The Mediterranean Question - Illegal immigration to Italy

[Catholic Federalized States]

This is my first thread, sorry if anything is bad

As you may know, Italy has been facing an immigration crisis from what it calls "Boat People 2.0" - lots of mainly Africans fleeing their continent on leaky, unstable boats trying to find their way into Europe. Although some arrivals have been recorded in Spain and France, it is mainly Italy facing the majority. Since 2011, Italy has launched a military-coastguard operation to rescue people from these unstable boats who are near drowning. The operation has recorded several shipwrecks and "thousands of deaths" - it is called Mare Nostrum, and it has since 2011 cost over half a billion dollars. It has saved almost 150 000 lives in this time. However, it is not without controversy, for a nation facing an extreme economic crisis, yet another YEAR of stagnation (2015 = +0.1% GDP) the operation is not in favour with Italy's right, and increasingly the left, who feel that this operation costs too much while the nation is suffering and indigenous people are facing cuts.

The operation has also brought unintended consequences - the Coastguards have observed that boats are becoming less and less stable, as traffickers are now used to Italy rescuing their customers. They could cram their human cargo into wrecks that only had to make it out to international waters—12 nautical miles (22 kilometers) from shore—before sending an SOS. The traffickers know that Italy won't let anyone drown, and do not care.

2014 immigration in relation to 2013 has increased significantly (not to say that 2013 had little immigration - it was already in tens of thousands) - an estimated 823% increase on the year [acronym] "Nei primi 4 mesi del 2014 c'è stato un aumento del 823% di arrivi di migranti verso l'Italia rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2013"[/acronym] as estimated by the Gov'nt.

I'm writing this thread because it is very likely that somewhere this month the 500k mark was passed for the number of illegal immigrants in Italy since the operation was launched.

I'd like to hear your opinion on Italy's operation of "Mare Nostrum" and what should be done, although you're welcome to express opinion about Italian immigration overall. In a country facing a humanitarian, demographic and economic crisis, it's hard to be "correct" without angering either side. Perhaps not rescuing people is unethical, but to what extent should Italy's compassion reach?

(I understand that there is a great difference between "Illegal immigration" and "Refugees", and this debate of what to call it is very far-reaching, but due to the fact that people pay traffickers to go to Italy, I used "illegal" instead. Please don't be offended.)

Sources:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... ng-europe/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... afficking/
http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/0 ... -86113009/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... eople.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... Italy.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... urope.html

[MERIZoC]

Keep rescuing people, take them in, and go after irresponsible smugglers.

[Carolusborg]

I said this before in the Australian General Discussion thread. Italy signed the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees so it would be illegal to simply send them back but I'm sure other countries not in the European Union (Morocco and Tunisia for example) would take them in if given monetary compensation. If the average cost of resettling them elsewhere is lower than the cost of letting them settle in the EU I don't why anyone would be opposed to it.

[Catholic Federalized States]

I said this before in the Australian General Discussion thread. Italy signed the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees so it would be illegal to simply send them back but I'm sure other countries not in the European Union (Morocco and Tunisia for example) would take them in if given monetary compensation. If the average cost of resettling them elsewhere is lower than the cost of letting them settle in the EU I don't why anyone would be opposed to it.

Tunisia has already agreed to participate in Italy's operation, and Italy is training their coastguards. The problem is, Tunisia is the second biggest departure point, after Libya. The Italian opposition Foreign Minister has already said they can get away with sending them back because of what I mentioned in the OP - they pay to be transported to Italy, thereby >possibly< classifying them as illegals rather than refugees.

[Dooom35796821595]

This could be a great opportunity for the UN, go to Africa and stop the smugglers at the source.

[Carolusborg]

I said this before in the Australian General Discussion thread. Italy signed the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees so it would be illegal to simply send them back but I'm sure other countries not in the European Union (Morocco and Tunisia for example) would take them in if given monetary compensation. If the average cost of resettling them elsewhere is lower than the cost of letting them settle in the EU I don't why anyone would be opposed to it.

Tunisia has already agreed to participate in Italy's operation, and Italy is training their coastguards. The problem is, Tunisia is the second biggest departure point, after Libya. The Italian opposition Foreign Minister has already said they can get away with sending them back because of what I mentioned in the OP - they pay to be transported to Italy, thereby >possibly< classifying them as illegals rather than refugees.

Then they should investigate and ask for legal advice through Italian and European courts.

[Udinia]

Eh, Italy should probably worry about its own citizens before it plays hero.

[Arglorand]

Eh, Italy should probably worry about its own citizens before it plays hero.

Multitasking is a thing.

[Udinia]

Eh, Italy should probably worry about its own citizens before it plays hero.

Multitasking is a thing.

Not when you have a failing economy.

