Skip to main content

Australia's PM, Hannah Arendt, refugees and responsibility

The Australian PM goes to Sri Lanka and acknowledges past human-rights infractions but, essentially, sweeps them under the carpet for seemingly political and expedient reasons.     The Australian Government has even announced a gift of 2 patrol boats to Sri Lanka.   Meanwhile even the Brit PM accuses Sri Lanka of having committed human rights abuses - as has the UN.

Good enough?  Not all says Jeff Sparrow in an excellent analysis in an op-ed piece in The Guardian.

"The writer Hannah Arendt noted how, during the refugee crises of the 1930s, the treatment received by those fleeing repression was determined, even when they escaped, by their oppressors.

 Those whom the persecutor had singled out as scum of the earth—Jews, Trotskyites, etc.—actually were received as scum of the earth everywhere,’ she wrote. ‘[T]hose whom persecution had called undesirable became the indesirables of Europe.

Arendt provides a useful framework to think about Tony Abbott’s extraordinary statement in Sri Lanka: his comment that, though his government "deplores the use of torture we accept that sometimes in difficult circumstances difficult things happen".

On one level, the Abbott "torture happens" line might be understood as old-fashioned realpolitik. Because Australia wants to repatriate Sri Lankan asylum seekers, Abbott needs to paint the authoritarian regime there as evolving to democracy (despite Amnesty International’s assessment that "the government is slowly but surely dismantling institutions, including the judiciary, that protect human rights".) Because Abbott seeks co-operation against people smugglers, he’s willing to provide warships to one of the most bloodsoaked militaries in the world.

Yet if the claim that extreme circumstances justify extreme measures sounds familiar, that’s because it’s the syllogism upon which the institutionalised cruelty of Australia’s refugee policy depends.

Think of Scott Morrison transferring a disabled four-year old Tamil asylum seeker to the isolated and squalid detention camp in Nauru on the basis that "no exceptions" could be made to the offshore processing of asylum seekers. "If you are fit enough to get on a boat," he said, "then you can expect you’re fit enough to end up in offshore processing." In difficult circumstances, difficult things happen.

Not surprisingly, a similar method produces familiar results. In the wake of Sri Lankan civil war, the military ushered thousands of Tamil survivors into notorious detention centres. Some of those who fled eventually reached Australian waters – where they were ushered into notorious detention centres."





Continue reading here.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...