Uncertain Refuge in an Aloof Region

BANGKOK, Nov 3 - Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his family’s fleeing to England is making the Thai public familiar with the intricacies of international conventions regulating the protection of people escaping conflict or political repression.

They are learning that persons who consider themselves victims of war, civil conflict, political strife or gross human rights violations are "refugees" who may seek asylum from persecution, thus becoming "asylum seekers", in another country.

The potential educational value of this high-profile case, however, is being reduced by the controversy surrounding the validity of the claim and the lack of emphasis on the importance of safeguarding human security globally. Public discussion on these key issues could be extremely beneficial to the many who seek refuge in Thailand from other countries in the region.

IN LEGAL LIMBO

As a matter of fact, Thailand has no legal provisions for refugees and asylum seekers, or for the determination of their status. It also has not signed the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 protocol, which to this day defines refugees' rights and the legal obligations of states to protect them.

This reflects national security fears, worries about the costs of sheltering large numbers of refugees, and the concern of possibly having to assimilate them into society. Yet on political and humanitarian grounds and under international pressure, the Thai government has repeatedly made administrative exceptions to defer the deportation of so-called "displaced persons"/"persons fleeing fighting", permitting them temporary respite in the country. Likewise, it has allowed the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), as the UN body entrusted with protection of refugees, and other relevant agencies, to operate in the country and provide assistance.

Alternating between restrictive responses dictated by security considerations and pragmatic tolerance of a refugee situation that is difficult to resolve, Thailand has de facto provided asylum to some 1.2 million refugees from the Greater Mekong Sub-region and beyond over the last three decades, and still -- somewhat reluctantly -- hosts hundred thousands of them.

In addition to the refugee flows from China and the former Indochinese countries when the region was stirred by the rise of anti-colonialism and socialism and divided by the Cold War, Thailand since 1972 has experienced an influx of people from Burma escaping oppression and armed conflict between the central government and minority-based opposition groups.

Nine "temporary shelters" (camps) have been established in Mae Hong Son, Tak, Kanchanaburi and Ratchaburi border provinces, hosting a population of 140,913 "displaced persons" by the end of 2007, according to the Thailand-Burma Border Consortium. Since 2005, the Thai government has allowed third-country resettlement of the camp population to the United States and other countries to resolve what UNHCR considers "one of Asia's most protracted refugee problems". Still, the population continues to grow as more seek refuge, regularly or irregularly, in the camps. Camp residents get minimal housing and food provisions, and basic health and education services. But their movements are restricted, and they are deprived of opportunities to work and to further their education. Inactivity and stress plague them.

Outside of the camps, UNHCR services the so-called "urban asylum seekers and refugees", a disparate group totalling more than 1,700 persons from more than 30 countries, including student activists and political dissidents from Burma and persecuted people from other GMS countries. After undergoing the process of refugee-status determination, urban asylum seekers are considered "persons of concerns to UNHCR" by the Thai government. Their deportation is suspended until their resettlement is processed. Although they receive international protection, urban asylum seekers and refugees live uncertain lives, remaining insufficiently sheltered legally and economically.

OUTSIDE INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION

All the more vulnerable are those groups that are excluded from UNHCR’s scope of work because of complex geo-political dynamics, namely the Hmong from Laos, the Shan and the Rohingya from Burma, and North Korean defectors.

The largest of the three groups is the Lao Hmong, whose claim of systematic persecution, grounded in their role in the Cold War period and their continued allegiance to the Hmong militant community in the United States, is not recognised. A total of 160 Lao Hmong (including children) remain detained in the Nong Khai Immigration Center, and thousands more assembled in a military-managed camp in Phetchabun province. A portion of the Hmong had been repatriated since June 2008 following an interrupted protest march to the UN office in Bangkok. Although the official version is that their repatriation has been voluntary, since they preferred that over languishing in the camps, observers are concerned about the lack of involvement of a neutral third party in the process, and the returnees’ safety.

From Burma, the Shan and the other ethnic groups fleeing from conflict in Shan state, are, unlike the displaced Karen and Karenni, not allowed into the official camps. This supposedly because they are considered the "Thais' ethnic cousins" whose similarities are sufficient for them to survive in Thailand, and due to their perceived association with the production and trafficking of drugs in Shan state. There are also fears that recognition would open a flood of new arrivals as the situation in Shan state continues to deteriorate, following increased militarisation and displacement in areas targetted by large infrastructure projects under regional cooperation plans.

Precariousness also characterises the situation of the Rohingya, another group from Burma in Arakan (Rakhine) that has been denied ethnic-minority group status by the Citizenship Act of Burma in 1983, and relegated to statelessness and discrimination. In search of a more welcoming environment in countries that share their Muslim religion – other than the traditional destination options of Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia, where increasingly severe measures are implemented – more and more Rohingya have attempted since 2006 to reach Malaysia by transiting through Thailand. Stranded in Thailand, Rohingyas continue to be arrested, with hundreds reportedly detained in Phuket recently.

Unrecognised asylum seekers also come from further afar. North Korean defectors enter Thailand on the Mekong River, after travelling through China, Burma and Laos to escape famine and oppression in their reclusive country. The Thai government, realising the impossibility of returning them, has allowed bilateral resettlement to South Korea as long as this is done in a low-profile manner in order to avoid encouraging more arrivals from the hundred of thousands who have fled to China. Still, some North Koreans are left behind in Thai immigration centres.

NO MORE THAN A TRANSITIONAL HOME

As Thailand remains preoccupied with its political future and the long-distance interference in national affairs by Thaksin, its most notorious and wealthy asylum-seeker, the fate of the many poor and nameless GMS refugees is of little interest to the public and policymakers. Their home countries are also little willing to recognise the problem, since they deny the circumstances leading to the escape of their citizens.

For all, it is convenient to pretend that in the GMS, there are no refugees but simply irregular migrants hoping for jobs and better livelihood opportunities in Thailand. This avoids having to address the root causes of the refugee flows and to invest resources in protecting those who live in fear for their lives and that of their relatives back home.

Until GMS countries decide to deal with the situation in a transparent and accountable manner, and to open up discussion on subscribing to international refugee conventions, the most its troubled citizens can hope for is finding an unofficial transitional home in Thailand, and hanging on until eventual resettlement to a third country. Whatever happens to Thaksin's asylum claim, as long as refugee concerns are excluded from regional frameworks, people in search of a safe haven in the GMS will be bound, like in Don Quixote's quest: "to dream the impossible dream, to fight the unbeatable foe, to bear with unbearable sorrow".

* * *

(This article uses information gathered by the author and Sureeporn Punpuing for an International Organization for Migration (IOM) report: ‘International Migration in Thailand’, which will be launched at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand on Dec. 18th, International Migrants Day.)

* * *

Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the organisations she is or has been associated with.

* * *

*Rosalia Sciortino, better known as Lia, is a cultural anthropologist and development sociologist by training, who is currently working in Thailand as Associate Professor at the Institute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, and Visiting Professor at the Master of Arts in International Development Studies at Chulalongkorn University. Before that, she was Regional Director of the Rockefeller Foundation Office for Southeast Asia in Bangkok, overseeing grant-making activities in the Greater Mekong Sub-region. She also worked with the Ford Foundation in Indonesia and the Philippines, and has published widely on development issues. A native of Italy, she has lived in Asia for nearly two decades.