[MERIZoC]

Multitasking is a thing.

Not when you have a failing economy.

....no, it still is.

[Gravlen]

I said this before in the Australian General Discussion thread. Italy signed the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees so it would be illegal to simply send them back but I'm sure other countries not in the European Union (Morocco and Tunisia for example) would take them in if given monetary compensation. If the average cost of resettling them elsewhere is lower than the cost of letting them settle in the EU I don't why anyone would be opposed to it.

This... doesn't seem to be correct.

It would be illegal to simply send back those claiming asylum without processing their claims. Those who don't claim asylum - and there are some who don't - can be returned, as long as they're being returned to a place where they don't risk torture or death.

Those found to not have grounds for refugee status can also be returned, on the same terms, while those found to have a claim to asylum cannot be turned away.

[Arglorand]

Multitasking is a thing.

Not when you have a failing economy.

First off, failing is a huge exaggeration.

Second, I'm truly not seeing how economic struggles paralyse your ability to multitask.

[Geilinor]

Multitasking is a thing.

Not when you have a failing economy.

Italy has passed the point of crisis on that. Its economy isn't growing, but it's better than what it was.

[Mike the Progressive]

Not when you have a failing economy.

....no, it still is.

Yep but you need to understand: It's only the ignorant, racist Americans that should be welcoming of the immigrants. Europe has more important things to do like keeping themselves racially homogenous.

/Sarcasm

Italy should welcome these poor fuckers who only seek a better life. Treat them and recognize them as people, because you know...they are?

[Romalae]

Additionally, I would like to point out the views amongst the Italian people regarding immigration, based on some good information from Pew Research Center.

Italians, above basically all the other Western European countries, have an overall negative perception about immigrants. 80% of Italians say that Italy should allow fewer immigrants, and 69% of Italians say that immigrants are a burden on society. As you can see below, this is significantly more than a lot of other surveyed European countries:

So this should be taken into account when answering this question. I can't imagine that the Italian government would have the political will to attempt to settle all these illegal immigrants within Italy because of the public's anti-immigration views. The backlash would be immense, and that's evident given the current discourse among Italians.

[Mike the Progressive]

There was a great deal of unpopularity with President Obama's executive decision. I think a clear majority of Americans opposed it. He did it anyway. Granted for political reasons, but also humanitarian ones. I think this mentality is classic Europe. Scoff at the ignorant Yanks for problems of racism and bigotry all the while pushing the same BS yourselves.

[Udinia]

....no, it still is.

Yep but you need to understand: It's only the ignorant, racist Americans that should be welcoming of the immigrants. Europe has more important things to do like keeping themselves racially homogenous.

/Sarcasm

Italy should welcome these poor fuckers who only seek a better life. Treat them and recognize them as people, because you know...they are?

It's not about whether or not the immigrants are people or not. It is whether Italy has the means to integrate them into its society and not implode in the process.

[Quintium]

As you all know, I believe this to be an invasion. The Africans and Middle Easterners who come to Europe through the Meditteranean - most are uneducated, young men of the Sunni faith - have nothing to offer us and serve only to destabilize Europe.

Now, if I am to believe people here I'm just a conspiracy theorist, but today I learned that the Islamic State (which now controls several coastal towns in Libya) has actually been making plans to send 500,000 migrants to Europe at once and to hide among them large numbers of fighters who, in the ensuing chaos, would be able to escape the authorities and wreak havoc in major Italian cities. The Italian government is now putting even more paramilitary police and soldiers in the big cities and near major tourist sites. So, evidently there is a big problem here, and there are relatively strong militant groups conspiring to use these migrants as a means to destabilize Europe and smuggle in hundreds or even thousands of fighters who aim to kill an awful lot of people.

Therefore, I will repeat what I have been saying for years: this is an invasion, and we should treat it like one. Deport the migrants back to Africa immediately and shoot any and all human traffickers you find. That is the only way to avoid the full economic, political, cultural and military collapse of Europe.

[Mike the Progressive]

Yep but you need to understand: It's only the ignorant, racist Americans that should be welcoming of the immigrants. Europe has more important things to do like keeping themselves racially homogenous.

/Sarcasm

Italy should welcome these poor fuckers who only seek a better life. Treat them and recognize them as people, because you know...they are?

It's not about whether or not the immigrants are people or not. It is whether Italy has the means to integrate them into its society and not implode in the process.

If there is that much of a chance that Italy could implode as a result, I'd say it has some bigger problems than just a bunch of poor brown and black people who only seek a better life from the country next door.

My point is I don't think Europe is going to end as we know it if they allow them in.

[Udinia]

It's not about whether or not the immigrants are people or not. It is whether Italy has the means to integrate them into its society and not implode in the process.

