PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS

FOR

FISCAL YEAR 2010

REPORT TO THE CONGRESS

SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

TO THE

COMMITTEES ON THE JUDICIARY

UNITED STATES SENATE

AND

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF

SECTION 207(E) (1)-(7)

OF THE

IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

 
i

INTRODUCTION

This Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2010: Report to 

the Congress is submitted in compliance with Section 207(e) of the 

Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The Act requires that before the 

start of the fiscal year and, to the extent possible, at least two weeks prior to 

consultations on refugee admissions, members of the Committees on the 

Judiciary of the Senate and the House of Representatives be provided with 

the following information:

(1) A description of the nature of the refugee situation;

(2) A description of the number and allocation of the refugees to be 

admitted and an analysis of conditions within the countries from 

which they came;

(3) A description of the plans for their movement and resettlement and 

the estimated cost of their movement and resettlement;

(4) An analysis of the anticipated social, economic, and demographic 

impact of their admission to the United States; 1

(5) A description of the extent to which other countries will admit and 

assist in the resettlement of such refugees;

(6) An analysis of the impact of the participation of the United States in 

the resettlement of such refugees on the foreign policy interests of 

the United States; and

(7) Such additional information as may be appropriate or requested by 

such members.

In addition, this report contains information as required by Section 

602(d) of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-

292, October 27, 1998, 112 Stat. 2787) (IRFA) about religious persecution 

of refugee populations eligible for consideration for admission to the United 

States. This report meets the reporting requirements of Section 305(b) of the 

North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-333, October 18, 

2004, 118 Stat. 1287) by providing information about specific measures 

taken to facilitate access to the United States refugee program for individuals 

who have fled ―countries of particular concern‖ for violations of religious 

freedoms, identified pursuant to Section 402(b) of the IRFA. 

 

i Detailed discussion of the anticipated social and economic impact, including secondary migration, of the

admission of refugees to the United States is being provided in the Report to the Congress of the Refugee

Resettlement Program, Office of Refugee Resettlement, Department of Health and Human Services.
ii

FOREWORD

The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) is an important 

component of the United States’ overall effort in support of refugees. On 

the occasion of World Refugee Day on June 20, Secretary of State Hillary 

Rodham Clinton described the commitment of the United States to provide 

assistance and protection to the world’s most vulnerable populations:

―The United States is committed to supporting refugees and 

displaced people worldwide. We are proud to support the 

heroic efforts of the United Nations High Commissioner for 

Refugees (UNHCR), the International Committee of the Red 

Cross, the International Organization for Migration, and 

many other non-governmental organizations that work on 

behalf of refugees worldwide, often in difficult and 

dangerous circumstances. Last year, we gave more than $1.4 

billion to support this work, making us the world’s largest 

donor for refugee relief. And we’re honored to welcome the 

many refugees who have resettled in our nation; since 1975, 

nearly 3 million refugees have made new homes in the 

United States, more than any other nation in the world.‖ 

U.S. resettlement should always be available to refugees in greatest

need, regardless of their location, national origin, health status, or level of 

educational attainment. In the early years of the program, large numbers of 

relatively few nationalities located in a limited number of countries 

dominated the program. Many of the refugees resettled had family members 

already in the United States. Over the past decade, however, the U.S. has 

worked closely with UNHCR to make third country resettlement a viable 

durable solution for increasing numbers from a broader representation of the 

world’s refugee population, which currently stands at over 15 million. 

While we will resettle large numbers of Iraqis, Burmese, and Bhutanese this 

year, the USRAP will admit refugees from over 60 nationalities who were 

processed in some 65 countries; over 80 percent of these applicants were 

referred to us by UNHCR either individually or in groups. Relatively few 

have family members resident in the United States. 

The Administration has worked closely with the Congress to invest 

the resources necessary to reach smaller numbers of the most desperate 

populations who find themselves in seemingly forgotten locations. For 
iii

example, after years of trying to reach the most vulnerable Darfuri refugees 

to offer the hope of a way out of their situation through resettlement, staff of 

the Departments of State and Homeland Security - with the invaluable 

support of our processing partners - overcame formidable security, logistical,

and other challenges to launch a pilot program for Darfuris in Chad. We 

regard this and similar efforts as important signs of progress as we seek to 

ensure that the USRAP is consistent with our humanitarian mandate.

The United States has been pleased to support UNHCR in its creative 

efforts to expand the community of nations involved in the resettlement of 

refugees. In recent years, several countries without a history of resettling 

refugees have stepped forward and established programs. Countries 

resettling refugees now total 25. In addition, four countries have offered 

their territory to UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration 

for use as transit locations. This provides a valuable opportunity for 

vulnerable refugees to be moved out of insecure or otherwise challenging 

circumstances to safe locations where they can undergo interviews, medical 

screening, and other required processing in a more stable setting.

For the last several years, the USRAP has sought to maintain the 

longstanding American tradition of offering resettlement to vulnerable 

refugees while incorporating numerous additional security modifications 

required after the events of September 11, 2001. Barring unforeseen 

disruptions in the movement of refugees to the United States in the coming 

weeks, we expect to admit some 75,000 refugees in FY 2009 – more than in 

any year since the terrorist attacks on our country.

This achievement has required a substantial investment of additional 

federal resources by the Departments of State and Homeland Security in the 

identification, processing, transportation, and initial resettlement of refugees. 

An important additional benefit of these efforts (and resources) has been the 

development of a sizeable approved caseload earlier in the fiscal year which 

has allowed the more even distribution of refugee arrivals throughout the 

year. This has reduced the end of fiscal year stress on resettlement agencies 

and improved the quality of services received by arriving refugees.

While there have been many positive developments this year in the 

overseas aspects of the USRAP, the downturn in the U.S. economy has 

posed substantial challenges to resettlement and integration activities here at 

home. Refugees and resettlement staff assisting refugees have found that 
iv

entry level jobs are increasingly difficult to find in receiving communities. 

Thus, the relatively high cost of housing has become a particular concern. 

To provide some relief, the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration 

(PRM) identified and programmed $5 million from the FY 2009 Omnibus 

Appropriation to enable resettlement agencies to assist recently-arrived 

refugees with acute housing needs. Notwithstanding these difficulties, 

history has demonstrated that he vast majority of refugees – who have 

arrived over the years during periods of economic growth and economic 

challenges – will succeed in their new lives in the United States. 

Earlier this year, PRM initiated a review of its Reception and 

Placement (R&P) Program, which provides assistance to refugees in their 

first weeks in the United States. In cooperation with R&P Program 

implementers, Health and Human Services/Office of Refugee Resettlement 

(HHS/ORR) staff, and representative state refugee coordinators, PRM 

explored the purpose and guiding principles of the R&P Program, program 

outcomes and measurements of success. After a series of productive 

meetings, the group articulated a set of principles for the program and agreed 

on a series of recommendations, the implementation of which will begin in 

FY 2010.

The R&P Program is an important but relatively small component in 

the extensive network of integration services available to refugees at the 

state, county, and local levels. Thus, the Administration plans to conduct a 

more comprehensive review of existing programs. We will seek to ensure 

that the Administration, in cooperation with local partners, is most 

effectively meeting the needs of resettled refugees in light of the changed –

and more diverse – character of the program. We will also seek to enhance 

our efforts at the strategic use of resettlement – by using that option to 

promote more generous policies among countries of origin and refugee 

hosting countries toward repatriation and integration, respectively; and to 

leverage greater support for third country resettlement among governments 

with the capacity to do more in this area. The goal of this process will be to 

ensure that all refugees’ needs are being met through the most efficient 

utilization of resources possible.

We continue to address obstacles to the admission of legitimate 

refugees who are covered by the definitions of ―terrorist activity‖ and 

―terrorist organization‖ under U.S. law. Although we have made progress in 

using the exemption authority over the last few years, vulnerable refugees 
v

continue to be affected by the broad scope of the law. The Administration is 

working to put in place an effective and efficient interagency process to 

further use the expanded exemption authority in Section 691 of Division J of 

the Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA), 2008. We will undertake this 

effort in a manner that carefully addresses both humanitarian and national 

security concerns.

During the past year the USRAP has contributed substantially to the 

international community’s efforts to provide concrete durable solutions to 

some of the world’s most vulnerable refugees. Many of them have lived in 

refugee camps for years where the possibility of a normal life is impossible. 

While starting life anew in the United States is not without its own 

challenges, the assistance provided to these newcomers by average 

Americans makes a significant difference in hastening their integration into 

a new society. Once on their feet, refugees add to the vitality and diversity 

of this country by making substantial contributions to our economic and 

cultural life.
vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction i

Foreword ii

I. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POLICY 1

II. REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 2010 5

Proposed Ceilings 5

Unallocated Reserve 6

Admissions Procedures 6

Eligibility Criteria 6

Priority 1: Individual Referrals 7

Priority 2: Group Referrals 8

FY 2010 Priority 2 Designations 9

Priority 3: Family Reunification Cases 11

FY 2010 Priority 3 Nationalities 12

Visas 93: Family Reunification Following to Join 13

DHS/USCIS Refugee Adjudications 14

The Eligibility Determination 14

Background Checks 15

Processing Activities of the Department of State 15

Overseas Processing Services 15

Cultural Orientation 16

Transportation 17

Reception and Placement (R&P) 17

III. REGIONAL PROGRAMS 19

Africa 20

Religious Freedom 20

Voluntary Repatriation 22

Local Integration 23

Third-Country Resettlement 24

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions 24

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program 25
vii

East Asia 26

Religious Freedom 28

Voluntary Repatriation 29

Local Integration 30

Third-Country Resettlement 30

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions 30

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program 31

Europe and Central Asia 31

Religious Freedom 33

Voluntary Repatriation 34

Local Integration 35

Third-Country Resettlement 35

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions 35

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program 35

Latin America and the Caribbean 36

Religious Freedom 38

Voluntary Repatriation 38

Local Integration 38

Third and In-Country Resettlement 39

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions 40

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program 41

Near East and South Asia 41

Religious Freedom 42

Voluntary Repatriation 44

Local Integration 45

Third-Country Resettlement 47

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions 49

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program 49

IV. DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS 51
viii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

I. Refugee Admissions in FY 2008 and FY 2009, 5

Proposed Refugee Admissions by Region for FY 2010

II. Proposed FY 2010 Regional Ceilings by Priority 19

III. Religious Freedom: Resettlement Access for Refugees

from Countries Designated by the Department of State

as Countries of Particular Concern 50

IV. Refugee Arrivals by Country of Origin, FY 2008 52

V. Median Age and Gender of Refugee Arrivals, FY 2008 54

VI. Select Age Categories of Refugee Arrivals, FY 2008 55

VII. Refugee Arrivals by State of Initial Resettlement, FY 2008 56

VIII. Estimated Costs of Refugee Processing, Movement, and 

Resettlement FY 2009 and FY 2010 58

IX. UNHCR Resettlement Statistics by Resettlement Country, 

CY 2008 59
1

I. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POLICY 

At the end of 2008, the estimated refugee population worldwide stood 

at 15.2 million, with 10.5 million receiving protection or assistance from 

UNHCR. The United States actively supports efforts to provide protection, 

assistance, and durable solutions to refugees, as these measures meet both 

our humanitarian objectives and our foreign policy and national security 

interests. Combined with humanitarian diplomacy, U.S. financial 

contributions to international and non-governmental organizations are vital 

to achieving these goals. Under the authority in the Migration and Refugee 

Assistance Act of 1962, as amended, the United States contributes to the 

programs of UNHCR, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), 

the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the UN Relief and 

Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), and 

other international and non-governmental organizations that provide 

protection and assistance to refugees, internally displaced persons (IDPs), 

victims of conflict, and other vulnerable migrants. These contributions 

address the legal and physical protection needs of refugees as well as their 

basic assistance needs for water, sanitation, food, health care, shelter, 

education, and other services. The United States monitors these programs to 

ensure the most effective use of resources, maximizing humanitarian impact 

for the benefit of refugees and IDPs.

During FY 2009, the United States has continued to support the 

achievement of durable solutions for refugees through voluntary repatriation

programs around the world. In seeking durable solutions for refugees, the 

United States and UNHCR recognize that - for most refugees - safe 

voluntary return to their homelands is their preferred solution. Refugee 

repatriation operations to countries including Mauritania, Afghanistan, 

Liberia, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Sudan 

have proceeded during FY 2009, representing significant progress in the 

protection of refugees, as well as in their home countries’ stabilization, 

reconstruction and development. 

Where opportunities for return remain elusive, the United States and 

partners pursue self-sufficiency and temporary, indefinite or permanent local 

integration in countries of asylum. The Department of State works 

diplomatically to encourage host governments to uphold their 

responsibilities to protect refugees through local integration and provides 

assistance to help meet these humanitarian needs. Afghans in India, Burundi 

in Tanzania, Liberians and Sierra Leoneans in seven countries across West 
2

Africa, Mauritanians in Senegal, and Colombians in Ecuador and Costa Rica 

are among those populations for whom opportunities for local integration 

have recently become possible. 

UNHCR identifies some 6.6 million people worldwide who are 

not recognized nationals of any state and are, therefore, legally or de 

facto stateless. Without recognized citizenship in any country, many 

exist in refugee-like situations, unable to claim rights and denied even 

the most basic protections of law. The United States has supported 

UNHCR’s efforts to achieve solutions for stateless persons, including 

addressing gaps in citizenship laws and promoting fair application of 

those laws. For example, in 2008, PRM advocacy and engagement was 

instrumental in improving the lives of stateless Rohingya in Burma. 

UNHCR successfully negotiated the provision of government-issued 

temporary residency certificates for Rohingya in Burma, thus advancing 

their legal standing, reducing travel restrictions and increasing their 

access to health services and schools. Also in 2008, the Government of 

Bangladesh agreed to issue national identity cards to formerly stateless 

Biharis. In addition, to focus greater attention on this ―hidden‖ 

population in need of protection, the Department of State began devoting 

a distinct sub-section on the issue of statelessness in its annual country 

Human Rights Reports. 

The United States and UNHCR also recognize resettlement in 

third countries as a vital tool for providing refugees protection and/or 

durable solutions, particularly for those for whom other durable solutions 

are not feasible. For some refugees, resettlement is the best, or perhaps 

only, alternative. The United States also encourages UNHCR to refer for 

resettlement stateless refugees, either as individuals or groups, for whom 

other durable solutions are not possible, even if they are located in their 

country of habitual residence.

