Rescuers pick up hundreds of migrants across Mediterranean ahead of EU talks

[rooster59]

Rescuers pick up hundreds of migrants across Mediterranean ahead of EU talks

 

A migrant, who is part of a group intercepted aboard a dinghy off the coast in the Mediterranean Sea, is helped by a rescuer after arriving on a rescue boat at the port of Malaga, Spain June 22, 2018. REUTERS/Jon Nazca

 

BARCELONA/VALLETTA (Reuters) - Spanish coast guards rescued nearly 600 migrants trying to make the perilous crossing from Africa, authorities said on Saturday, while off the coast of Libya coastguards recovered bodies of five migrants and picked up 185 survivors.

 

Elsewhere in the Mediterranean, Malta's army made a medical evacuation from a stranded rescue ship that Italy and Malta have refused to take in, while the container ship Alexander Maersk picked up 113 migrants from a boat off southern Italy on Friday, the ship owner said.

 

The rescues come ahead of a hastily-arranged EU summit in Brussels on Sunday to discuss disputes over migration.

 

The Maltese government said its army was answering a request to offer medical assistance to a person onboard the MV Lifeline boat and would also provide humanitarian supplies.

 

On Friday evening and Saturday morning Spanish rescuers picked up 449 people from 20 dinghies in the Mediterranean, as well as 129 people from a wooden raft headed from West Africa to the Canary Islands, the maritime rescue service said on Twitter.

 

Earlier this month Spain offered safe haven to the charity ship Aquarius that was blocked from docking in Italy or Malta as Rome's new government tries to pressure European partners to shoulder more of the burden of immigration from North Africa.

 

Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte said on Thursday a draft EU accord on migration had been withdrawn after he clashed with Chancellor Angela Merkel over an issue that is splitting Europe.

 

Italy on Friday slammed Malta's refusal to take in the Dutch-flagged MV Lifeline as "inhumane", but Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat on Saturday retorted his country would not be told what to do.

 

EU leaders will hold an emergency meeting on Sunday to discuss migration, with Merkel at odds with a coalition partner over its demands to turn back migrants at the border.

 

However, several central European countries have said they will boycott the Brussels meeting and Merkel on Friday played down expectations of any major breakthrough.

 

Austrian Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache said on Saturday he expects a chain reaction across the European Union if Germany closes its borders to refugees.

 

The German NGO Mission Lifeline that operates the MV Lifeline ship called for a swift resolution at the EU summit.

 

"Europe owes a solution to 234 rescued people on the Lifeline and 113 people on the merchant vessel Alexander Maersk. Both have no port of safety assigned as of yet and remain adrift in international waters," it said in a statement.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-06-23

[sweatalot]

" Spanish coast guards rescued nearly 600 migrants trying to make the perilous crossing from Africa, ..."

 

... and took them right back to 'Africa, after sinking their boat. Right?

[Chelseafan]

"Europe owes a solution to 234 rescued people on the Lifeline and 113 people on the merchant vessel Alexander Maersk. Both have no port of safety assigned as of yet and remain adrift in international waters," it said in a statement.

 

Solution is to sail back to Africa. As the Meerkats say....Simples .

 

 

[simple1]

6 hours ago, Chelseafan said:

"Europe owes a solution to 234 rescued people on the Lifeline and 113 people on the merchant vessel Alexander Maersk. Both have no port of safety assigned as of yet and remain adrift in international waters," it said in a statement.

 

Solution is to sail back to Africa. As the Meerkats say....Simples .

 

 

It is not 'simples'. A rescue vessel would require permission to dock and offload rescued people, plus of course the receiving country being designated 'safe' to detain & process asylum seekers.

 

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/comment/2017/12/7/refugees-face-libyan-slave-markets-under-proposed-european-law

[i claudius]

4 hours ago, simple1 said:

It is not 'simples'. A rescue vessel would require permission to dock and offload rescued people, plus of course the receiving country being designated 'safe' to detain & process asylum seekers.

 

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/comment/2017/12/7/refugees-face-libyan-slave-markets-under-proposed-european-law

then just leave them in their boat and don't let it dock , Simples.!!!!!!!

[Chelseafan]

6 hours ago, simple1 said:

It is not 'simples'. A rescue vessel would require permission to dock and offload rescued people, plus of course the receiving country being designated 'safe' to detain & process asylum seekers.

