SENIOR INTERAGENCY GROUP (SIG) MEETING ON REFUGEE POLICY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 15
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 7, 2010
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: July 31, 1985
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
Next 2 Page(s) In Document Denied
Q0'
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
CONFIDENTIAL
STAT
~ 31Jul85)
DCI (w/att)
DDCI (w/att)
Executive Director (w/att)
SA/DCI/IA (w/att)
Executive Registry (w/att)
C/NIC (w/att)
NIO-at-Large (w/att)
DDI (w/att)
ADDI (w/att)
DDI Registry (w/att)
D/OGI (w/att)
DD/OGI (w/att)
C/OGI/GD (w/att)
SUBJECT: Senior Interagency Group (SIG) Meeting on Refugee
Policy (U)
OGI/GD)
Distribution:
Original -
1 -
1 -
3
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
Iq
Next 2 Page(s) In Document Denied
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
UNITED STATES COORDINATOR
FOR REFUGEE AFFAIRS
July 26, 1985
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Nicholas Platt
Department of State
Mr. Stephen Galebach
Department of Justice
Mr. Malcolm Butler
Agency for International Development
STAT
Central Intelligence Agency
Colonel David R. Brown
Department of Defense
Mr. Alton Keel
Office of Management and Budget
Mr. David A. Rust
Department of Health and Hum ervices
FROM: Ambassador H. Eugene Dougl s
SUBJECT: Background Papers
Attached are background papers on several of the issues
that will be considered at the July 29 Senior Interagency Group
Meeting. Agencies should be prepared to discuss their views
and recommendations on the issues outlined in these papers.
Final recommendations on proposed policy changes will be
developed following the SIG meeting and circulated to agencies
for comment.
The following background papers are included for agency
review:
1. Cuban Refugee Processing
2. Romanian TCP Processing
3. Implications of H.R. 1452 and S. 1262
ea -a- -2, 16
V 47 --0
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
United States Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
MEETING OF THE SIG/RP
JULY 29, 1985
Department of State Position Paper
Cuban Refugee Processing
ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION:
Should there be changes in Cuban refugee processing?
CUBAN REFUGEES -- A HISTORY
Since the fall of the Batista regime on December 31, 1958,
almost one million Cubans have entered the United States under
a variety of circumstances and programs; however, most of these
entrants could be regarded as refugees.
From January of 1959 until the missile crisis in October of
1962 there was a relatively free and direct flow of Cubans to
the United States, and during this period about 300,000 Cubans
entered this country. Prior to the break in diplomatic
relations in January of 1961, this was generally accomplished
through an extraordinarily liberal non-immigrant visa policy in
Havana, followed by a pro-forma granting of political asylum in
the United States. After the break in diplomatic relations
Cubans entered with "visa waivers" obtained by relatives or
friends in the United States through the Cuban Refugee Program
Office in Miami.
From October 1552, the missile crisis, until late in 1965, the
Freedom Flight Program (FFP), Cubans entered the United States
via third countries. About 50,000 entered this way using
"parole visas". About 10,000 others were allowed to come to
the United States in the cargo ships returning from Cuba after
having delivered the ransom for the Bay of Pigs invaders in May
and June of 1963.
In September of 1965, the Cuban government announced that any
Cuban could leave by sea or air, which lead to the FFP.
However, before that program could be organized, about 5,000
Cubans came to the United States in small private boats during
October and November of 1965 in a mini-Mariel through the Cuban
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
port of Camarioca. Applications for the FFP were accepted
between December 1965 and the end of 1972. Over 1,700,000 such
applications were filed, and some 260,000 persons actually
entered under the program. During the FFP, Cuba stopped
issuing exit permits for third countries, and the U. S. phased
out its third-country parole program--with the exception of
Spain. About 10,000 Cubans per year entered the United States
from Spain during this period under a parole program.
Late in 1972, Cuba terminated the FFP, as well as the granting
of exit documents in general. There was practically no
movement of Cubans to the United States until the initiation of
a new parole program in 1979.
In the summer of 1978, the Cuban government announced that it
would release political prisoners, if they could be resettled
in the United States, and a willingness to allow more Cubans to
leave. A parole program, limited to ex-political prisoners,
was initiated in 1979 and converted to a refugee program with
the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980. This program was
terminated late in 1980, as a result of the Mariel crisis after
the entry of about 9,000 refugees. During the Mariel boat lift
over 125,000 undocumented Cubans entered the United States.
With the termination of the refugee program in Havana, the
Department authorized in FY 1982, the processing of Cuban
refugee applications in third countries. This program has been
limited to ex-political prisoners, who are not considered to be
resettled in the country in which they are located. Since that
date, the following numbers of Cuban refugees have entered the
United States: FY 1982 - 577, FY 1983 - 666, FY 1984 - 67, and
FY 1985 (through May) - 52. Prior to the suspension of the
December 14, 1984, migration agreement by the Cuban government,
about 1,800 applicants had been approved in Havana, about 1,000
of whom had also been sponsored for refugee admission.
