New Year’s is seen as a time of renewal, but it does not always bring desired changes. This week the Thai government forced over 4,000 Hmong over the border into Laos, despite the possibility that they will be persecuted upon their return. This action runs counter to international human rights law, as some of the Hmong entered Thailand seeking physical protection.
As Article 1A (2) of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees explains, a refugee is a person who, due to a “well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion”. Many, though not all, of the deported Hmong were covered by this statement.
Why did the Hmong enter Thailand in the first place? They fought in support of the United States during the Southeast Asia conflict in the 1960s, and thousands fled from Laos after the Communist government came into power in 1975. More than 150,000 have been resettled to the United States over the past decades.
Thailand’s Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, stated “that these Hmong will have a better life” in Laos. While this is the hope, the decision of whether or not a refugee wants to repatriate remains theirs to make. Even if thousands of Hmong in Thailand have already returned voluntarily, we can ask: if physical security truly exists in Laos, why did the forcibly-repatriated Hmong not return earlier?
Understandably, those who qualified as refugees may have found improved economic opportunities in Thailand. Admittedly, some of the deported Hmong entered Thailand as migrants seeking jobs, and so possessed different rights under international law. However, there remain clear complications distinguishing between mixed populations of refugees and economic migrants.
It is a positive sign that the story of the forced repatriation was covered by the New York Times (and I am thankful to the article for much of the information in this posting). Will a follow-up on the lives and conditions of the returned-Hmong draw significant international attention?
