Complexities in the Refugee Problem

• Culture Matters - Race Doesn't
• Disentangling Race and Culture
• Refugees and Illegal Migrants
• Suggestions
• A: Playing the "Racism card"

In 2001 (and for a few years thereafter), it was asserted that Australia's efforts to control the flow of refugees generated by conflicts in Afghanistan and elsewhere reflected racism (see Attachment A).

However it was highly undesirable to smear political opponents with allegations of racism in relation to the refugee / illegal-migration problem when:

• there were valid security and cultural issues involved;
• 'playing the racism card' could severely damage Australia and its close neighbours; and
• people-smuggling is not a viable solution to the human disaster represented by the 'umpteen' million displaced persons worldwide. 

An attempt is made below to outline those issues in terms of: 

• the very real practical implications of culture for social and economic effectiveness - and the irrelevance of race; 
• why no solutions may be emerging to the problems of racism (eg the racism slurs that are used to block of discussions about the practical consequences of culture for political, social and economic affairs; the intellectual difficulties of communication about cultural differences; the moral (but illogical) desire which some have to ignore the practical consequences of culture; the need for caution about encouraging some cultures' traditions for exerting power to operate in Australia; and the counter-intuitive requirements to reduce barriers to Australia's effective relationships in East Asia);
• the complexities of the refugee / illegal-migration situation (the potential humanitarian disaster; the choice between legal and illegal migration; the real risks which illegal migration potentially poses; and the inability of people-smuggling to be a satisfactory solution for the (say) 21m refugees now in the world );
• better alternatives to 'playing the racism card'.

Some suggestions about requirements to deal with the global refugee crisis as a whole are offered in response to efforts by the UN Human Rights commission to encourage discussion of this issue through its Goodwill Ambassador.

1. Culture Makes a Difference - Race Doesn't

Cultural traditions have a major effect on the behaviour and capabilities of communities. 

Culture involves questions of what people believe (and this affects their goals and aspirations), how they solve problems (and this determines how effective they are in developing tools and technologies), and what sort of institutions their society will support (and very complex institutions are essential in modern developed societies). 

For example:

• the development of a good legal system simplifies what would otherwise be a complex social, economic and political environment (ie it makes causes and effects much more predictable). This enables individual rationality to be effective as a means for problem solving. However if a culture assumes (as at least one of the world's major religions tends to do) that the world is irrational and miserable (and that it is best to 'escape' by willing oneself not to care) then a strict legal system will not be created, and the assumption that the world is irrational and miserable will tend to be self fulfilling;

• the ability to change economic systems is vital to economic performance (see Towards a Comparative Study on Development policies: Indonesia and Australia). Thus cultures that have rigid social hierarchies or moral legalisms will tend to find success difficult. 

The development of culture has been a major factor in the rise of humanity (eg through the emergence of symbolic languages) and the growth of the belief systems and political organization that allowed the operation of complex civilizations. Furthermore Western societies have tended to be dominant in the world for several centuries because of particular cultural developments (as discussed - briefly and thus over-simplistically - in Competing Civilisations).  

It seems most unlikely that cultures have a genetic (ie racial) origin because:

• current genetic research appears to suggest that the human genome contains only some 30,000 genes, not many more than the simplest organisms. There are simply not enough genes for much if any cultural information to be encoded genetically. Thus the old debate about whether character is determined by nature or nurture must be resolved firmly on the side of nurture. Furthermore there is more genetic variation within, than between, races. 

• individuals tend to adopt the culture they are brought up in irrespective of their genetic makeup; and

• education and religious conversion can have a transforming effect on individuals and communities. 

Despite this, questions of race and culture tend to be associated, because both race and culture tend to correlate within particular ethnic groups - and because cultures tend to persist in time and be closely associated with a person's sense of identity. 

Moreover several cultural features may be required to work together to achieve particular outcomes - and the adoption of any one apparently advantageous feature in isolation may not achieve much, thus inviting the view that there is something wrong with a particular race. For example, Competing Civilisations argues that a combination of individual liberty, a put-others-first ethical ideal and a rule of law were all required to allow rationality to be effective in generating Western economic efficiency and power.

