Without borders
Andrew Charles
Voglio girare tutte le strade del mondo… senza frontieri, senza barrieri
(I want to travel all the roads of the world… without borders, without barriers).
Last year, The Age hosted a regular website on the "flood" of "illegal"
immigrants entitled "1999 - the year the trickle of boat people became
a flood". Interestingly, the difference between a trickle and a flood seems
to lie primarily in the media statements of the major political parties as opposed
to sober analysis of the number of arrivals over the past few years.
Between 1990 and 1999, about 7,000 people arrived in Australia by boat seeking
asylum. In 1994/5 the number was about 1,200, which fell to a low of 150 in
1997/98, and then back to about 1000 for 1998/99 . A flood?
In 1999, in Italian waters off the coast of Puglia, almost 60,000 people
were arrested for crossing the border illegally. The Italian state has a military
base on the small island of Saseno, from which navy ships and helicopters patrol
the surrounding areas. There have been recorded incidents in which Italian navy
and coastguard vessels have collided with vessels carrying people. Hundreds
have died. Investigations have been held. In the past twelve months, almost
100,000 asylum seekers have entered Britain. This has risen from 46,000 in 1998.
Britain plans to build more detention centers across the country. A similar
number have crossed the border to Germany. The other week 58 people died in
a shipping container on the back of truck trying to enter Britain.
In the Age, Simon Mann talks of a "rational response" by EU political
leaders to the issue of unofficial immigration in the wake of this tragedy.
In reality their statements were nothing more than a call for greater co-operation
in enforcing rights of non-access to European state's territories. While Antonio
Vitorino calls for a "coherent and global" solution, he stresses the
importance of a "strengthening of the co-operation in the controlling of
access to the EU member states territory.
That is to say that the solution to the problem of unofficial migration is
more fences, gun towers, and papers. "Organised criminal people smugglers"
are an easy scapegoat. They can be blamed for numerous deaths and mishaps, for
misleading the people they are transporting, and for profiting from a business
built on fear and misery. They can not, however, be blamed for the social and
economic conditions that cause people to flee en masse. Neither can they be
blamed for the militarisation of border zones, which requires risky clandestine
operations, and thus creates the conditions for organised criminals to meet
the needs of refugees. Blame for these conditions falls on the class of people
who control the international economy, and who create debt, war, famine, and
poverty, and the states who maintain the integrity of their economic islands.
The federal government, with the collusion of the mainstream press have seen
to it that any "incursion" of boat people is reported as a high priority.
Groups numbering in tens or hundreds are considered to constitute some sort
of serious threat, usually explained by reference to an imaginary floodgate
that will open as soon as boat people are shown leniency or compassion. Alternatively,
boatpeople are depicted as criminals ("…could be murderers, could be terrorists…"
- The Age 14/6/00) and carriers of dangerous disease.
This is a highly suspect logic, especially when you take into account the
hundreds of thousands of Australians who travel abroad and back, and the hundreds
of thousands of tourists that visit Australia every year - modern nations are
sieves, and the movements of a few thousand people would barely rate on a graph
that included tourism, legal migration, and business trips in and out of the
country. The number of "legitimate" tourists arriving daily far exceeds
any illegal attempts to enter the country, and these arrivals, on account of
their presumably having money to spend, are treated in a far more humane manner.
To say the least.
Ironically, "illegal" refugees with money are subject to accusations
along the lines of "they can't be that bad off if they can afford to bring
food and money with them." Of course, persecution, war and famine do not
always spare those with savings, and passage to Australia, official or unofficial,
costs money. Damned if they do, and damned if they don't. Australia has found
it easier to develop an anti-immigration discourse on account of the land mass
being "girt by sea". Unlike nations with land borders, where in times
of crisis mass refugee crossings are commonplace and easy, Australia requires
a bit more effort to get to, and the combined efforts of Australian defence
forces and other government departments make it more difficult to arrive unannounced.
Last year when this was a bigger press issue, there were regular letters
to various daily papers full of suggestions like "they should all be sent
back home immediately after a meal and a shower" (and these were the generous
proposals). It seems the national paranoia of yellow/black hordes lining up
to cross the north west frontier is still alive and well.