 

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/comment/2017/12/7/refugees-face-libyan-slave-markets-under-proposed-european-law

That's just bureaucracy. If they had a will to do it then they would.

 

[The Renegade]

13 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Rescuers pick up hundreds of migrants across Mediterranean ahead of EU talks

Can they be called EU talks when 12 EU Countries are not participating in those talks ?

[sukhumvitneon]

13 hours ago, sweatalot said:

" Spanish coast guards rescued nearly 600 migrants trying to make the perilous crossing from Africa, ..."

 

... and took them right back to 'Africa, after sinking their boat. Right?

Eh, one can dream

[Andrew65]

According to the Dublin Agreement, where ever these people land in the EU, that country's stuck with 'em. Italy already has 500,000+. The French were stopping these people from crossing their border some months ago, maybe they still are.

 

The EU held a meeting with the African Union in Casablanca recently (maybe to "normalize" the situation?).

 

As someone has mentioned, this has the potential to fragment the EU, maybe more so than economic problems.

 

Naturally, all EU countries love all the benefits that they get from membership. When there are problems, they are reverting to national self-interest.

 

Maybe it's wishful thinking, but Britain might be securing a big advantage by being the first to leave.

 

Around year 2,000, we were led to believe that if we in the UK didn't join the Euro the economic-sky would come crashing down around us. It didn't for us, but did eventually for the PIGS countries. Even though a massively complex task, not having adopted the Euro probably makes leaving the rotten-edifice that is the EU easier.

Edited June 24, 2018 by Andrew65

[micmichd]

2 hours ago, i claudius said:

then just leave them in their boat and don't let it dock , Simples.!!!!!!!

Send them to the German  labour market. There's plenty of vacancies there, and the German natives don't want the jobs (they prefer welfare) So, these refugees should get a chance. 

[simple1]

51 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

That's just bureaucracy. If they had a will to do it then they would.

 

No. International Conventions regards Laws of the Sea and Nation State law. 

[simple1]

3 hours ago, i claudius said:

then just leave them in their boat and don't let it dock , Simples.!!!!!!!

To be expected from you, a variation of let them drown - no surprise you got a 'like' from a certain member.

[jippytum]

open borders swamping ccuntries with undocumented illegal immigrants backed by a legion of doogooders who themelves obtain government handouts must be curtailed.

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

Can they be called EU talks when 12 EU Countries are not participating in those talks ?

 

Because the EU Chancellor will be there and will issue her commands afterwards.

[The Renegade]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Because the EU Chancellor will be there and will issue her commands afterwards.

Not so sure this is correct.

 

More a chance to try and save her political @rse.

[Chelseafan]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

No. International Conventions regards Laws of the Sea and Nation State law. 

So Bureaucracy then! It seems that the Conventions are being ignored anyhow otherwise they would be docked by now.

 

 

 

[simple1]

13 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

So Bureaucracy then! It seems that the Conventions are being ignored anyhow otherwise they would be docked by now.

 

 

 

Try looking up the meaning of bureaucracy. I have no doubt those rescued will be landed for assessment and processing.

[Chelseafan]

12 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Try looking up the meaning of bureaucracy. I have no doubt those rescued will be landed for assessment and processing.

I know what the word means thanks and yes I'm sure some country will take them in but then what happens the next time and the time after and the time after that. It's got to stop.

 

I do find it ironic that as an Australian your esteemed Mr Rudd kept all immigrants in detention centers on the island of Manus and wouldn't allow them into Australia.

 

 

Edited June 24, 2018 by Chelseafan

[simple1]

39 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

<SNIP>

I do find it ironic that as an Australian your esteemed Mr Rudd kept all immigrants in detention centers on the island of Manus and wouldn't allow them into Australia.

Personally i wouldn't name Rudd as "esteemed', more accurately - prat. However, you should know the PNG Supreme Court  overruled the Off Shoring contract as in breach of Human Rights. It now costs the Oz govt approx AUD500k p.p. p.a. for offshore detention, a good model for the EU - LOL

Edited June 24, 2018 by simple1

[Chelseafan]

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

Personally i wouldn't name Rudd as "esteemed', more accurately - prat. However, you should know the PNG Supreme Court  overruled the Off Shoring contract as in breach of Human Rights. It now costs the Oz govt approx AUD500k p.p. p.a. for offshore detention, a good model for the EU - LOL

Agreed. But as far as I know, while Australia has as a policy of allowing pre-approved immigrants into the country, they still do now allow asylum seekers. I could be wrong.

