THE lack of response from the public, in relation to the Australia-Malaysia refugee swap a few months ago, comes as no surprise to refugee rights activists.
An average citizen, who perceives that there are more than enough Third World foreigners in Malaysia, will regard the agreement as a win-win solution.
Receiving 800 refugees in exchange for 4,000, therefore, sounded like a fantastic deal. Following the announcement, a journalist from Al-Jazeera wished to get in touch with refugees willing to provide their honest perspectives on the issue. I was working with Afghan and Myanmar refugee communities at the time.
The first person who said yes, proclaimed, "Of course! I want this to happen – I want to go to Australia, for me and my family. I want to thank the Australian government and hope they will resettle me."
This refugee's response summarised the kind of hope that goes hand-in-hand with bleakness. While politicians, learned academics and well-informed critics were and still are debating the legality of the agreement, for many refugees in Malaysia, any flicker of hope is good news.
Refugees in Malaysia are in a country of transit. Fully conscious of their lack of choices, feelings of desperation run high: having being forced to accept and struggle to live with the reality that resettlement involves years of waiting at best for the luckiest.
As of May, UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) Malaysia registered 94,400 asylum-seekers and refugees. In addition, new asylum-seekers are processed every day.
Colleagues from UNHCR Malaysia estimate the office receives about 400-500 new asylum-seekers daily. The chance of being counted among the 4,000 heading to Australia is slim. Still, it offers a choice many hope to take.
(Contextualise this figure against UNHCR's latest figure of 10.4 million refugees worldwide, which does not include the 4.7 million refugees registered under UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.)
Although the agreement came as good news to many, this must have come as bad news for refugees who left for Indonesia via the smugglers' route.
This may be precisely the hoped-for response, given that Malaysia and Australia are involved in the Bali Process. Supporters of the bilateral agreement argue that hard measures must be taken to clamp human smuggling.
Since the announcement of the bilateral agreement, Thailand expressed interest in a similar swap agreement with Australia. For reasons which may prove similar to Malaysia, taken up, this could be good news to a government with 100,000 refugees and an estimated unregistered 53,000 in nine camps along the Thai-Myanmar border, not to mention to the refugees themselves.
Less certain is the impact of such agreements on human smugglers' profits. Would the bilateral agreement have attracted even more refugees to Malaysia who hope to be resettled under the Malaysian Solution?
Desperation breeds its own logic. In the face of harm, optimism becomes a survival tactic. Despite the many risks, refugees continue using smugglers.
The discovery that 128 refugees were dropped off in Indonesia instead of Australia as promised, did not deter others from setting their sights on Australia as a destination point, even after the agreement was announced. These refugees either did not know or could not believe that they will be taken to Malaysia.
Additionally, smugglers have started the process of rerouting – sending refugees from Indonesia to New Zealand as an alternative to Australia. This group in question consisted of Sri Lankan refugees who do not have resettlement as a durable option even with UNHCR status.
Canada, which is further away and more perilous as a destination may be a preferred route (and a more lucrative option) as well in future.
In the end, the agreement's feasibility as a solution depends on who you are and which country you are coming from – as a government, citizen or refugee.
A refugee learns not to think in terms of days or months. Many think in decades. Some, especially those who have spent most of their lives in war and transit, think in generations: "I do not want resettlement for myself," they say. "My time is over. I want it for my children's education and for them to build new lives. It is OK if I die here, as long as they can live."
Sadly, to a refugee, this agreement matters. Although it is heartening that the solution was struck down by the Australian High Court, there are millions more around the world in search of a home.
Petra works with children and refugees. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
The Sundaily
No comments:
Post a Comment