This is about a news report I read just before Xmas. Like so many things before a big holiday it got a little lost in the mix but I didn't want to just leave it because it was a few days old. There are important issues raised by this story that I think are worth considering and they mustn't get lost in the news cycle...
The story concerns allegations that Australia's Federal Police are collaborating with Pakistan's intelligence services to profile and identify people likely to flee the country, thereby stopping them before they leave. Amnesty International has condemned the Australian governments actions as "questionable and sordid", but you can read the full report here:
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/2012-12-20/australia-helping-pakistan-stop-hazara-asylum-seekers-from-leaving-report/1064234
There's a lot of rhetoric in Australia about stemming the flow of asylum seekers and breaking the business model of people smugglers. Politicians wax lyrical about stopping the boats and ending deaths at sea. The upshot of this talk is to paint a picture of individuals illegally entering the country by collaborating with dubious criminals. By preventing individuals from taking 'dangerous' boat journeys, the story goes, the Australian government is helping them; saving them from almost inevitable death at sea. What this picture ignores is the circumstance that led to an individual fleeing and the reason they are seeking asylum, often from their own government.
The rhetoric of Australia's asylum seeker policy is one of 'help', whereas the reality exemplified in the above report is one of prevention. Targeting potential refugees at the source and stopping them before they flee the Australian government does nothing to address the issues that lead people to flee their homes and countries. This strategy may stem the growth of the numbers of refugees globally but it does not prevent individuals from being ethnically targeted and persecuted by majority powers in their country.
Why would Australia promote a policy more geared towards preventing refugee arrivals than helping them? Australia's obligations as a signatory to the UN convention on the rights of refugees mean that it must act to help refugees arriving on it's shores. However this issue over more than a decade has developed to become a veritable political albatross, with no ruling party willing to make the hard calls that our obligations demand. The upshot of this is rather than act to truly help refugees, a stance both morally and legally correct, the powers that be act to prevent arrivals thereby leaving them with no one to help.
This issue is more complicated than my cursory description suggests. What is not more complicated though is the distinction between truly helping and just preventing. It may be comfortable to hide behind claims of saving lives at sea, but that does not address the fact that these people still face possible death at home if they do not receive asylum. It may look better on paper if individuals never flee, as in the story on Pakistan, but just because these people are not official refugees does not mean they will not suffer persecution.
We need to consider what we want from our government on this issue. Politically expedient results are not enough when they come at the cost of human rights. Australians must demand it's government act to truly help asylum seekers, not just prevent their arrival, and they must do it now.
No comments:
Post a Comment