SENIOR INTERAGENCY GROUP FOR REFUGEE POLICY (SIG/RP)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 29
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 7, 2010
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: March 9, 1984
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
D C!
STAT
I ar
T F
3 I EXl t2
D; ICS
6 1DDA
DDSM
Chin/WIC
c ;r vES? TAR1.AT
MUTING SLIT
ACTION lNFO DATE INITIAL
11 IG
1"2 Crart pt
13 D/EEO
D/Pens
15. D/OLL
16 C/PAO
17 SA/IA
13 AO/DCI
19 C/1PD/OIS
lo 0e;Z-10bf
21
.SUSPENSE
3- / -
STAT
3537 ro-a?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
United States Departrlient of Starr
JI'ashirrttorr, D. C. 20520
March 9, 1984
LIHITED OFFIGI'AL USE
MEMORANDUM FOR: MR. ROBERT KIMNITT--------------------8407261
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
.MR. GERALD PAGANO---------------------8407262
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
COLONEL-JOHN STANFORD------------------8407263
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
14S. MARY LOWE-------------------------8407264
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
MR. ROGER CLEGG-----------------------8407265
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
MR. THOMAS B. CORMACK-----------------8407266
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
MR. ALTON KEEL------------------------840726 7
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
MR. ROBERT SEARBY---------------------- 8407268
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
MR. LOGAN SALLADA---------------------8407269
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SUBJECT: Senior Interagency Group for Refugee
Policy (SIG/RP)
As a follow up to our March 4, 1984 notification of the
upcoming SIG/RP meeting, we are attaching the following four
.briefing papers: ICARA II, ODP, TCP, and Southeast Asian
Admissions.
The agenda for the SIG/RP of Friday, March 16, 1984 will
center totally on ICARA II.
(W/ Cnm'TnEA'TIAL ATTACUgE iT
0-77
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE
2 -
We will begin the meeting at 10:30 P.M in the Deputy
Secretary's conference room and do a background on ICARA II.
At 11:00 AM we will be joined by the ICARA II delegation for
their presentation. The delegation includes:
---Abdulrahmin Farah, U.T. Under. Secretary for Special
Political Questions
--Mr. David Feldman, (UNDP) Head, ICARA II Technical Team
--Mr. Peter Onu, Interim Secretary General,
Organization for African Unity
--Mr. Richard Smyser, Deputy High Commissioner for Refugees
--Mr. Joachim Henkel, Acting Liaison Officer, UNHCR
--Mr. G. Arthur Brown, Deputy Administrator, UNDP
Development Program.
The issues of ODP, TCP, and Southeast Asian Admissions will
be discussed at a SIG/RP meeting to be convened within three
weeks. The date, time and location will be sent in a separate
notification letter.
Charles Hill
Executive Secretary
Attachments:
Tab
1
- ICARA II Briefing Paper
Tab
2
- ODP Briefing Paper
Tab
3
- TCP Briefing Paper
Tab
4
- Southeast Asian Admissions
Briefing Paper
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
ICARA II (SIG)
The First International Conference on Assistance to
Refugees in Africa (ICARA I) was held in April of 1981. Its
purpose was to increase international awareness of the African
refugee problem and to mobilize resources to meet the needs of
refugees and of the host countries that shelter them.
Although ICARA I was successful in raising international
awareness (it garnered $560 million in pledges, including $283
million from the USG), it did not adequately address the burden
placed on host nations by refugees. Hence, in 1982 the UN
General Assembly passed a resolution calling for ICARA II to:
1) review the results of ICARA I; 2) study the requirements
for additional support to refugee relief and self-reliance
efforts; and 3) consider ways to help African countries meet
the burdens placed on their economies by refugees.
The USG abstained from voting on the operative paragraph
of the resolution, stating that the conference was not needed
to assure continued support for African refugees and expressing
skepticism about the will of host nations to seek lasting
solutions. We were also concerned that the inadequate planning
of ICA RA I would be repeated.