Recognizing the importance of ensuring UNHCR’s capacity to 

identify and refer refugees in need of resettlement, the U.S. Government has 

for more than a decade provided financial support to expand and improve 

the organization’s resettlement infrastructure. As a result of this initiative, 

UNHCR has substantially increased referrals to the U.S. and other 

resettlement countries. We will continue to work with UNHCR and consult 

with host governments on group referrals. We will continue to assess 

resettlement needs and allow qualified non-governmental organizations 

(NGOs) to refer refugee applicants to the program. 
3

The United States has also supported UNHCR’s efforts to expand the 

number of countries active in resettlement and engaged bilaterally on the 

issue. In 2008, UNHCR referred refugees to 25 countries for resettlement 

consideration. Some 90 percent were referred to the United States, Canada, 

and Australia. Smaller numbers of referrals were accepted by Sweden, New 

Zealand, Norway, Great Britain, Finland, the Netherlands, Denmark, France, 

Ireland, Argentina, the Czech Republic, Chile, and Italy. In addition, 

Iceland, the Republic of Korea, Austria, Brazil, Switzerland, Spain, 

Belgium, Portugal, and Greece each accepted some refugees for 

resettlement.

While the overall number of refugees referred by UNHCR and the 

percentage resettled by various countries fluctuate from year to year, the 

United States aims to provide resettlement consideration to at least 50 

percent of all refugees referred by UNHCR worldwide, depending on 

availability of funds. In 2008, some 74 percent of UNHCR-referred 

refugees were resettled in the United States (see Table IX). We have 

encouraged UNHCR to make further strategic use of resettlement and to 

expand the number of referrals it makes annually. 

The foreign policy and humanitarian interests of the United States are 

often advanced by our willingness to work with first-asylum and 

resettlement countries to address refugee issues. In some cases, the U.S. has 

been able to use its leadership position in resettlement to promote and secure 

other durable solutions for refugees or advance other human rights or foreign 

policy objectives. During the past few years, U.S. resettlement efforts in 

Africa, the Middle East, and East Asia have helped energize efforts by 

UNHCR and other countries to ensure that first asylum is maintained for 

larger refugee populations; that local integration solutions are offered; and 

that third country resettlement is accorded to those in need of that option. In 

certain locations the prompt resettlement of politically sensitive cases has 

helped defuse regional tensions. In the case of Bhutanese refugees in Nepal, 

the U.S. offer of resettlement helped garner similar pledges from other 

countries, while the international community is still pressing for the right for 

refugees to voluntarily return to Bhutan or seek local integration 

opportunities in Nepal. In the case of Burundian refugees in Tanzania, U.S. 

resettlement has been a critical component of an overall strategy that 

includes voluntary repatriation to Burundi as well as local integration in 

neighboring countries of more than 150,000 1972-era Burundi refugees to 

date.
4

During its 29 year history, the USRAP has responded to changing 

refugee circumstances. Even before the events of September 11, 2001, the 

end of the Cold War had dramatically altered the context in which the 

USRAP operates worldwide. Having shifted its focus away from large 

groups concentrated in a few locations, primarily refugees from Vietnam, 

the former Soviet Union, and the former Yugoslavia, the program began to 

offer resettlement to refugees of over 50 nationalities per year. Interviews 

are often conducted in remote locations, guided in large measure toward 

populations in greatest need of third country resettlement opportunities. 

Refugees resettled in the United States contribute positively to the 

diversity and enrichment of our country. The U.S. program emphasizes the 

goal that refugees become economically self-sufficient as quickly as 

possible. Department of Health and Human Services-funded programs 

administered by individual states and the District of Columbia provide cash 

and medical assistance, training programs, employment, and other support 

services to arriving refugees. A variety of institutional providers perform 

these services, including the voluntary agencies that provide initial reception 

and placement services under cooperative agreements with the Department 

of State. 

The Department of State works domestically with agencies 

participating in the Reception and Placement (R&P) program to ensure that 

they are able to provide services according to established standards. An 

increasing proportion of arriving refugees do not have close family members 

already living in the United States to help with their adjustment and 

integration. Refugees are increasingly diverse linguistically, with wideranging educational and employment histories. The shortage of available 

affordable housing, particularly in urban areas, continues. All of these 

factors create significant challenges for the resettlement agencies in meeting 

the needs of refugees in the program. The Department of State is working 

closely with these agencies on adjustments that will enhance capacities to

provide effective services.
5

II. REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 2010

PROPOSED CEILINGS

TABLE I

REFUGEE ADMISSIONS IN FY 2008 AND FY 2009,

PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS BY REGION FOR FY 2010

REGION

FY 2008

ACTUAL 

ARRIVALS

FY 2009

CEILING

FY 2009

REVISED 

CEILING

FY 2009

PROJECTED 

ARRIVALS

PROPOSED 

FY2010

CEILING

Africa 8,935 12,000 9,000 15,500

East Asia 19,489 19,000 20,500* 19,500 17,000

Europe and Central Asia 2,343 2,500 2,500 2,500

Latin America/Caribbean 4,277 4,500 5,500* 5,000 5,000

Near East/South Asia 25,148 37,000 39,500* 39,000 35,000

Regional Subtotal 60,192 75,000 80,000* 75,000 75,000

Unallocated Reserve 5,000 5,000

Total 60,192 80,000 80,000 75,000 80,000

*2,500 admissions numbers from the Unallocated Reserve were allocated to the Near 

East/South Asia ceiling, 1,500 to the East Asia ceiling, and 1,000 to the Latin 

America/Caribbean ceiling in the fourth quarter of FY 2009, because refugee arrivals 

were projected to exceed the original ceilings.

Some refugees are considered for resettlement through in-country 

refugee programs. Generally, to be considered a refugee, a person must be 

outside his or her country of nationality or, if stateless, outside his or her 

country of last habitual residence. Under INA § 101(a)(42)(B), however, the 

President may specify circumstances under which individuals who are 

within their countries of nationality or last habitual residence may be 

considered a refugee for purposes of admission to the U.S.. The FY 2010 

proposal recommends continuing such in-country processing for specified 

groups in Iraq, Cuba, and the countries of the former Soviet Union, and 

stateless individuals referred by UNHCR. Persons for whom resettlement is 
6

requested by a U.S. ambassador in any location in the world may also be 

considered, with the understanding that they will only be referred to the 

USRAP following PRM consultation with DHS/USCIS.

Unallocated Reserve

This proposal includes 5,000 unallocated admissions numbers to be 

used if needed for additional refugee admissions from any region. The 

unallocated numbers would only be used following notification to Congress.

ADMISSIONS PROCEDURES

Eligibility Criteria

The Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and 

Migration (PRM) is responsible for coordinating and managing the USRAP. 

A critical part of this responsibility is determining which individuals or 

groups from among the millions of refugees worldwide will have access to 

U.S. resettlement consideration. PRM coordinates within the Department of 

State, as well as with the Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Citizenship 

and Immigration Services (DHS/USCIS) and other agencies in carrying out 

this responsibility. 

Section 207(a)(3) of the INA states that the U.S. Refugee Admissions 

Program shall allocate admissions among refugees ―...of special 

humanitarian concern to the United States in accordance with a

determination made by the President after appropriate consultation.‖ Which 

individuals are ―of special humanitarian concern‖ to the United States for the 

purpose of refugee resettlement consideration is determined through the U.S. 

Refugee Admissions Program priority system. There are currently three 

priorities or categories of cases that have access to the USRAP:

 Priority 1 – Individual cases referred to the program by virtue of 

their circumstances and apparent need for resettlement;

 Priority 2 – Groups of cases designated as having access to the 

program by virtue of their circumstances and apparent need for 

resettlement;

 Priority 3 – Individual cases from eligible nationalities granted 

access for purposes of reunification with anchor family members 

already in the United States.
7

(Note: Refugees resettled in the United States may also seek the admission 

of spouses and unmarried children under 21 still abroad by filing a 

―Following to Join‖ petition which obviates the need for a separate refugee 

claim adjudication. This option is described in more detail in the discussion 

of Visas 93 below.)

Access to the program under one of the above-listed processing 

priorities does not mean an applicant meets the U.S. statutory ―refugee‖ 

definition or is admissible to the United States. The ultimate determination 

as to whether an applicant can be admitted as a refugee is made by 

DHS/USCIS in accordance with criteria set forth in the INA. Applicants 

who are eligible for access within the established priorities are presented to 

DHS/USCIS officers for interview. 

Although the access categories to the USRAP are referred to as 

―processing priorities,‖ it is important to note that assignment to a certain 

priority does not establish precedence in the order in which cases will be 

processed. Once cases are established as eligible for access under one of the 

three processing priorities, they all undergo the same processing steps. 

PRIORITY 1 – INDIVIDUAL REFERRALS

Priority 1 allows consideration of refugee claims from persons of any 

nationality2, in any location, often with compelling protection needs for 

whom resettlement appears to be the appropriate durable solution. Priority 1 

cases are identified and referred to the program by UNHCR, a U.S. embassy, 

or a designated NGO. UNHCR, which has the international mandate 

worldwide to provide protection to refugees, has historically referred the 

vast majority of cases under this priority. NGOs providing humanitarian 

assistance in locations where there are large concentrations of refugees may 

also undergo training by PRM and USCIS in order to be eligible to provide 

Priority 1 referrals. 

Process for Priority 1 Individual Referral Applications

Priority 1 referrals from UNHCR and NGOs are generally submitted 

to the appropriate Regional Refugee Coordinator, who forwards them to the 

appropriate Overseas Processing Entity (OPE) for case processing and 

scheduling of the DHS/USCIS interview. PRM’s Office of Admissions 

 

2 Referrals of North Koreans and Palestinians require State Department and DHS concurrence before they 

may be granted access to the USRAP.
8

reviews embassy referrals for completeness and may consult with DHS in 

considering these referrals. 

A U.S. ambassador may make a Priority 1 referral for persons still in 

their country of origin if the ambassador determines that such cases meet 

established referral criteria. In some cases, an alternative vehicle,

―Significant Public Benefit Parole‖ (SPBP – a program administered by the 

Department of Homeland Security) may be a more appropriate option. 

PRIORITY 2 – GROUP REFERRALS

Priority 2 includes specific groups (within certain nationalities, clans 

or ethnic groups, sometimes in specified locations) identified by the 

Department of State in consultation with DHS/USCIS, NGOs, UNHCR, and 

other experts as being in need of resettlement. Some Priority 2 groups are 

processed in their country of origin. The process of identifying the group 

and its characteristics includes consideration of whether the group is of 

special humanitarian concern to the United States and whether members of 

the group will likely be able to qualify for admission as refugees under U.S. 

law. Groups may be designated as Priority 2 during the course of the year as 

circumstances dictate and the need for resettlement arises.

Priority 2 group referrals are typically developed with the 

involvement of UNHCR, Refugee Coordinators, NGOs, PRM program 

officers, or other State Department officials. PRM plays the coordinating 

role for all group referrals to the USRAP. There is no minimum or 

maximum number of applicants required for a group referral.

There are two distinct models of Priority 2 access to the program: 

open access and predefined group access. Under both models, Priority 2 

designations are made based on shared characteristics that define the group. 

In general, the possession of these characteristics is the reason the group has 

been persecuted in the past or faces persecution in the future. 

The open-access model for Priority 2 group referrals allows 

individuals to seek access to the program on the basis of meeting designated 

criteria. To establish an open-access Priority 2 group, PRM, in consultation 

with DHS/USCIS, and (as appropriate) with UNHCR and others, defines the 

specific criteria for access. Once the designation is in place, applicants may 

approach the program at any of the processing locations specified as 

available for the group to begin the application process. Applicants must 
9

demonstrate that they possess the required characteristic(s) to establish 

eligibility for inclusion. 

The open-access model has functioned well in the in-country 

programs, including the long-standing programs in the former Soviet Union, 

Cuba, and Vietnam. It was also used successfully for Bosnian refugees 

during the 1990s and is now in use for Iranian religious minorities and Iraqis 

with links to the U.S.

The OPE(s) responsible for handling open-access Priority 2 

applications, working under the direction of PRM, make a preliminary 

determination as to whether the applicants qualify for access and should be 

presented to DHS/USCIS for interview. Applicants who clearly do not meet 

the access requirements are ―screened out‖ prior to DHS/USCIS interview. 

In contrast to an open-access group, a predefined group is clearly 

identified both in number and location and linked to a specific list of eligible 

refugee applicants. Once PRM has established the access eligibility criteria 

for the group, in consultation with DHS/USCIS, the referring entity (usually 

UNHCR) provides a list of eligible refugee applicants for processing. This 

type of group referral is advantageous in situations in which the intensive 

labor required to generate individual referrals would be impracticable, 

potentially harmful, or counterproductive. Often predefined groups are 

composed of persons with similar persecution claims. The predefined group 

referral process is a step-saver and can conserve scarce resources, 

particularly for UNHCR. Predefined group referrals with clear, well-defined 

eligibility criteria and several methods for crosschecking group membership 

can serve as a fraud deterrent as well, preventing non-group members from 

gaining access to the USRAP by falsely claiming group membership. It can 

also speed the resettlement process in cases where immediate protection 

concerns are present.

FY 2010 Priority 2 Designations

In-country processing programs

The following ongoing programs that process individuals still in their 

country of origin under Priority 2 group designations will continue in FY 

2010:
10

Former Soviet Union

This Priority 2 designation applies to Jews, Evangelical Christians, and 

Ukrainian Catholic and Orthodox religious activists identified in the 

Lautenberg Amendment, Public Law No. 101-167, § 599D, 103 Stat. 1261 

(1989), as amended (―Lautenberg Amendment‖), with close family in the 

United States.

Cuba

Included in this Priority 2 program are human rights activists, members of 

persecuted religious minorities, former political prisoners, forced-labor 

conscripts (1965-68), persons deprived of their professional credentials or 

subjected to other disproportionately harsh or discriminatory treatment 

resulting from their perceived or actual political or religious beliefs or 

activities, and persons who have experienced or fear harm because of their 

relationship – family or social – to someone who falls under one of the 

preceding categories.

Iraqis Associated with the United States 

Under various Priority 2 designations, including those set forth in the 

Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act, employees of the USG, a USG-funded contractor 

or grantee, and U.S. media and NGOs working in Iraq, and certain family 

members of such employees, as well as beneficiaries of approved I-130 

(immigrant visa) petitions, are eligible for refugee processing in Iraq. 

Groups of Humanitarian Concern outside the Country of Origin 

The following Priority 2 groups are already designated and, in most cases, 

undergoing processing with significant arrivals anticipated during FY 2010. 

(Additional Priority 2 groups may be designated over the course of the year.)

