There is a great danger that the wave of sympathy caused by the deaths of the eight stowaways in Wexford will quickly subside. It is tragic that it takes such an event to spur a collective reflection on our attitudes to irregular migrants, but even more tragic if the opportunity for such reflection passes.
It is too easy to blame traffickers. They are indeed cruel and greedy people, but they would not be able to operate if it were not for the circumstances which mean that people are desperate or vulnerable enough to be exploited by them.
Not all who are involved in moving people across borders are traffickers. There are informal and even commercial networks which do not prey on people, which are better termed human smugglers. The informal networks usually aim to help people of the same nationality escape from difficult circumstances.
For the commercial networks, what might be termed "customer satisfaction" is important. This is very different to the traffickers who exploit the desperate, often by operating prostitution rings, but also by providing cheap labour for employers, and in some cases demanding kickbacks on an ongoing basis. It appears clear that these stowaways were not trafficked, not that that absolves the smugglers from all responsibility. Why do people leave? Some fit the classic 1951 Geneva Convention definition of someone facing persecution or state violence. Some flee desperate poverty. Others want to better themselves, or support family at home by sending back money for a short time until they can return themselves.
We do not know the exact circumstances of those who died , but the garda∅ are almost certain that they came here by mistake, that they had no idea they would be so long in the container. Representatives of the Government have been quick to seize on this.
Since the people did not intend to come here in the first place, they claim, the tough stance taken by Ireland in demanding that people be turned back and never allowed to enter the country at all could not be responsible for their deaths.
This is to ignore our wider responsibility as members of the EU, which with its fortress mentality treats migrants and asylum-seekers as a threat. Or to be more accurate, which regards certain categories of migrants with suspicion. In Ireland, over 34,000 work permits were granted this year.
We do not hear much rhetoric about such people taking scarce housing. Nor, let's face it, would there be much outcry if a couple of thousand Americans had Irish-born children and thus gained leave to remain. No, the people we have the difficulty with are those from developing countries or the poorest parts of Europe. Yet the EU often fosters conditions which well-nigh force people into irregular migration. Moroccan oranges cannot compete with well-subsidised Spanish oranges. Ironically, this leads many Moroccans to work illegally picking Spanish oranges, and to shadowy existences where their rights are at best ambiguous and at worst non-existent. This example typifies many other Catch-22s facing the poorer countries and stems from EU decisions.
Similarly, Minister O'Donoghue continually hides behind what he calls an international agreement that asylum-seekers must make application in the first country where they land. He neglects to mention that this is an EU decision, and with a more open mentality a very different decision could have been reached.
Why do people resort to containers, or in some instances to arriving in an advanced state of pregnancy? They do so because they feel driven to desperate measures, because everywhere they are greeted with barriers and suspicion.
No-one could claim that our own asylum processing system is working properly. Firstly, there is the delay in processing decisions. There have been improvements, but so much needs to be done. The backlog at September 30th stood at 12,325. These included 45 people from 1998 and over 650 from 1999. There are even a tiny number awaiting decisions for five years. This is crazy. It fosters dependency on the State and it is depressing and demotivating for those who are suspended in uncertainty for that length of time.
We also need to develop alternative channels of entry. Our rudimentary channel of economic migration is employer-dominated, in that an employer must make application for a specific person. This is open to abuse if an employer is unscrupulous. A visa system where people could market their skills would be much fairer.
We should recognise that many economic migrants and indeed, some of those granted refugee status will go home if they can, if the circumstances which forced them to flee improve. Or they may move to other countries. No country in Europe has dealt adequately with this problem, but neither is any country being swamped. Ironically, the developing world bears a disproportionate part of the burden of refugees and displaced people.
However, to immediately label anyone who has concerns about asylum-seekers or irregular migrants as racist serves little purpose. "Racist" is used as a blanket adjective. It can cover anyone from a person who would assault a pregnant asylum-seeker in the street, to people who feel slight unease that asylum-seekers and irregular migrants will be difficult to integrate. By crushing debate on this issue, we are storing up trouble for the future.
Take for example, the viewpoint which says unless people can be successfully integrated and offered the chance of a decent standard of living, it is unfair to allow them to enter. In my view, there is a degree of truth in this. However, rather than allowing this to prevent people from entering, it should spur us to create the conditions where people can become part of the community and contribute to Irish society. Tougher border controls simply drive people into the arms of smugglers and traffickers.
Maybe we should listen to the words of UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Mr Ruud Lubbers, on Wednesday last. "We must overcome this fear. Political leaders are no leaders when they fuel anti-foreigner and anti-refugee sentiments, contributing to this cycle of fear and mistrust. We have nothing to fear. No problem is intractable when states are willing to come together to resolve it. Let us, therefore, show the same courage as the framers of the Geneva Convention."
bobrien@irish-times.ie