If there is that much of a chance that Italy could implode as a result, I'd say it has some bigger problems than just a bunch of poor brown and black people who only seek a better life from the country next door.

My point is I don't think Europe is going to end as we know it if they allow them in.

Eh, I'm just of the opinion that nations should care for their own in times when the economy is fragile. Italy really shouldn't bring more people in if it's already having problems as its population currently is.

[Romalae]

There was a great deal of unpopularity with President Obama's executive decision. I think a clear majority of Americans opposed it. He did it anyway. Granted for political reasons, but also humanitarian ones. I think this mentality is classic Europe. Scoff at the ignorant Yanks for problems of racism and bigotry all the while pushing the same BS yourselves.

It is not clear if this is in response to me (there was no quotation), but if so, let me just say that I am not European. I'm American. Also, I'm not aware of any surveys conducted prior to or during Obama's executive action on immigration, but I get the sense that the unpopularity wasn't as high as 80%, as is the Italian view against immigration. It's not exactly an on-par comparison, but point taken nonetheless.

As you all know, I believe this to be an invasion. The Africans and Middle Easterners who come to Europe through the Meditteranean - most are uneducated, young men of the Sunni faith - have nothing to offer us and serve only to destabilize Europe.

Now, if I am to believe people here I'm just a conspiracy theorist, but today I learned that the Islamic State (which now controls several coastal towns in Libya) has actually been making plans to send 500,000 migrants to Europe at once and to hide among them large numbers of fighters who, in the ensuing chaos, would be able to escape the authorities and wreak havoc in major Italian cities. The Italian government is now putting even more paramilitary police and soldiers in the big cities and near major tourist sites. So, evidently there is a big problem here, and there are relatively strong militant groups conspiring to use these migrants as a means to destabilize Europe and smuggle in hundreds or even thousands of fighters who aim to kill an awful lot of people.

Therefore, I will repeat what I have been saying for years: this is an invasion, and we should treat it like one. Deport the migrants back to Africa immediately and shoot any and all human traffickers you find. That is the only way to avoid the full economic, political, cultural and military collapse of Europe.

If you're going to make outlandish claims like that, you're going to need a credible source. Namely one that identifies the Mediterranean migrants as "mostly Sunni" and that ISIS has been "making plans" to send covert fighters into Europe as migrants.

[Quintium]

My point is I don't think Europe is going to end as we know it if they allow them in.

They are a serious destabilizing factor in the short term and a serious cultural and religious threat in the coming centuries.

In the short term, a government that is still very much on the brink financially will have to find accomodation for these migrants, and feed them, and provide them with health care. All across Italy, there are rumours that these migrants have been involved in gruesome violent and sexual crimes, and it is a fact that they tend to work in the black market and get in trouble with the police a lot. And, of course, more and more Italians hate them. Already, some asylum centres have been besieged after incidents and hostility climbed due to overcrowding.

In the long term, you must understand that a lot of these people reject secularism, democracy and tolerance. In a representative poll held among Muslims (sorry for bringing this up again, but Sunni Islam is the most popular faith among these migrants) in several European countries and published about a week ago, it turned out that anywhere between 40 and 70 percent of Muslims in Europe were fundamentalist, compared to between 2 and 5 percent of Christians. And contrary to Christians, young Muslims are actually more likely to be fundamentalist.

I never get why anyone who is progressive would think that having hundreds of thousands of these people settling your lands and voting in your elections won't hurt. Do you not know that these people are unanimous in condemning homosexuality as a vile sin, and that they have already caused an exodus of Jews in France due to constant intimidations and acts of violence?

Why do we need to saddle ourselves with hordes of unenlightened, superstitious men? Do we need to repent for something? Is this some sort of masochistic self-inflicted punishment for colonials?

[Arglorand]

As you all know, I believe this to be an invasion.

And I believe unicorns exist and they shit rainbows.

[Geilinor]

Additionally, I would like to point out the views amongst the Italian people regarding immigration, based on some good information from Pew Research Center.

Italians, above basically all the other Western European countries, have an overall negative perception about immigrants. 80% of Italians say that Italy should allow fewer immigrants, and 69% of Italians say that immigrants are a burden on society. As you can see below, this is significantly more than a lot of other surveyed European countries:

(Image)

(Image)

So this should be taken into account when answering this question. I can't imagine that the Italian government would have the political will to attempt to settle all these illegal immigrants within Italy because of the public's anti-immigration views. The backlash would be immense, and that's evident given the current discourse among Italians.

Countries with more struggling economies seem to be more anti-immigration. I think the opposition will weaken when the economy improves.

[Quintium]

If you're going to make outlandish claims like that, you're going to need a credible source. Namely one that identifies the Mediterranean migrants as "mostly Sunni" and that ISIS has been "making plans" to send covert fighters into Europe as migrants.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... urope.html