• Understanding cultural difference
• Consequences
• Why it matters
• Racism claims don't help

2. Disentangling the Consequences of Culture from Racism 

This linkage of race to culture is particularly unhelpful because:

• it can lead to discrimination against, or persecution of, individuals and communities, because characteristics are ascribed to particular people because of perceptions about their racial group generally (eg the group's cultural traits may be seen as weaknesses or immorality from others' cultural viewpoint). At its worst, such perceptions can lead to the view that certain people, by virtue of race, are intrinsically hopeless or superior; 
• valid issues related to the practical advantages and disadvantages of different cultural characteristics for political, social and economic affairs can be made almost impossible to discuss by ascribing nothing but 'base instincts' to those who try to do so. This not only prevents risks being evaluated; but also inhibits constructive changes to cultural characteristics (from which Australia's various cultures would almost certainly benefit). Moreover injustice of accusations of 'racism' against those who might discuss the practical advantages and disadvantages of particular cultural features can provide a 'moral shield' for those who might practice real discriminatory racism.

The articles referenced below, for example, have sought to present the concerns which ordinary Australians have about unauthorized migration as primarily a 'racist' issue.  However Australians must have real concerns about the risks posed by such migration (see Section 3), and have important questions  to address about the practical consequences of various cultures. 

Unfortunately any realistic attempt in Australia to discuss the practical implications of cultural characteristics was confused by 'racist' slurs by people who probably believed that they were being 'virtuous' - but who thus seriously impeded the emergence of rational consensus. Aspect to consider in relation to this include: 

A. Even Understanding Some Cultural Differences is Hard

There is a massive intellectual obstacle to effective communication between cultures. For example:

• people simply can't communicate complex ideas across wide cultural barriers (because doing so involves stepping outside the way they  think and understand the world). For example, much of the traditional friction (and centuries of conflicts) between France and England can probably best be explained in terms of different ways of thinking (differences between a whole-of society rationality and an individual rationality which even today few would understand eg see Galtung J. 'Structure, culture and intellectual style: An essay comparing saxonic, teutonic, galic and nipponic approaches', Social Science Information, V 20, No6, 1981) . And 

• the problem gets even worse when one starts to deal with even more radically different cultures - eg of the world's second largest economy, Japan which traditionally:

  • disputes whether communication in terms of ideas is even an appropriate thing to do - and 'gut' reactions from the 'belly' of society may be preferred to elites dealing with abstract ideas, which is the origin of 'bottom-up' decision making and the weakness of Japan's democratic system.

  • pursues 'Art of War' strategies one of whose central features involves ensuring that others do not understand one's 'shape' (which is party achieved by 'holding up a mirror' so that, when others look, all that they see is a reflection of themselves). Also 

• some amongst Australia's intellectual elites find ways not to have deal with the problem - eg by:

  • claiming that culture doesn't make any practical difference (noting currently-common assumptions about cultural relativism, and the confusion about the value of real knowledge and experience which has emerged in post-positivist and post-modern ideologies); 

  • assuming that their (say liberal humanist) cultural values are, or should be, universal; 

  • drawing false perceptions about cultural differences through communicating with persons of different ethnicity who operate in a Westernised culture (which is an easy trap to fall into as communicating with those who are not of like culture can be too hard); or 

  • ascribing racist motives to those who attempt to raise the issue - which is the most effective, and thus the most popular, method of all.

B. The Consequences of Cultures

Western societies have been relatively successful partly because of their Christ-ian cultural commitment to universal values (ie to valuing the welfare of all) and they thus tend to see racism as morally wrong. This assumption is quite different to that held in some other major world cultures (eg in cultures in East Asia which have ancient Chinese roots where particularist ethical systems tend only to value the welfare of those with whom one has a direct relationship - so racism is considered natural and (politely / officially) practiced though people are normally too cultured to talk about it). Allegations about 'racism' in Australia are of immense interest in much of East Asia because they provide:

• amusement that 'Asia's' moralizer is being accused of having 'feet of clay'; and 
• the basis for advantage in negotiations because Australians believe racism to be immoral.  

