You really must watch this BBC video
Far away from all the talk and hypocrisy, this puts Muscat’s demands for Libyan coastal border patrols into stark, horrible perspective.
Exactly what does he think will become of those hundreds of people packed into dirty rooms in Libya, in the hands of traffickers, literally awaiting shipment, if they are stopped on the beach before they leave?
But typically, he is concerned only with what he sees as his problem – the mess they make on his doorstep, having to rescue them and look after them while their asylum requests are processed. He wants to stop them reaching his doorstep, and he doesn’t care how it’s done as long as it’s done.
Something about all these reports of boats being shot at after they leave the shore, by vessels full of armed men described as ‘militia’, is nagging at my mind. It doesn’t make sense, unless you look at it in the context of those armed men wanting to stop the boats reaching Malta/Italy. Otherwise, why would they do it? The people on board have paid their money, they’re en route away from Libya – why would Libyan vessels shoot at them? They’re leaving, not entering.
I hope to heaven that all this enthusiastic contact with the Libyan authorities hasn’t involved yet another secret and unofficial agreement we know nothing about, one that shames us to the pits.
At this stage, we can exclude nothing.
11 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24669906?ocid=socialflow_facebook_bbcnews
Rather than asking for the UN to patrol Libyan ports, Joseph Muscat should be asking the Libyan authorities to comply with the UN’s charter for human rights.
Now that he pretends that he has a close relation with the Libyan Prime Minister (why is he always close to male PMs, but not to female ones like Angela Merkel – the one who really matters in Europe at the moment?), he should use the confidence there is between them to ask the Libyan PM to take all those measures necessary to strengthen human rights in Libya, and to fight human trafficking.
I think we need to understand better why Joseph Muscat has come up with this idea.
Because China has been very keen to contribute troops to UN missions lately. They’re everywhere: Sudan, Cyprus, among others, and now Mali. They’re also dead keen on establishing themselves a major player among Mediterranean navies.
Two birds, one stone, and good for PR too.
Yesterday, the PM declared that those who will not obtain the document for refugee status WILL BE SENT BACK.
I ask: SENT BACK WHERE?
Many were refugees in the country they came from.
As long as they are sent back, why should we worry where?
That’s not our problem
Our only concern is that they should not come to Malta..
[Daphne – Terribly primitive and uncivilised, Mr Loporto. So…unevolved. The liberal and progressive party must be so proud of your vote.]
Your only concern is that you can live comfortably in a civilized country. It follows, whether you are able to see it or not, that Malta should honour its international obligations. If asylum seekers are unsafe here, then so are you.
Mallia has already said that people will be sent back. Maybe he meant back to Syria?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23938583
Reflecting on the last part of your post triggered my memory to an interview with two AFM officers — one from the air wing and the other from the maritime section — which was carried on TVM the day after these immigrants were ‘saved’ and brought over to Malta (some of them).
During that interview I remember being disturbed by a statement by one of the officers (I believe it was the airman) who said that “they had information” (‘kellna nformazzjoni’) that there was a boat in distress. He didn’t specify where that information came from, neither did the interviewer ask him.
It seemed odd to me that the Maltese were the first on the scene of the tragic disaster which happened so much closer to Lampedusa than Malta. We were continually shown a map to prove it.
It seemed odd to me because our government hardly gave the impression that we were so eager to help the immigrants at sea. Secondly, because the Italians came to the rescue quite some time after the Maltese stole the limelight on the operation.
Much was made (locally) about the fact that it was our airplane that spotted the disaster area and were it not for our propitious intervention the consequences of the tragedy would have probably been a lot worse. .
Was the Marina Militare alerted by the Maltese authorities or did they sense that there were problems and went out to sea on their own steam? Quite a few things surrounding those tragic events remain unclear.
It also struck me that contrary to the previous occasion where immigrants were involved Dr Mallia, minister for the Police and National Security, kept a very low profile if at all. It was only Joseph Muscat and the foreign minister who gave the official statement, (pompously) on top of the Castille steps.
For a long time since, I had this gnawing doubt about the meaning of that statement: “kellna nformazzjoni” I heard during that interview. Taking your cue that at this stage we can exclude nothing, your conjecture is a possible answer to my doubts.
If anything of this sort has taken place — and you made your case quite strongly: why would the Libyan police shoot at them; if anything, they’re leaving Libya — then as Maltese we are really put to shame before the international community.
Why would somebody shoot at the departing boats near the Libyan shores? I don’t think they are primarily trying to stop or sink these boats. If it was so, they would have used higher calibre weapons. I think they do it because of racial hatred and sadism.
[Daphne – You need a pretty high-calibre weapon to puncture a boat’s hull at a distance. You’re not going to do that with an ordinary rifle.]
I think that the shootings have little to do with Malta.
Italy signed a new secret agreement on migrants with Libya in 2012. Unfortunately, it didn’t cause the furore that the previous Italy/Libya agreement had caused.
The previous one which was stopped was about push-backs. The new one is about not letting migrants leave in the first place. Out of sight, out of mind.
It was condemned by human rights organisations when it was signed but few took notice. Condemning Muammar Gaddafi and Silvio Berlusconi, both buffoons, was easy but everybody wanted to give the newly elected governments in both countries a chance. There seemed to be more pressing matters than migration.
This agreement is still in force and will be so for a long time yet. Italy is a former coloniser of Libya and still has sway and business interests in the country.
http://euobserver.com/justice/116600