Michael Roberts
Beset by an upsurge of asylum-seekers arriving by boat from Sri Lanka, Australian government and media personnel continue to rely on the tired shibboleths of the past. Three shortcomings hinder their evaluations. Let me stress three points briefly.
- The increase in migration is largely due to the snowballing effect of chain migration with Sri Lankan kinsfolk and friends who have migrated to the Western countries over the last forty years assisting aspirant relatives and friends to find the monies for the journeys (legal or illegal); while intra-familial dynamics encourage poorer relatives in Lanka to try and emulate their cousins in the West by getting across to the new Eldorado.[1]
- Contrary to Australian perceptions the journeys by boats are not inevitable death traps. If one excludes the instances of boats from Indonesia that have come a cropper, I know of only two or three from Sri Lanka that have run into real difficulties (as distinct from manufactured sinking within sight of big ships). I challenge people to provide contrary evidence in circumstances where the “boat people” have satellite phone connections.
- With reference to Tamil Sri Lankans the Australian evaluations are directed by the concept of “persecution” – with the alternative being “economic migration.” This is simpleton. As such, it is misleading. “Persecution” is a gross tool and does not allow for feelings that are short of terror. There is, for one, such a thing as “harassment.” There is also the possibility of “alienation” among the Tamils arising from a sense of marginalization (genuine, exaggerated or imagined). Continue reading