Some amongst intellectual elites in Australia tend now to treat all cultures as equally valid (because of a moral desire not to discriminate against others, and because 'post-modern' scholarship suggests (with partial validity) that what is seen to be true is largely a 'social construct', ie simply a product of people's assumptions). Australia has thus sought to be a multi-cultural society - one in which all cultures would be respected and tolerated. Whilst tolerance is highly desirable, treating all cultures as equally desirable encounters several problems: 

• it is logically impossible to value all people equally, whilst also valuing all cultures equally as some human cultures have included (and continue to include) inbuilt inequalities such as (in alphabetical order): apartheid; arranged marriages; aristocracy; cannibalism; castes; elitism; fascism; fetal abortion; feudalism; human sacrifice; infanticide; jihad; matriarchy; militarism; oligarchy; patriarchy; polygamy; racism; secret societies; slavery; social hierarchies; suttee; terrorism; tribalism; thugee. Such issues are not of purely historical interest, as East Asian societies:
  • tend to be built on assumptions of social hierarchy rather than individual equality. For example, a Chinese writer labelled Western societies as barbarians, because the invention of advanced weapons had allowed common folk to challenge to power of their aristocratic superiors [1];
  • present an alternative model for a global political and economic order to that which has been constructed in recent centuries on the basis of Western assumptions about the desirability of individualism; individual rights; universal ethics; and democracy;
• as noted above, cultural characteristics have a major impact on whether people tend to be materially successful. The assumption that culture is mainly a social construct appears valid - but culture has consequences none-the-less. Thus there is dubious moral value in preventing evaluation of cultural practices that keep people disadvantaged by either (a) excluding them from opportunities to learn or (b) by encouraging them to just see themselves as victims and making them dependent on welfare (the latter having been the 'ideal' approach to Australia's indigenous peoples until recently - see also The Challenge of Aboriginal Advancement)  
• culture is not just an individual thing, or a question of food and artistic preferences. It affects how society works; how relationships are formed; and how problems are solved and how power is exerted. All societies are 'multi-cultural' in that they have several different cultures operating in parallel - even if only because of differences in political and religious opinions and because cultures change over time so at least slight variations are always present. However if radically different cultural characteristics (particularly those which affect how power is exerted) operate in parallel in a particular society, the result may be conflict - as some cultures' characteristics may be dysfunctional for others. For example:
  • East Asia tends to be characterized by 'communitarian' rather than 'individualistic' cultures - in other words these cultures favour promoting the wealth and power of an entire racial / cultural group (and its elites in particular) rather than promoting the welfare of the individuals within it. In doing so ALL segments of the ethnic group work together against outsiders. Thus, the Chinese diaspora who have spread throughout and been economically dominant and politically influential in SE Asia for thousands of years, tend to work together as cohesive communities in 'foreign' cultures - and also to acquire power for the benefit of their ethnic community through co-opting local leaders. For those communities, business groups constitute the economy and work closely with organized crime (triads) who provide the community's 'private army' (see Seagrave S. Lords of the Rim: The Invisible Empire of the Overseas Chinese, 1995). The triads' role in those communities is similar to, though apparently less politically influential than, that of Japan's yakuza (see Kaplan D and Dubro A, Yakuza, 1986) who appeared to gain strong but covert insider-influence over, and to distort, Queensland's economic and political systems in the 1980s. 
  • the dominant ethnic group in Afghanistan (and north Pakistan) is the Pathans - who are arguably the most hospitable and belligerent peoples in the world. For example:
    • "He is not a Pathan who does not return a blow for a scratch goes a favourite Pathan proverb. Another is 'an eye for an eye, a leg for a tooth' ... (though there are dozens of proverbs which celebrate friendship, hospitality and loyalty ) the self image and the stereotype of the Pathan emphasize his recalcitrance, unreasonable independence, and the willingness to fight at the slightest excuse .... (of the Pathans an early British Governor once said) 'armed insurrection is his vocation, the blood feud his pastime, and hospitality his passion'  ".  (see An Extremely Concise History of the Pathans)

C. Why Differences need Attention

Cultural issues are not only of academic interest, but require careful consideration and management in relation to migration. For example: 