Our reservations and distant attitude toward ICARA II seem
to have resulted in improved preparations by the Interagency
Steering Committee (consisting of representatives of the UN
Secretary General's Office, the Organization of African Unity,
the UN Development Program and the UN High Commissioner for
Refugees) which is responsible for conference planning. The
evidence suggests that they will avoid a repeat of the poor
planning that preceded ICARA I.
In order to determine whether, and if so how, the USG
should participate'in ICARA II, an Interdepartmental Group (IG)
was formed in December by the U.S. Coordinator for Refugee
Affairs. The IG/ICARA II is chaired by the Bureau for Refugee
Programs and includes representatives of State AF and IO as
well as AID, NSC and OMB. The IG is tasked with: 1) reviewing
the question of USG participation in view of foreign and
domestic policy considerations; 2) developing a broad strategy
that would maximize our influence on Conference planning and
preparation; 3) reviewing the project concepts submitted by the
various countries and the reports of the UN Technical Team
charged with evaluating them; 4) identifying promising project
concepts that we may consider funding; 5) identifying USG
resources available for possible use in project funding.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
At its initial meeting on January 6th, the IG took up the
question of USG participation in ICARA II. It decided, for
reasons enumerated below, to recommend to Secretary Schultz,
through SIR, that the USG attend ICARA II provided conference
planning continued to be satisfactory. The Secretary approved
this recommendation on February 15 and in his address on Africa
to the World Affairs Council that same evening stated that the
USG would participate in ICARA II.
In developing its recommendation for USG participation in
.ICARA II, the IG considered a variety of foreign and domestic
policy factors. Factors favoring USG participation included:
---The main justification for convening ICARA II is the
need to deal with the refugee-related infrastructural
burden placed on African countries of asylum. There is
little doubt that such a burden exists and that it is
compounded by the extreme financial crisis and severe
drought facing African countries.
---Several of our major allies in Africa, including Sudan,
Somalia, and Zaire, are-experiencing severe economic and
infrastructural burdens because of the presence of large
numbers of refugees. These countries have strongly urged
us to attend ICARA II. Full USG participation in ICARA II
would help to reassure them of our dependability.
--Our prudently cautious approach to ICARA II has resulted
in improved preparations when compared to those preceding
ICARA I. First, at our insistence, the UNDP is part of
the ICARA II Steering Committee in order to deal with the
development aspects of solving the problem. Second, more
realistic planning in terms of numbers of refugees and the
burdens they place on specific countries is apparent. Only
14 refugee-impacted countries were visited by the*Technical
Teams, whereas ICARA I had been a continent-wide exercise
involving countries with relatively minor refugee-related
needs. Third, some acceptable project concepts have
emerged from the planning process, and the projects have
been prioritized within individual country submissions.
--Participation in ICARA II provides us with an opportunity
to reaffirm our humanitarian concern for refugees and the
host nations, a concern emphasized in the penultimate
paragraph of President Reagan`s acceptance speech for the
Republican presidential nomination in 1980, and which is
well-known and appreciated in Africa.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
---The issues of refugees and drought in Africa command
great Congressional interest. They would welcome an
anticipatory approach to ICARA II.
--While much has been gained in the past year and a half
by USG circumspection toward ICARA II, nothing further can
be achieved by not announcing our intention to
participate. Such an announcement will allow us, working
with other donors, to shape the Conference so as to
further our :objectives.
Arguments against participation included:
--ICARA II may become, despite-all efforts to the contrary,
a pledging conference once it begins.
--Some Africans might view the limited resources likely to
emerge from ICARA II as paltry in comparison to the major
sums announced for the Central American initiative.
--Any African expectations of large and readily available
resources from ICARA II are likely to be disappointed.