However, only 28 had actually entered the United States and are
included in the FY 1985 total of 52.
INS officers from offices in Panama, Mexico City, and Madrid
continue to process a small number of Cuban ex-political
prisoners for refugee admission. Most of the recent applicants
have been Cubans in Costa Rica, Panama, and Spain. Cubans in
Panama and Spain are generally not residents and are not
allowed to legally work, meaning that they are not considered
to be resettled.* Although some Cubans in Costa Rica are
residents and, therefore, considered to be resettled, other are
not residents and are allowed to apply for our refugee
program. However, the INS officer from Mexico on his last
*See the Code of Federal Regulations, 207.1(b) and (c),
Attachment A
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
visit there found that all the claims to being ex-political
prisoners were fraudulent and denied about 90 applicants.
Caracas is not a refugee processing post, and the Department
has generally refused to process refugee applicants in
Venezuela, where apparently most Cubans are residents with the
right to work.
About 400 Cubans of the thousands that took refuge in the
Peruvian Embassy in Havana in 1980 were offered permanent
asylum in Peru. Although these Cubans have been assisted by
both the UNHCR and the government of Peru, some have stubbornly
refused to cooperate. Some with qualifying relatives in the
United States have since immigrated to the United States, and
others have entered the United States fraudulently. Although a
few of these Cubans are apparently ex-political prisoners, the
Department has maintained that they are resettled and have
refused to process them as refugees.
There are substantial Cuban communities in several countries.
Certain Cuban-American organizations approach governments
throughout the hemisphere requesting that Cubans be issued
visas so that they can enter those countries to be processed as
immigrants by the U. S. Embassy. Often such entrants have
proven to be completely ineligible for immigrant visas or found
to be facing long waiting periods for their petitions to become
current. The fraudulent entry of Cubans into the United States
from a variety of countries is widespread.
Mariel entrants are currently being converted to permanent
residency status retroactive to the time of their entry, which
means that they will be eligible for naturalization immediately
after obtaining residency status. This will allow for the
entry of the parents, spouses, and children of Mariel entrants
in the very near future (except for those who are unable to get
out of Cuba). They will also be able to file fifth preference
petitions for their siblings, but because of the current
backlog the siblings will not be able to obtain immigrant visas
for a number of years.
CONCLUSIONS:
Any extention of precessing of Cuban refugees must be
approached cautiously:
o The USG must honor the INA provisions on firm
resettlement.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
o Any refugee applicant will have to meet the basic
definition of being a refugee and establish that
he/she fled persecution or has a well-founded fear
of persecution. (Our laws no longer presume that
persons migrating from Communist controlled
countries automatically meet this criteria.)
o Any extension of processing may create a magnet
effect--creating more severe problems with which
the USG would then have to contend.
o The Cuban government may take advantage of any
processing by allowing thousands to depart for
third countries.
o We do not want to undercut our position on Cuba's
suspension of the of the U. S.-Cuban migration
agreement by allowing Cuba to enjoy the benefits
of normal migration without meeting its
responsibility.
o Reversal of prior policies may create difficult
precedents.
However,-the Department of State is currently examining
populations of Cubans in first asylum and is prepared to accept
some as refugees under limited conditions:
o The Department will work with INS to insure
that there would be no misunderstanding on the
true meaning of "firmly resettled" among
processing posts.
o The Department will examine the possibility of
approving some exceptions on the limitation
of ARA processing to priorities one and two for
those who have established a well-founded fear
of persecution.
These steps would insure that any compelling humanitarian cases
are addressed. Specific criteria for the determination of
elibility of such cases would have to be developed. The
Department could complete the preliminaries on these measures
by the end of the fiscal year.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
Washington, D. C. 20520
CONFIDENTIAL
MEETING OF THE SIG/RP
JULY 29, 19b5
Department of State Position Paper
Romanian TCP Processing
ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION:
How should future Romanian TCP applications be processes?
PROGRAM HISTORY
Thira Country Processing (TCP) for Romanians started in the
early 197U's by the Department as an informal administrative
mechanism to enable a small number of Romanians who were then
able to obtain exit permission to proceed to Rome for refugee
processing for entry into the United States. With our granting
of Most Favored Nation status to Romania in 1975, the GOR allowed
larger numbers of Romanians (primarily Jews) to leave, and there
were increasing numbers registering for the TCP program. Prior
to the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980, refugee numbers were
readily available for this group, and there has been a tendency
to admit nearly all refugee applicants from Communist-ruled
countries.