• clearly Australia (or anyone else) should be very cautious about encouraging the traditional ways in which the latter cultures exert power to be developed locally as an alternative to a rule of law. When, through migration, persons from different cultures are introduced in small numbers, they tend to be acculturated into the power structures operating in the dominant culture. However if very large numbers are introduced (and acculturation is not effective) then other cultures will start to deploy their techniques for gaining power eg consider 
  • the growing ethnic branch stacking in Australia's electoral process; 
  • the claim that it would be discriminatory not to allow Muslims in Australia to create Islamic styles of power structures [1];
  • the Asian criminal gangs which appear to be a major problem now for Sydney (see Gangs) which emerged when when many individuals who were not accustomed to living under a rule of law had difficulty gaining jobs and applied their culture's traditional solution. 
• Australia's legal and governance institutions are built on the assumption of individual liberty - a feature which is only possible where there is a deeply embedded ethical basis for interpersonal morality embedded in individual consciences (such as the 'put others first' ethical ideal derived from Christianity). In other societies reliance seems to be traditionally placed on authorities to define and enforce the nature of interpersonal morality - and when Western institutions fail to provide this support persons operating within those other cultural traditions may be unable to integrate and may even tend to cause trouble [?1] (just as societies whose institutions are built on individual liberty are in trouble if those ethical ideas are eroded - see Moral foundations of individual liberty);
• the sectarian violence which plagues Indonesia does not seem to arise from religious concerns but from the fact that these differences have had political implications  (Greenlees D. 'Keep the home fires burning', Australian, 13/12/01);
• even where conflict is not an issue, incompatible 'cultural baggage' may have implications for raising economic and social transaction costs - see Migration;
• segments of the community clearly believe that cultural differences are significant (eg see Charlton P. 'Battling a cultural crusade',  Courier Mail, 8/9/01);
• suppression of community concerns about the cultural issues associated with migration has been suggested to have allowed the issue to fester underground and to emerge in the form of extremist political groups opposed to migration in a number of European countries [1];
• tribalism - the attachment of people to only one racial or cultural group within a country - is a real obstacle to effective social, political and economic development in many parts of the world (eg this is apparently one of the major factors in the continued disadvantage suffered by most Africans);

D. Why Playing the 'Racism Card' doesn't Help

Alleging 'racism' to damage opponents has become a standard tactic by some groups in Australia's political establishment - which is most unfortunate because (a) even though racial prejudice is can be very real in Australia, the 'political' allegations about racism that are made frequently appear to be  nonsense in fact (b) they are none-the-less almost impossible to refute and (c) they lead to sensationalist headlines which do a great deal of damage to Australia's international reputation. For example: 

• even though Australia is comparatively more tolerant of people living in different cultures, compared with the US, China and India (according to comparative studies) (Mathewson C. 'Australia further than America from heart of darkness', Courier Mail, 13/11/01) ....
• the election campaign increased international perceptions that Australia was xenophobic, making it harder to attract investment - according to AXISS Australia (which was established to promote Australia as a financial center). This particularly follows an article by an Indonesian observer who claimed that Australia was an international pariah (Cleary P. 'Australia a hard sell thanks to race poll', Financial Review, 16/11/01)  [Comment: the views of that Indonesia observer were probably based on the way in which the refugee situation was used by some Australian journalists and editors to gain advantages over their political opponents - though the media were NOT representative of general public opinion (Flint D. 'Commentators out of touch on refugees', Financial Review, 7/11/01)].  
• in the event of a future takeover of neighbouring countries by factions which are hostile to Australia (which is not impossible to envisage at this time - see Islamism in SE Asia), then 'playing the racism card' could provide sufficient 'justification' for such a faction to conduct a propaganda campaign of hatred against Australia.

Groups such as One Nation, who primarily represented the 'left-behind' victims of the failure of Australia's leaders to successfully manage economic change (see Defects in Economic Tactics, Strategy and Outcomes), have argued that all Australians should be treated equally. They have been labelled as racist for doing so (see Assessing the Implications of Pauline Hanson's One Nation) partly because because they have incorrectly blamed their problems on the preferential treatment which government gives to other disadvantaged groups and also because they lack the ability to express their concerns with sophistication. However:

• a respectable case can be made that inequality in the form of long term welfare support can do more harm than good to disadvantaged groups - through creating dependency (a point which the aboriginal leader Noel Pearson has now made politically acceptable to discuss in relation to Australia's aborigines, which was not 'politically correct' when it was raised earlier by Pauline Hanson) - eg see Jones G. and Etherington S. 'Integration the only way to break the cycle of despair',  Australian,  14/2/02;

• individual equality before the law was one of the greatest social and economic strengths of Australia's Anglo-Saxon heritage, and the reasons for this need some consideration before casually allowing power to be exerted through cultures that are based on social inequalities (see above), or those that have little commitment to a rule of law. 

