Greece dumps refugees in Ocean tells Turkey Deal with it

[Outer Acharet]

Condemnation should do the trick.

Strongly worded letters with no teeth to back them up have been proven to be useless

They don't need teeth if the edges of the paper are crisp enough to give papercuts

[No State Here]

Yeah realized the idiocy of my statement a second after I hit "submit". I feel there's a distinction that these poor conditions aren't equal to Auschwitz, though, which I know is what the phrase "concentration camp" evokes. Hell, that's what it made me think of right before I wrote a poorly worded response.

This post reminded me of an excellent video I watched on the importance of historical context when relating to present day

The specific timestamp for the "concentration camps" comparison during discourse

He makes good points, even if something fits the definition of a "concentration camp", the immediate picture most people in the West draw in their minds is to Auschwitz, even if the subject in question is nowhere near that level.

Similarly, to connect it back to the topic, when someone says "genocide," most people in the West think of the Holocaust

[Fartsniffage]

The speed in which people can defend letting other people drown is horrific.


There are no international waters in the Mediterranean.

This is not correct, international waters are anything outside 12NM, the Med is definitely wider than 24 NM in places.

EEZ.

[Thermodolia]

This is not correct, international waters are anything outside 12NM, the Med is definitely wider than 24 NM in places.

EEZ.

Which is still international waters per international law which states all areas outside of the national waters are international waters.

The EEZ isn’t national waters

[Sao Nova Europa]

I am an EU federalist, so of course I am proud Greece is being (rightly) supported by the EU. We are defending the borders of our Union.

By letting refugees drown? Your union doesn't deserve to exist if thats how cruel it is

No one has drowned. Since the start of the year, only one person has been died in an accident (rest in boat rescued by Greek coastal guard).

[Borderlands of Rojava]

This post reminded me of an excellent video I watched on the importance of historical context when relating to present day

The specific timestamp for the "concentration camps" comparison during discourse

He makes good points, even if something fits the definition of a "concentration camp", the immediate picture most people in the West draw in their minds is to Auschwitz, even if the subject in question is nowhere near that level.

Similarly, to connect it back to the topic, when someone says "genocide," most people in the West think of the Holocaust

It's sad. The holocaust wasn't even the only genocide.

[Greed and Death]

I am sympathetic to Greece bearing the brunt of this crisis in the Mideast. The solution is to ask the EU to contribute more funds not to drop people in the ocean.

Yes, more money and more support. The other EU member states should help out financially, with manpower, and by taking a proportional share of the refugees.

We are in agreement. I do not know if this means the end of the world.

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

Responding to a wrong behavior with the wrong attitude

The Megali Idea is dead. No one in Greece (aside from a few crazy nationalists, who are mostly on web and trolling) wants Turkish land. We don't want war with Turkey. Many of us actually like the Turkish people. We simply want to defend our sovereignty.

I say we should think of refugees together, we should take them back to their countries safely. I say Turks or Greeks should not be alone

[Borderlands of Rojava]

By letting refugees drown? Your union doesn't deserve to exist if thats how cruel it is

No one has drowned. Since the start of the year, only one person has been died in an accident (rest in boat rescued by Greek coastal guard).

Dog, they dumped a boat full of people in the ocean. They've been sent adrift and if they aren't rescued, they will probably drown or die of thirst.

Those are human beings. "Preserving Greek heritage" is a 5 or 6 on the importance scale while preserving human lives is a 10.

[Mannixa Prime]

I like how one is addressing the fact that if we stopped electing the same combination of neo-liberal and neo-conservative governments in the western world,who create these middle eastern conflicts and also African conflicts the flow of people wouldn’t be an issue.


Again the working class people of Greece and any other Western/European nation have zero obligation to be responsible for the sins of bankers, war mongers, and their ilk.

Nor should science or LGBT rights suffer because corporations want cheap labour and pretend leftists want diversity.

[Sao Nova Europa]

The Megali Idea is dead. No one in Greece (aside from a few crazy nationalists, who are mostly on web and trolling) wants Turkish land. We don't want war with Turkey. Many of us actually like the Turkish people. We simply want to defend our sovereignty.

I say we should think of refugees together, we should take them back to their countries safely. I say Turks or Greeks should not be alone

I agree.

[Novus America]

This is not correct, international waters are anything outside 12NM, the Med is definitely wider than 24 NM in places.

EEZ.

EEZ are international waters. Although you have exclusive economic exploitation rights in the EEZ you have no control over movement of ships.

[Fartsniffage]

EEZ.

Which is still international waters per international law which states all areas outside of the national waters are international waters.

