Page images
PDF
EPUB

Senator KENNEDY. Have you made that judgment at all for anyone so far?

Mr. MCNARY. We have 1,000 that have been approved.

Senator KENNEDY. Well, Mr. Zimmerman, could you give us a report on the conditions of those refugee camps and give us an idea of what the flow line is in terms of interviews and what you are doing?

Ambassador ZIMMERMAN. Yes.

Senator KENNEDY. It seems to me some of them probably ought to go to Iran. Some ought to go to other countries. Some probably ought to come here, but we ought to do something. There are desperate circumstances facing those individuals who basically responded against Saddam Hussein.

KURDS IN TURKEY

Let me move on, Mr. Secretary. In an effort to combat the Kurdish terrorism in Turkey, the Turkish Air Force over the past year has been bombing sanctuaries in northern Iraq. Information is that bombing has been extensive, civilian targets have been hit. In some instances, villages newly reconstructed by the Allies were bombed, placing international relief workers at risk.

My staff visited there and reports that the bombing is galvanizing anti-Turkish sentiments in northern Iraq and destroying the progress we achieved to return Kurds to their ancestral villages.

Kurdish terrorism is a significant problem in Turkey and we should support efforts to address it. Why is the administration turning a blind eye to the extensive bombing of Kurdish civilians? Mr. EAGLEBURGER. I don't think we can plead guilty to that, Mr. Chairman. We have had a number of conversations with Turkish authorities and will continue to do so. We have not always, as your staff has indicated, been successful, but it is not an attitude on the part of the Turkish Government that we are prepared to accept.

Senator KENNEDY. Well, have they made any statements or comments, or has the Secretary or you condemned that activity?

Mr. EAGLEBURGER. I am not aware of any public statements. I will have to check and see. I certainly haven't. I will have to check and see whether the Secretary has, but I do know it has been a subject of substantial conversation between us and the Turkish Government. But I will have to check on whether anything has been said publicly.

Senator KENNEDY. Is it still continuing?

Mr. EAGLEBURGER. Not to my knowledge, but I will have to doublecheck that. I don't know of anything for some period of time, but I will check it and get back to you.

Senator KENNEDY. Thank you. My time is expired.
Senator Simpson.

BUDGETARY SUPPORT FOR REFUGEE ADMINISTRATIONS

Senator SIMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Acting Secretary, I do sincerely believe that the administration deserves our praise for continuing to do our share, I believe is the phrase, in the world of humanitarian assistance to refugees in these times.

However, I do obviously believe that it is wrong and a violation of the spirit, if not the letter, of the Refugee Act to admit more refugees than the Federal Government will provide funding to resettle. The States are facing these fiscal difficulties, cutbacks-we hear that all day long-tax increases, and other measures, which we in many cases do not have the courage to deal with in the U.S. Congress and we don't, especially in a political year. And it is simply unfair and irresponsible for us to expect them to provide resettlement funding for these very high levels of refugee admission. If I might ask this question, why can we not reduce the flow through this refugee pipeline, which we have constructed, for a year or two so we can pay our fair share of the costs of those we decide we admit? Are these 122,000 refugees in such dire straits that if we don't admit all of them this year, they will be in any way likely to be actually persecuted, which is the test?

As far as I can tell, for the most part these are not people fleeing for their lives or their safety. For the most part, they seem to be persons living in their home countries waiting for admission to the United States as refugees. I am sure that there indeed are some that need to be rescued and whom we should bring to the United States as soon as possible. But I am equally sure that the majority of them, or a great many of them, could safely wait another year for admission.

Why can't we then either slow the flow until we have the money, or find the money if it is truly necessary to bring the full 122,000 to the United States this year?

Mr. EAGLEBURGER. Senator, the Ambassador has asked to make a comment and then I would like to make one.

Senator SIMPSON. Sure.