Ethnic Minorities and others from Burma in camps in Thailand

Under this existing Priority 2 designation, individuals who have fled Burma 

and who are registered in nine refugee camps along the Thai/Burma border 

and who are identified by UNHCR as in need of resettlement are eligible for 

processing.

Ethnic Minorities and others from Burma in Malaysia

Under this existing Priority 2 designation, individuals who have fled Burma 

and who are recognized by UNHCR as refugees in Malaysia and identified 

as being in need of resettlement are eligible for processing.
11

Bhutanese in Nepal

Under this existing Priority 2 designation, Bhutanese refugees registered by 

UNHCR in camps in Nepal and identified as in need of resettlement are 

eligible for processing. 

Iranian Religious Minorities

Under this existing Priority 2 designation, Iranian members of certain 

religious minorities are eligible for processing and benefit from a reduced 

evidentiary standard for establishing a well-founded fear of persecution, 

pursuant to the 2004 enactment of P.L. 108-199.

Iraqis Associated with the United States 

Under various Priority 2 designations, including those set forth in the 

Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act, employees of the USG, a USG-funded contractor 

or grantee, and U.S. media and NGOs working in Iraq, and certain family 

members of such employees, as well as beneficiaries of approved I-130 

(immigrant visa) petitions, are eligible for refugee processing. 

Eritreans in Shimelba

Under this Priority 2 designation, Eritrean refugees (except those Kunama 

who previously went through refugee processing) who were registered with 

UNHCR in the Shimelba Camp prior to August 7, 2008 or who were 

registered in the former Wa’ala Nhibi Camp and re-registered or re-validated 

in the Shimelba Camp in November 2004, are eligible for processing.

PRIORITY 3 – FAMILY REUNIFICATION 

The Priority 3 category affords USRAP access to members of 

designated nationalities who have immediate family members in the United 

States who initially entered as refugees or were granted asylum. At the 

beginning of each fiscal year, PRM, in consultation with DHS/USCIS, 

establishes the list of nationalities eligible for processing under this priority. 

The list may be modified by the PRM Assistant Secretary during the year, 

but additions or deletions are generally made to coincide with the fiscal year.

Fundamentally, inclusion on the Priority 3 list represents a finding by 

PRM that the nationality is of special humanitarian concern to the United 

States for the purpose of family-reunification refugee processing. Eligible 

nationalities are selected following careful review of several factors. 

UNHCR’s annual assessment of refugees in need of resettlement provides 

insight into ongoing refugee situations which could create the need for 
12

family-reunification processing. In addition, prospective or ongoing 

repatriation efforts and U.S. foreign policy interests must be weighed in 

determining which nationalities should be eligible. 

In March 2008, in consultation with DHS/USCIS, PRM suspended P3 processing and issued a moratorium on P-3 arrivals of certain nationalities 

due to indications of extremely high rates of fraud obtained through pilot 

DNA testing. Further, in October 2008, PRM suspended the acceptance of 

Affidavits of Relationship (AORs) of all nationalities while PRM and 

DHS/USCIS examined how additional procedures may be incorporated into 

P-3 processing on a more regular basis so that the family reunification 

component of the program can resume while at the same time safeguarding 

the integrity of the program. We are also in the process of revising the AOR 

to make it an official Department of State (DS) form. Revisions to the P-3 

program and AOR were still under review in the final months of FY 2009. 

PRM and DHS/USCIS will update the Congress when the revisions are 

complete and we are prepared to resume P-3 processing. 

In order to qualify for access under Priority 3 procedures, an applicant 

must have been outside of his or her country of origin, have had an AOR

filed on his or her behalf by an eligible ―anchor‖ relative in the United States 

during a period in which the nationality was included on the eligibility list, 

and have been cleared for onward processing by the DHS/USCIS Refugee 

Access Verification Unit (RAVU). 

The following relatives of the U.S.-based anchor have traditionally 

been eligible for inclusion on the case: spouses, unmarried children under 

21, and/or parents. Qualifying anchors are persons who were admitted to the 

United States as refugees or were granted asylum, including persons who are 

lawful permanent residents or U.S. citizens who initially were admitted to 

the United States as refugees or were granted asylum. 

FY 2010 Priority 3 Nationalities

Upon resumption, P-3 processing will be available to individuals of the 

following nationalities:

Afghanistan 

Bhutan

Burma

Burundi
13

Central African Republic

Colombia

Cuba

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK)

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Iran

Iraq

Somalia

Sri Lanka

Sudan

Uzbekistan

Zimbabwe

VISAS 93 – FAMILY REUNIFICATION FOLLOWING-TO-JOIN PETITIONS

Under 8 CFR Section 207, a refugee admitted to the United States 

may request following-to-join benefits for his or her spouse and unmarried 

children under the age of 21 if the family has become separated. Once in the 

United States, and within two years of admission, the refugee may file a 

Form I-730 Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition3for each eligible family 

member with DHS/USCIS. If the Form I-730 is approved by DHS/USCIS 

(signifying adequate proof of a qualifying family relationship), the National 

Visa Center then forwards the petition for processing to the embassy or 

consulate nearest to the location of the beneficiaries of the petition. (Note: 

In locations where the USRAP has a significant processing operation, these 

cases are often forwarded to the OPE for initial processing and presentation 

to DHS/USCIS rather than the consular section within the embassy.)

Cases gaining access to the USRAP through an approved I-730 

petition are interviewed by DHS/USCIS or consular officers to verify the 

relationships claimed in the petition, as well as to examine any applicable 

bars to status and admissibility to the United States. These interviews are 

not refugee adjudications. The applicants are not required to demonstrate a 

persecution claim, as they derive their status from the refugee (or asylee) 

relative in the United States who filed the petition. Beneficiaries of I-730 

 

3 This petition is used to file for the relatives of refugees and asylees – known as Visas 93 and Visas 92 

cases respectively. The Refugee Admissions Program handles only Visas 93 cases, which are counted 

within the annual refugee admissions ceiling. Visas 92 cases are not considered to be refugee admissions 

cases and are not counted in the number of refuges admitted annually.
14

petitions may be processed within their country of origin or in other 

locations.

Anchor relatives in the United States may file an I-730 

Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition and seek Priority 3 access (if eligible) 

simultaneously. In some cases, the I-730 will be the only option as the 

family members are still in their country of origin. It is also important to 

note that the I-730 or ―follow-to-join‖ process is more limited than Priority 3 

in that it does not allow the relative in the United States to petition for 

parents. 

DHS/USCIS REFUGEE ADJUDICATIONS

Section 207(c) of the INA grants the Secretary of the Department of 

Homeland Security authority to admit, at his/her discretion, any refugee who 

is not firmly resettled in a third country, who is determined to be of special 

humanitarian concern, and who is admissible to the United States. The 

authority to determine eligibility for refugee status has been delegated to 

DHS/USCIS. Beginning in FY 2006, DHS/USCIS restructured the Refugee 

Affairs Division and established the Refugee Corps. The Refugee Corps 

is staffed by DHS/USCIS officers dedicated to adjudicating applications for 

refugee status. The Refugee Corps provides DHS/USCIS with the necessary 

resources and flexibility to respond to an increasingly diversified refugee 

admissions program. DHS/USCIS has also substantially enhanced its antifraud, training, and policy-setting capacity related to refugee processing.

The Eligibility Determination

In order to be approved as a refugee, an applicant must meet the 

refugee definition contained in § 101(a)(42) of the INA. That section 

provides that a refugee is a person who is outside his or her country of 

nationality or last habitual residence and is unable or unwilling to return to 

that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on 

account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social 

group, or political opinion. As mentioned above, the President may specify 

special circumstances under which a person can meet the refugee definition 

when he or she is still within the country of origin. The definition excludes 

a person who has ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in 

persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a 

particular social group, or political opinion. Further, an applicant who has 

been ―firmly resettled‖ in a third country may not be admitted under INA § 
15

207. Applicants are also subject to various statutory grounds of 

inadmissibility, including criminal, security, and public health grounds, 

some of which may be waived or from which they may be exempted.

A DHS/USCIS officer conducts a non-adversarial, face-to-face 

interview of each applicant designed to elicit information about the 

applicant’s claim for refugee status and any grounds of ineligibility. The 

officer asks questions about the applicant’s experiences in the country of 

origin, including problems and fears about returning (or remaining), as well 

as questions concerning the applicant’s activities, background and criminal 

history. The officer also considers evidence about conditions in the country 

of origin and assesses the applicant’s credibility and claim. 

Background Checks

All refugee applicants are required to undergo background security 

checks. Security checks consist of biographic name checks for all refugee 

applicants and biometric (fingerprint) checks for refugee applicants aged 14 

to 79. PRM, through its overseas processing entities, initiates background 

name checks, and name check adjudicators of the PRM-contracted Refugee 

Processing Center (RPC) conduct initial vetting. DHS/USCIS reviews and 

analyzes the results of biographic and biometric background check results to 

determine whether the data have an impact on the refugee eligibility 

determination. DHS/USCIS has established enhanced security vetting 

procedures in partnership with the national security and intelligence 

communities. 

PROCESSING ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Overseas Processing Services

In most processing locations, PRM engages a non-governmental 

organization (NGO), an international organization (IO), or U.S. embassy 

contractors to manage an OPE that assists in the processing of refugees for 

admission to the United States. OPE staff pre-screen applicants to determine 

preliminarily if they qualify for one of the applicable processing priorities 

and to prepare cases for DHS/USCIS adjudication. The OPEs assist 

applicants in completing documentary requirements and schedule 

DHS/USCIS refugee interviews. If an applicant is approved for 

resettlement, OPE staff guide the refugee through post-adjudication steps, 

including obtaining medical screening exams and attending cultural 
16

orientation programs. The OPE obtains sponsorship assurances and, once all 

required steps are completed, refers the case to IOM for transportation to the 

United States. 

In FY 2009, NGOs (Church World Service, Hebrew Immigrant Aid 

Society, International Rescue Committee) worked under cooperative 

agreements with PRM as OPEs at locations in Austria, Ghana (covering 

West and Central Africa), Kenya (covering East and Southern Africa), and 

Thailand (covering East Asia). International organizations and NGOs (IOM 

and the International Catholic Migration Commission [ICMC]) support 

refugee processing activities based in Jordan, Russia, Nepal and Turkey 

covering the Middle East, South and Central Asia and Europe. The 

admissions program operates at a U.S. Government (USG) installation in 

Cuba. 

Cultural Orientation

The Department of State strives to ensure that refugees who are 

accepted for admission to the United States are prepared for the significant 

life changes they will experience by providing cultural orientation programs 

prior to departure for the United States. It is critical that refugees arrive with 

a realistic view of what their new lives will be like, what services are 

available to them, and what their responsibilities will be. 

Every refugee family receives Welcome to the United States, a 

resettlement guidebook developed with contributions from refugee 

resettlement workers, resettled refugees, and state government officials.

Welcome to the United States is produced in 17 languages: Albanian, 

Amharic, Arabic, Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian, English, Farsi, French, Karen, 

Karenni, Kirundi, Kiswahili, Nepali, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Tigrinya and 

Vietnamese. Through this book, refugees have access to accurate 

information about the initial resettlement period before they arrive. The 

Welcome to the United States refugee orientation video is available in 15 

languages: Af-Maay, Arabic, Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian, English, Farsi, 

French, Hmong, Karen, Kirundi, Kiswahili, Nepali, Russian, Somali, 

Spanish, and Vietnamese. In addition, the Department of State enters into 

cooperative agreements for one-to-three day pre-departure orientation 

classes for eligible refugees at sites throughout the world. In an effort to 

further bridge the information gap, for certain groups, brief video 

presentations featuring the experience of recently resettled refugees of the 

same ethnic group are made available to refugee applicants overseas. 
17

Transportation

The Department of State funds the transportation of refugees resettled 

in the United States through a program administered by IOM. The cost of 

transportation is provided to refugees in the form of a loan. Refugees are 

responsible for repaying these loans over time, beginning six months after 

their arrival.

Reception and Placement (R&P)

PRM currently funds cooperative agreements with ten entities – nine 

private voluntary agencies and one state government agency – to provide 

initial resettlement services to arriving refugees. The R&P agencies agree to 

provide initial reception and core services (including housing, furnishings, 

clothing, food, and medical, employment, and social service referrals) to 

arriving refugees. These services are provided according to standards of 

care developed jointly by the NGO community and U.S. Government 

agencies. The ten organizations maintain a nationwide network of some 350 

affiliated offices to provide services. Two of the organizations also maintain 

a network of 20 affiliated offices through which unaccompanied refugee 

minors are placed into foster care funded by the Department of Health and 

Human Services. 

Using R&P funds from PRM supplemented by cash and in-kind 

contributions from private and other sources, the R&P agreement obligates 

the participating agencies to provide the following services:

 Sponsorship;

 Pre-arrival resettlement planning, including placement;

 Reception on arrival;

 Basic needs support (including housing, furnishings, food, and 

clothing) for at least 30 days;

 Community orientation; 

 Referrals to health, employment, education, and other services as 

needed; and

 Development and implementation of an initial resettlement plan for 

each refugee for 90-180 days.

Refugees are eligible for lawful employment upon arrival in the 

United States. After one year, a refugee is required to apply for adjustment 

of status to lawful permanent resident. Five years after admission, a refugee 
18

who has been granted lawful permanent resident status is eligible to apply 

for citizenship.
19

III. REGIONAL PROGRAMS

TABLE II

PROPOSED FY 2010 REGIONAL CEILINGS BY PRIORITY

AFRICA

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 5,500

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 5,500

Priority 2 Groups 3,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 1,000

Total Proposed: 15,500

EAST ASIA

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 2,700

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 600

Priority 2 Groups 13,600

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 100

Total Proposed: 17,000

EUROPE / CENTRAL ASIA

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 540

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 720

Priority 2 Groups 1,230

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 10

Total Proposed: 2,500

LATIN AMERICA / CARIBBEAN

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 2,000

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 200

Priority 2 Groups 2,750

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 50

Total Proposed: 5,000

NEAR EAST / SOUTH ASIA

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 18,000

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 8,900

Priority 2 Groups 8,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 100

Total Proposed: 35,000

UNALLOCATED RESERVE 5,000

TOTAL PROPOSED CEILING: 80,000
20

In the following regional program overviews, we provide a 

description of refugee conditions and religious freedom in each region. In

addition, we discuss prospects for voluntary repatriation, resettlement 

within the region, and third-country resettlement.

