Yet the conferees dropped this unanimously passed House provision because they did not want to authorize new money this year. But I want to repeat. my amendment would not cause the need for funding this year. What it would do would be to reduce the U.S. necessity for contributing vast amounts on a unilateral basis toward refugee resettlement. Therefore. it represents an effort to internationalize the refugee problem. I think other nations of the world and the Asian Development Bank itself should play a role in the handling of refugee resettlement. This problem is growing more acute daily. and yearly. It is a problem which is not going to go away. It is imperative that the burden of refugee support be shared in the international community. This country gives tremendous amounts of direct aid to countries and relief organizations for refugee camps and resettlement. These direct demands will only increase in the future. The recent disappointing results of the pledging conference for Cambodian refugees shows that international fervor for contributing has subsided. A longterm problem cannot be solved by crisistype mechanisms. My amendment would have set up a longterm mechanism to deal with the refugee problem. My intent was to aid those countries impacted by temporary asylum for refugees. as well as development in presently underdeveloped and underpopulated areas of Asia without disrupting the existing social and economic balance. The nations of temporary first asylum must be assured that they will not be saddled with a permanent "residue" of refugees for whom they must shoulder the entire burden. By the same token. the United States should not have to shoulder the entire burden of financial support. although we are willing and able to take on a substantial portion of it. I believe that the conferees were mistaken in dropping this House provision.
Keywords matched
refugee refugees