Between June 21 and 23, at 8:30pm, I joined many other Australians in turning on my television to SBS for the three part documentary series "Go Back To Where You Came From".
Although there are extremes on either side of this discussion, many people accept that it is good and right for Australia to assist and welcome UNHCR registered refugees who have applied through the 'appropriate' legal channels. These same people, however, reject the idea that Australia might assist and accept those who are not registered with the UN refugee agency and have not applied for Australian residency before arriving in Australian territory by boat. On the surface this seems an understandable viewpoint. Certainly, Australians are not heartless. In fact, Australian citizens have shown extreme financial generosity in the way we have responded to many traumatic situations, both within Australia and around the world. However, many would see that laws are put in place for a reason, and it is not fair for those who make the effort to apply through the correct procedures to be superseded by those who cut in line and choose not to do the right thing. As I have previously mentioned, though, this is a complex issue, and not one that can be properly explored without looking deeper.
Some of those who seek asylum in our country, including many who are fleeing the war-torn middle east, do not have access to either the UNHCR, an Australian embassy or any other means of applying for asylum and refuge in Australia through the legally prescribed channels. These people, commonly referred to as 'queue jumpers', in reality, have no access to this so-called 'queue' at all. Is it really fair for us to reject these people, who are trying to escape the extreme danger, fear and trauma of their homeland, simply because they have the added misfortune of coming from a country that does not allow them to make an application for refuge in Australia?
Having said that, it does not seem right for those who have gone through the process of applying for asylum in Australia, to be left behind to suffer in UNHCR camps while those who arrive by boat are re-settled in freedom.
Why, though, does it have to be one or the other?
There is a limit to the number of refugees and asylum seekers that Australia can support and re-settle. However, I doubt that the several hundred who arrive in Australian waters by boat each year come near to the number that we can afford to accomodate.
Politicians have been heard to argue that a hard line must be taken to "stop the boats" due to the danger that less than seaworthy boats pose to the people that pay to travel in them. It is most definately true to say that those who operate the boats take advantage of human beings who are vulnerable and desperate, risking the lives of those who seek asylum in order to selfishly increase the health of their own bank balance. Unless action is taken to give these people seeking asylum a safe means by which to travel to Australia (in order to put the people smugglers out of business), or to solve the problem from which they are fleeing in the first place, how is "stopping the boats" really solving anything?
Somehow, our current government have come to the conclusion that sending those who come by boat to Malaysia is the ultimate and best solution. Malaysia is not a signatory to the UNHCR and is known to physically abuse those seeking refuge and asylum. They have also been seen to arrest and imprison refugees and asylum seekers with little interest even to whether they are registered or not with the UNHCR. As a result, those who come to Malaysia after fleeing persecution and danger in their country of birth continue to live in fear. Parents are unable to work, children are not free to go outside and play. Is it any wonder that so many human beings reach the point where they are desperate enough to take up a people smuggler's offer? Yet, that is what our government wants to send them back to. We have been told that those who enter Australian waters and are turned around will be protected and kept safe in Malaysia by Australia. We have not, however, been told how long this protection will last and how they will manage to track the asylum seekers in order to make sure that they are protected and well cared for. These desperate and traumatised people will also be permanently denied resettlement in Australia.
In any case, if the intent is to "stop the boats" how is providing those who depart Malaysia by boat for Australia, due to the terrible mistreatment and fear they face there, with protection from that which they fear (even temporarily), going to help stop people desperate enough to choose to take that voyage in the first place? On top of that, this program is going to cost our country a heck of a lot of money that, quite frankly, could be better spent. And how does any of this actually acknowledge the trauma that these people have faced and respond with appropriate and humane compassion?
In exchange for returning 800 asylum seekers to Malaysia, Australia will take 4000 UNHCR registered refugees over the next four years. Though it is truly wonderful for those who have been able to register with UNHCR and benefit from this scheme, the question remains: Is it not unfair for us to reject these people simply because they have the added misfortune of coming from a country that does not allow them to make an application for refuge in Australia, or because they have had their identification documents taken from them by people smugglers who they sought help from in utter desperation?
I don't have all the answers. I don't have a solution to the question of how all the world's people might be able to live in a place of both physical and emotional safety. But I do know that the answer does not lay with fear and judgement, but rather love and compassion.
It's time to acknowledge and accept that this is about humanity, not politics.