AFRICA

There are currently approximately 2.5 million refugees across the

African continent, making up roughly 20 per cent of the global refugee 

population. Thus far in 2009, we have seen continued progress on several 

fronts for major refugee populations in Africa. The Comprehensive Peace 

Agreement (CPA) in Sudan in 2005 and successful elections and new 

governments formed in Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), 

and Liberia over the past four years laid the groundwork for large-scale 

refugee returns. In 2009, UN-organized repatriations were underway for 

refugees from Sudan, Burundi, the DRC, and Mauritania. Organized 

repatriations to Liberia and Angola were largely completed in 2007 but 

efforts continued in 2009 to find solutions for residual refugee populations. 

At the same time, ongoing violence in Somalia, the Central African 

Republic (CAR), and eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) 

generated new refugee flows. Eritreans continued to seek asylum in 

neighboring countries due to political tensions and increasing political 

repression. In Zimbabwe, economic collapse combined with governmentsponsored political repression generated migrant and some refugee outflows 

in 2009. 

The principle of first asylum is honored by most African countries. 

Traditionally, refugees in Africa have been allowed to remain – and in many 

cases to integrate locally – until voluntary repatriation is possible. In most 

cases, local integration is de facto, and does not include granting of legal 

permanent residence or voting rights. However, countries such as Tanzania, 

Guinea, Cote d’Ivoire, Nigeria, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Senegal have 

announced intentions to consider legalizing the status (de jure local 

integration) of long-staying refugee populations interested in remaining on 

their territories. 

Religious Freedom 

In Sub-Saharan Africa, people are generally free to practice their 

chosen religions. Governments regularly provide for and respect freedom of 
21

religion, although in some countries, such as, such Eritrea and Sudan, 

religious freedom is limited – particularly in the midst of ethnic and other 

conflicts. 

The Government of Eritrea is responsible for the most severe religious 

freedom abuses in Africa. In recent years it has engaged in serious religious 

repression, harassing, arresting, and detaining members of independent 

evangelical groups, including Pentecostals, Jehovah’s Witnesses (who lost 

certain basic rights of citizenship for not participating in the 1993 national 

referendum), and a reform movement within the Eritrean Orthodox Church. 

It has also sought greater control over the four approved religious groups: 

the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church, the Evangelical 

(Lutheran) Church, and the Islamic community. The government reportedly 

holds individuals who are jailed for their religious affiliation at various 

locations, including facilities administered by the military and police stations 

inside Asmara and other cities. Often detainees have not been formally 

charged, accorded due process, or allowed access to their families. While 

many were ostensibly jailed for evasion of military conscription, significant 

numbers were being held solely for their religious beliefs.

In Sudan, distinctions in the constitution negotiated as part of the CPA

have resulted in disparities in the treatment of religious minorities in the 

north and south. Whereas the Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) 

generally respects the rights of Christians and Muslims in the ten states of 

the south as provided for in its separate 2005 Constitution of Southern 

Sudan, the Government of National Unity (GNU) continues to place 

restrictions on Christians in the North. The Constitution preserves Shari’a as 

a source of legislation in the north, while the Constitution of Southern Sudan 

establishes ―the traditional laws, religious beliefs, values, and customary 

practices of the people‖ as a source of legislation in the south.

Although there is no penalty for converting from another religion to 

Islam, converting from Islam is punishable by death in the north. This 

penalty has never been imposed by the current government, but authorities 

express their strong prejudice against conversion by occasionally subjecting 

converts to intense scrutiny, ostracism and intimidation, or by encouraging 

converts to leave the country.

On January 16, 2009, the Secretary of State re-designated both Eritrea 

and Sudan as ―countries of particular concern‖ for particularly severe 

violations of religious freedom. The USRAP continues to be available to 
22

Sudanese, Eritrean, and other refugees who are victims of religious 

intolerance through Priority 1 referrals. Refugees from Eritrea and Sudan 

with refugee or asylee family members in the U.S. will also have access to 

the program through Priority 3, subject to its resumption, and certain 

Eritrean refugees in Ethiopia have access through P-2. 

Voluntary Repatriation

Despite the continued existence of protracted refugee situations 

throughout Africa, voluntary repatriation to improved conditions in the 

home country remains the most common and desirable durable solution. 

With the conclusion of peace agreements and the support of the U.S. 

Government and other donors, UNHCR has made great progress in 

promoting and supporting refugee repatriation and reintegration in Africa. 

Over the past fifteen years, refugee numbers have been reduced by more 

than 60% (from six to less than three million) even in the face of new 

outflows. 

In West Africa, UNHCR’s Liberian repatriation program officially 

ended in June 2007, with some 150,000 Liberians having returned home 

either spontaneously or with UNHCR assistance. However, in 2008 

repatriation was reopened to accommodate some of the residual Liberian 

refugees. As many as 500,000 Liberian refugees returned in several waves 

prior to 2004. The focus now is on local integration as a durable solution for 

some 60,000 Liberians remaining in West Africa. UNHCR launched its 

Mauritania repatriation operation in January 2008 and, despite the coup 

d’etat in August of that year, succeeded in repatriating over 10,000 of the 

24,000 Mauritanian refugees in Senegal by June 2009. 

In East and Central Africa, even larger numbers returned home in 

2009. Repatriation to South Sudan started in 2005 and has continued apace 

with over 320,000 – well over half the original refugee population – having 

returned from neighboring countries by June 2009. No return initiatives are 

anticipated for the Darfur region of Sudan or Somalia, where conflict 

continues. Repatriation to relatively stable areas of the Democratic Republic 

of Congo (DRC) continues with nearly 200,000 returns by June 2009 and 

ongoing movements of many of the remaining 300,000 planned for 2009-

2010. Most are currently returning to eastern DRC’s South Kivu and 

Katanga provinces; North Kivu and Orientale Provinces remain too insecure 

for large-scale refugee return. Returns to Burundi have increased in FY 

2009, with nearly 500,000 returns since 2002. Another 50,000 are expected 
23

to return in 2009-2010, while most of the remaining 200,000 are in the 

process of formalizing their permanent status in Tanzania. Although the 

majority of Rwandan refugees returned home in the late 1990s, some 60,000 

Rwandans remained in exile. Nearly 10,000 have repatriated from Uganda 

and the DRC thus far in 2009 to date with another 10,000 expected by year’s 

end. 

Local Integration 

In a number of protracted refugee situations, refugees were able to 

become self-sufficient and their camps and settlements were effectively 

integrated into the host communities. This integration dynamic occurred 

particularly for refugees who fled during the 1960s through the early 1980s 

to countries that had arable land available, allowing many refugees to move 

out of camps. Despite such de facto local integration, however, refugees 

residing among the local population did not necessarily enjoy the rights, 

entitlements, or economic opportunities available to legal residents. As a 

result, local integration was often an interim, rather than a durable solution 

for many African refugees.

More recently, however, a number of African countries have 

considered more formal integration as a durable solution for residual refugee 

populations that have chosen not to repatriate when it was possible to do so. 

In 2005, Guinea stated its willingness to offer local integration to residual 

populations of Sierra Leonean and Liberian refugees who were unwilling or 

unable to go home. In 2007, under an agreement with UNHCR, the 

Governments of Liberia and Sierra Leone, and the Economic Community of 

West African States (ECOWAS), Nigeria offered local integration and legal 

residency to Liberians and Sierra Leoneans. UNHCR hopes that all West 

African states might offer similar opportunities to refugees on their 

territories in the context of free movement of peoples under the ECOWAS 

procedures, and is collaborating with host governments throughout the 

region to make this arrangement a reality. 

Senegal offered Mauritanian refugees who wished to remain in 

Senegal the option of becoming Senegalese citizens in 2007 but has not yet 

established procedures for refugees to take advantage of this option. The 

governments of Uganda and Zambia have previously stated their intention to 

provide refugees with local integration opportunities and citizenship but 

have not yet passed the required legislation. As mentioned above, the 

Government of Tanzania has agreed to provide permanent settlement and 
24

citizenship to the estimated 200,000 1972 era Burundi refugees who desire 

it; 80% of whom have already accepted the offer.

Third-Country Resettlement

Given the political and economic volatility in many parts of Africa, 

resettlement to third countries outside the region is an essential durable 

solution and element of protection for certain refugees. With limited 

opportunities for permanent integration in many countries of asylum and the 

protracted nature of some refugee situations, the need for third-country 

resettlement of African refugees is expected to continue despite the overall 

decrease in the refugee population on the continent. In recent years, 

UNHCR has increasingly viewed resettlement as an important tool of 

protection for refugees in Africa. However, the number of referrals, 

particularly in West Africa, continues to fall below projections. Several 

resettlement countries – including Canada and Australia – accept African 

refugees, but the United States resettles far more than any other country. 

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions

We anticipate some 9,000 African refugee arrivals in FY 2009. Five 

countries of origin (Somalia, Eritrea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan

and Burundi) account for the vast majority of U.S. admissions from Africa. 

In East Africa, we will largely complete processing of the residual 

Congolese and Burundian caseload in Tanzania. In Kenya, a surge in 

UNHCR referrals in Dadaab will lead to more than 2,000 P-1 Somali 

departures. From West Africa, we expect close to 1,000 refugee admissions. 

In November 2008, PRM, UNHCR, IOM and OPE Accra were able to 

undertake a long-planned joint mission to southern and eastern Chad to 

launch processing. We received and processed individual UNHCR P-1 

referrals in N’djamena (urban refugees), Gore (CAR refugees) and in 

Abeche (Darfuri refugees). We anticipate at least 100 departures from Chad 

in FY 2009. In all, we expect to admit refugees of approximately 23 African 

nationalities, processed in 23 countries during FY 2009.

Overall, U.S. refugee admissions from Africa in FY 2009 will 

continue at FY 2008 levels due in part to the compelling indications of 

systemic fraud discovered last year in the P-3 family reunification program. 
25

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program

We propose up to 15,500 resettlement numbers for African refugees 

in FY 2010. PRM has actively engaged relevant offices within the 

Department of State, the voluntary agency community, UNHCR, and 

DHS/USCIS to identify caseloads appropriate for resettlement consideration. 

As a result of these discussions, PRM has identified a number of 

nationalities and groups for priority processing during FY 2010. 

From East and Southern Africa, we expect approximately 12-13,000 

admissions, primarily Somalis in Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia, and South 

Africa, as well as the continued resettlement of Eritreans in Shimelba Camp 

(Ethiopia) who are eligible for P-2 processing. We also expect to receive 

additional P-1 referrals of Congolese and Burundians in Tanzania and 

Zambia, and possibly Rwanda. 

From West and Central Africa, we expect approximately 2,000 

admissions. It is anticipated that the largest numbers will be processed in 

Chad, Cameroon, CAR, Gabon and Ghana. Ghana’s referrals are expected 

to include several hundred Darfuri in the Krisan refugee camp. We expect 

to complete the processing of the residual Liberian P-3 caseload in FY2009. 

Due to improved country conditions in Liberia, very few Liberians in 

asylum countries are now being referred for U.S. resettlement consideration. 

Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, we anticipate small numbers of 

Sudanese, Somali, and other African refugees to be processed in Egypt. 

Small numbers of Sudanese, Somali, Eritrean and other African refugees 

will be processed in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia. 

Proposed FY 2010 Africa program: 

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 5,500

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 5,500

Priority 2 Groups 3,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification 1,000

Total Proposed Ceiling 15,500
26

EAST ASIA 

Several East Asian countries host large and diverse refugee 

populations. Recent years have seen important developments for these 

groups, particularly involving the strategic use of resettlement as a durable 

solution. 

Thailand, Malaysia, Bangladesh, and India continue to host large 

numbers of Burmese refugees and asylum-seekers. The U.S. Government 

continues to promote a genuine democratic transition in Burma. 

Unfortunately, with few signs of change from Burmese authorities and 

continued attacks against ethnic minority populations, prospects for refugees 

to return to safe and stable conditions appear distant. 

As of April 2009, more than 117,000 refugees from Burma, mostly 

ethnic minorities, were recognized by UNHCR and lived in nine Royal Thai 

Government (RTG)-administered refugee camps along the Thai-Burma 

border. The RTG continues to support the international community’s efforts 

to resettle large numbers of refugees from these camps. Despite ongoing 

resettlement, births and new arrivals fleeing continued conflict in Burma 

maintain the camps’ total population at current levels. 

Developments in Thailand involving Lao-Hmong asylum seekers are 

being monitored closely by the international community as the RTG 

increases the rate of returns to Laos of the remaining 4,800 Hmong residing 

in a Thai military facility in Petchabun. As of April, 2,500 Lao-Hmong of 

the original population of some 7,300 have been returned to Laos. The 

United States has consistently urged the RTG to share the details of its 

screening procedures to ensure that Lao-Hmong with a well-founded fear of 

persecution are not returned to Laos. We have also expressed our concern 

about the status of the 158 Lao-Hmong confined in an immigration detention 

center in Nong Khai who have been recognized as refugees by UNHCR and 

referred to third countries - including the United States - for resettlement. 

The United States and other resettlement countries are prepared to consider 

the Lao-Hmong group detained in Nong Khai and their close family 

members living in Lopburi Province, Thailand who were also recognized by 

UNHCR for third-country resettlement once the RTG allows access to the 

group. The RTG has initiated discussions with UNHCR, the USG and other 

resettlement countries to explore options for this.
27

Since 2006, UNHCR Malaysia has operated the second largest 

refugee status determination program in the world. As of June, there were 

49,852 persons of concern registered with UNHCR in Malaysia - 15,603

Rohingya from Burma’s Northern Rakhine State, 16,904 Chin, and 11,714

other ethnic minorities from Burma, as well as some 7,142 asylum-seekers 

and refugees from other countries. Malaysia is not a party to the 1951 UN 

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 Protocol. We 

support UNHCR's efforts to use resettlement as a strategic tool to assist a 

significant number of refugees in Malaysia.

In May 2007, the Department of State announced that, while the 

United States would continue to accept referrals of refugees in Cambodia 

from UNHCR, we would expect those not found by UNHCR to be refugees 

to return home. The number of ethnic minorities from the Central Highlands 

of Vietnam crossing into Cambodia has dramatically decreased since that 

time; only one individual has arrived to the UNHCR site in CY 2009. As of 

May, 140 individuals remained under UNHCR protection in Phnom Penh; a 

24% decrease from one year ago. 

