Over 160 people are feared dead after an unseaworthy boat packed with asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Iran sank off the coast of Indonesia yesterday. The tragedy again sparked debate over asylum seeker policy and offshore v. onshore processing.
There are differing accounts of survivor numbers, with Indonesian authorities saying 34 people are confirmed safe — including two small boys, while Australia’s Home Affairs Minister Jason Clare said 87 people were rescued by Indonesian fisherman. The boat was packed with between 215-250 asylum seekers — including 40 children — although it had an official capacity of just 100.
Survivors spoke of their escape to news.com.au:
“Khadzim Huzen, a 30-year-old Afghan, told AP that after the big wave hit, the ship started tipping into the water, and everyone rushed to the front. A fight broke out for life jackets.
There were only 25, he said, and nine already had been taken by the crew.
‘In the end, as everything was being swallowed up by the water, we just grabbed hold of anything we could,’ he said. ‘We formed small groups in the water and tried to help each other stay afloat.'”
Tom Allard in the Canberra Times explains how people smugglers sent the asylum seekers on their deadly voyage:
“Many of the asylum-seekers flew from Dubai to Jakarta, where Indonesian officials are said to be ready for the migrants to arrive, charging them each $500 to pass through the airport without visas.
They arrived over several days and were taken in four buses on a 23-hour journey to an unknown location on Java’s south coast.
The modus operandi highlights the increased confidence of the smugglers and the huge demand for their services.”
Cardinal George Pell, who was openly critical of John Howard’s treatment of asylum seekers in the early 2000s spoke publicly yesterday about the need for the government to adopt offshore processing.
“The people-smugglers are evil and irresponsible money-makers prepared to risk the destruction of their passengers. These deaths are a tragedy,” Pell told The Australian. “It’s difficult to see any alternative to the government and opposition promptly agreeing on effective offshore deterrents. Australians do not want more tragedies like this.”
Time to focus on the kingpins in the people smuggling war, not the bit players, writes Susan Metcalfe (author of The Pacific Solution) in The Age:
“I understand that it can be difficult to catch the heads of operations in other countries, and that corrupt officials often collude in smuggling operations. But there is no excuse for Australian laws that do not discriminate between different levels of involvement and do not allow room for leniency where it is warranted.
Like many other asylum policies and laws created for political reasons over the past decade, this is simply another that is ineffective, unfair and has no logical basis.
Both parties should now support investing more heavily in tracking those dealers who run the people-smuggling shows in the region.
If the Coalition genuinely wants a policy that deters boat arrivals and ensures the safety and rights of refugees, it should work with the government to ensure the security of anyone returned to Malaysia.”
The Coalition must help the government pass changes to the Migration Act to allow offshore processing so that these deadly boat voyages end, says The Australian‘s editorial.
“The people-smugglers are responsible for the deaths, but the onus is on Australia to do everything possible to stop the boats.”
88 thoughts on “Tragedy at sea: over 160 asylum seekers feared dead”
GeeWizz
December 19, 2011 at 11:37 pm[“@Geewizz – I do believe words cannot describe how utterly despicable you truly are!”]
“The left can’t handle criticism and can never admit they got it wrong. It’s in their DNA, blame someone else.”
Rinse and repeat.
You guys have stuffed up. The leftwing open borders experiment has been a disaster. It’s time to admit you got it wrong and fall behind support for the reintroduction of the Howard era solution.
Andybob
December 19, 2011 at 11:42 pmThe only thing worse than the government’s determination to re-introduce offshore processing is the confected concern of various contributors.
shepherdmarilyn
December 20, 2011 at 2:10 amhttp://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/page?page=49e4884c6&submit=GO
Here is the update of conditions in Malaysia that Gee and others think we should send people to in breach of the law, sort of collective punishment for daring to survive and get here safely.
shepherdmarilyn
December 20, 2011 at 2:12 am“The main refugee groups in Malaysia originate from Afghanistan, Iraq, Myanmar and Somalia, where current conditions are not conducive to return. A sizeable group of refugees from Sri Lanka also live in Malaysia. In their case, however, improving conditions in Sri Lanka could present the potential for safe return. Local integration is not considered a viable option by the Malaysian authorities for the majority of refugees. For them, given the lack of prospects for return or local integration, resettlement remains the only option.”
And what does Australia say about this _ you will never get resettlement so we would be sentencing people to nothing for no reason while pretending we care.