Unfortunately knee-jerk allegations of racism, without thinking the matter through or considering whether allegations are valid in particular cases, have thoroughly confused the issue, damaged Australia's reputation and slowed the emergence of a reasoned consensus. 

• some intellectual elites have argued that there is a racist element in grass-roots groups, who suggest that Australia should take an exclusionist approach to protect its Anglo-Saxon / Western cultural heritage - and that this is an obstacle to Australia developing closer relationships in Asia. However, any 'grass roots' groups that took such an approach would be exhibiting behaviour which was quite consistent with the particularist, rather than universal, ethics of what has been promoted as 'Asian' values. Thus it would be they, rather than their critics, who would be speeding Australia's effective integration into 'Asia'. To accommodate (so called) 'Asian values' would mainly involve revoking Australia's commitment to universal values (eg accepting that it is OK to be racist, or to reject individual human rights or democracy).  In other words Australia's general acceptance in terms of 'East Asian' values would best be facilitated by becoming less interested in universal human welfare and by embracing what some of Australia's elites now see as 'moral failings'  (eg by being unconcerned about the welfare of refugees). 

For human rights activists to engage at a community level - rather than relying on elitist practices (eg media statement and ceremonies) - has been seen as necessary to allow their point of view to be considered by ordinary Australians (see Community Development)

The above does not constitute a solution to the problems with racism. Nor is it even a proposal for such a solution. It merely attempts to suggest why little progress seems to be being made towards such a solution.

• Problem
• Best Solution
• Terrorism Risk
• Australia's Choices

3. Complexities of the Refugee / Illegal-Migration Situation 

A. The Problem

A clear humanitarian disaster had been looming as a consequence of conflict and the failure of economic and political systems in and around Afghanistan - and this was generating a flood of refugees that those nearby were unable to cope with, and for which UN machinery was not effective. That refugee situation was inseparable from the action of, and military action against, persons who apparently launched terrorist attacks in America in September 2001 - an incredibly complex and difficult issue in itself. 

B, The Best Solution

Ultimately the only satisfactory solution to the problem of refugees is economic and political development in the countries that the refugees are originally from (eg Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan). This, rather than just coping with the symptoms of those failures, should be seen as the main issue. (See Afghan reconstruction)

C. The Terrorism Risk

There is a real risk that persons with terrorist motivations will be concealed amongst the refugees / illegal-migrants being conveyed by people-smugglers. 

It appears likely that the Al-Quida (and similar) networks have been preparing for a large scale and long term attack on Western societies (ie that, as Taliban leaders frequently claimed, much more was envisaged than the September 11 attacks in America). And those involved have had not only the motivation but also the opportunity to determine who is included in the boatloads of people being sent to Australia. It is noted that: 