The EEZ isn’t national waters

So the Greeks are dumping the people within 12 miles of Turkey or nah?

[Borderlands of Rojava]

I like how one is addressing the fact that if we stopped electing the same combination of neo-liberal and neo-conservative governments in the western world,who create these middle eastern conflicts and also African conflicts the flow of people wouldn’t be an issue.


Again the working class people of Greece and any other Western/European nation have zero obligation to be responsible for the sins of bankers, war mongers, and their ilk.

Nor should science or LGBT right suffer because corporations want cheap labour and pretend leftists want diversity.

No one is asking you to be tho. No one is asking working class greeks to carry Syrians back to Syria on their backs.

[Gravlen]

It's not a crime if they are refugees.

What is a crime, however, is abducting people, robbing people, and placing people in harm's way. (All of which can be seen examples of in the OP's article)

It is a crime entering illegally a country. There are no refugees. Turkey is a safe country, so according to Geneva Conventions people coming from Turkey to Greece are economic (illegal) immigrants. Only the first safe country has to accept refugees. Turkey is that first safe country.

First of all, a refugee is a person who, owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it. This is the legal definition of a refugee. As you can see, there's nothing in the definition which says that a person no longer is a refugee due to travelling over geographical distances. As long as their fear is well-founded, as long as they fear being persecuted for membership in one of the protected classes, as long as they're outside their country of origin - they are still refugees.

Your talking point is a complete misunderstanding of what the debate has been about. There's no question that they continue being refugees no matter where they go (apart from back home). The question is, and has always been, which country has a duty to process the refugee and grant him or her the rights set down in the convention. This, however, doesn't change the fact that a refugee is still a refugee.

So, that brings us to the second part of your incorrect statement. You see, the Refugee definition does not contain a requirement that a refugee has to stop in the first safe country. So as above, this has no bearing on whether or not a person is a refugee. It is only a question of which country is responsible for them. That means, it's a question of admission and recognition of asylum seekers. To put it simply, the question is whether an asylum seeker has a choice of where to go to have his application for recognition of his or her refugee status processed. And the answer is yes, and courts have rejected the idea that you have to apply in the first safe country since such an approach lacks basis in international law and could easily violate international obligations, particularly the principle of non-refoulement.

I'll give you a nice quote from R v. Uxbridge Magistrates Court and Another, Ex parte Adimi

(a)
“Coming directly”
17. The respondents accept that a literal construction of “directly” would contravene the clear purpose of the Article and they accordingly accept that this condition can be satisfied even if the refugee passes through intermediate countries on his way to the United Kingdom. But that is only so, they argue, provided that he could not reasonably have been expected to seek protection in any such intermediate country and this will not be the case unless he has actually needed, rather than merely desired, to come to the United Kingdom. In short it is the respondents’ contention that Article 31 allows the refugee no element of choice as to where he should claim asylum. He must claim it where first he may: only considerations of continuing safety would justify impunity for further travel.

18. For my part I would reject this argument. Rather I am persuaded by the applicants’ contrary submission, drawing as it does on the travaux préparatoires, various Conclusions adopted by UNHCR’s executive committee (ExCom), and the writings of well respected academics and commentators (most notably Professor Guy Goodwin-Gill, Atle Grahl-Madsen, Professor James Hathaway and Dr Paul Weis), that some element of choice is indeed open to refugees as to where they may properly claim asylum. I conclude that any merely short term stopover en route to such intended sanctuary cannot forfeit the protection of the Article, and that the main touchstones by which exclusion from protection should be judged are
the length of stay in the intermediate country, the reasons for delaying there (even a substantial delay in an unsafe third country would be reasonable were the time spent trying to acquire the means of travelling on), and whether or not the refugee sought or found there protection de jure or de facto from the ersecution they were fleeing.

19. It is worth quoting in this regard the UNHCR‘s own Guidelines with regard to the Detention of Asylum Seekers: "The expression ‘coming directly’ in Article 31(1) covers the situation of a person who enters the country in which asylum is sought directly from the country of origin, or from another country where his protection, safety and security could not be assured. It is understood that this term also covers a person who transits an intermediate country for a short period of time without having applied for, or received, asylum there. No strict time limit can be applied to the concept ‘coming directly’ and each case must be judged on its merits

Not a Greek case, but this is an illustration of a common understanding of the Refugee Convention.

