return to:
Index of "Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration Press Releases and Statements"
Index of "Population, Refugees and Migration" ||
Electronic Research Collections Index ||
ERC Homepage
U.S. Department of State
95/08/01 Testimony: Acting Secretary Tarnoff on Refugee Admissions
Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration
Peter Tarnoff
Acting Secretary of State
FY 1996 Refugee Admissions Consultations
Before the
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
August 1, 1995
I appreciate this opportunity to reaffirm the President's deep
commitment to the United States refugee program as well as to outline
for the Committee and to present to you the President's specific
proposal for the Fiscal Year 1996 refugee admissions program.
Perhaps more than at any time since 1980 - when the Refugee Act was
enacted - the question of to whom and in what numbers this country
should offer permanent resettlement is generating considerable national
interest. There are, no doubt, many reasons for the renewal of this
debate, but the changed circumstances of global migration in the post-
Cold War period and its impact on the United States is one of the most
significant. We are not alone. Many other countries are wrestling with
the same issues. But it is clear that we, the United States, must
provide the necessary leadership within the international community to
ensure that refugee resettlement remains available to those for whom
there is no other viable alternative.
Refugee resettlement embodies who we are and what we stand for as a
nation. Throughout our history, flight from tyranny has caused millions
of people to seek refuge in our land of freedom. In a decade dominated
by ethnic tensions, ethnic cleansing, and ethnically-inspired violence
and killing, it is essential that America remain an example of tolerance
and compassion. Given the numerous volatile situations in the world
today, we believe that the United States must retain maximum flexibility
to offer resettlement opportunities, when needed, and to be in a
position to encourage other countries to accept their international
responsibilities. It is for this reason that we oppose any legislated
numerical cap on annual refugee admissions.
Having said this, let me emphasize that we concur that the use of
resettlement as a durable solution should evolve to match changing
requirements. Since the end of World War II, refugees resettled in the
United States have - in the main - been persons fleeing communism. In
most cases, communism became synonymous with persecution. While we
continue to admit members of certain groups to whom commitments were
made before the demise of most communist states, we are in a period of
transition which is resulting in adjustments of worldwide admissions
numbers overtime.
We will also use our position to ensure that resettlement needs are
viewed as a shared international responsibility. Recognizing the
changed circumstances in the world, the Administration with our NGO
partners has begun to revise criteria for the United States refugee
admissions program.
This fiscal year, new priorities were established to determine who among
the world's refugees would be given primary consideration for United
States resettlement. Without sacrificing our ability to act
unilaterally, these new priorities allow for far greater coordination
with the efforts of the international community and other resettlement
countries. Working with the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), we are moving away from a Cold War
framework and toward a system with greater emphasis on refugees
recognized as having both a well-founded fear of persecution and a need
for third-country resettlement. Where necessary, refugee admissions
resources can be used as an instrument to ensure the preservation of the
practice of first asylum.
Turning to the specifics of the admissions program for Fiscal Year 1996,
a copy of which I believe the committee has received, the President
proposes an overall refugee admissions ceiling of 90,000. This
represents an 18% decrease from the current fiscal year ceiling of
110,000.
Much of the reduction will result from a decline in the need for
admissions numbers in the East Asia region. The 25,000 numbers proposed
for this region will allow us to resettle the last group of Vietnamese
re-education camp prisoners and Highlanders from Laos, to whom we have
firm commitments, as well as a small number of non-Indochinese refugees.
In addition, in an effort to accelerate voluntary repatriation from
first asylum camps in Southeast Asia and ensure the successful
conclusion of the Comprehensive Plan of Action (CPA), we are discussing
with our CPA partners, a proposal to provide opportunities for
resettlement interviews upon return to Vietnam to those Vietnamese now
in camps who agree to return to their homes voluntarily. The exact
details of this proposal would be determined, in part, as a result of
consultations with those governments whose cooperation would be required
for its successful implementation.
In the former Soviet Union, religious minorities with close family ties
in the United States will continue to receive significant refugee
admissions slots under the European ceiling of 45,000. Unfortunately,
the situation of Bosnian refugees not only continues unresolved in many
locations but may even be deteriorating. We are working closely with
UNHCR and, in FY 1996, we will admit at least 15,000 Bosnians -- almost
double the number expected to arrive during FY 1995. We will continue
to monitor events in Bosnia, and will be prepared to consult with
Congress if further adjustments appear necessary.
In Africa, we have embarked on a new approach to refugee processing to
ensure we take in those people truly in need of resettlement. This
effort involves not only the USG and USG-funded non-governmental
organizations, but also many UNHCR offices whose primary focus is on
basic humanitarian assistance. Travelling teams of voluntary agency and
Immigration and Naturalization Service staff members this year will
interview African refugees in more than double the number of first-
asylum countries traditionally visited for this purpose. To their
credit, most African countries honor first asylum and refugee protection
obligations. With the financial assistance of the international
community, many diverse groups of African refugees - Mozambicans in
Malawi, Ethiopians in the Sudan, Somalis in Kenya - have been allowed to
remain in neighboring countries until repatriation was possible.