In 1992, more than 250,000 Burmese Rohingya suffering oppression 

due to their Muslim faith and ethnicity migrated from Northern Rakhine 

State to Bangladesh. During the 1990s, over 230,000 Rohingya refugees 

were voluntarily repatriated from Bangladesh, leaving behind approximately 

28,000 in two UNHCR camps in southern Bangladesh at present. A further 

10,000 unregistered Rohingya reside in an unofficial settlement in Leda, 

located 3 kilometers from one of the two UNHCR camps. In addition to 

those who have remained in the camps, some who have previously 

repatriated have again returned to Bangladesh and are living without 

UNHCR protection, further increasing their vulnerability. Up to 200,000 

unregistered Rohingya live outside of the two official UNHCR refugee 

camps. UNHCR continues to work to improve the protection and address 

security concerns caused by growing tensions between the registered 

refugees living inside the camps and the unregistered Rohingya and local 

Bangladeshis living outside of the camps. UNHCR referred a small number 

of Rohingya Women-At-Risk cases for U.S. resettlement consideration who 

were approved and arrived in the U.S. this fiscal year. We expect additional 

referrals of Rohingya in the future. 

As reflected in the North Korean Human Rights Act (NKHRA), the 

United States is deeply concerned about the human rights situation of North 

Koreans both inside the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) and 
28

in various countries in the region. The United States began resettling 

interested, eligible North Korean refugees in 2006 and remains committed to 

continuing this program. 

Religious Freedom 

Although many governments in East Asia permit freedom of worship, 

religious believers face serious persecution in several countries. The DPRK 

severely restricts religious freedom, including organized religious activity, 

except that which is supervised tightly by officially recognized groups 

linked to the government. Although the DPRK Constitution provides for 

―freedom of religious belief,‖ genuine religious freedom does not exist. 

Little is known about the day-to-day life of religious persons in the country. 

Religious and human rights groups outside of the country have provided 

numerous reports that members of underground churches have been beaten, 

arrested, tortured or killed because of their religious beliefs. 

The situation in countries such as China, Vietnam, Burma, and Laos is 

complex. While the constitutions of these countries ostensibly provide for 

freedom of religion, in practice these governments restrict or repress 

activities of some religious organizations. Many independent religious 

activities may be either prohibited or severely restricted, and dissenters may 

face physical mistreatment or imprisonment.

Despite dramatic increases in religious observance in China, the 

government continues to harass and interfere with unregistered religious 

groups, most notably the unofficial Catholic churches loyal to the Holy See, 

Protestant ―house churches,‖ some Muslim groups (especially Uighur 

Muslims in Xinjiang province), and Buddhists loyal to the Dalai Lama. 

There are many cases of arrest, imprisonment, and alleged torture of 

religious believers in China. Practitioners of the banned spiritual movement 

Falun Gong have also been subjected to arrest, imprisonment, and alleged 

torture. In Burma, the government maintains a pervasive internal security 

apparatus that generally infiltrates or monitors the activities of all 

organizations, including religious groups. The government actively 

promotes Buddhism over other religions as a means of boosting its own 

legitimacy and continues harsh discrimination against religious minorities. 

On January 16, 2009, the DPRK, China, and Burma were re-designated by 

the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom as 

―Countries of Particular Concern‖ for serious violations of religious 

freedom.
29

Vietnam has made significant progress on many religious freedom 

issues since it was designated a ―country of particular concern‖ in 2004. 

The USG and Government of Vietnam signed a Religious Freedom 

Agreement in May 2005, under which Vietnam committed to implementing 

fully its new legal framework on religion. Vietnam has officially banned the 

practice of forced or coerced renunciations of faith, released all prisoners of 

conscience held for practicing their religious beliefs, and reopened over 

1,000 churches that had previously been closed and encouraged them to 

register. Recognizing this significant progress, the USG removed Vietnam 

from the ―countries of particular concern‖ list in November 2006. Uprisings 

by ethnic minorities as recently as 2004 contribute to Vietnam's added 

emphasis on public security in the region, including tighter controls on all 

gatherings and heightened suspicions toward organizations that previously 

had connections with separatist groups. In Laos, we have seen modest 

improvements in religious freedom; however, problems remain in some 

remote areas. 

Nationals of the DPRK, Vietnam, China, and Burma have access to 

the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program through Priority 1 individual 

referrals. A significant number of Burmese will be processed in FY 2009 

and FY 2010 under Priority 2. North Korean and Burmese refugees will 

also have access to family reunification processing through Priority 3, 

subject to its resumption.

Voluntary Repatriation

Given the systematic persecution of ethnic minorities, the repatriation 

of most Burmese refugees, including the Rohingya remaining in camps in 

Thailand and Bangladesh, and other UNHCR-recognized Burmese persons 

of concern in Malaysia, India and elsewhere is not currently a viable 

solution. However, Vietnamese Montagnards in Cambodia do continue to 

return to the Central Highlands in Vietnam. International access to the 

Central Highlands continued to increase throughout the year. UNHCR 

international staff, U.S. Embassy and Consulate General officials, and other 

Western diplomats have been able to visit with returned members of ethnic 

minorities who have repatriated from Cambodia and found no systemic 

problems. 
30

Local Integration

Due to fears of a ―pull factor‖, countries in the region have 

traditionally been reluctant to integrate refugees or to grant temporary 

asylum. We hope that U.S. efforts to resettle large numbers of refugees 

from the camps along the Thai-Burma border will encourage the RTG to 

take steps to improve the local integration prospects for those refugees who 

will not be resettled. The U.S. and other donor governments continue to 

seek a strategic dialogue with the RTG concerning the future of the nine 

camps on the Thai-Burma border. We recognize that the RTG remains 

concerned that resettlement has not dramatically reduced the camp 

population as new refugees are taking the place of those who are departing 

for third countries. Elsewhere, the Government of Malaysia has not yet 

honored an earlier pledge to issue work permits to the Rohingya population, 

rendering local integration elusive for this group. 

Third-Country Resettlement

The United States continues to lead third country resettlement efforts 

in the region. Other resettlement countries, including Australia, Canada, 

New Zealand, and the Nordic countries, consider refugees referred by 

UNHCR. In FY 2009, the United States processed UNHCR-referred 

refugee cases in Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, Hong Kong, Laos, 

Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. 

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions

We expect to admit over 19,000 refugees from East Asia in FY 2009. 

This will include some 17,500 Burmese – Karen and Karenni living in 

camps along the Thai-Burma border and Burmese Chin in Malaysia – and 

1,500 Vietnamese through the Humanitarian Resettlement (HR) process. 

The United States continued processing in six Burmese camps in 

Thailand throughout FY 2009. Working in close consultation with UNHCR 

and the RTG, we also began processing in Ban Mai Na Soi (Site 1) camp in 

Mae Hong Son province, which is the third and most remote of the three 

provinces hosting Burmese refugees. We expect to admit some 6,000 of 

these refugees by the end of the fiscal year. 

The HR program continued to process the applications submitted by 

Vietnamese citizens by June 25, 2008 who might have been eligible under 
31

one of three categories of the former Orderly Departure Program (ODP). 

This process was open only to those who were unable to complete the 

application process before the ODP closed on September 30, 1994. As of 

May 2009, the U.S. Consulate in Ho Chi Minh City had evaluated almost 

63,600 completed applications and found some 4,100 eligible for further 

consideration. Under the Lautenberg Amendment, certain categories of 

Vietnamese refugee applicants benefit from a reduced evidentiary standard 

when seeking eligibility for refugee status. The HR program is now 

essentially completed. As of October 1, the Overseas Processing Entity 

(OPE) in Bangkok will assume processing responsibility for the small 

number of approved cases that will not depart Vietnam prior to the end of 

the fiscal year and for any future cases referred for USRAP consideration. 

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program

We propose the admission of 17,000 refugees from East Asia in FY 

2010. This will include some 2,700 individuals already approved and 

pending departure at the beginning of the year. We will interview Burmese 

refugees living in nine camps located in three provinces in Thailand and will 

continue processing in Malaysia, leading to the admission of some 16,500 

refugees from Burma in FY 2010. We also expect the admission of small 

numbers of Vietnamese, North Koreans, Sri Lankans, Chinese and other 

nationalities from this region. 

Proposed FY 2010 East Asia Program: 

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 2,700 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 600 

Priority 2 Groups 13,600 

Priority 3 Family Reunification 100 

Total Proposed Ceiling 17,000

EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

The nations that once comprised the Soviet Union have for over a 

decade demonstrated a wide range of political progress and economic 

growth. Important steps have been taken by many of these independent 

states in Eastern Europe and some in Central Asia, in the direction of 

democratization, rule of law, civil rights, and tolerance. For example, 
32

Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are vibrant free-market democracies, 

members of NATO and the European Union. Each of these governments 

generally respects the human rights of its citizens, including freedom of 

speech, press, and religion. Many Eurasian countries have made significant 

progress in consolidating democratic institutions and instituting the rule of 

law. All Eurasian countries except Uzbekistan have acceded to the 1951 

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. In 

some former Soviet Republics and in Russia, the governments provide scant 

protection of refugees and asylum seekers; public intolerance and even 

attacks against non-Slavic foreigners are common.

In its 2008-2009 Global Appeal, UNHCR reported that there were 

some 4.6 million asylum seekers, refugees, IDPs, or other persons ―of 

concern‖ throughout Europe and Central Asia. Most had fled conflicts 

outside the region, such as in Afghanistan, but persons claiming persecution 

within the countries of the former Soviet Union were also included. 

Furthermore, even those nations that are abandoning totalitarianism and 

pursuing democratic governance have been slow or reluctant to recognize, 

protect, and integrate refugees and other at-risk individuals. UNHCR has 

been working with many of these governments on asylum procedures and 

refugee protection laws. Modest progress has been made. 

According to UNHCR, at the end of 2008 there were approximately 

486,000 refugees and IDPs in the Balkans, almost all of whom have been 

displaced for nine years or longer. An estimated 244,000 persons within this 

population are minorities from Kosovo, many of whom are in Serbia. 

Finding durable solutions for the remaining refugees and IDPs in the 

Balkans continues to be problematic, particularly following Kosovo’s 

declaration of independence in February 2008. 

Since 1989, the USRAP has offered resettlement consideration to 

individuals from certain religious minorities in the nations that made up the 

former Soviet Union who also have close family ties to the United States. 

Under the Lautenberg Amendment, Jews, Evangelical Christians, and certain 

members of the Ukrainian Catholic or Ukrainian Orthodox Churches benefit 

from a reduced evidentiary standard when being considered for refugee 

status. In recent years, fewer new applications and low approval rates have 

resulted in fewer departures to the United States. In addition to those 

eligible under the Lautenberg Amendment, individuals of all nationalities 

throughout the region may be referred for Priority 1 processing. 
33

Religious Freedom 

Freedom of religion varies widely in Europe and Central Asia. Most 

states regulate religious groups and activities to some degree, by granting socalled ―traditional‖ religious privileges sometimes denied to other, newer 

religious groups. In Eastern Europe, majority religions such as the Orthodox 

Church are often provided with such special treatment and privileges. These 

states sometimes view other religious groups as ―dangerous sects and cults.‖ 

Some states have enacted restrictive legislation to govern the activities of 

foreign missionaries, especially those from Protestant or ―nontraditional‖ 

denominations. In many cases, registration with state bodies has been 

required, not only to establish a group as a legal entity able to rent or own 

space but also to hold religious services, a practice which is not in keeping 

with international covenants on freedom of religion. In some eastern 

European countries, onerous membership and legal requirements restrict 

new religions from enjoying the privileges of traditional ones, such as the 

right to appoint military and prison chaplains and receive state subsidies. 

These so-called ―multi-tiered‖ religion laws exist in Romania, Austria, the 

Czech Republic, and Slovakia. Restitution of religious properties seized by

Communist regimes and the Nazis is an issue yet to be fully resolved, and, in 

some countries, progress on this issue has been slow and uneven.

Manifestations of anti-Semitism continue throughout the region, 

including demonstrations by extremist groups and vandalism of cemeteries 

and monuments. Most incidents have been in former communist bloc 

countries but a number of west European countries have faced a disturbing 

increase in anti-Semitic acts. Attacks on synagogues and other places where 

religious groups gather have been reported in Russia. The Russian 

government has condemned such acts. In the Caucasus and Central Asian 

states, the remaining small Jewish communities enjoy reasonably amicable 

relations with their Muslim compatriots. Jewish communities from 

Azerbaijan in the Caucasus to Bukhara and Tashkent in Uzbekistan report 

societal and governmental support for their security. 

Observant Muslims across Europe and Central Asia have been treated 

as potential Islamists and accused of membership in banned groups. In some 

countries, there are legal prohibitions against wearing the hijab in certain 

public contexts; in others, doing so or wearing beards marks one as an 

observant Muslim and leads to frequent requests for identification 

documents by the authorities. Muslims in some Russian cities are subject to 

harassment and societal violence. Islamic cemeteries have also been 
34

desecrated.

Observant Muslims in Russia and Central Asia have experienced 

mosque closures, detention, prison terms, and the possibility of torture, 

especially in Uzbekistan. As a result of concerns over this treatment, as well 

as arrests and harassment of members of Christian groups under

Uzbekistan’s restrictive religion law, the Secretary of State re-designated 

Uzbekistan a ―country of particular concern‖ for particularly severe 

violations of religious freedom on January 16, 2009. Since August 2008 

Uzbekistan has cracked down on the Nur movement associated with Turkish 

scholar Fethullah Gulen, arresting dozens of alleged members, many of 

whom have since been sentenced to 6-12 year prison terms. 

Religion and ethnicity are closely intertwined in the Balkans, so it is 

often difficult to identify threatening acts as primarily religious or primarily 

ethnic in origin. The USRAP has provided protection for persecuted 

Muslims, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians, as well as individuals of other 

religious minorities and mixed marriages. We will continue to work with 

UNHCR, NGOs, human rights groups, and U.S. missions to identify victims 

of religious persecution for whom resettlement is appropriate.

Voluntary Repatriation

The international community continues to support efforts to create 

favorable conditions for the return of ethnic minorities to their homes in the 

Balkans. In June 2006, Serbian, Kosovar and UN authorities signed the

Protocol on Voluntary and Sustainable Return to Kosovo, which seeks to 

improve the conditions for return by focusing on three elements: ensuring 

the safety of returnees; returning property to the displaced and rebuilding 

their houses; and creating an overall environment that sustains returns. 

