Today, I listened, on CBC Radio, to a discussion about the possibility of creating a new country solely for refugees, and thought that this would be perfect for my stated “intention to develop this blog to facilitate communication ... and discuss almost any subject ....” For example; Should we create a new country solely for refugees (Mentioned twice for affect)?
This week, according to French police, another man has been killed trying to enter the Channel Tunnel to get to England. Hundreds of attempts to enter the UK, by this method, are made each day, say the tunnel operators.
Almost 2,000 people are believed to have died crossing the Mediterranean to reach Europe this year and, it is estimated that, there are 60 million displaced people throughout the world.
Now, a controversial plan has been developed, by a real estate developer, to solve, at least help to solve, the problem, by creating a “Refugee Nation” (A brand-new country for the world’s refugees). Critics are concerned that it could become a type of prison camp ... are you?
Please comment here.
At one time America was a new country for refugees coming from many European Countries. Canada accepted refugees from Ireland when the English drove them off their lands. It seems most parts of the world today are already claimed and cannot be divided as a new country for modern refugees. Can you suggest a space to create a new country?
ReplyDelete
DeleteAnother example would be Israel, but it is preferred that we leave any mention of that country for another day.
The idea proposed in this programme is to select one of many uninhabited islands in the world and, probably, authorize control by the UNHCR.
A discussion about the number of displaced people (asylum seekers) today, approximately 60 million, is very difficult to calculate as asylum seekers are not considered refugees until registered by a host country. Equally, the financial cost internationally is difficult to calculate. Having said that, it is believed that if the cost is consolidated (combined) under the control of the UNHCR, an island state could be developed for asylum seekers, i.e., not refugees.
Here are a few brief aspects that have been suggested.
- The island state would be an open environment, i.e., not a prison.
Infrastructure would be developed, e.g., homes, schools, work places, shops, churches/mosques, etc.
- Government offices would be available to process refugee applications.
- All asylum seekers throughout the world, during a reasonable initial time period, would be sent to this island state and, thus, countries should be relieved of a responsibility to care for displaced people ... other than registered refugees (who may quickly become permanent residents) and this would act as a deterrent for ‘economic’ asylum seekers.
- The population should have no reason to leave (escape) this island for the same reason ... other than to return to their country of origin.
- Immigration regulations should remain unchanged.
Of course, this is just a brief introduction of the idea but, I feel, worthy of discussion and consideration.