• Jihad has been declared against Australia by leaders in the region that most refugees are coming from (eg noting McPhedran I., 'Holy war called on Australia', Courier Mail, 2/11/01). And in declaring jihad against the 'crusader' West Osama bin Laden made special mention the role of the 'crusader' Australians in separating Indonesian people - in reference to East Timor (see 'Terror war is all about religion, says leaders', Australian, 5/11/01)
• 150-200 holy warriors (from Osama bin Laden's core following) reportedly slipped out of Afghanistan in the two months before November 2001 - according to Newsweek reports. Diplomats in Islamabad were quoted as seeing illegal migration as a terrorist threat. Even those who emigrate legally could have terrorist links. Such people have been moving around the world for years - though security has now tightened up (Blair T. 'Beware of terrorists in refugee clothing',  Australian, 8/11/01)   
• though they may have little chance of success, Islamic extremists appear to be TRYING to coopt traditional Islam worldwide into a totalitarian political movement. For example:  
  • a source (who has clearly studied radical Islamism, though as a competing traditional Muslim he may have biases) has alleged that traditional Muslims are fearful because local branches of the radical Muslim organizations that promote terrorism in the Middle East are taking root in Western countries. They were said to have gained control of the main Muslim organizations and most of the mosques though they represent no more than 10% of the total Muslim populations. What started as the Muslim Brethren was said to be now a worldwide organized network - using many different acronyms but always ensuring radicals are in control behind the scenes. They claim to represent all Muslims and get respectful receptions from non-Muslims who know no better  (Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi 'Fundamental errors', Courier Mail,  10/10/01 - see also Radical Islamism and Traditional Islam)
  • there are signs that extremist Islamic organizations are also operating in Australia (see article by Bolt in About Islam; and numerous articles in Implications for Australia of Attack in America); and in the UK (see article by Dhondy in About Islam). 
• France's chief intelligence officer has alleged that hundreds of al Qaida 'sleeper agents' who trained in 'heavy' terrorist tactics in Afghan camps and resettled in Europe are now ready to strike ('Al-Qaida agents ready to strike in Europe', Australian, 20/11/01)
• some individuals accepted into Australia as refugees have reportedly been involved in people-smuggling (according the Federal Police), and this is allegedly one of the techniques being used by terrorists to fund their activities (see Refugees);
• the traditions of the Pathan people (of Afghanistan and northern Pakistan) is not only one of extreme belligerence (as noted above) but of great pride in their participation over hundreds of years in armies of conquest organized from outside Afghanistan;   
• ‘Refugees’ have been coming through Indonesia. This is extremely unlikely to be occurring if the people-smugglers have not been given protection (and perhaps active encouragement) by some local Indonesian officials. Supporters / members of Osama bin Laden’s Al-Qaida networks (which appears to be large and well organized worldwide) are reportedly well established in Indonesia - and to have an international agenda that includes establishing terrorist cells in Australia (see Islamism in SE Asia). There has been speculation that Indonesia's pro-Western President could be unable to hold power for more than a year or two before Islamic extremists displace her (see Indonesia).  In this respect it can be noted that the Indonesian army has: 
  • always been a non-democratic contender for political power in Indonesia in its own right, and a chief advocate and activist for the Javanese Empire that Indonesia constitutes;
  • allegedly (through rebellious elements) been involved in organizing an unofficial and murderous militia in East Timor to defend the ‘Empire’. Various militia elsewhere in Indonesia have apparently been pursuing jihad (ethnic cleansing ?) against non-Muslim Indonesians; 
  • been displaced by Australian forces acting for the UN in what others saw as the liberation of East Timor - but which the bin Laden's jihad declaration labelled as Australian support for a UN conspiracy to separate East Timor from Indonesia (see Implications for Australia of the Attack in America). The flood of (Islamic) boatpeople sent to Australia from August 2001 could well have been seen by rogue factions in the Indonesian army as a 'counter invasion' which would be hard to resist because of its humanitarian overtones.. 

• Indonesian police were involved in people smuggling operations linked to the Tampa, and $US1000 from $4300 paid for being smuggled went to Indonesian authorities (Shine K 'Smugglers got help from the police', A, 20/9/02)

• Indonesia quietly arrested and deported several people smugglers to gain credibility before an international conference on people trafficking (Dodd T. 'Jakarta acts on people smuggling', Financial Review,  25/2/02)
• The possibility of a linkage between Al-Qaeda and the people smugglers who seek to sneak illegal migrants into Australia is being investigated - as is the possibility that terrorists escaping to SE Asia might have used the same transport network ('Al Qaeda link to people smugglers' (?), Sunday Mail,  24/2/02)

• At least 12 Indonesians with links to the founder of the Islamic group suspected of organising the Bali bombing sought refugee status in Australia in the 1990s (Marx A and McPhedran I 'Islamic extremists sought refugee entry', CM, 30/10/02)

• The UN urged Australia to isolate boatpeople suspected of terrorism or serious crimes - and fast-track their refugee applications (Saunders M 'fast track for suspect refugees', Australian, 8-9/12/01) [Comment: what the UN is asking is presumably not easy to accomplish - unless such individuals have some clear distinguishing features]
• ASIO has spent a lot of time conducting security assessments of asylum seekers (Chulov M. 'Terrorists already here, says spy body',  Australian,  14/2/02)
• The US military is investigating a possible link between a-Qaeda and the people smugglers who try to sneak illegal migrants into Australia (‘Al-Qaeda link to people smugglers’, Sunday Mail, 24/2/02)

• Terrorist trained by Al Qaeda could have come to Australia - according to Afghan foreign minister. Hundreds are still on the run. The government said that there was no evidence that dozens of asylum seekers claiming o be Afghan were linked to Al-Qaeda. But the Immigration Department is investigating the backgrounds of 700 claimed-Afghan refugees who fraudulently obtained temporary protection visas - who may have been Pakistanis. Some are suspected of links with the pro-Taliban Pakistani intelligence service. Others are suspected of fighting with the Taliban or at militant Islamic schools. ASIO stated in August that none of the asylum seekers it had checked since 1999 had been assessed as a security risk. (Phillips M 'Australia warned of ex-Taliban migrans', CM, 14/11/02)