Nonetheless, the rate of ethnic minority returns to Kosovo has steadily 

decreased, in part due to poor economic opportunities for returnees and in 

part because of Kosovo’s 2008 declaration of independence. Despite their 

long displacement, many of these displaced persons still express a strong 

desire to return home. If the political and economic situation stabilizes, 

returns will increasingly become a viable and desirable option for many 

displaced minorities from Kosovo. In Croatia, recent progress in providing 

housing for returnees may encourage some of the more than 70,000 refugees 

in Serbia to return to their homes, although the fact that certain categories of 

returnees do not have the same tenancy rights they held before the war may 

limit their interest. 
35

Local Integration

UNHCR has led efforts to create viable asylum systems and effective 

legal protections for refugees in the Balkans and in the countries that 

emerged from the former Soviet Union. However, ineffective 

implementation of these laws, combined with the history of national 

animosities and xenophobia throughout the region, make effective local 

integration of ethnic minorities difficult for refugees. In Russia, difficulties 

in local integration and acquisition of citizenship remain for some former 

Soviet citizens who entered Russia before 1992 and are, therefore, entitled to 

become citizens under Russian law. Like the Meskhetian Turks, they have 

been unable to obtain recognition of their Russian citizenship and thus 

remain - effectively - stateless. In Montenegro, the path to citizenship has 

been particularly slow for those displaced from Kosovo, whom the 

government considers neither refugees nor IDPs. The government of Serbia 

has recently begun implementing integration programs for some displaced 

persons from Kosovo. 

Third-Country Resettlement

The United States and other resettlement countries continue to accept 

refugees from the region. UNHCR has referred and will continue to refer to 

the United States, Canada, and other resettlement countries a number of atrisk individuals fleeing various forms of persecution within the region. 

Jewish emigration to Israel continues, with 5,400 individuals from states of 

the former Soviet Union availing themselves of this opportunity in 2008 

under the United Israel Appeal Program.

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions

In FY 2009, we estimate close to 2,500 admissions from Europe and 

Central Asia. In addition to UNHCR-referred cases, religious minorities 

processed under the Lautenberg Amendment from countries of the former 

Soviet Union constitute a significant portion of the caseload. During FY 

2009, OPE and DHS personnel processed applicants in Almaty, Ashgabat, 

Baku, Bishkek, Chisinau, Kyiv, and Tashkent.

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed FY 2010 ceiling for refugees from Europe and Central 

Asia is 2,500. This includes some 540 who will be in the final stage of 
36

admissions processing at the end of FY 2009, as well as new cases approved 

in FY 2010. Priority 2 includes individuals who will be processed under 

Lautenberg guidelines in the states of the former Soviet Union. Low 

approval rates for this Priority 2 program and fewer applications limit the 

number of admissions. We anticipate processing some Uzbek P-3 

beneficiaries during FY 2010 as well. 

Proposed FY 2010 Europe & Central Asia Program:

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 540

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 720

Priority 2 Groups 1,230

Priority 3 Family Reunification 10

 

Total Proposed Ceiling 2,500

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

According to UNHCR, in 2008 the number of refugees, asylum 

seekers, IDPs, and other people of concern in Latin America and the 

Caribbean totaled over 4 million. The ongoing conflict in Colombia 

generated the most significant numbers of refugees and IDPs in the region. 

Estimates for the number of IDPs in Colombia varies between 2.8 

(government figure) and 4.3 (NGO figure) million, representing between 6 

to 10 percent of the population. The Government of Colombia (GOC) 

registered over 389,000 IDPs in 2008. In surrounding countries, nearly 

500,000 Colombians live in refugee-like situations, but only some 50,000 

have been recognized as refugees, according to UNHCR. Ecuador, the 

country with the largest population of Colombian refugees, has an effective 

asylum process in which UNHCR participates. Several other countries in 

the region with significant refugee populations, such as Costa Rica, 

Venezuela, the Dominican Republic, and Panama have established asylum 

procedures; however, the registration and determination procedures are often 

implemented ineffectively. UNHCR is working with these countries to 

improve their asylum processes. 

The number of Colombian asylum seekers in Ecuador continues to 

rise. As of December 2008, there were approximately 50,000 Colombian 

refugees and asylum seekers in Ecuador, of whom just over 20,000 were 
37

recognized as refugees. The situation in Ecuador is UNHCR’s major 

concern in the region, where there may be an additional 135,000 ―persons of 

concern.‖ The Government of Ecuador launched an enhanced registration 

program in March under which mobile teams from the Office of the 

Directorate General for Refugees (DGR) complete the refugee registration, 

determination, and documentation processes in a single day. Within the first 

two months of the program, the DGR issued more than 5,000 refugee 

visas—which constitutes 20 percent of the total number of refugees 

recognized in the country since 2000. The goal is to register up to 50,000 

Colombian refugees along the northern border during the 12 month program. 

The GOE is also working with UNHCR to improve the regular asylum 

registration process. 

In Panama, there are approximately 1,250 recognized refugees 

(mainly Colombians) and 900 persons with official temporary protected 

status. In Costa Rica, there are approximately 14,000 recognized refugees. 

Costa Rica is working to revise its asylum system and to re-establish a 

Refugee Department. There are some 5,000 recognized refugees and asylum 

seekers in Brazil as well as approximately 10,000 in Venezuela. 

The United States began a Priority 1 resettlement program in 2002 to 

resettle Colombians referred by the U.S. Embassy in Bogotá. As instability 

in Colombia continued, we expanded the program and began to interview 

Colombians referred for resettlement consideration by UNHCR in Ecuador 

and Costa Rica. For several years, UNHCR limited its referral of 

Colombians to the U.S. program due to the possible applicability of broad 

material support inadmissibility provisions added to our immigration laws 

under the USA PATRIOT ACT of 2001 and the REAL ID Act of 2005. 

Since the implementation of an exemption benefiting individuals who 

provided material support under duress to the Revolutionary Armed Forces 

of Colombia (FARC), National Liberation Army of Colombia (ELN) and the 

United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, the number of Colombian refugees 

eligible for refugee admission to the United States has increased and 

UNHCR has increased the number of referrals to USRAP in FY 2009. 

In Haiti, political and economic conditions continue to create 

pressures. Riots over rising food prices led to the resignation of the Prime 

Minister in April 2008. A new government took office in September 2008 

just as devastating storms hit the country. Recent steps by the government 

to crack down on gang-related crime and violence have led to some 

improvements in the security situation. At the donor’s conference for Haiti 
38

in April 2009, the U.S. pledged $302 million in assistance. The current 

mandate of the UN MINUSTAH mission runs through October 2009. The 

United States continues to support UNHCR’s efforts to help governments in 

the Caribbean address the needs of Haitian and other asylum seekers and 

welcomes referrals to the USRAP.

Religious Freedom

In Latin America, religious freedom is widely recognized and 

enjoyed. An exception is Cuba. The Cuban Constitution recognizes the 

right of citizens to profess and practice any religious belief within the 

framework of respect for the law; however, the government continues to 

place restrictions on freedom of religion. The Ministry of Interior, through 

its state security apparatus, continues to monitor the country's religious 

institutions, including through surveillance, infiltration, harassment of clergy 

and church members, evictions from and confiscation of places of worship, 

and preventive detention of religious activists. Some prisoners report that 

they are denied visits by clergy. In punishment cells, prisoners were denied 

access to reading materials, including bibles. The USRAP is a component of 

the U.S. – Cuba Migration Agreement that allows for the acceptance of 

Cubans for permanent residence in the United States under the Priority 2 

category that includes religious persecution.

Voluntary Repatriation

Given the violence in Colombia from illegally armed groups (nonstate actors) and the Government of Colombia’s inability to provide full 

protection in many areas, UNHCR does not actively promote repatriation of 

Colombian refugees. UNHCR has provided some assistance to Haitians in 

Jamaica and Cuba who have chosen to return home voluntarily. 

Local Integration 

The Governments of Ecuador, Costa Rica, and Venezuela have 

maintained policies that allow Colombians in need of protection to obtain 

asylum and integrate locally. Despite such policies, their capacity to review 

applications and confer refugee status remains limited, processing is slow, 

and these countries maintain documentation requirements that are difficult 

for many applicants to fulfill. Further, as more refugees have fled to these 

countries, living conditions for Colombians have deteriorated as asylum 

seekers wait longer for status determinations and are not given the right to 
39

work. Additionally, some Colombian asylum seekers in Ecuador and 

Venezuela continue to experience harassment by illegally armed Colombian 

groups operating in these countries. Some Colombian refugees in Costa 

Rica experience harassment by people with ties to these groups. For asylum 

seekers in Panama, the situation is more complicated, as the government 

continues to be reluctant to receive Colombian refugees or confer even 

minimal protection. Many Colombians in need of protection who enter 

these countries irregularly must hide in remote border areas or in the 

shantytowns of larger cities. Some are moving to more secure communities 

further inland.

PRM is currently supporting UNHCR’s efforts to assist the 

Dominican Republic and other Caribbean countries in developing systems 

for conducting refugee status determinations for asylum seekers including 

Haitians. 

Third- and In-Country Resettlement 

In the past, local integration had been the solution best suited to 

regional refugee problems in Latin America. In recent years, however, 

third-country resettlement has become an important alternative for those 

who face physical risks and have urgent protection needs. Canada and the 

United States offer resettlement to at-risk Colombian refugees. Canada 

operates an in-country humanitarian program in Colombia, through which as 

many as 1,000 Colombians are resettled each year. Currently, the United 

States accepts referrals from the U.S. Embassy in Bogotá or from UNHCR 

and processes these cases in Ecuador or Costa Rica. Limited resettlement 

processing out of Panama will start by the end of FY2009. We are also 

exploring options for reaching Colombians who do not have access to 

UNHCR in other locations. Under the ―Solidarity Resettlement Program,‖ a 

component of the Mexico Plan of Action which sought regional solutions to 

the Colombian refugee issue, countries in the region including Argentina, 

Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Paraguay and Uruguay are working with UNHCR to 

resettle limited numbers of Colombian refugees. 

The referral of refugees for resettlement out of the Caribbean (other 

than Cuba) historically has been very limited. In FY2009, UNHCR referred 

a group of refugees with mixed nationalities located in Trinidad as well as 

individual cases in Haiti, Jamaica, and the Dominican Republic. The United 

States remains committed to considering for resettlement refugees in the 

Caribbean.
40

The United States also facilitates the resettlement to other countries of 

persons, mostly from Cuba and Haiti, who are interdicted by the U.S. Coast 

Guard or who enter Guantanamo Naval Station illegally and are found by 

DHS/USCIS to have a well-founded fear of persecution or who would more 

likely than not face torture if repatriated. From 1996 through 2009, more 

than 300 such protected persons have been resettled to seventeen countries 

in Latin America, Europe, Australia and Canada. 

The U.S. Government continues to operate an in-country refugee 

resettlement program in Cuba. We have taken steps to ensure that all 

Cubans eligible for consideration have access to the program and that 

approved refugees travel as soon as possible. Unfortunately, 

communications with refugees are sometimes intercepted by the Cuban 

government, causing delays, misunderstandings, or misinformation. Also, 

some approved refugees are not granted exit permits by the Cuban 

government. Others do not have sufficient funds to pay for the medical 

exams, passports and exit permits needed to travel. 

Cubans currently eligible to apply for admission to the United States 

through the in-country program include the following:

1. Former political prisoners;

2. Members of persecuted religious minorities;

3. Human rights activists;

4. Forced labor conscripts (1965-68); and

5. Persons deprived of their professional credentials or subjected to 

other disproportionately harsh or discriminatory treatment resulting 

from their perceived or actual political or religious beliefs.

6. Persons who have experienced or fear harm because of their 

relationship – family or social – to someone who falls under one of 

the preceding categories.

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions

We anticipate admitting over 4,500 refugees from Latin America and 

the Caribbean during FY 2009. Cubans comprise the overwhelming 

majority of refugees resettled from the region. Historically, most Cuban 

admissions were former political prisoners and forced labor conscripts who 

served sentences in the 1960s and 1970s. The program was expanded in 

1991 to include human rights activists, displaced professionals, and others 

with claims of persecution, which currently comprise the majority of 
41

admissions. In addition, we expect some 75 Colombian refugees to be 

admitted to the United States during FY 2009.

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed 5,000 ceiling for Latin America and the Caribbean for 

FY 2010 comprises Cuban refugees eligible for the in-country Priority 2 

program, a small number of UNHCR-referred Priority 1 Colombians, as well 

as a small number of Priority 3 family reunion cases. 

Proposed FY 2010 program for Latin America and the Caribbean:

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 2,000

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 200

Priority 2 In-Country Cubans 2,750

Priority 3 Family Reunification 50

Total Proposed Ceiling 5,000

NEAR EAST AND SOUTH ASIA

The Near East/South Asia region remains host to millions of refugees, 

primarily Iraqis, Palestinians, Afghans, Iranians, Tibetans, Sri Lankans, and 

Bhutanese. Few countries in the region are party to the 1951 Convention 

relating to the Status of Refugees and/or its 1967 Protocol. Nonetheless, to 

their credit, many host governments allow for the presence of refugees 

within their borders.

UNHCR, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), IOM, 

World Food Program (WFP), the United Nations Relief and Works Agency 

for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), and other humanitarian 

organizations work with refugees in the region. Some countries have 

provided long-term protection, mainly to Palestinians, Afghans, and some 

Africans. Other countries in the region have provided long-term asylum for 

Tibetan, Bhutanese, and Sri Lankan refugees. Refugees identified by 

UNHCR for third-country resettlement include Iraqis in Jordan, Syria, 

Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, Yemen, the Gulf States, and India; Bhutanese in 

Nepal; Afghans in Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Syria, and India; and Iranians in 

Turkey and Syria.
42

Millions of Iraqis are displaced. While exact figures are unavailable, 

hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees are believed to be living in 

neighboring countries, primarily Syria and Jordan, with smaller numbers in 

Lebanon, Egypt, Turkey and Iran. As of March 2009, UNHCR registration 

rolls included over 300,000 Iraqis. The Iraqi government and IOM estimate 

that 2.8 million Iraqis are internally displaced, 1.6 million of whom fled their 

homes in the period following the February 2006 Samara mosque bombing. 

More than 40,000 third-country refugees (including Palestinians and Iranian 

Kurds) remain in Iraq.

Despite the voluntary repatriation of over 5.3 million Afghan refugees 

since 2002, Pakistan continues to host approximately 1.7 million 

documented Afghans, and Iran continues to host approximately 900,000 

registered Afghan refugees, many of whom have been resident in these 

countries for decades. Hundreds of thousands of Afghans, mostly 

unaccompanied men, are believed to live and work in Pakistan and Iran 

without proper documentation. The number of Afghan refugees and asylum 

seekers in India registered with UNHCR is over 9,600. Identifying durable 

solutions remains an important component of UNHCR’s strategy in India; 

integration of long-staying ethnic Afghan refugees, many of whom have 

lived in India from 15 to 27 years, is a key element of this strategy.