Another example, this one from Canada, is also clear:

Aucune disposition de la Convention n’oblige les demandeurs d’asile à déposer une demande d’asile dans le premier pays où ils ont fui

See Menjivar, Carlos Othmar Navarrete c. M.C.I. (C.F., IMM-9660-04). Alternatively, see the conclusion drawn by the Canada Immigration and Refugee Board:

There is no provision in the Convention that obliges refugee claimants to seek asylum in the first country they reach.

So: There's no requirement in the Convention for refugees to stay in the first safe country, and under the convention a contracting state has an obligation to offer protection to a refugee applying for asylum if they've only passed through other safe countries. According to the UNHCR, there's also a legal obligation to grant them refugee status and let them stay if they previously have stayed in a "safe country" which lacks protection there against refoulement and they're not treated in accordance with basic human standards, if they're subject there to persecution or threats to safety and liberty, or if they don't have access to a durable solution. The situation in Turkey fits that description.

[Atheris]

This is not correct, international waters are anything outside 12NM, the Med is definitely wider than 24 NM in places.

EEZ.

The EEZ aren't international waters. Europe isn't a nation.

[Sao Nova Europa]

No one has drowned. Since the start of the year, only one person has been died in an accident (rest in boat rescued by Greek coastal guard).

Dog, they dumped a boat full of people in the ocean. They've been sent adrift and if they aren't rescued, they will probably drown or die of thirst.

Those are human beings. "Preserving Greek heritage" is a 5 or 6 on the importance scale while preserving human lives is a 10.

'Will' 'Probably'

Hypotheticals. No one dies. People go back to Turkey. The fact that people have attempted that journey more than once despite the push backs shows that they didn't consider the risk to be lethal.

[Fartsniffage]

Dog, they dumped a boat full of people in the ocean. They've been sent adrift and if they aren't rescued, they will probably drown or die of thirst.

Those are human beings. "Preserving Greek heritage" is a 5 or 6 on the importance scale while preserving human lives is a 10.

'Will' 'Probably'

Hypotheticals. No one dies. People go back to Turkey. The fact that people have attempted that journey more than once despite the push backs shows that they didn't consider the risk to be lethal.

How many people have died attempting the crossing?

[Thermodolia]

Which is still international waters per international law which states all areas outside of the national waters are international waters.

The EEZ isn’t national waters

So the Greeks are dumping the people within 12 miles of Turkey or nah?

It’s entirely possible that the Greeks could be dumping people outside that range.

[Gravlen]

I love how you're trying to act proud of the fact your country is basically being propped up by the EU.

"Oh what are you gonna do to us?" Easy, cut off the cash and watch Greece turn into an uninhabited wasteland in five years. I know you're a proud Greek. But I don't think your country is as powerful anymore as you want to think it is my guy.

I am an EU federalist, so of course I am proud Greece is being (rightly) supported by the EU. We are defending the borders of our Union.

"Border control can and must go hand in hand with respect for fundamental rights."

[Sao Nova Europa]

'Will' 'Probably'

Hypotheticals. No one dies. People go back to Turkey. The fact that people have attempted that journey more than once despite the push backs shows that they didn't consider the risk to be lethal.

How many people have died attempting the crossing?

In 2020? Only one, in an accident (not during a push back) and while the rest of the boat were saved by the Greek coast guard.

[Gravlen]

Yes, more money and more support. The other EU member states should help out financially, with manpower, and by taking a proportional share of the refugees.

We are in agreement. I do not know if this means the end of the world.

It does. The swarms of locusts are coming on Friday after tea.

[Novus America]

Which is still international waters per international law which states all areas outside of the national waters are international waters.

The EEZ isn’t national waters

So the Greeks are dumping the people within 12 miles of Turkey or nah?

Not sure exactly where the are being dumped.
But although your MAXIMUM territorial waters are 12NM some cases they might be less.
You only get the full 12NM if another country is at least 24NM away, if less than that you split the difference.

Also you can claim less than the maximum amount.

[Fartsniffage]

How many people have died attempting the crossing?

In 2020? Only one, in an accident (not during a push back) and while the rest of the boat were saved by the Greek coast guard.

How do you know that?

[Sao Nova Europa]

So: There's no requirement in the Convention for refugees to stay in the first safe country, and under the convention a contracting state has an obligation to offer protection to a refugee applying for asylum if they've only passed through other safe countries. According to the UNHCR, there's also a legal obligation to grant them refugee status and let them stay if they previously have stayed in a "safe country" which lacks protection there against refoulement and they're not treated in accordance with basic human standards, if they're subject there to persecution or threats to safety and liberty, or if they don't have access to a durable solution. The situation in Turkey fits that description.

No one cares. We will not accept them even if you bomb us with napalms. There is no way you can force us.