However, it can be noted that:

• in the 1860s the NSW colonial government was convinced that Irish Catholics were all potential Fenian terrorists (Harris T. 'Tune in for a divisive and racist view', Financial Review,  18/12/01)
• it may be more likely for terrorists to travel in jets with well forged papers, rather than on leaky boats. It the attack on 9 September does turn out to have been done by Muslims, then it is essential to recall that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims - all but a tiny minority of whom are law abiding. Once can't blame all Christians for Irish terrorism. Australia's experience is that the country changes those who come here. Neither Irish sectarian violence nor any other form of ethnic conflict has survived here in a any threatening form.  Australia profited enormously from the Jewish refugees it took from Hitler, and the Vietnamese boatpeople who came in large numbers after the fall of Saigon were never supposed to adapt. But their sons and daughters now top their school classes. Each now group of migrants is initially treated with suspicion. Italians and Greeks were vilified after WWII. Genuine political leadership is needed to avoid xenophobia (Steketee M. 'Muslim bashing compounds the terror',  Australian,  14/9/01)

Intelligence services (if they have been doing their job) should have a much better idea of what is going on than the public (and the media). And, if there is a problem, Australia’s political leaders (government and opposition) will also presumably have been informed - but might be able to say nothing publicly if doing so could further destabilize Indonesia's already precarious political situation.  

• [[The fact is that Australians should have paid serious attention 10-20 years ago to how to head off the economic and political difficulties Indonesia is now facing . Collusion with despots and impractical moralizing have not really helped. Furthermore questions of racial / cultural relationships are absolutely critical to the viability of Indonesia as a unified state - and casual allegations of racism in Australia for domestic political advantage have potentially explosive implications in Indonesia]]
• [[However it is also noted that one author who has closely studied Islamic extremism suggested that US intelligence agencies failed entirely to understand the nature of the enemy now seeking to destroy the US - see  article by Paul Monk]]

D. Australia's Choices

The question does not seem to be about whether Australia will accept some refugees (because it has often done so).

Note: Australia is one of only 10 nations in the world that permit permanent resettlement for refugees - and has generous generous welfare arrangements for needy new arrivals - Rod T and Brunton R. 'Unauthorized arrivals: the unpalatable alternatives', IPA Review, Sept 2001

Rather the real question should presumably be how the humanitarian disaster represented by 'umpteen' millions of refugees worldwide can be dealt with. There is no way that people smuggling can be a practical solution for all these people - so the difficult issues identified in B (The Best Solution) above much be addressed.

Furthermore, in so far as accepting refugees is part of such a solution, it seems far preferable for refugees to arrive in an orderly way rather than by allowing people-smugglers to ignore Australia's borders.

A process for admitting refugees based on allowing free reign to smugglers provides no way to limit the numbers involved, which is significant because:

• failure of the current global order to prevent economic and political breakdown in numerous countries means that there are tens of millions of refugees in the world. Furthermore a very high percentage of those on smugglers boats are apparently not true refugees at all;
• the potential for environmental disasters resulting in future mass refugee movements can not be discounted. For example there is a plausible (but unproven) view that groundwater may often be a non-renewable resource - and as 40% of global agriculture depends on sources with rapidly falling water levels that something like 1bn people may be forced eventually to move in search of food and water [1];
• there is considerable debate and uncertainty about Australia's ultimate population potential. Some with a business and economic viewpoint suggest that its current (just less than 20m) population should be raised to (say 50m) in order to create a stronger local market. However, despite Australia's large land mass (a) serious environmental analysts argue that Australia's long term population potential is already exceeded because, except in a few rich regions, Australia has very limited soil and water resources and (b) though Australia currently feeds 30m people (ie 10m through food exports) there are many signs (eg extensive soil salination) that its limited productive land and water resources have already been somewhat over-exploited by agriculture. 

From Australia's point of view an orderly process for dealing with refugees is even more important in the case of those from the Middle East (than would be the case for refugees from (say) Europe) because of the cultural issues that need to be addressed (eg see Cultural Issues and Migration);

Australia’s ability to process illegal migrants was apparently already overloaded (both through detention centres, and in the community after release from those centres) when it became obvious in August 2001 that thousands more were to be sent at the same time. Furthermore the Australian courts (and assorted community lobby groups with both humanitarian and (presumably) pro-terrorist motivations) make it hard to exert the necessary degree of security assessment of refugees.