McFly Marty
December 20, 2011 at 8:17 amFor all the rhetoric Geewiz makes a good point. Howard was hounded by people over the deaths that occurred on the SIEV X, if you want to be consistent you have to lay just as much blame at the feet of Gillard.
Otherwise it’s YOU who are playing tribal politics with this.
Peter Ormonde
December 20, 2011 at 8:52 amNo not really Mr McFly
Any set of policies that oblige asylum seekers to climb onto overcrowded dangerous boats is despicable.
Troofie/Geewizz believes that this can be stopped by throwing such people into prison, by towing their boats out to sea, by treating them as criminals. “Sending a message”.
There are a few problems with this, not least it is illegal and abrogates our obligations under the UN Convention and a few other duty of care issues. Also it does not work.
If Troofie and his ilk were actually concerned about the plight of asylum seekers they would be keen to establish a humane process offshore which made such trips unnecessary. But that is not what concerns them. They are angry because asylum seekers “get economic incentives, free houses, centrelink handouts for life.” That they are “queue jumpers” stealing places from the nice polite poor people waiting in line in the UN camps. This position asserts there is a queue. There is not.
Of course those asylum seekers who arrive on valid visas and apply for asylum once they are here are no less “queue jumpers”. But it is boat people who get them wild, who make them frightened of a tsunami of uncontrolled immigration from the swarming hordes to our north. The yellow, brown, brindle peril.
The debate has moved past this.
It is not about blame and guilt – all governments since Gerry Hand introduced mandatory detention have been guilty. The challenge is to solve it, to keep people safe, to treat people fairly and to provide a safe refuge for people who need it.
This can be easily resolved – we’ve done it before. It involves offshore processing centres adjacent to source countries operating on Australian law. It means winning the co-operation of regional countries and increasing the number of countries willing to take successful asylum claimants.
This is a humane and workable response. It is not about imprisonment and it honours both the letter and the spirit of the UN Convention.
Sadly that is not what the Troofies and the Abbotts are interested in. They think that, with enough razor wire, with enough detention centres, with sending the boats back, we can drive people away. In short we make Australia as unattractive and unpleasant as the countries they are fleeing. Hateful and despicable stuff. And at its core deeply racist and selfish.
Not Australian at all.
jeebus
December 20, 2011 at 9:33 am@Gee Whiz, there is a crazed gloating to your posts, the kind of which you would once have derided as ‘Howard hating’.
Sorry to break this to you, but you have become your enemy.
Alexander Berkman
December 20, 2011 at 10:24 am@Mcfly & Geewhizz – do you REALLY think that because we found Howard’s policies abhorrent that we don’t find Gilliard’s either? You’re polarised view of the world is so narrow and sincerely lacking in anything close to compassion, empathy or reality.
Bloody OiCrikey
December 20, 2011 at 11:54 am@MCFLY
It’s a little different. Some women went on the SIEV X because they were compelled to make the trip to join their husbands who were on Temporary Protection Visa which is a dead end Visa (also it is not the same as Bridging Visa, with Bridging Visa you are still able to apply and wait for other status to be considered).
Regardless, I would not hold Howard or Gillard responsible for those deaths. People made their own decision to get on the boats and had some idea of the risk entailed. Howard and Gillard have been telling them to F off they, didn’t tell them to get on the boat.
They should increase the intake of refugees in the region and let them know of eligibility up to 2 years in advance so that would relief a lot of pressure for those waiting. They should also have vocational training for those accepted while waiting be resettled so they can get employment quickly when they arrive in Australia.
Australia does not have open border policy under Labor nor Liberals. They spend billions to keep people out and lock people up. I wouldn’t mind open border policy. Non-citizens should be taxed at 50-60%. Deport them if they work illegally, heavy penalty imposed on those who employ them illegally and $2000 reward for dobbing in. It would be good for the economy, government gets about 50% of their wages and they spend about another 30% on food and rent etc., it will boost the economy.
Heard of Westfield Shopping Centre? Started and owned by a former refugee Frank Lowy, one of the many refugees who have contributed a lot to the economy, Westfield alone contributes billions to the GDP of this country. I used to run a shop and I can tell you that there are many (White Australian) welfare dependants (or dole bludgers if you want to call them that) who rely on Centrelink payments to spend . Just because there are refugees who find it difficult to find employment due to language and skills barrier does not mean refugees want to come here just because they want welfare and Australians don’t abuse the welfare system themselves.
Peter Ormonde
December 20, 2011 at 12:27 pmWell said Mr or Ms OiCrikey.