The IG concluded that the arguments favoring participation
far outweighed the negative ones. Even if the Africans are
disappointed that ICARA II is not a pledging conference, it is
hard to see how they would appreciate USG non-attendance as an
alternative. Indeed, an early and clear indication of USG
support for the conference will allow us to bring African
expectations in line with actual po:sibil'itir.:;, and to continue
to shape the conference constructively in several other ways.
The IG recommends that the SIG use its March 16 meeting
with the Steering Committee as an opportunity to confirm the
Secretary's announced decision that the USG will participate in
ICARA II, and to emphasize our views on how it should be
structured: e.g., that ICARA II not be viewed as a pledging
conference. The IG, assigned by the Chairman, is specifically
requested to work with the appropriate international parties so
that the conference address the specifics of refugee
assistance, self-sufficiency and integration.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
c~Fio~ria~
THE ORDERLY DEPARTURE PROGRAM (SIG)
The Orderly Departure Program (ODP) was established by
the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in 1980 as a
humane alternative to the perils of clandestine flight for
those who must leave Vietnam. The UNHCR has negotiated
resettlement arrangements with more than twenty countries
including the United States. In most months, about
half of those who depart under the'ODP go to the U.S.,
about half to the rest of the world, especially Canada,
Australia, and France. Participants in the U.S. ODP are
processed both as immigrants and as refugees.
The refugee flow from Vietnam by boat is fraught with
danger. Some estimates are that no more than fifty
percent of those who flee by boat survive the pirates and
other dangers.
The ODP plays a central role in this Administration's
strategy for preserving first-asylum and resolving the
Southeast Asia refugee crisis while winding down the
Indochinese refugee program. A goal is to make the ODP
credible to those in Vietnam who must leave so that they
will not take to the boats.
Mare than seventy percent of those who participate in
the U.S. ODP are ethnically Chinese -- the relatives of
Chinese expelled.by Hanoi in 1977-78. Up to fifteen
percent are Asian-Americans or their close relatives.
Rarely in any given month are more than ten percent
ethnically Vietnamese. Hanoi regards the ODP as primarily
a family reunification program. Very few former prisoners
in the "re-education camps" or those associated with the
pre-1975 regime are allowed to leave.
SRV/U.S Dialogue: Hanoi would like to use the ODP as
-a means of developing a bilateral relationship with the
U.S. and to reduce its diplomatic isolation. The U.S.
position is that so long as Vietnam persists in its
illegal occupation of Kampuchea, bilateral dialogue would
be inappropriate. COUFLDEMT1L
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
CtJWlfll3jrj4j
Hanoi, however, continues to press for a bilateral
meeting with the U.S. to discuss specific aspects of the
ODP, especially Asian-Americans (see below).
the U.S. response is that the ODP is a UNHCR program,
and not for bilateral discussion between the U.S. and
Hanoi. We continue to insist that discussion of the ODP
be conducted only under the chairmanship of the UNHCR.
For the time being, we will also insist that any such
meeting take place at the UNHCR headquarters in Geneva.
Asian-American Children and their close relatives:
these children and their close relatives suffer
persecution because of their obvious ties to the U.S.
They are a population of profound humanitarian concern.
We insist to the Vietnamese that the ODP provides the
means for their resettlement in the U.S. Hanoi -- for the
time being -- has agreed to their processing by this
means, in part because it .is anxious for this population
to leave Vietnam for racist reasons. We continue to see
no role for U.S. voluntary agencies in aid of
Asian-Americans inside Vietnam; but their special
resettlement problems could be alleviated by special
voluntary agency efforts once they have arrived in the U.S.
Prisoners in the so-called "re-education" camps: we
maintain that this manifest violation of human rights by
Hanoi makes these prisoners a humanitarian concern of the
entire international community. As a first step, we have
repeatedly called for access to them by-international
organizations -- which Hanoi has refused to allow. We see
the ODP as the means by which those prisoners who are
eligible should be resettled in the U.S.