With the limited refugee admission numbers available under
the 1980 Refugee Act ana a continued high level of registration,
a backlog of over 8,000 registrants had developed by mid-1982.
Having received no instructions from the Department concerning
the program, the Embassy ceased registration for the program on
August 27, 1952. This aDrupt stopping of registration was
considered arbitrary by many, and public concern and
Congressional interest in the program increased.
Late in 1983, it was aeciaea within the Department that the
United States government was obligatea to process for refugee
admission all those applicants who had been allowed to register
for the program prior to August 27, 19b2, (about 8,500) and all
those who has obtained exit documents
CONFIDENTIAL
DECL: OADR
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
prior to January 1, 1984, expecting to be processed under the
program (estimated at about i,3UU). This determination was
widely publicized through the Embassy in Bucharest and through
broadcasts by the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe.
Romanians, who lose practically all rights and privileges upon
obtaining exit documentation, were warned not to take any
action without verification by the Embassy that they were
eligible for entry into the United States. Since that time the
GOR has been repeatedly requested nut to issue exit
aocumentation without verification of the individual's
eligibility to enter the U. S.
The Department had planned to process these cases at a rate
of 2,000 per year under the regular EUR refugee ceiling.
Unfortunately the number of applicants receiving passports
prior to January 1, 19b4, proved greater than originally
estimated and backlogs of such individuals developed.
Responding to the acute situation of such applicants, RP
allocated additional numbers to the program in both FY 1984 and
1985.
CURRENT SITUATION
The recent reallocation of 750 additional refugee admission
numbers to this program will reduce the number of potential TCP
applicants to 3,700 by the end of the fiscal year, of whom
fewer than 1UU will have exit documents. This remaining
caseload can be processed in an orderly manner using the
originally anticipated ceiling of 2,000 per year over the next
two years. The recent agreement of the GOR, as a part of the
package arranged during your June 17-18 visit to Bucharest, to
issue exit documents only to persons with letters trom the
Embassy indicating their eligibility for the program shoulQ
mean that there will no longer be a large number of applicants
suffering from having lost their rights and privileges for
having obtained exit documents, while awaiting the availibility
of a refugee admission number.
With the restriction of the regular Romanian TCP program to
those who had registered for the program before August 27, 1982
and to those who obtained exit aocumentation prior to January
1, 1984, a "revised" Romanian TCP program was initiated. Under
this program the Embassy may recommend for registration those
special cases currently suffering from severe persecution.
Since early 19b4, the Embassy has recommended only 18 cases for
registration, of which the Department approvea 16.
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
CONFIDENTIAL
- 3 -
A recommendation nas been made to establish the presence of
ICM and/or UNHCR in Bucharest to process Romanian TCP
applicants and to allow INS visits to the post on a regular
basis to approve retugees there for direct travel to the Unitea
States. Eastern bloc countries ao not generally accept the
activities of eitner 1CM or UNHCR within their borders. INS
cias not in the past interviewea in any Eastern bloc country.
The GOR has recently ayreeu to limit the issuance of exit
documents to those with appropriate Emdassy letters and to
restore rights and privileges to those Romanians who obtained
exit documents after January 1, 1984, and are not eligible for
entry into the United States. We nave sought both of these
actions since early 19b4. It appears not only inappropriate,
but possibly counter-productive, to seek further changes until
there has been sufficient time to evaluate the effectiveness of
the new system.
Applicants unaer both the regular and revised Romanian TCP
programs are processed through INS in Rome and receive cultural
orientation there. There have been no processing problems
involving these cases. In aadition, the expected flow of
retugees under the revised Romanian TCP is not sufficient to
justify the presence of ICM or UNHCR in Bucharest. The
Romanian TCP programs (both regular and revised) appear to be
in a healthy condition for the first time since 1980; and,
therefore, there appears to be no need tor changes at this time.
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
MEETING OF THE SIG/R
JULY 29, 1985
Department of State Position Paper
Implications of H.R. 1452 and S. 1262
The implications of H.R. 1452 and S. 1262 for FY 1986
admissions and for FY 1986 and FY 1987 budgets.
ESSENTIAL FACTORS
The basic legislative authority for funding refugee
resettlement expired on September 30, 1983. Since that date,
the funding authority has been established by continuing
resolution. The authorizing committees of both houses have
confirmed their desire to enact new legislation effective for
FY 1986, including several substantive amendments.