Ambassador LAFONTANT-MANKARIOUS. You have said earlier in your first statement that we can't have it all, although all my life I have thought you can have it all. But I think I do agree with you that are right, but we can do it better, and we have brought with us the responsible person from ORR, Ms. Givens here, to tell you what some of the plans are to help extend the length of period for these refugees, and we will be able to do the job better. It won't be a perfect job, but we can do it better.

As far as the numbers we have come up with, rest assured that these numbers have been reached, Mr. Senator, after many consultations with all the experts in the field, and we feel that these people are deserving to come into the United States now. Now, there may be many, many more out there, and I am sure there are, but these are the ones that we felt for this fiscal year, 1993, with consultations with all of our people, that they should be brought in.

And, yes, we recognize that we are in dire straits financially, and there has been a cutback. So for that reason, Ms. Givens is going to explain to all of us what is being done by the administration to actually take better care of these people.

Senator SIMPSON. Well, I appreciate that, and if that can come during her testimony, I have a limited time to ask questions. I might ask

Mr. EAGLEBURGER. Can I just make one comment on the 122,000? Senator SIMPSON. Yes, please, Larry.

Mr. EAGLEBURGER. Senator, the only point I would make is, you know, I can't tell you that all 122,000 of them are sitting there with their feet in the blocks and about ready to run or else. But I can tell you that, you know, if you take a look at the numbers, for example, a fair number-for example, those coming out of the former Soviet Union, there are legislative demands upon us in terms of numbers, and so forth, and the same is true with regard to some in Southeast Asia. So to some degree, the answer is we are trying to follow the law.

In addition to that-and I would not for 1 minute say that the law is wrong. Most of these people that have applied and have been waiting for so long in the former Soviet Union have good and sufficient reason for wanting to leave and we have moved them as fast as we can. I can't argue with you that all 122,000 are in that category, but I can say, I think, if you take a look at the numbers, a fair number of them fall into this kind of a circumstance.

Senator SIMPSON. Well, I understand that ORR is striving mightily to stretch the funding, and I applaud that, but should we not wait until we have the money? There are legislative demands. We got off on the track of a presumption of refugeeness-and who is going to vote against that? I watched that one roll through here like a dose of salts, and that is too bad. That really distorts our refugee policy to have a presumption of refugeeness without going through the case-by-case process. That is wholly unfortunate, driven by remarkable political engines.

AFRICAN SITUATION

But let me ask Ambassador Lafontant, because I think Ted mentioned African admissions, I remember at one of your first appearances here that you hoped to increase the proportion of refugee admissions allocated to Africa. I am aware of millions there. We all know that, and Senator Kennedy went there when I was chairman and brought back a very fascinating and moving story of refugees there.

They are fleeing famine and war in the Horn of Africa, and I assume we can expect more famine refugees in southern Africa in the coming months, but I am curious about the type of political persecution that we are finding among these refugees that we admit from Africa. In the past, we have heard complaints from certain quarters, those well connected with Africa, that our refugee program is actually creating a brain drain from África.

The complaint was that many of the persons interested in applying for refugee status in the United States were the better educated who were so very badly needed in Africa. Looking at the statistics, as I have in the past on that, I think that is a very serious issue. Has that been a problem?

Ambassador LAFONTANT-MANKARIOUS. I would say, Senator Simpson, two decades ago that was a real problem. That was before even got into the refugee business. We did everything to stop the brain drain out of Africa.

Before I respond further to your question, I wanted to correct one-I shouldn't say correct, but tell Senator Simon that last year we advocated a 6,000 figure for Africa. We expect 6,000 to come in

by the end of fiscal year 1992. We are increasing it to 7,000 for 1993 because of the various problems throughout the world. And, yes, those numbers have been increased from 2,000 when I first came on board in 1989-roughly, 2,000; I think it was 1,920-to now 7,000, which is a recognition of the refugee plight of some Africans. When I was in southern Africa, I did find, in talking to all the refugees that I had a chance to talk with, those in Malawi that had fled Mozambique who were suffering-when I asked them the question, what do you want to do when the war is over in Mozambique, everyone said we want to go home.