People-smuggling leaves Australia with the cost and difficulty of picking the genuine refugees (apparently typically about 10% of the total) in a paperless throng, who may also include gangsters, terrorists or those who are in search of an easier life. It also ensures that genuine refugees have to endure hardships in detention camps which probably alienates them from a community in which some may settle.

Extremism? Australia's tough programs against illegal migrants could promote terrorist reactions (Robinson P. 'Camps legacy may be suicide bombers',  Financial Review,  4/4/02)

• Solving the Global Refugee Crisis

4. Suggestions

Thus, rather than encouraging people smuggling and damaging Australia's international reputation by claiming that those who have concerns about illegal migration must be xenophobic racists, a far better strategy would appear to involve:

• seeking options to eliminate the political and economic failures elsewhere that cause people to become refugees in the first place [1]; and 
• improving, and generously participating in, internationally organized programs for refugees.

The fact that the Australian debate about the refugee / illegal-migration problem seemed for many years to be conducted in loud voices in terms of almost everything but these options was clearly counter-productive.

Solving the Global Refugee Crisis

In 2006 the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) sought, through a Goodwill Ambassador (Angelina Jolie), to encourage more effort to eliminate the suffering of refugees [1]. In brief she suggested that: 

• Europe's post WWII experience shows a refugee crisis can be solved;
• the West has forgotten history and doesn't care about refugees anymore;
• the UNHRC's resources are inadequate to deal with its responsibilities for 20m refugees;
• developed countries object when refugees and economic migrants try to enter their territory - and confusion with economic migrants is an obstacle to dealing with refugees properly;
• refugees fall into the hands of people smugglers, and many die. They can also be turned into hate figures for political purposes;
• the West doesn't want uncontrolled migration - but won't invest in 'curing' crises which displace refugees, or in preventing crises in the countries refugees come from;
• there is a need for more Marshall Plans - to provide resources in countries refugees first go to, and to support countries where peace has been established. Such investment in Afghanistan might have changed the course of history - as Osama bin Laden thrived on its neglect;
• there is a need to create a politically and economically stable world in which people and nations can progress.

This call to action highlights a real problem, but raises more questions than in answers.

The problem can't be 'cured' no matter how much is spent on refugee support programs, because this would do nothing to prevent tyrannical regimes, economic crises and conflicts continuing to create refugees in large numbers.

The only satisfactory solution is 'prevention' by creating a more politically and economically stable world.

However the latter can not be achieved simply by more 'Marshall Plans'.  The essence of that Plan involved initiating investment in countries after military victory had provided political control as a basis for reforming government and economic institutions along democratic capitalist lines.

This worked in Europe after WWII, but is proving much more difficult where it is being attempted by the US (and its 'Coalition of the Willing') in Iraq and Afghanistan. A key difference is that Europe had previously had modern government and economic institutions based on similar principles which could be reactivated and had social and cultural traditions that were compatible with those institutions - a situation which does not apply in (say) Iraq and Afghanistan. Moreover the latter are affected by factions violently  seeking to destabilize the 'Marshall Plan' in order to promote a radically different (Islamist) political and economic model or to pursue unresolved ethnic conflicts.

Creating a politically and economically stable world (ie a world in which there would be few refugees) was the reason that the United Nations and other multilateral institutions (eg the Bretton Woods triplets) were created - and it is reform of those institutions to take account of factors which has made it impossible to date to achieve their goal that is probably most vital to solve the global refugee crisis.

The key requirement to solve the refugee crisis is not not primarily more resources. Rather there is more to be gained by creating human capabilities and organisation in (a) global institutions and (b) in societies on the global margins which give all the potential to achieve material success and social harmony. These requirements are indistinguishable from those to win the 'war on terror'.

Some suggestions about the way in which global institutions and societies might need to adapt were outlined in Competing Civilizations,  while a method of exploring ways by which nations (especially those suffering chronic political and economic dysfunctions) might adapt to these (possible) new global arrangements was suggested, very briefly and inadequately, in A New Manhattan Project for Global Peace, Prosperity and Security. .