Approximately 108,000 Bhutanese refugees of ethnic Nepali origin 

have lived in seven camps in eastern Nepal since the early 1990s. The 

population of the camps has been reduced to about 93,000 refugees with the 

advent of third country resettlement programs in 2008. This population fled 

Bhutan due to the Royal Government of Bhutan’s (RGOB) policy of ―one 

nation and one people‖ (also referred to as ―Bhutanization‖). Aimed at 

forcing cultural integration of ethnic minorities and strengthening national

integration, this policy has resulted in the denial of basic rights of ethnic 

Nepalese from Bhutan. Despite fifteen rounds of formal negotiations 

between Bhutan and Nepal to resolve the issue and secure the right of return 

for ethnic Nepalese from Bhutan, to date, none have been permitted to return 

to Bhutan. 

Religious Freedom 

Persecution of religious minorities is common in certain countries in 

the Middle East and South Asia. In Pakistan, blasphemy laws, anti-Ahmadi 

laws, and other discriminatory legislation have been used to target religious 

minorities, including Shi’as, Christians, Hindus, and Ahmadis. Sectarian 
43

violence between majority Sunnis and minority Shi’as has claimed hundreds 

of lives in recent years. In India, enactment of ―anti-conversion‖ legislation 

in some states has resulted in harassment of minorities. State and local 

government responses to extremist violence against religious minorities, 

particularly Muslims and Christians, are often inadequate. In Afghanistan, 

religious freedom is limited due to constitutional contradictions, legislative 

ambiguity, and deference to Shi’a interpretations of shari’a law.

In Saudi Arabia, Muslims who do not adhere to the officially 

sanctioned version of Sunni Islam can face severe repercussions, and the 

minority Shi’a Muslim and Ismaili communities are subject to 

discrimination. Public non-Muslim worship is prohibited. In several 

countries in the region, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, the conversion by a 

Muslim to another religion is a criminal act punishable by death. It is also 

illegal for a Saudi woman to marry a non-Muslim man. In Iran, certain 

minority religions (Bahais, Sufis, Jews, Zoroastrians, and Christians) 

continue to face arrest, harassment and discrimination. In Egypt, converts to 

Christianity from Islam are viewed as apostates and are subject to severe 

violations of religious freedom by both the government and society. In 

some countries in the region, most notably Egypt, those accused of apostasy 

are subject to severe governmental repression and societal violence. 

Sectarian violence in Iraq has resulted in what UNHCR considers the largest 

dislocation in the Middle East since the Palestinian exodus following the 

creation of the State of Israel. Small religious minority communities in 

particular, such as the Christians and Sabean-Mandaeans, have experienced 

wide-scale displacements. 

The USRAP provides resettlement access in various ways to refugees 

who suffer religious persecution. The Specter Amendment, first enacted as 

sec. 213, Division E, of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 (P.L. 

108-199), provides that Iranian religious minorities designated as category 

members benefit from a reduced evidentiary standard for establishing a wellfounded fear of persecution. They are eligible to apply under Priority 2. 

Iranian refugees have also gained access to the program through Priority 3. 

In addition, the USRAP accepts UNHCR and embassy referrals of religious 

minorities of various nationalities in the region. Nationals of any country, 

including ―countries of particular concern‖ such as Saudi Arabia, may be 

referred to the U.S. program by UNHCR or a U.S. embassy for reasons of 

religious persecution.
44

Voluntary Repatriation

After the fall of the Taliban, voluntary repatriation to Afghanistan 

proceeded on a massive scale for several years, both with and without 

UNHCR assistance. More than 5.3 million Afghan refugees, the majority 

from Pakistan and Iran, have returned to Afghanistan since 2002. Over 3.6 

million were assisted by UNHCR in the largest refugee repatriation in 

UNHCR’s history. However, this massive repatriation has taxed the 

capacity of Afghanistan to absorb further refugee returns.

In 2008, Pakistan agreed to drop its unilateral deadline of the end of 

2009 for all Afghan refugees to depart Pakistan. In 2009 Pakistan agreed to 

work with UNHCR to extend refugee proof- of- registration cards until the 

end of 2012. Still, it is unlikely that all of the remaining 1.7 million 

registered Afghans will repatriate by the end of 2012. About 278,000 

Afghan refugees volunteered for assisted repatriation in 2008, and UNHCR 

has projected that perhaps 150,000 will do so in 2009. UNHCR’s and the 

International Organization for Migration’s assessment is that the continuing 

migration of Afghans in both directions across the Afghan-Pakistani border 

is part of a larger process of economic and social migration that has been 

occurring for centuries. Many of the Afghans who are choosing to stay in 

Pakistan are no longer seeking refuge from violence or persecution. They 

are, rather, seeking economic opportunities, fleeing poverty, visiting family, 

or remaining in place until security conditions and the absorptive capacity 

for returnees to Afghanistan improves. UNHCR is working with the 

Government of Pakistan and the international community to develop policies 

and programs to encourage voluntary returns to the extent possible and to 

manage the population of Afghans that may remain in Pakistan for the 

longer term. IOM is seeking a greater role in border management and in 

developing regional mechanisms for economic migration that would bolster 

protection for Afghans.

The return prospects of the Afghan population in India have been 

assessed as extremely limited given the profile of the cases. Generally, they 

have no family/social links in their country of origin, which is fundamental 

to their security upon return. Many of the refugees have now married 

Indians, whose integration capacity in Afghanistan is seen as remote given 

the cultural and religious differences between the two countries. For some 

refugees there are heightened security risks and problems for return 

precisely because of their protracted exile in India. Children, particularly 

girls and young women, who have grown up in India in a more liberal 
45

environment may not be able to adjust. In 2008, UNHCR only assisted three 

cases comprising four persons to voluntarily repatriate from the urban 

caseload. Thus far in 2009, one refugee has repatriated while another one is 

currently being processed for repatriation.

In the middle of 2008, displaced Iraqis began returning in larger 

numbers. Reports indicate that recent improvements in security were the 

overwhelming impetus for these increased returns. Returns remain slow, 

neighborhood-specific, and concentrated in Baghdad and its environs. 

Reports of total 2008 returns range from 220,000 to almost 300,000 persons;

of which about 11 percent were returning refugees. UNHCR maintains that 

the basic conditions for sustainable, large-scale return of refugees to Iraq, in 

conditions of safety and dignity, are not yet in place. In October 2008, 

UNHCR began to facilitate voluntary returns to Iraq through individual case 

management protocols and assisted the return of 3,751 Iraqis by the end of 

the calendar year. The long term U.S. strategy for Iraq’s displaced is to 

help Iraq develop the capacity to reintegrate returning Iraqis into stable 

neighborhoods, while maintaining resettlement for the most vulnerable. The 

international community continues to provide protection and assistance to 

Iraqis living in neighboring countries. 

The United States has worked multilaterally with other interested 

governments in urging the Royal Government of Bhutan to allow for the 

voluntary repatriation of Bhutanese refugees to Bhutan under acceptable 

terms and conditions and preclude further refugee outflows in the future. 

With the recent developments in Sri Lanka, UNHCR anticipates that there 

may be an increased demand for repatriation by Tamils currently residing in 

India.

Local Integration 

Few countries in the region offer local integration to refugees. 

UNHCR and the Governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan have a Tripartite 

Agreement that provides for the orderly, voluntary return of Afghan 

refugees. The Tripartite Agreement with Iran expired on March 19, 2008,

but an ad hoc agreement remains in place. As mentioned above, the 

agreement with Pakistan allows Afghan refugees who hold a ―Proof of 

Registration‖ (POR) card to extend their POR cards and reside in Pakistan 

through 2012. Children born in Pakistan to Afghan POR holders will also 

be able to register, on their head-of-household parent’s card if under five 

years old, and with their own POR card if five or older. In partnership with 
46

the Government of Pakistan and UNDP, UNHCR is shifting its focus away 

from assistance to Afghan refugees in South Asia in favor of a more broadbased development plan for the region, addressing both refugee and host 

community needs. These are referred to as the Refugee-Hosting Areas and 

Refugee-Affected Areas (RAHA/RAA) initiatives. 

The key to the successful transition from short-term humanitarian 

maintenance to long-term development is acceptance by the governments of 

Afghanistan and Pakistan that they are best served by a system of managed 

migration across their border. Progress has been made in this area; some 

within the government of Pakistan have publicly acknowledged that some 

Afghans in Pakistan are likely to stay. The majority of Afghans who 

repatriated in the last few years had fled Taliban rule relatively recently. 

Many of the Afghans remaining in Iran and Pakistan left Afghanistan in the 

early years of the Soviet occupation. More than half were born in exile, 

and 74 percent are under age 28. Many of these refugees are unlikely to 

return without strong economic and social incentives. 

Reports indicate that Iraqis are still able to obtain visas at the border 

between Iraq and Syria. Visas are routinely valid for three months and 

renewable by exiting and reentering the country. In February 2008, Jordan 

began requiring Iraqis to apply for Jordanian visas in advance of entry. This 

visa policy substantially reduced the number of Iraqis seeking refuge in 

Jordan. 

Local integration of Iraqi refugees in Syria and Jordan is not an 

option, although both governments have permitted Iraqis to remain on a 

temporary basis. Iraqis in Syria and Jordan are not legally defined as 

refugees, but rather as visitors. However, both governments allow UNHCR 

to register Iraqis. With help from the international community, the 

governments of Syria and Jordan have allowed Iraqi students to enroll in 

public schools; however enrollments in both countries have been lower than 

anticipated. 

Despite the steadily increasing number of asylum seekers, India does 

not have a clear national policy for the treatment of refugees, and UNHCR 

has no formal status in the country. India recognizes and aids certain 

groups, including Sri Lankan Tamils and Tibetans in the 117 settlements for 

Sri Lankans and 37 settlements for Tibetans throughout the country. Many 

Tibetans and Sri Lankan Tamils in India are permitted limited work 

opportunities within the informal economy and receive some social benefits. 
47

India also permits UNHCR to assist other so-called urban refugees in New 

Delhi, primarily Afghans, Burmese, Somalis, Iraqis, Palestinians, Iranians, 

and Sudanese. 

UNHCR earlier negotiated an agreement with the Government of 

India whereby India would facilitate access to citizenship for Hindu and 

Sikh Afghan refugees who meet the standard criteria to acquire Indian 

citizenship, while UNHCR would pursue third country resettlement 

opportunities for other long-staying ethnic Afghan refugees. Naturalization 

clinics were established to support the citizenship process for Hindu and 

Sikh Afghans, and UNHCR has intensified its efforts to ensure that all 

eligible refugees submit applications for Indian citizenship by December 31, 

2009. These concrete efforts are aimed at bringing to an end one of the 

world’s longest-standing urban refugee situations. 

Third-Country Resettlement

The USRAP anticipates large-scale processing of Iraqis, Bhutanese, 

and Iranians during FY 2010. The U.S. Government recognizes that the 

possibility of third-country resettlement must be available to the most 

vulnerable Iraqi refugees. We have processing facilities in Amman, 

Baghdad, Damascus, Cairo, Istanbul, and Beirut. UNHCR has referred over 

20,000 individuals to the U.S. program this fiscal year and will continue 

making referrals in coming months. We project the admission of at least 

17,000 Iraqi refugees during FY2009.

While most Iraqis gain access to the USRAP via a referral from 

UNHCR, we are also facilitating direct access to the USRAP for Iraqis with 

close U.S. affiliations in some processing locations. The passage of the 

Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act, enacted January 28, 2008, created new categories 

of Iraqis who are eligible for direct access (P-2) to the USRAP, both inside 

and outside Iraq. Currently, beneficiaries of P-2 categories who may seek 

access to the USRAP in Jordan, Egypt and Iraq include:

1. Iraqis who work/worked on a full-time basis as 

interpreters/translators for the USG or MNF-I in Iraq; 

2. Iraqis who are/were employed by the USG in Iraq; 

3. Iraqis who are/were employees of an organization or entity closely 

associated with the U.S. mission in Iraq that has received USG 

funding through an official and documented contract, award, grant 

or cooperative agreement;
48

4. Iraqis who are/were employed in Iraq by a U.S.-based media 

organization or non-governmental organization; 

5. Spouses, sons, daughters, parents and siblings of individuals 

described in the four categories above, or of an individual eligible 

for a Special Immigrant Visa as a result of his/her employment by 

or on behalf of the USG in Iraq, including if the individual is no 

longer alive, provided that the relationship is verified;

6. Iraqis who are the spouses, sons, daughters, parents, brothers or 

sisters of a citizen of the United States, or who are the spouses or 

unmarried sons or daughters of a Permanent Resident Alien of the 

United States, as established by their being or becoming 

beneficiaries of approved family-based I-130 Immigrant Visa 

Petitions. 

We established an OPE unit in Baghdad in FY 2008, but given the 

security and logistical challenges associated with operating an OPE in Iraq,

we expect our processing capacity to remain greater in neighboring 

countries. Nonetheless, refugee processing in Iraq is a high priority for the 

USG and we believe it has significant potential, particularly to benefit Iraqis 

associated with U.S. efforts in Iraq. 

Middle Eastern and South Asian refugees in most of Europe avail 

themselves of the asylum systems of the countries in which they are located. 

In Vienna, however, certain Iranian religious minorities (Baha’is, 

Zoroastrians, Jews, Mandaeans, and Christians) may be processed for U.S. 

resettlement using special procedures authorized by the Government of 

Austria. U.S. law provides a reduced evidentiary standard for Iran’s 

religious minorities, and more than 99 percent of eligible applicants are 

approved for admission to the U.S. In FY 2009, the Austrian Government 

made more transit visas available to applicants to the program at its Embassy 

in Tehran, enabling the U.S. to process higher numbers. During the same 

timeframe however, fewer Iranian religious minorities applied to the 

program. The United States also processes Iranian religious minorities 

(primarily Baha’i) in Turkey through special procedures involving fast-track 

refugee status determination and referral by UNHCR. 

The Government of Nepal publicly announced in November 2007 its 

support for third-country resettlement as a durable solution for ethnic Nepali 

Bhutanese refugees. Resettlement processing of these refugees is now fully 

underway and the United States is committed to considering for resettlement 
49

as many refugees as express interest. As of May 31, 2009, more than 15,000 

Bhutanese refugees have been resettled to the U.S. and other countries.

U.S. resettlement processing resumed in Pakistan in 2009 with the 

first large-scale refugee adjudications since mid -2007. UNHCR has begun 

to refer larger numbers of vulnerable Afghan refugees in Pakistan for whom 

repatriation is not an option. UNHCR continues to give priority to the 

remaining protracted ethnic Afghan refugees in India for resettlement and 

has already referred several hundred Afghans in India who cannot naturalize 

or repatriate. We are currently exploring modalities for processing 

vulnerable Tibetan refugees in the region. 