H.R.?1452, the Refugee Assistance Extension Act of 1985,
with amendments, passed the House on June 13, 1985. The Senate
bill, S. 1262, has completed full committee mark-up but has not
yet been reported for floor action. Although similar in many
respects, there are several specific issues to be resolved in
conference once Senate action is completed. While the
Administration position for the conference on the detailed
provisions will be developed after Senate action is completed,
it would be useful for the SIG to consider five items with
broad policy implications:
-- Continued line item authorization for targeted
assistance;
-- Line item dollar freeze for social services, for medical
screening, and for reimbursement of state costs for the
incarceration of Mariel Cubans;
-- Presumptive eligibility for medical assistance of all
refugees for the first year after entry regardless of need;
-- Assistance to refugees without regard to their date of
entry;
-- New requirements for voluntary agency initial
resettlement services (the State Department's 'Reception and
Placement' program).
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
DISCUSSION
Although the relationship between the provisions of either
of the two bills and the consultations on FY 1986 admissions
numbers is indirect, the SIG/R should be aware that the state
Department's FY 1986 admissions program (i.e., actual arrivals)
will be affected by final Congressional action on the State
Department authorization bill and on the appropriations
process. The Department will be taking appropriate action, in
coordination with OMB, to attempt to obtain authorization and
appropriations at the level of the Administration's original
request for FY 1986.
Of the five broad issues identified above, only the latter
two affect the Department of State.
Assistance to refugees without regard to their date of entry
This concept is incorporated in different ways in two
provisions of H.R. 1452, neither of which was contained in the
Administration's proposed reauthorization bill:
Section 8, authorizing targeted assistance project
grants, states that "grants shall be made available... without
regard to the date a refugee arrived in the United States;" and
-- Section 6, directing the allocation and use of social
service funds, states that "the funds available for a fiscal
year...shall be allocated among the States based on the total
number of refugees (including children and adults) who arrived
in the United States after March 31, 1975..."
Although both provisions aim at the genuine problem of
states and counties impacted by refugees with special
resettlement needs, they may have the unintended and
deleterious side effect of further retarding the process of
naturalization of Indochinese refugees. By sending the message
that the federal government will continue to fund special
programs for "refugees" who may have been in this country as
far back as 1975, this legislation would create a strong
disincentive to naturalization and, thus, would inhibit
Administration efforts to redirect the Indochinese caseload
into the channel of normal immigration. As is well known,
there is also a strong Congressional interest (in particular
Sen. Simpson) in maximizing the use of immigrant visas for
Indochinese, with the greatest need being the category of fifth
preference (siblings of U.S. citizens).
The Department of State believes that the policy objective
of promoting naturalization and redirecting the Indochinese
flow into normal immigration channels should take precedence
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
over the objectives embodied in legislative provisions which
add to the federal government's long-term responsibility for
funding assistance to refugees as a special class. On this
basis, and with the benefit of the views of the other members
of the SIG/R, the Department of State will consider whether to
recommend that the Administration adopt a position for the
House-Senate conference opposing the inclusion of these two
provisions.
New requirements for voluntary agency services
The legislative history of this provision (Section 5 of
H.R. 1452, commonly referred to as the 'Lungren Amendment')
covers two years of hearings and public debate, with the
current version greatly altered from that reported out by the
House in the previous Congress, but not enacted, on the basis
of which the Administration formulated its FY 1986 budget
request. The essential element of the original Lungren
concept, endorsed by the Administration, was a requirement that
the voluntary agencies be responsible for the basic needs
(income support) of refugees for their first 90 days in the
United States, in order to prevent their early exposure to the
welfare system.
Following the strong representations of the private
voluntary agencies, who opposed both the degree of government
direction of their activities and the exposure to litigation
they saw in the original language, the House accepted a greatly
altered description of the voluntary agencies responsibilities:
'...to provide for the basic needs (including food,
clothing, shelter, and transportation for job interviews
and training) of each refugee resettled and to develop and
implement a resettlement plan including the early
employment of each refugee resettled and to monitor the
implementation of such plan.'
The Senate version duplicates this language, adding at the end
the phrase: '...for one year after the date such refugee was
admitted to the United States.'
The difficulty with this outcome is that it adds
responsibilities to the State Department Reception and
Placement Program without reducing the initial income support
costs which must be funded through the state welfare programs
reimbursed from HHS/ORR. The end result is a set of new
service requirements -- voluntary agency activities for one
year instead of the present 90 days -- which will necessitate
funding (considering both State and HHS) in excess of the
Administration's request level. Consequently, the Department
of State will consider, taking into account the views of the
other members of the SIG/R, a recommendation that the
Administration adopt a position for the House-Senate conference
opposing this Amendment.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6
-4-
Drafted: RP/RPL:d1~Hunter, 632-5195
7/22/85
Cleared: RP:JNPurcell, Jr.
RP/RA:RDEnglish d?lk
RP/PB:ROliver gh
OMB:SGates (info)(dh
CC: C:JClunan
M/COMP:LEmery
H:TBleha
HHS/ORR:PHolman
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520002-6