I wouldn't expect any less from a government whose head praised Mussolini as a "great leader". I hope these NGOs can find a way to get around this and get back to helping migrants; the Italian...
I wouldn't expect any less from a government whose head praised Mussolini as a "great leader". I hope these NGOs can find a way to get around this and get back to helping migrants; the Italian government certainly doesn't seem interested in doing so.
On the one hand one has to feel sympathy for Italy – they have suffered so many years of internal mismanagement, corruption and a failure to eliminate the Mafia, which has left their economy in...
Exemplary
On the one hand one has to feel sympathy for Italy – they have suffered so many years of internal mismanagement, corruption and a failure to eliminate the Mafia, which has left their economy in dire (relative to the western European standard) straights.
On the other hand, Italy does not actually have very many refugees in terms of accepted asylum claims. For example ~3% of the German population are refugees, ~3% of the Swedish population, ~2% of the Swiss population, ~2.5% of the Greek population but less than 1% of the Italian population. There are a lot of claims that other EU countries have not done enough to help Italy, but they generally have accepted a lot more refugees.
I really find it hard to accept the claims that Europe "cannot afford" to accept so many asylum seekers (it's a rich continent), but if this is really true then the only way to reduce the numbers (without just point blank shooting people at the border as the European far-right would like) is to make the countries they are coming from more attractive. This probably means lifting trade barriers, funding development efforts, and for heaven's sake – not giving lots of weapons to poor countries and then acting really surprised when the military runs a coup.
If we didn't give military assistance to countries like Niger, they'd either be overrun by Jihadists or forced to turn to Russia for military assistance to defend themselves against said...
If we didn't give military assistance to countries like Niger, they'd either be overrun by Jihadists or forced to turn to Russia for military assistance to defend themselves against said Jihadists. Not to mention that a military with fewer, shittier weapons would still be more than capable of defeating their country's police force, and being so poorly funded would only increase their discontent.
Should they leave them to drown instead? Also Germany does not border the Mediterranean and it seems a bit impractical to sail 4-5,000km to "drop them off" in Germany instead!
Should they leave them to drown instead?
Also Germany does not border the Mediterranean and it seems a bit impractical to sail 4-5,000km to "drop them off" in Germany instead!
This honestly brought chills to my heart – I think we should always seek to have compassion for other humans and not wish harm upon them. One of the best things about maritime culture is that...
I'm not even willing to say it's better to save them than have them drown.
This honestly brought chills to my heart – I think we should always seek to have compassion for other humans and not wish harm upon them.
One of the best things about maritime culture is that there is a very strong emphasis on mutual aid and support. Would you support changing maritime law so that there is no need to assist a vessel in distress – i.e. container ships or other commercial vessels will not "drop them off" in Italy?
But to stop refugees entering Europe you really have to try to make it worse for them to enter Europe than go back to their countries of origin. Of course, I have no illusions about European barbarity (I don't think that the moral framework which underpinned colonialism has gone away) but I suspect at this point they wouldn't like the optics of bombing people in boats out of the water either.
Why are the only options to rescue them and drop them off in Italy or let them drown? Why can't the Italian coast guard rescue them and then put them on a properly seaworthy boat right back to...
Why are the only options to rescue them and drop them off in Italy or let them drown? Why can't the Italian coast guard rescue them and then put them on a properly seaworthy boat right back to return to sender?
The other country doesn’t want them either. Remember, the smugglers are operating illegally. The Italian navy can’t just port at a foreign country unauthorized or place a bunch of people at a...
The other country doesn’t want them either. Remember, the smugglers are operating illegally. The Italian navy can’t just port at a foreign country unauthorized or place a bunch of people at a foreign country unauthorized. They have to do things by the book as an arm of a sovereign country.
…and since the smugglers operate illegally, it also means Italy can't drop them in Libya with a note of “they came from your shores” because the smugglers also lack paperwork that would tie them...
…and since the smugglers operate illegally, it also means Italy can't drop them in Libya with a note of “they came from your shores” because the smugglers also lack paperwork that would tie them to any home country (even if obvious to the outside observer)
Weren't migrants disposing of their documents in the sea part of the reason why Australia has prison islands for attempted migrants? It's a theory that without proper paperwork, they won't have...
Weren't migrants disposing of their documents in the sea part of the reason why Australia has prison islands for attempted migrants? It's a theory that without proper paperwork, they won't have anywhere to be deported to. Even if it's blatant which nation they left, being petulant about the text of treaties must be respected.