Although we have such a large so-called refugee population in Africa, most Africans, especially those who are of an agricultural bent, want to stay home. Now, why do we think that is so unusual? I think it is normal to want to stay in your own environment. The only time you pick up and leave is, when it is impossible to remain in that environment.

Now, the African that has been coming over here since I have been involved-most of them have been Ethiopians, urbanized people who are not tied to the land who feel they can adjust to an urban society. Coming to the United States has been an out for them. So the vast number of Africans coming into the United States the vast number has been from Ethiopia.

We expect that the number from Liberia will pick up. You have a large number of Liberians who are urbanized people who can adjust-unless things change remarkably, who feel they can adjust to Western life. And, yes, some of them are fleeing political persecution because it depends on what side of the fence you are on in these civil wars whether or not you are considered an enemy or not, just like in Haiti, the followers of Aristide are certainly not economic migrants; they are fleeing persecution.

But these people are interviewed on a case-by-case basis. There is no blanket saying all of them are refugees. They are not all refugees, and INS is doing a terrifically good job in screening these people on a case-by-case basis. So the ones we are bringing over, we feel, deserve to be brought here under the persecution label.

Senator SIMPSON. I heard that, and I heard the phrase, too, "some are suffering political persecution," and that has always been my great hangup in here. They are all supposed to be in that category-fleeing persecution based on race, religion, national origin, or membership in a political organization. Ambassador LAFONTANT-MANKARIOUS. Yes.

AMERASIAN PROGRAM IN VIETNAM

Senator SIMPSON. I do know that, and unfortunately it gets all tangled up in foreign policy instead of just refugee policy, and it ought to be one or the other. I know that is kind of a John the Baptist howling in the wilderness kind of an attitude, but it is one that I have always tried to follow.

Let me just ask one of Gene McNary. We were all involved in the Amerasian program. That was a heart-tugging thing here and we responded. The subcommittee now has received reports of widespread fraud in the Amerasian program. One report estimated that

two-thirds of the accompanying family members were frauds, unrelated to the Amerasian child.

I would appreciate your comments on the issue of fraud in the program and what is being done to reduce or eliminate it. We have heard that some of the, quote, "families" have actually put the Amerasian, which is their ticket to America, out on the street after they got here and got settled. Why can't these frauds be deported? What are we doing about that kind of activity?

What is the relationship now that qualifies one to be a, quote, "accompanying family member," which at one time we thought would be mothers and now has ended up with uncles and ancient uncles and second uncles and third cousins? Where does all that end?

Mr. McNARY. Senator, the following relationships qualify persons to accompany an Amerasian: Spouse or children of an Amerasian; the natural mother of the Amerasian, her spouse and her children, half siblings. So it really is quite a large group of people who qualify.

We are aware of the reports that you have cited, and we have investigated some early fraud cases, and indeed some Amerasians have been bought and sold, we have found, as a means of getting a ticket to come here. Fortunately, most, we found, are victimless. They are not just dumped on the streets. Those are rare cases.

But what has been done there is an 80-percent denial on the applications. So they are carefully screened, and we are making every effort to weed out the fraud.

Senator SIMPSON. Eighty-percent denial rate, and that has increased exponentially, really, hasn't it, in these last years?

Mr. MCNARY. I believe it has. I don't have the past figures or the trend.

Senator SIMPSON. I think it is important, to protect the integrity of that program, that we weed that out. We had the integrity of the SAW Program under the immigration bill nearly chopped up because of the loss of that.

I thank the Chairman, and I welcome Ambassador Zimmerman to his new post. I admire you and what you were doing and trying to do in Yugoslavia. I will have other questions, but I will necessarily have to submit them in writing, and I thank you, Mr. Chair

man.

[The questions of Senator Simpson follow:]

« PreviousContinue »