Immigrants and refugees: ODP participants who come to
the U.S. as refugees are charged against the East Asia
refugee admissions ceiling. We are seeking ways to
facilitate the processing of a larger proportion of the
ODP caseload as immigrants.
Expansion of the ODP: continued expansion of the ODP
is necessary as part of our efforts to reduce refugee
flight. At UNHCR-sponsored meetings in October, 1982, and
October, 1983, the U.S. delegation pressed Hanoi to
institute certain practical .changes which would improve
the efficiency of the program and lead to a high level of
departures. Though Hanoi has repeatedly promised the
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
'fi- A4
jus I I L.
Wit Ii
UNHCR to implement most of these reforms, only within the
past few months has there been signs that it is doing so.
. The Trend in ODP Departures from Vietnam The goal
since the inception of ODP has been 24,000 departures a
year, with half coming to the U.S. This level of
departures is assumed to be the minimum to make the
program credible to persons in Vietnam as an alternative
to boat departures. The trend in OD? departures is on the
rise and the level of boat arrivals in countries of first
asylum is declining: indeed, for the past several months
ODP departures from Vietnam have exceeded Vietnamese boat
arrivals in countries of first asylum (see attached chart
at Tab A and graphs at Tab B). In January, 1984,
departures via Bangkok for the U.S. from Vietnam reached
1,003 per month for the first time.* The U.S. ODP office
in Bangkok expects that the monthly departure rate for the
U.S. will equal or exceed 1,000 per month for the rest of
the calendar year.
*In the same month, 915 ODP participants departed Bangkok
for the U.S.; the remaining 88 who departed Vietnam in
January traveled to the U.S. in early February.
Cp~!~IDE~TI\L
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
x ?Q5t1 RP/RAP:BAFla Lr-y
BAP:PGardnersubs)
it -AO
Drafted:RP/RAP/AP:p$JBa'rn art?:blm Clearances :RP/RA:RDEn 1ieh
2/Z8/8i B t 3 9
Document no. 5817B
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2 I
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
A
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
TO The. U'S' AND OTI" .1'!L uT CVUhTitilCS
VIA THB C$~f8'~I.T ~tstp,ar-t~E plc
1tcm rH
tALIUM TO OTHER
LF a L OtAL. D
3t?Sinaina to 9/30/81
2,473
22%
8,713
11,186
O tober
November
December
January
February
>1arcb
April
Pf ay
June
July
August
September
283
322
266
Soo
127
129
427
521
466
267
363
253
16%
43%
13%
37%
23%
20%-
45%
47%
43%
29%
43%
36%
1,436
435
1,253
829
433
521
.530
589
618
645
485
445
$41,
37%
82%
63%
77,,
80%
55%
53%
57%
71%
57%
64%
1,719
757
1,519
1,329
360
650
957
1,110
1.084
912
848
698
Sub-Total FY 82
3,924
32%
8,219
12,143
rf 83-
i3,,: tober
214
26%
599
November
406
74%
813
47%
454
December
341
53%
860
35%
642
January
612
65%
983
65%
327
February
376
35?
939
45%
451
lurch
476
55%
827
38%
792
April
539
62%
1
268
47%
599
.
May
579
53%
1
138
June
46%
'689
54%
,
804
45%
1,268
July
917
48%
996
994
55%
1,800
August
690
52%
1
911
40%
1
088
.
September
771
,
60%
1
778
37%
1,292
63%
,
2,063
Sub-Total FY 83
43%
8,923
15.648
FY 84
October
841
41%
1
212
November
866
.
59'..
2
053
39%
1
327
,
December
933
.
61%
2
193
49%
979
,
January
915
51%
1
912
49%
956
51%
,
1,871
Sub-Total FY 84
44%
4,474
8,029
CUMULATIVE TOTAL
16,577
36% 30,329
64% 46,906
RP/RAP/AP:NSoper/revised 3/5/84
Document No. 67848
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
T
A
Z
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
COMPARISON OF ODP DEPARTURES AND BOAT ARRIVALS IN FY 84
Total Boat Arriv
l
a
s
""?~?? Total ODP D9partur
................. ............ _.........