 

In 2015 and 2016 Europe took in over 2.5m asylum seekers - this figure doesn't include those who slipped the net. it's just not sustainable.

Edited June 24, 2018 by Chelseafan

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, simple1 said:

Personally i wouldn't name Rudd as "esteemed', more accurately - prat. However, you should know the PNG Supreme Court  overruled the Off Shoring contract as in breach of Human Rights. It now costs the Oz govt approx AUD500k p.p. p.a. for offshore detention, a good model for the EU - LOL

Good value for money if it stops others arriving on boats, or in many cases never arriving anywhere, which is why the policy was brought in in the first place. IMO, any that demand the boats be allowed to deliver their paying passengers to Australia, are accepting that some will drown. Offshore detention is the only way to stop the boats. Genuine refugees will have gained safe destination long before sailing from Indonesia, and economic migrants are not given residence anyway. The EU needs to emulate the Australian solution. There is a lot of empty space in Northern Africa where all the refugees/ migrants can be held in safety while their cases are investigated. Genuine refugees can be brought to the EU, and the economic migrants will agree to repatriate if the alternative is a camp in the desert for the rest of their life. If economic migrants knew they would be held in the desert and not allowed into the EU, they would stop paying traffickers.

[simple1]

9 hours ago, Chelseafan said:

Agreed. But as far as I know, while Australia has as a policy of allowing pre-approved immigrants into the country, they still do now allow asylum seekers. I could be wrong.

 

In 2015 and 2016 Europe took in over 2.5m asylum seekers - this figure doesn't include those who slipped the net. it's just not sustainable.

FYI...Oz has a pre-approved allocation of asylum seekers and humanitarian visas, currently 13,765 p.a., increasing to around 19k p.a. in the next few years. Approx further 6,000 p.a. arrive by air on tourists visas etc then claim asylum - majority Chinese. A few years back there was a once off exception for 12,000 Syrian refugees - mainly Christian.

Edited June 24, 2018 by simple1

[simple1]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Genuine refugees will have gained safe destination long before sailing from Indonesia

Really? Pray tell the average number of years a refugee waits to be resettled? a hint...

 

There were 17.2 million refugees of concern to UNHCR around the world at the end of 2016, but less than one per cent were resettled that year. 

[Chelseafan]

58 minutes ago, simple1 said:

FYI...Oz has a pre-approved allocation of asylum seekers and humanitarian visas, currently 13,765 p.a., increasing to around 19k p.a. in the next few years. Approx further 6,000 p.a. arrive by air on tourists visas etc then claim asylum - majority Chinese. A few years back there was a once off exception for 12,000 Syrian refugees - mainly Christian.

Fair dinkum. So pretty much nothing then....Perhaps we could send half of them to Australia so you can take your fair share ? ?

[thaibeachlovers]

50 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Really? Pray tell the average number of years a refugee waits to be resettled? a hint...

 

There were 17.2 million refugees of concern to UNHCR around the world at the end of 2016, but less than one per cent were resettled that year. 

Safe destination is not the same as resettlement, but you knew that. Safe destination is somewhere they are not going to be killed, regardless of how long they wait to be resettled, if at all. The west has no obligation to take 17.2 million refugees.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.  

[simple1]

48 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Safe destination is somewhere they are not going to be killed, regardless of how long they wait to be resettled, if at all. 

Wrong. Look up the internationally agreed definition of "Safe Country"

[simple1]

52 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

Fair dinkum. So pretty much nothing then....Perhaps we could send half of them to Australia so you can take your fair share ? ?

If using population numbers in comparison to refugee intake, Oz has one of the highest globally. e.g. US has a population of around 320 million, but official refugee annual intake is only 45,000.

[Chelseafan]

25 minutes ago, simple1 said:

If using population numbers in comparison to refugee intake, Oz has one of the highest globally. e.g. US has a population of around 320 million, but official refugee annual intake is only 45,000.

And that's my point. Too many slating countries like Italy for not taking in more migrants and yet globally no-one is willing to help. Who can blame them ?

 

[simple1]

3 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

no-one is willing to help.<snip>

 

Certainly not those politicians beloved by many on this forum i.e. Populist Nationalists