To callously suggest that refugees be returned to the circumstances that
forced them to leave their home country betrays a serious lack of compassion,
and a refusal to engage with the reality of why people flee the country in which
they are living. The fact that "illegal" arrivals are denied the natural
justice considered a right of all people is just one of the ways by which "illegals"
are dehumanised. They are denied proper legal counsel, entertainment, and as
refugees can receive at most a three year visa. They are subject to mandatory
incarceration despite having been convicted of no crime. The independence of
those responsible for providing for the inmates and those responsible for investigating
their complaints is questionable, i.e. inmates of these camps live under prison
conditions, and there is no authority with the power to investigate which represents
the interests of the detained. The other means by which "illegals"
are dehumanised is by denying them a public voice.
Does anyone else find it ironic that last year's parliamentary delegation
to inspect conditions at the detention centres did not speak to one inmate?
Clearly, the inmates' wellbeing was not the reason for the visit. Conveniently,
claims of smiling, waving inmates have been construed as signs of being happy
and content, rather than as attempts to gain favour and better treatment.
The frequent demonstrations, breakouts, and suicide attempts tell a different
story, as do the reports of solitary confinement, cruelty, and chemical restraint.
I wonder if the stories of some of these "illegals" were made public
if there would be such public aquiescence to their cruel treatment. Many immigrants
have no papers, having learned that it is often advantageous for there to be
no record of their country of birth. Such people without papers (known as sans
papiers amongst European migration activists) have been the subject of campaigns
in Europe, calling for rights for the sans papiers, and protesting against the
increasing militarisation of borders that leads to the deaths of those who try
to cross covertly.
Once we start to define a persons humanity, and their right to humanitarian
assistance by their paperwork, we invalidate any claim that we live in a compassionate
society.
It is clear that much profiteering is going on, mostly at the expense of
those people wanting to get out of wherever they are fleeing. There is also
the transfer of millions of taxpayer's money to pay the global incarceration
company ACM (Australian Correctionals Management, a subsidiary of the US Wackenhut
Corporation) to manage the refugee incarceration facilities at Perth, Port Headland,
Villawood, Woomera and Maribyrnong.
Australians seem to be a petty bunch these days, witness the outrage that
Kosovar refugees staying in camps in Australia were not gushing with thanks
at their short term, temporary accomodation. Why were the Kosovars expected
to fawn with praise on account of being provided with the basic necessities
of life? Because, as Sarah Macdonald suggested last year on the JJJ morning
show (16.11.99, in reference to the "baby boomers") Australians have
become extraordinarily selfish, taking our "rights" for granted, resentful
of any attempt by any group no matter how disadvantaged to get "something
for nothing".
Rather than blame our own leaders, and our own system for social problems
we prefer to find a scapegoat group. Consider this - most illegal immigrants
are British and American travellers overstaying their tourist visas. Why are
they not locked away in the South Australian desert? Perhaps because they flew
here, carrying papers and money, and are able to "pass" as a "civilised"
person, whilst the "boat people" carry the stigma of being different,
alien. Or ask yourself why escapees of political persecution in Iraq (which,
incidently, the US and Britain continue to bomb on a casual basis) are made
to feel unwelcome, while victims of political violence in Zimbabwe who happen
to be white landowners are all but invited over for permanent residence? One
wonders whether, were the illegals more white, their stories would be told with
a little more heroism and a little less overtone of criminality than the mostly
Afghan, Iraqi, and Asian immigrants are currently being smeared with. So what
am I advocating be done with "illegal aliens"?
What is my alternative to the isolated concentration camps, the strict process
of applying for refugee status, and the lack of access to assistance, publicity,
and social contact with non-inmates? My solution is a radical revision of citizenship,
and a reappraisal of the legitimacy of national borders.
We hear every day about new initiatives to enable sums of money, and material
goods, to pass through national borders as if they didn't exist, yet most Western
countries are redoubling their efforts to prevent desperate people from doing
the same.
While governments scramble to free the movement of capital across borders
without restrictions, why are we making it harder for people without capital
to move freely? Besides, the right of the current Australian government to this
land mass is now widely recognised to be based on invasion and genocide. It
takes double-think to continue to fawn to the crown whilst mumbling apologies
for past wrongs. From the time I first heard the real history of this nation
to the present time I have hesitated to call myself "Australian".
I am not a patriot - I am an intenationalist. I am a person, a descendant of
Italian, Irish and British immigrants, but I don't claim the right to lock people
away for fleeing to this land. My solutions are not based on policy, on election
strategies or on readjusting immigration targets. They are based on a recognition
of the right of sans papiers to compassion and freedom.
July, 2000
|