Australia fails to practise its own precept

By Amit Baruah

SYDNEY, SEPT. 2. Is Australia a white fortress? Would the Australian Government have denied white farmers escaping ``persecution'' in Zimbabwe permission to land on Christmas Island?

There is a furious debate going on in this country on such issues following Australia's decision not to allow the mostly-Afghan refugees on the Norwegian freighter Tampa to land on Christmas Island.

As the Tampa issue lurches towards resolution, the Government, rather than taking a measured and moderate approach towards the refugee issue, actually seems to be fuelling anti- refugee public opinion.

The Sydney Morning Herald's website recently carried a letter calling upon the John Howard Government to hold firm against ``Muslim invaders''- the hapless Afghan refugees.

The abuse in the media has gone to such lengths that the Victorian Equal Opportunity Commission acting chief executive, Mr. Matthew Carroll, warned: ``The current discussion and debate around refugee policy is being used by some individuals and groups as a forum to engage in racial hatred. They are acts of verbal violence and appear to fall within the category of vilification,'' he was quoted as saying by The Sunday Age.

The provocation for his intervention? ``Talkback'', or interactive radio, had one caller saying that asylum-seekers ``should be barbecued'' and ``fed to the sharks''.

Given the fact that Australia has a mixed population of migrants from different ethnic backgrounds, such abuse only goes to show the racist tendencies in this society.

The case of the Tampa, in fact, has come as a kind of litmus test for Australia and its democratic society. Just as some have called for the refugees to be ``fed to the sharks'', other sections of public opinion have been umbraged by the stand taken by the Howard Government.

With elections due in December, the Liberal coalition needed just the Tampa issue to be one up on the Labour Opposition, which seems to have played into the hands of the Government.

With public opinion polls backing the Government, the Australian State wants to ``show'' that it is not a ``soft touch''- whatever that means.

The decision to send the refugees to Nauru and New Zealand is welcome, but what can one make of Mr. Howard's statement that not a single refugee will be permitted to land on Australian soil, before being shifted to New Zealand or Nauru?

Such a statement is inexplicable, given the fact that other countries have been more than accommodating in bailing Mr. Howard out - what ``national ego'' will be injured if a few hundred refugees land in Christmas Island and then fly on to New Zealand or Nauru?

Not so long ago, the Australian Foreign Minister, Mr. Alexander Downer, created a controversy here, when in some ``private'' comments, he referred to poor countries in an insulting term.

While Mr. Downer is clearly entitled to his private

views, such remarks reflect poorly on the Foreign Minister of a Government which has been the champion of human rights in East Timor.

Today, much of the Western world and Australia use every available occasion to call on the Indonesian Government to prosecute those responsible for the atrocities in East Timor. Such a view can only be supported. But what of the treatment of refugees and the mandatory detention policy that Australia follows while processing asylum-seekers' claims?

Should the developing world use the occasion of the upcoming Commonwealth Summit in Brisbane to raise the issue of Australia's objectionable approach to refugees?

Sadly enough, none of the developing countries have spoken up on the issue. India, which once took the lead on such issues, is silent. There are reported to be 13 Sri Lankans on board the Tampa. Colombo, too, is silent. Understandably so. Who wants to own asylum-seekers as bona fide nationals.

The movement of refugees from countries such as Afghanistan will not stop given the conditions that exist there.

If Australia is interested in stemming the flow of refugees, it would do well to help address the root causes of such problems in Afghanistan and other ``refugee-producing'' nations.

The Tampa issue will be resolved, but what happens when the next boat makes it to Australian waters?

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Previous : Pak. assurance to UNHCR
Next     : U.K.-French row over refugees