..... __....... _...... ...... _ ........ ........._...... ............................_...........__
....... _ .........................X.......... ..._.........
_
......................................
__ ........... ...._..__ _,.._._~ ._ .
000rr.rr0000r r^ ra+ ......
0rrrrrftrrlralrrOrr~~__--
1000 4---
Oct83
Dao83
NOTE': 40% to 50% of the total 01)? flow coffes to the
U.S.
3ar184
0D:',7'L L', " CHART2 N3
RP/RAP/AP:NSoper:lS Feb 84
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 - Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
r
A..% r
rrlw
..~
~,~rrr
low ...................... .............. r__ .......-.._....... ? ._
............... ..............................
500
Ccte2 iTo v cx Da$~ ai283 T eb83 iiai83i Api 83 MayS3 - un83 JUi83 Augg83 ap83
Note: 40% - 50% of the total ODP f?ow ccr s to the U.S.
ODPi 2LTNE C]-;: '
?i n~P/i~F' : N$oper : 2 Feb 84
COMPARISON OF GDP DEPARTURES AND BOAT ARRIVALS IN FY 83
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
THIRD COUNTRY PROCESSING PROGRAM (ICP) FOR ROMANIiiNS - SIG
The Third Country Processing Program (TCP) for Romanians
began almost a decade ago as a gesture of humanitarian concern
and in response to congressional interest to enable some 200
Romanians, (mostly Jews) who where able to obtain exit permits,
(but who could not qualify for U.S. immigrant visas) to enter
the U.S. In essence., the TCP functioned and (and still does)
as follows; Romanians seeking to emigrate to the U.S. register
with Embassy Bucharest; if and when the Government of Romania
(GOR) grants them permission to emigrate, U.S. sponsors are
found; when they become "travel-ready," Embassy Bucharest
facilitates their-obtaining Italian transit visas from the
Italian Embassy in Bucharest; they then travel to Rome, where
they are considered by the Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS) for admission to the U.S. as refugees.
Aware of the requirements of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment
concerning most-favored trading eligibility, and in the face of
human rights prodding by the U.S. and other countries, the GOR
began to loosen their emigration controls in 1974-75. TCP
registrations swelled in the ensuing years. Refugee admissions
from Romania increased substantially, while a backlog of TCP
registrants awaiting exit permission gradually developed.
By mid-1982, there were over 10,000 TCP registrants. It
became evident that the numbers of registrants receiving exit
permission considerably exceeded the TCP share of the refugee
admissions numbers available under the Eastern European refugee
ceiling, which also covers Poles and other Eastern European
refugees. On August 27, 1982, Embassy Bucharest suspended
registration for new TCP applicants. This suspension remains
generally in effect.
Despite this suspension of registration and, therefore,
ineligibility for consideration for refugee admission to the
U.S., numbers of Romanian non-TCP registrants continued to
apply for and receive exit permission -- in most instances,
permission for travel only to the U.S. Thus, a pool of "exit
permit holders" with no place to go began to grow. Most were
described as being in dire material straits and/or suffering
active harassment. Upon issuance of exit permits, if not
earlier, many recipients are rendered stateless and lose their
jobs, homes, schooling possibilities for children, etc. Many
have relatives in the U.S. who were, and are, understandably
concerned at the dismal prospects for those non-TCP registrants
who had no opportunity for consideration under the U.S. Refugee
Program.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
A program review undertaken in 1983 aimed at: (1) drawing
down the backlog of TCP registrants; (2) finding a means to
provide relief to persons with exit permits and "no place to
go` (cases of acute humanitarian concern and Congressional
interest); (3) creating awareness among the Romanian public of
the risks involved in obtaining an exit permit without guaran-
tee of resettlement in the U.S. or elsewhere; and (4) providing
a mechanism whereby a small number of Romanians suffering per-
tecution on account of race, nationality, religion, membership
in a particular social group, or political opinion, could con-
tinue to be pre-processed for refugee admission to the U.S.