Third-country resettlement opportunities, therefore, are needed for
relatively few cases in each of these locations. The President's
proposed 7,000 African admissions will be available for Sudanese,
Somalis, Zairians, Liberians, and numerous other nationalities.
The U.S./Cuban Migration agreement calls for the safe, orderly, and
legal admission of 20,000 Cubans annually. One component of this effort
involves the admission of persons approved in our in-country refugee
admissions program. Individuals who have been jailed or harassed for
their political or religious beliefs or activities are examples of those
included in this program. Given the prevalence of democratically-
elected governments in this hemisphere, Cubans are the only nationality
designated for refugee processing and 6,000 numbers are recommended for
their use.
For the Near East/South Asia region we are proposing 4,000 numbers for
FY 96. Resettlement in the U.S. for refugees from this region is
closely coordinated with UNHCR. Many referrals for United States
resettlement are persons who fled Iraq but cannot remain in first asylum
countries such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey or Syria. Religious
minorities from Iran - particularly Baha'is and Jews - also require
third-country resettlement. As in the Africa program, we are working
closely with UNHCR to bring United States processing to those who are
most in need. In the coming fiscal year we will interview refugees in
regional capitals that had been rarely, if ever, visited by our
processing teams.
Given the unpredictability of world events, the President's proposal
includes a reserve of 3,000 numbers which are not assigned to any
region. As situations develop during the year, additional numbers for
existing programs or numbers for new refugee groups may be required.
The availability of an unallocated reserve allows the program the
flexibility necessary to operate effectively in this constantly changing
environment.
By current UNHCR estimates, there are some 20 million refugees in the
world and an even greater number of persons displaced within the borders
of their own countries. In addition, millions of migrant workers and
asylum-seekers are on the move around the globe. In the face of these
growing numbers, the international community now rarely views large-
scale permanent resettlement as an appropriate or manageable solution
for refugee crises. As with the Kurds on the Turkish border after the
Gulf War, or Rwandans fleeing the massacres of last year, the first
concern for refugees is protection and assistance in place, followed by
the hope of eventual voluntary repatriation.
The vast majority of the millions of refugees worldwide will never be
resettled anywhere but, rather, will remain in first asylum under the
care of the international community until they can return home in safety
and dignity. It is to these vital programs that some $430 million
dollars of Department of State funds are devoted in the current fiscal
year. We believe the U.S. commitment to generous levels of overseas
assistance represents money very well spent.
In recent years, United States leadership - be it in the form of
financial resources, food aid, diplomatic intervention or the unique
assets of the U.S. military - has made the difference between
catastrophe and the preservation of human life. As the UN High
Commissioner for Refugees recently told me, in today's world, there
simply is no substitute for U.S. leadership. This view is shared as
well by the American people who, through their elected representatives,
have continued to demonstrate their support for these programs.
There are many examples. The ethnic tensions in Central Africa that led
to genocide in Rwanda last year and still threaten to plunge Burundi
into bloodshed and chaos elicited an outpouring of American concern and
resources despite the limited United States strategic interests in that
part of the world. Since April of 1994, the U.S. Government has
provided over $500 million in emergency relief for refugees, the
internally displaced, and other conflict victims in this region. When
nearly a million Rwandans arrived in the Goma area of Zaire within a
matter of days, the UNHCR reached the outer limits of what it could
implement even on an emergency basis, and appealed to governments to
provide services directly to the refugees. United States leadership was
instrumental in mobilizing resources and contributions from other
nations. Our response was possible because of the military's
capabilities and our political will to use them in such unique
circumstances.
Rwanda illustrates another aspect of this country's contribution to
handling humanitarian crises - that of the private sector. The
community of non-governmental organizations or "NGOs" reported an
unprecedented fundraising response from the American people to the
Rwandan tragedy; and many American and other voluntary agencies provided
life-saving work throughout the region. The NGO community has also
stepped forward to devise community-based conflict prevention programs.
These are a necessary complement to the government's effort on the
diplomatic and political front in saving Burundi from a similar
cataclysm.
The relief activities of American NGOs have also made a substantial
difference in alleviating suffering in the ongoing tragedy of Bosnia.
Since 1992, NGOs have assisted the millions of people uprooted in this
agonizing ethnic conflict. Often without regard to their own personal
security, they have ensured the provision of food and shelter to victims
of ethnic cleansing and violence both within and outside of Bosnia's
borders. They have also provided life-sustaining medical treatment,
medicines, and medical supplies to Bosnian refugees and displaced
persons throughout the region.
Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States continue to demonstrate an
enormous capacity and willingness to reach out to those in need - both
at home and abroad. Americans want to be part of the solution. In
recent years it has been made abundantly clear that the United States
retains the will, creativity, and willingness to "take charge" when
necessary in assisting the victims of natural or manmade disasters. In
addition, our track record as a multi-cultural society - even in light
of the current debate on appropriate levels of new immigration - is
excellent and can serve as a positive example to other nations. The
President's proposal for the admission of 90,000 refugees in Fiscal Year
1996 reflects his intention to maintain America's leadership while at
the same time recognizing that changed circumstances demand new and
flexible approaches.
I will be happy to respond to your questions.
(###)
To the top of this page