Well it's owned by a German NGO, but that doesn't mean it's operating out of Germany. It would at least have to dock in Italian ports to drop off the migrants (and also to be seized by the Italian...
Well it's owned by a German NGO, but that doesn't mean it's operating out of Germany. It would at least have to dock in Italian ports to drop off the migrants (and also to be seized by the Italian government), and presumably it spends the rest of its time elsewhere in the Mediterranean, rather than going all the way up to Germany for no reason.
I mean, there's a reason these ships are getting impounded. If things keep escalating the Italians could even prevent the ships from docking in Italy in the first place. They have a Navy/Coast...
I mean, there's a reason these ships are getting impounded.
If things keep escalating the Italians could even prevent the ships from docking in Italy in the first place. They have a Navy/Coast Guard, not sure how exactly it's broken up over there, but they are more than capable of stopping ships from landing in Italy if they really want to.
I wouldn't expect any less from a government whose head praised Mussolini as a "great leader". I hope these NGOs can find a way to get around this and get back to helping migrants; the Italian government certainly doesn't seem interested in doing so.
On the one hand one has to feel sympathy for Italy – they have suffered so many years of internal mismanagement, corruption and a failure to eliminate the Mafia, which has left their economy in dire (relative to the western European standard) straights.
On the other hand, Italy does not actually have very many refugees in terms of accepted asylum claims. For example ~3% of the German population are refugees, ~3% of the Swedish population, ~2% of the Swiss population, ~2.5% of the Greek population but less than 1% of the Italian population. There are a lot of claims that other EU countries have not done enough to help Italy, but they generally have accepted a lot more refugees.
I really find it hard to accept the claims that Europe "cannot afford" to accept so many asylum seekers (it's a rich continent), but if this is really true then the only way to reduce the numbers (without just point blank shooting people at the border as the European far-right would like) is to make the countries they are coming from more attractive. This probably means lifting trade barriers, funding development efforts, and for heaven's sake – not giving lots of weapons to poor countries and then acting really surprised when the military runs a coup.
If we didn't give military assistance to countries like Niger, they'd either be overrun by Jihadists or forced to turn to Russia for military assistance to defend themselves against said Jihadists. Not to mention that a military with fewer, shittier weapons would still be more than capable of defeating their country's police force, and being so poorly funded would only increase their discontent.
Should they leave them to drown instead?
Also Germany does not border the Mediterranean and it seems a bit impractical to sail 4-5,000km to "drop them off" in Germany instead!
This honestly brought chills to my heart – I think we should always seek to have compassion for other humans and not wish harm upon them.
One of the best things about maritime culture is that there is a very strong emphasis on mutual aid and support. Would you support changing maritime law so that there is no need to assist a vessel in distress – i.e. container ships or other commercial vessels will not "drop them off" in Italy?
But to stop refugees entering Europe you really have to try to make it worse for them to enter Europe than go back to their countries of origin. Of course, I have no illusions about European barbarity (I don't think that the moral framework which underpinned colonialism has gone away) but I suspect at this point they wouldn't like the optics of bombing people in boats out of the water either.
Why are the only options to rescue them and drop them off in Italy or let them drown? Why can't the Italian coast guard rescue them and then put them on a properly seaworthy boat right back to return to sender?
The other country doesn’t want them either. Remember, the smugglers are operating illegally. The Italian navy can’t just port at a foreign country unauthorized or place a bunch of people at a foreign country unauthorized. They have to do things by the book as an arm of a sovereign country.
…and since the smugglers operate illegally, it also means Italy can't drop them in Libya with a note of “they came from your shores” because the smugglers also lack paperwork that would tie them to any home country (even if obvious to the outside observer)
Weren't migrants disposing of their documents in the sea part of the reason why Australia has prison islands for attempted migrants? It's a theory that without proper paperwork, they won't have anywhere to be deported to. Even if it's blatant which nation they left, being petulant about the text of treaties must be respected.
Well it's owned by a German NGO, but that doesn't mean it's operating out of Germany. It would at least have to dock in Italian ports to drop off the migrants (and also to be seized by the Italian government), and presumably it spends the rest of its time elsewhere in the Mediterranean, rather than going all the way up to Germany for no reason.
I mean, there's a reason these ships are getting impounded.
If things keep escalating the Italians could even prevent the ships from docking in Italy in the first place. They have a Navy/Coast Guard, not sure how exactly it's broken up over there, but they are more than capable of stopping ships from landing in Italy if they really want to.