BY
SARAH STEPHEN
The war against Iraq, the US government and its allies say, is being waged for a just and moral cause to free the Iraqi people from a despotic and brutal dictator, to allow the people of Iraq to build a free and democratic country. It is a war of liberation, they claim.
If the strongest backers of the US war the governments of Britain and Australia were sincere in their rhetoric, they would treat Iraqis seeking refuge in Britain and Australia with dignity, and immediately commit to take in significant numbers of refugees created by their war.
In Britain, the opposite is happening the government has put the processing of Iraqi asylum seekers on hold until the situation becomes a bit clearer. Home secretary David Blunkett said in February: I'm looking forward one way or another ... to not only stopping the flow of asylum seekers but returning those who are here back to their homes.
If the people of Iraq were really the primary concern of the Australian government in waging this war, we could anticipate the granting of full citizenship rights to the 4000 or so Iraqi refugees on temporary protection visas (TPVs), bringing to an end their limbo status, eliminating the crippling effects of fear and uncertainty.
We could also anticipate the granting of refugee or humanitarian visas to the 152 Iraqi asylum seekers who remain locked behind the razor wire or electric fences of Australia's detention centres. We should also expect to hear statements from Prime Minister John Howard and immigration minister Philip Ruddock about the government's willingness to take in a significant number of the refugees generated by the devastating conflict which is unfolding in Iraq.
The fact that the opposite is happening demonstrates the complete insincerity of the government's claim that it is supporting this war to liberate the Iraqi people from tyranny..
The 4000 Iraqi TPV-holders face being returned to Iraq as soon as Saddam Hussein has been deposed, despite the devastation that will be inflicted on Iraq to achieve this goal.
Howard and Ruddock are cocky and self-satisfied about the way their brutal policy shift in 2001 helped to stem the flow of boats carrying asylum seekers. But this lull will undoubtedly be short-lived. Australia cannot be cordoned off from changes in the international political situation. The effects of the war on Iraq will be felt in this country, regardless of the brutal measures taken by the Howard government to avoid it.
In 2002, 51,000 Iraqis claimed asylum around the world, already making them the largest group seeking asylum. As many as 1 million Iraqi refugees may require resettlement as a result of the US-led war. A further 7.2 million Iraqis could be displaced within the country. As this human catastrophe unfolds, many refugees will no doubt flee beyond the countries immediately bordering Iraq to find safety.
The UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), weakened by funding cuts, is not equipped to deal swiftly and comprehensively with such a crisis. Many Iraqi refugees will take matters into their own hands and make their way overland to Europe. Smaller numbers will make the arduous and potentially dangerous journey to countries further away which have signed the refugee convention, such as the US, Canada and Australia.
In the 1970s, all Vietnamese people fleeing their country were considered to be refugees. It is a grave injustice that Iraqis and Afghans have not been assessed in the same way.
Many Afghans and Iraqis who have spent months and years locked in desert prisons, their applications for refugee status rejected, missed out simply because they could not provide documented proof of being individually singled out for persecution.
Others missed out because they spent more than a few days, perhaps even a few years, in a country that the Australian government deems safe, even if that country was forcibly returning refugees to their country of origin, as has been the case with Syria and Pakistan; even if that country granted them no rights, even to work or send their children to school, such as Indonesia.
Haydar al Rahal's family suffered greatly for their opposition to Saddam Hussein's regime. His brother was shot dead and his father disappeared. Al Rahal was involved in the 1991 uprising against Hussein, which the US encouraged, then abandoned. Many thousands were slaughtered, but al Rahal escaped. He came to Australia in 1999, and remains imprisoned after three-and-a-half years in Port Hedland detention centre. He sent an appeal direct to the minister in August 2001. Eighteen months later, he is still waiting for a reply.
The Australian government is treating Iraqi refugees, not as victims of a brutal tyranny, but as if they were also the enemy, to be punished accordingly.
Take the example of the majority of Iraqi asylum seekers still in detention, 113 of whom have been imprisoned on Nauru and Manus Island, in Papua New Guinea, for the past 18 months. Among the detainees on Nauru are seven Iraqi women and their 12 children. The women remain separated from their husbands, who are in Australia on TPVs. After a fire at State House detention camp in January, where the Iraqis were detained, power and water supplies were cut, and detainees only had enough food for one meal per day.
Bronwyn Adcock, an SBS journalist, gained entry to the camp to interview Iraqi refugees. They told her the story of one man who had been approved as a refugee by the UNHCR but was locked up before the arrival of a New Zealand plane to prevent him joining his family to be resettled in New Zealand. He was labelled by the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), which manages the Nauru camp, as a troublemaker because he spoke out about the conditions in detention.
On March 14, some Iraqi detainees were told that one of their friends, who had been taken away two days earlier, had died. Demanding that IOM officials tell them if this was true, they were told it was not, but IOM refused to let them speak to the man to prove that he was still alive. Reports of the death have also been denied by a spokesperson for the immigration minister, yet at the same time Ruddock has issued no statements raging against refugee advocates for fabricating outrageous lies an opportunity he would rarely miss.
What's more, phone contact with Nauru has been cut since March 14, making it impossible for refugee advocates to contact detainees. There is a great deal of fear and panic among detainees, who continue to believe that their friend has died, and that the Australian government and IOM want to cover it up.
We should demand an end to the government's hypocrisy if it is truly interested in the human rights of the Iraqi people, the Australian government should immediately release all Iraqi asylum seekers from detention and let them stay here on humanitarian grounds. It should end the suffering of Iraqi TPV holders and grant them permanent protection.
All Iraqi asylum seekers who arrive here should be granted protection, but they shouldn't have to risk their lives to find their way to safety. Those countries able to offer protection should assist them to make the journey, as they did during the 1970s and early 1980s with Vietnamese refugees.
Australia resettled 150,000 Vietnamese people, 55,000 taken in as refugees (including 2000 who came on boats) and a further 95,000 through family reunion.
The impending humanitarian crisis in Iraq demands the same response. This is the very least the Howard government owes to the people it is helping to bomb to smithereens in the name of their liberation.
From Green Left Weekly, April 2, 2003.
Visit the Green Left Weekly
home page.