Australia’s outsourced migration policy: Deterrence is dangerous, ineffective, and cruel
Country: Australia
U.S. President Donald Trump has fought to restrict the physical flow of asylum seekers to the United States, pushing Mexico and other “third countries” to shoulder the burden. Australia’s stringent migration policies warn how dangerous outsourcing migration policy can be for human rights and dignity.
Lessons:
Outsourcing the asylum process to other countries can increase the suffering of asylum seekers, and in a way that is less transparent and accountable to voters. Such deterrence policies don’t lessen suffering or death; they simply shift where it happens.
Harsh detention policies are a political slippery slope, difficult to escape even when serious human rights violations come to light and are widely condemned.
Donald Trump propelled himself to the presidency amid promises to build a wall and crack down on crossings along the United States’ southern border. A particular focus of the Trump Administration has been deterring asylum seekers (those who flee their homeland and request international protection as refugees) from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. Trump has pushed the Mexican government to shoulder the burden, demanding increased immigration enforcement on the Mexico–Guatemala border and attempting to require an asylum application to be made and denied in a country through which an asylum seeker passes before being able to seek asylum in the United States.[1]
In his efforts to curb immigration of all sorts, Trump has complimented Australia’s harsh migration policies, noting that “much can be learned.”[2] True, argues Australian journalist Rachel Withers, but mainly what not to do.[3] According to Withers, “Australia’s shameful, infamous, but by now deeply embedded immigration detention system should send a clear warning to the US.”[4]
Australia does not accept asylum seekers via boat and confines those who arrive in contracted offshore detention centers in Papua New Guinea and Nauru. Since 2013, more than 3,000 asylum seekers have been apprehended at sea and sent to one of the camps, many for years at a time. The policy has been widely condemned as illegal under international humanitarian law for inflicting harsh conditions and essentially trapping migrants in legal limbo.[5] Mental health in the island camps is at a crisis point, particularly with “resignation syndrome,” a severe trauma-related disorder.[6] After Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s conservative government was unexpectedly reelected in May 2019, dozens of desperate migrants attempted suicide, including by self-immolation.[7]
Many accuse the Australian government of designing the policy precisely to be harsh in order to scare away future asylum seekers. In other words, cruelty is the point.[8] While this aspect seems particularly attractive to Trump, whose “family separation” policy was similarly conceived,[9] there is scant evidence that detention effectively deters migration or decreases deaths.[10] According to the Australian Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, offshore detentions and boat turnbacks may not even effectively deter asylum seekers.[11] Kaldor Centre Director Jane McAdam stated that Australia’s policy “simply shifts the problem out of sight; it doesn’t address the underlying protection needs.”[12] That seems to be the point: the Australian government has even banned journalists from accessing the detention centers in order to prevent “sharing intelligence with people smugglers”—a questionable pretext, especially if detention is really intended to deter future arrivals.[13]
Should the Trump Administration succeed in normalizing secretive and harsh detention policies while offloading some asylum seekers to Mexico and Guatemala, the effect could be similarly unclear. That is, such policies are unlikely to stem the tide of migration itself, but the increased hardship suffered by asylum seekers would be less present or visible to American voters.
“Australia has backed itself into a corner,” says Withers, “with neither major party willing to significantly loosen the hardline policy, lest they prompt a fresh flood of asylum attempts or simply be labelled ‘weak’ on security.”[14] While the slide to offshore detention was incremental, then, the cruelty has become normalized.
Attempting to push the issue of migration out of sight and out of mind for voters through harsh policies and offshore detention has serious consequences and is unlikely to deter asylum seekers; the United States must escape the slippery slope of brutality before it is too late.
Recommended Reading:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/07/trump-morrison-australia-immigration-manus-nauru.html
https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/02/australia-papua-new-guinea-refugee-manus-nauru
[1] James Fredrick, “How Mexico Beefs Up Immigration Enforcement To Meet Trump’s Terms,” NPR, July 13, 2019, https://www.npr.org/2019/07/13/740009105/how-mexico-beefs-up-immigration-enforcement-to-meet-trumps-terms; Miriam Jordan and Zolan Kanno-Youngs, “Trump’s Latest Attempt to Bar Asylum Seekers Is Blocked After a Day of Dueling Rulings,” The New York Times, July 24, 2019, sec. U.S., https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/us/asylum-ruling-tro.html.
[2] “Donald J. Trump on Twitter: ‘These Flyers Depict Australia’s Policy on Illegal Immigration. Much Can Be Learned! Https://T.Co/QgGU0gyjRS’ / Twitter,” Twitter, accessed October 20, 2019, https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1144033134129758208.
[3] Rachel Withers, “Trump Is Right That ‘Much Can Be Learned’ From Australia on Immigration. Mostly, What Not to Do.,” Slate Magazine, July 3, 2019, https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/07/trump-morrison-australia-immigration-manus-nauru.html.
[4] Rachel Withers. Interview by Ben Raderstorf. Email. July 28, 2019.
[5] Ben Doherty, “Australia Should Bring Manus and Nauru Refugees to Immediate Safety, UN Says,” The Guardian, November 9, 2017, sec. Australia news, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/10/australia-should-bring-manus-and-nauru-refugees-to-immediate-safety-un-says.
[6] Louise Newman, “Explainer: What Is Resignation Syndrome and Why Is It Affecting Refugee Children?,” The Conversation, August 21, 2018, https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-resignation-syndrome-and-why-is-it-affecting-refugee-children-101670.
[7] Damien Cave, “A Timeline of Despair in Australia’s Offshore Detention Centers,” The New York Times, June 26, 2019, sec. World, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/world/australia/australia-manus-suicide.html.
[8] Mark Isaacs, “The Intolerable Cruelty of Australia’s Refugee Deterrence Strategy – Foreign Policy,” Foreign Policy, May 2, 2016, https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/02/australia-papua-new-guinea-refugee-manus-nauru/.
[9] Julia Ainsley and Geoff Bennett, “Trump’s Support of Renewed Child Separation Policy Led to Collision with Nielsen,” NBC News, April 8, 2019, https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-has-months-been-urging-administration-reinstate-child-separation-policy-n992021.
[10] Sharon Pickering, “There’s No Evidence That Asylum Seeker Deterrence Policy Works,” The Conversation, July 24, 2012, http://theconversation.com/theres-no-evidence-that-asylum-seeker-deterrence-policy-works-8367.
[11] Ben Doherty, “Asylum Seeker Boat Turnbacks Illegal and Don’t Deter People, Report Finds,” The Guardian, May 2, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/03/asylum-seeker-boat-turnbacks-illegal-and-dont-deter-people-report-finds.
[13] Paul Karp, “Keeping Journalists out of Detention Centres Helps Stop Boats, Says Cormann,” The Guardian, June 13, 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/14/keeping-journalists-out-of-detention-centres-helps-stop-asylum-boats-mathias-cormann-bill-shorten-election.
[14] Rachel Withers. Interview by Ben Raderstorf. Email. July 28, 2019.
