Lately, I have taken to listening to NPR on my short drive to work in the morning. Like I have with other news sources, I have conditioned myself to get past its blatant bias (in this case, to tha left, to tha left!) and pick out the news - all while mostly learning something of which I had had no knowledge previously.
Today was no exception, as one of the exposes was on a row between the United Nations' Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and Silvio Berlusconi's borderline-comic Italian government. Fundamentally, it concerned the steps Italy is taking to crack down on illegal migration - something which we Americans, as we grasp to control the spigot of illegal migration coming across our southern border, are wrestling with, as well.
As a peninsula, Italy's coast is very porous in terms its capacity to physically absorb migrants from Africa. Mentally, however, is another story. Italy's current government makes the Bush Administration look like tree-hugging pinkos. It espouses the same, if not more, conservative values as the Bushies and is unabashedly xenophobic. Berlusconi's words about immigration: "The leftist opposition envisions and multi-ethnic, multi-cultural Italy. We do not". This is also a reflection of the Italian population, not only because they voted the current "Forza Italia" government in; but also, because Italians themselves are pretty xenophobic.
Despite its constant chiding of the cold, conservative Anglo-Saxons, most Europeans are much more racist, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic than Britons or Americans. But, relative to their European compatriots, Italians exhibit sometimes shocking xenophobia. The treatment of gypsies in Italy is merely a thread away from apartheid; who can forget the image of two drowned gypsy girls' corpses covered by beach towels as Italian beachgoers went merrily about their days. While I personally find gypsies to be dirty and annoying - the human equivalent of rats - if I saw one drowning, I would jump in and save him or her, or at least call for help. And it doesn't stop with Italians' treatment of gypsies. There have been sporadic pogrom-like episodes directed toward African immigrants, as well.
But, I digress. What are the actual steps being taken these days by the Italian government to address this issue? Are they reverting back to fascism? Hardly. Recently, the Italian navy has been intercepting ships with refugees launched from Libya - a huge staging ground for illegal migration into Europe - and towing those ships back to Libya. Seems pretty reasonable to me; we do the same thing with ships, rafts, and floating doors from Haiti and even sometimes Cuba. However, the UN Refugee Agency - itself an oxymoron - is crying foul, as it complains these refugees' rights and protections are not properly guaranteed when the Italians are boomeranging them back to Libya. Libya is not a party to the UN Refugee convention, it says.
So, who is right? Italy is crying foul, as it feels its judgement to protect its borders is being usurped by a quasi-Communist global talking shop. This is a valid point. Furthermore, how can someone's "rights and protections" be guaranteed when they are illegally coming into a country? It is my opinion that a constitution only awards you rights if you abide by its laws; the modern social contract. It is the same thing as interest groups in the US crying about the rights of illegal immigrants; they don't have any. And on top of all of this is the economic argument; Italy is already a poor performer relative to it's European peers. If scores of no-skilled immigrants join the fray looking for jobs that don't exist, it could make an already poor country even poorer.
On the other side of this, as an American, I love immigration and feel that everyone should have a shot to make a better life for himself. It's what made this country great. I do feel that if these people take the proper avenues to legally come into Italy - or any other EU member state, for that matter - they should eventually be awarded with full citizenship. Italy's, and the EU's, current obstacle course for citizenship is already appallingly absurd. Both of them, despite the current economic environment and their populations' subconcious xenophobia, should make their processes more streamlined and welcoming to immigrants.
Until such time, however, laws should not be broken. Italy needs to do what it needs to do. Thoughts?
1 comment:
Matt, thanks for another great blog.
The issue of illegal immigration is difficult, perhaps irreconcilable.
Great nations will naturally attract geographically linked immigrants looking for a better life. To immigrate legally, in most cases, one must follow a lengthy and somewhat arbitrary quota-based process. Regarding the potential immigrant that is locked out due to a numbers game, I understand why they break the law. The way they see it, their only mistake was to be born in the wrong country at the wrong time.
On the other side, sovereign nations certainly have the right to make whatever law they feel appropriate, even when said law is onerous to those living outside their borders. The right to make law comes with the right to enforce it, so let the settling of irreconcilable differences begin!
For my own part, I’d like to see nations consider removing the quota portion of immigration law. If we instantly flipped a switch and declared all current illegal immigrants as legal, nothing would really change except that we could stop spending time and money on the issue. The vast majority of immigrants will work hard to improve their lives, and in doing so will make their host country a better place.
Post a Comment