in late 1983, as a result of these studies, the Counselor
of the Department approved several recommendations outlining
USG policy toward the Romanian Third-Country Processing Program
for the next several years. He determined that the USG:
(A) remains committed to providing resettlement opportunities
for current TCP registrants; (B) should consult with the GOR
about existing problems involving the issuance of exit permits;
(C) should intensify efforts to better inform would-be emi-
grants with respect to the U.S. immigration laws, procedures,
requirements, etc; (D) should provide assistance to the extent
possible to non-TCP registrants who currently hold GOR exit
documents valid only for emigration to the U.S.; and (E) should
establish means for handling future emigres in Romania.
Implementation of these recommendations has already begun.
On January 2, 1984, both Radio Free Europe and the Voice of
American began broadcasting information to the Romanian public
concerning immigration to the U.S. and the necessity to consult
with the American Embassy before seeking exit permits to
emigrate from Romania to the U.S. Embassy Bucharest was
authorized to consider for TCP processing up to 300 persons who
held exit permits issued before January 1, 1984, but who were
not registered for the TCP program prior to August 27, 1982.
Consultations have been held with GOR authorities, both in
Washington and in Bucharest. The GOR has been informed that,
beginning in January 1984, Embassy Bucharest would issue let-
ters to those intending to emigrate to the U.S. who did not yet
have Romanian exit documents, but who could be considered for
processing for admission to the U.S. in the near future if they
were to receive exit documents. Letters are being issued to
all those on the representation lists, all Visas 92 and Visas
93 cases, all beneficiaries of immediate relative immigration-
visa petitions, and those beneficiaries of preference
immigration-visa petitions with current priority dates.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
in addition, in order to provide relief for future poten-
tial emigres of special humanitarian concern to the U.S., the
Embassy has been authorized to consider a limited number of new
.applications, but must refer these applications to the Depart-
ment where they will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
Statistical data on the current status of the Romanian TCP
Program is attached.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
ROMANIAN THIRD COUNTRY PROCESSING PROGRAM
I.
U.S. Admissions of Romanian TCP refugees
FY
1981
--
1,881
FY
1982
--
2,024
FY
1983
--
2,093
FY
1984
--
2,000
(estimated)
II. Current status (as of February 29, 1984)
U.S. Admissions, 1st quarter, FY 84 -- 483
U.S. Admissions, 2nd quarter, FY 84 -- 567 (estimated)
1,050
Registered TCP applicants with
travel documents
Remaining Pipeline
Registered TCP applicants with exit 922
permits
Non-TCP registrants with exit permits 1,042*
Registered TCP applicants without 500
travel documents but who can be
expected to obtain exit permits and
become travel ready for U.S.
admission in FY 1984
Registered TCP applicants without 1,000-1,200
travel documents but who can be
expected to obtain exit permits by
the end of FY 1984, though not made
travel ready in FY 1984.
Registered TCP applicants who 5,000-5,500
are not expected to obtain exit
permits in this FY.
* Under the current policy, no more than 300 of this number
will be processed for U.S. admission in FY 1984.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
Drafted:RP/RAPIAPf ?:art:Aly
3/6/84 Ext. 2-0541
Document no. 6825B
Clearances :RP/RA:RD&nglin'h
RP/RAP:BAFlatin
EUR/ZEY: JRi cker t
C:R7Neitske W
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
L
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/04/30: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400520006-2
INDOCHINESE REFUGEE ADMISSIONS (S_IC
Since the fall of Saigon in April, 1975, the flight of
In,;,-,chinese refugees has had the potential to destabilize the
se:,.city of friendly states in Southeast Asia. _e U.S. and
ot,