FY 2009 U.S. Admissions

We estimate the admission of more than 39,000 refugees from the 

region in FY 2009. These will include about 5,500 Iranians processed in 

Vienna and Istanbul, over 17,000 Iraqis, over 13,000 Bhutanese, as well as 

some 1,000 Afghans and others. 

FY 2010 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed regional ceiling for refugees from the Near East and 

South Asia for FY 2010 is 35,000, including vulnerable Iraqis, Bhutanese, 

Iranians, and Afghans. We expect individual UNHCR referrals of various 

religious and ethnic groups in the region, including Assyrians, Mandeans, as 

well as Iranian Kurds and Iranian Arabs (Ahwazis). In addition, Ahmadi 

Muslims in many locations and Afghans in the former Soviet Union, 

Pakistan, India, and elsewhere will be included. Small refugee populations 

in Libya, Algeria, and elsewhere are also under consideration for individual 

referrals. 

Proposed FY 2010 Near East/South Asia program:

Approved pipeline from FY 2009 18,000

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 8,900

Priority 2 Groups 8,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification 100

Total Proposed Ceiling 35,000
50

TABLE III

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

RESETTLEMENT ACCESS FOR REFUGEES FROM COUNTRIES DESIGNATED BY THE 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE AS COUNTRIES OF PARTICULAR CONCERN*

COUNTRY OF PARTICULAR 

CONCERN

PRIORITY 1 PRIORITY 2 PRIORITY 3

Eritrea X X X

Sudan X X

China X

Burma X X X

DPRK X X

Iran X X X

Saudi Arabia X

Uzbekistan X X

* Countries currently designated under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, 

as amended. Section 402(b)(1)(A) defines a country of “particular concern” as a 

country that “has engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious 

freedom in that country during the preceding 12 months or since the date of the last 

review of that country”.
51

IV. DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS

In FY 2008, the USRAP admitted 60,191 refugees from 51 countries. 

Over half were originally from either the countries of Burma or Iraq. (See 

Table IV.)

The demographic characteristics of refugee arrivals from the 20 

largest source countries (representing 100 percent of total arrivals) in FY 

2008 illustrate the variation among refugee groups. The median age of all 

FY 2008 arrivals was 26 years and ranged from 19 years for arrivals from 

Burundi to 36 years of age for arrivals from Iran. In FY 2008, 48.5 percent 

of all arriving refugees were female and 51.5 percent of all arriving refugees 

were male. Males predominated among refugees from Pakistan (58.7 

percent), Sierra Leone (56.6 percent), and Rwanda (55.6 percent). (See 

Table V.)

Considerable variation among refugee groups can be seen among 

specific age categories. Refugees under the age of five ranged from a high 

of 17.9 percent among Eritrean arrivals to a low of 2.4 percent of those from 

Iran. The number of school-aged children (from five to 17 years of age) 

varied from a high of over 40.0 percent of arrivals from Burundi to a low of 

15.2 percent of those from Iran. The number of working-aged refugees (18 

to 64 years of age) varied from a high of 75.4 percent of those from Iran to a 

low of 48.2 percent of individuals from Burundi. Retirement-aged refugees 

(65 years or older) ranged from a high of 14.6 percent of arrivals from 

Vietnam to a low of less than one percent of those from Congo, the 

Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Rwanda. Of the total arrivals in FY 

2008, some 8.9 percent were under the age of five, 27.1 percent were of 

school age, 64.6 percent were of working age, and 3.8 percent were of 

retirement age. (See Table VI.)

During FY 2008, 67.8 percent of all arriving refugees resettled in 12 

states. The majority were placed in California (15.75 percent), followed by 

Texas (8.52 percent), Florida (6.18 percent), New York (6.03 percent), 

Michigan (5.48 percent), Arizona (4.99 percent), and Illinois (4.04). The 

state of Georgia (3.86 percent), North Carolina (3.78 percent), Washington 

(3.74 percent), Pennsylvania (2.89 percent) and Indiana (2.53 percent) each 

resettled significant percentages of the total of newly arrived refugees. (See

Table VII.)

TABLE IV
52

Refugee Arrivals By Country of Origin

Fiscal Year 2008

Country of Origin

Arrivals

Number % of Total

Afghanistan 576 0.96%

Bhutan 5,320 8.84%

Burma 18,139 30.14%

Burundi 2,889 4.80%

Cambodia 8 0.01%

Cameroon 2 0.00%

Central African Republic 56 0.09%

Chad 23 0.04%

China 43 0.07%

Colombia 94 0.16%

Congo 197 0.33%

Cuba 4,177 6.94%

Dem. Rep. Congo 727 1.21%

Ecuador 3 0.00%

Egypt 5 0.01%

Eritrea 251 0.42%

Ethiopia 299 0.50%

Former Soviet Union* 2,342 3.89%

Former Yugoslavia** 1 0.00%

Gambia 6 0.01%

Guinea 3 0.00%

Guinea-Bissau 2 0.00%

Iran 5,270 8.76%

Iraq 13,822 22.96%

Ivory Coast 30 0.05%

Korea, North 37 0.06%

Kuwait 1 0.00%
53

Country of Origin

Arrivals

Number % of Total

Laos 59 0.10%

Lebanon 2 0.00%

Liberia 992 1.65%

Mauritania 26 0.04%

Morocco 3 0.00%

Nepal 4 0.01%

Nigeria 76 0.13%

Pakistan 104 0.17%

Palestinian Territories 9 0.01%

Rwanda 108 0.18%

Senegal 1 0.00%

Sierra Leone 99 0.16%

Somalia 2,523 4.19%

Sri Lanka 1 0.00%

Sudan 375 0.62%

Syria 24 0.04%

Tanzania 1 0.00%

Tibet 7 0.01%

Togo 204 0.34%

Turkey 6 0.01%

Uganda 42 0.07%

Venezuela 3 0.00%

Vietnam 1,196 1.99%

Zimbabwe 3 0.00%

TOTAL 60,191 100.0%

*Former Soviet Union includes Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, 

Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, 

Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.

**Former Yugoslavia includes Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, and

Yugoslavia.

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
54

TABLE V

Median Age and Gender of Refugee Arrivals, Fiscal Year 2008

Rank

(# of 

Arrivals) Country of Origin

Refugees

Admitted

Median

Age

%

Females

%

Males

1 Burma 18,139 22 44.7% 55.3%

2 Iraq 13,822 27 51.6% 48.4%

3 Bhutan 5,320 28 48.0% 52.0%

4 Iran 5,270 36 50.3% 49.7%

5 Cuba 4,177 33 49.0% 51.0%

6 Burundi 2,889 19 49.2% 50.8%

7 Somalia 2,523 22 48.7% 51.3%

8 Former Soviet Union* 2,342 29 51.9% 48.1%

9 Vietnam 1,196 35 50.6% 49.4%

10 Liberia 992 23 54.9% 45.1%

11 Dem. Rep. Congo 727 20 46.6% 53.4%

12 Afghanistan 576 25 48.1% 51.9%

13 Sudan 375 21 48.0% 52.0%

14 Ethiopia 299 24 47.8% 52.2%

15 Eritrea 251 22 47.8% 52.2%

16 Togo 204 24 50.0% 50.0%

17 Congo 197 22 54.3% 45.7%

18 Rwanda 108 20 44.4% 55.6%

19 Pakistan 104 25 41.3% 58.7%

20 Sierra Leone 99 27 43.4% 56.6%

All Other Countries 581 26 49.9% 50.1%

TOTAL 60,191 26 48.5% 51.5%

*Former Soviet Union includes countries of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, 

Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, 

Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
55

TABLE VI

Select Age Categories of Refugee Arrivals, Fiscal Year 2008

Rank

(# of 

Arrivals) Country of Origin

Under 

5 Yrs

School 

Age 

(5-17)

Working 

Age

(18-64)

Retirement 

Age

(=or > 65)

1 Burma 12.0% 28.3% 62.7% 1.4%

2 Iraq 9.1% 27.1% 64.6% 3.3%

3 Bhutan 4.7% 22.5% 73.7% 3.9%

4 Iran 2.4% 15.2% 75.4% 10.0%

5 Cuba 4.1% 20.8% 71.6% 6.4%

6 Burundi 15.4% 40.0% 48.2% 1.6%

7 Somalia 10.2% 33.5% 61.0% 2.0%

8 Former Soviet Union* 8.7% 29.3% 58.7% 8.5%

9 Vietnam 4.4% 26.0% 58.9% 14.6%

10 Liberia 8.0% 38.1% 55.6% 4.1%

11 Dem. Rep. Congo 12.0% 38.1% 55.3% 0.7%

12 Afghanistan 4.7% 34.7% 65.8% 1.0%

13 Sudan 12.5% 32.8% 58.9% 1.1%

14 Ethiopia 5.7% 30.4% 70.6% 1.3%

15 Eritrea 17.9% 23.5% 58.6% 2.0%

16 Togo 13.7% 28.4% 57.8% 2.0%

17 Congo 9.6% 39.6% 54.8% 0.5%

18 Rwanda 13.0% 32.4% 56.5% 0.9%

19 Pakistan 10.6% 24.0% 67.3% 1.0%

20 Sierra Leone 4.0% 29.3% 68.7% 7.1%

Other Countries 9.8% 33.7% 58.7% 2.2%

TOTAL 8.9% 27.1% 64.6% 3.8%

*Former Soviet Union includes countries of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, 

Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, 

Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.

NOTE: Totals may exceed 100% due to overlapping age categories.

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
56

TABLE VII

Refugee Arrivals By State of Initial Resettlement, Fiscal Year 2008

STATE

Refugee 

Arrivals

Amerasian 

Arrivals

Total

Arrivals 

% of 

Total Arrivals 

to U.S.

Alabama 177 0 177 0.29%

Alaska 52 0 52 0.09%

Arizona 3,005 0 3,005 4.99%

Arkansas 9 3 12 0.02%

California 9,472 8 9,480 15.75%

Colorado 1,264 0 1,264 2.10%

Connecticut 381 0 381 0.63%

Delaware 1 0 1 0.00%

District of Columbia 34 0 34 0.06%

Florida 3,715 7 3,722 6.18%

Georgia 2,325 0 2,325 3.86%

Hawaii 15 0 15 0.02%

Idaho 1,024 0 1,024 1.70%

Illinois 2,429 0 2,429 4.04%

Indiana 1,525 0 1,525 2.53%

Iowa 593 4 597 0.99%

Kansas 329 0 329 0.55%

Kentucky 1,215 0 1,215 2.02%

Louisiana 148 3 151 0.25%

Maine 60 0 60 0.10%

Maryland 865 0 865 1.44%

Massachusetts 1,110 3 1,113 1.85%

Michigan 3,292 6 3,298 5.48%

Minnesota 1,329 0 1,329 2.21%

Mississippi 9 0 9 0.01%

Missouri 996 0 996 1.65%

Nebraska 645 3 648 1.08%

Nevada 461 0 461 0.77%

New Hampshire 521 0 521 0.87%

New Jersey 741 0 741 1.23%

New Mexico 174 0 174 0.29%
57

STATE

Refugee 

Arrivals

Amerasian 

Arrivals

Total

Arrivals 

% of 

Total Arrivals 

to U.S.

New York 3,628 3 3,631 6.03%

North Carolina 2,274 4 2,278 3.78%

North Dakota 407 0 407 0.68%

Ohio 1,348 4 1,352 2.25%

Oklahoma 207 4 211 0.35%

Oregon 687 0 687 1.14%

Pennsylvania 1,729 10 1,739 2.89%

Puerto Rico 9 0 9 0.01%

Rhode Island 134 0 134 0.22%

South Carolina 111 0 111 0.18%

South Dakota 317 0 317 0.53%

Tennessee 847 0 847 1.41%

Texas 5,113 17 5,130 8.52%

Utah 914 0 914 1.52%

Vermont 329 0 329 0.55%

Virginia 1,467 5 1,472 2.45%

Washington 2,254 0 2,254 3.74%

West Virginia 5 0 5 0.01

Wisconsin 411 0 411 0.68%

Total 60,107 84 60,191 100.0%

Note: Arrival figures do not reflect secondary migration.

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
58

TABLE VIII

ESTIMATED COSTS OF REFUGEE PROCESSING, MOVEMENT, AND RESETTLEMENT

FY 2009 AND FY 2010 ($ MILLIONS)

AGENCY

ESTIMATED

FY 2009

(BY 

DEPARTMENT)

ESTIMATED 

FY 2010

(BY DEPARTMENT)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

 Refugee Processing $21.8 $22.9

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration

 Refugee Admissions $345.7* $358.9** 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families,

Office of Refugee Resettlement

 Refugee Resettlement 

 $523.0 *** $510.0 ***

TOTAL $890.5 $891.8 

* Includes FY 2009 MRA appropriation of $282.7 million, $29.3 million in carry-forward from 

FY 2008, $28.6 million projected IOM loan collections/carry-forward, and approximately $5.1 

million in FY 2009 recoveries.

** Includes FY 2010 MRA budget request of $305.4 million, $16.3 million in projected carryforward from FY 2009, $30 million projected IOM loan collections/carry-forward, and projected 

$7.25 million in FY 2010 recoveries.

*** HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlement’s (ORR) refugee benefits and services are also 

provided to asylees, Cuban and Haitian entrants, certain Amerasians from Vietnam, victims of a 

severe form of trafficking who have received certification or eligibility letters from ORR, and 

certain family members who are accompanying or following to join victims of severe forms of 

trafficking, and some victims of torture, as well as Iraqi and Afghan Special Immigrants and 

their spouses and unmarried children under the age of 21. None of these additional groups is 

included in the refugee admissions ceiling except Amerasians. This category does not include 

costs associated with the Unaccompanied Alien Children’s Program, Transitional Assistance for 

Needy Families (TANF), Medicaid, or Supplemental Security Income programs. 
59

TABLE IX

UNHCR Resettlement Statistics by Resettlement Country

CY 2008 Departures

RESETTLEMENT 

COUNTRY TOTAL

PERCENT OF TOTAL

RESETTLED

United States* 48,793 74.43%

Canada 5,542 8.45%

Australia 5,133 7.83%

Sweden 1,541 2.35%

New Zealand 775 1.18%

Norway 720 1.09%

United Kingdom 697 1.06%

Finland 674 1.02%

Netherlands 575 0.87%

Denmark 407 0.62%

France 276 0.42%

Ireland 87 0.13%

Argentina 78 0.11%

Czech Rep. 46 0.07%

Chile 45 0.06%

Italy 30 0.04%

Other** 129 0.19%

TOTAL 65,548

*Includes departures to the U.S. of individuals referred to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program 

by UNHCR.

**Departures from all other countries