Sir, – I read with some bemusement that at the recent summit in Malta, the European Union pledged €1.8 billion to African governments for agreeing to dissuade their peoples from becoming migrants and also for accepting the return of those whose asylum applications have been rejected ("EU plans €1.8 billion fund for Africa to halt flow of migrants", November 11th).
When we consider the profile of the average African migrant – young, male, reasonably well-educated but with few prospects, and most likely discontented with and alienated from his country’s government – these are just the sort of individuals that many African leaders are only too pleased to be rid of, so it seems rather unlikely that this agreement will be successful. – Yours, etc,
MICK BOURKE,
Dublin 8.
Sir, – The EU treats the largest migration of refugees since the second World War with sticking plasters rather than tackle the root cause of the problem.
The current focus on Africa ignores the fact that the majority of refugees are from Afghanistan and Syria and exposes the utter hypocrisy of the EU powers who have supported, if not directly instigated, the wars that have led to the refugees fleeing their countries in the first place.
They refuse to admit that the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the Nato bombing of Libya were wrong. They refuse to call for a ceasefire in Syria while continuing to flood the Middle East with arms. The combined sales of arms from the UK, France and Germany to Saudi Arabia and the UAE in 2014 alone totalled $3.3 billion.
If the major EU powers are serious about solving the refugee crisis then they should stop selling arms to despotic regimes, apologise for their imperialist wars and call for a ceasefire in the Syrian civil war and for peace talks between all the belligerents while assisting those refugees fleeing for safety from wars not of their own making. – Yours, etc,
JIM ROCHE,
Irish Anti-War Movement,
PO Box 9260,
Dublin 1.
Sir, – Brian Dineen (November 13th) is typical of the naivety of those who believe in an unlimited right to asylum. Alas, such people have failed to think through the long-term consequences. There are 7.3 billion people in the world today, most of whom live pretty wretched lives by western standards. If everyone experiencing war, civil conflict, tyranny or extreme poverty had an automatic right to asylum, literally billions of people could pour into Europe and North America at will, in which case Western civilisation would evaporate and the migrants themselves would no longer have a stable and prosperous West to reside in.
Mr Dineen says it would be wrong for Ireland to withdraw from international protocols on asylum (which were drawn up in a very different world, of individual dissidents fleeing communism, for example) because this would “damage . . . Ireland’s reputation”. Presumably, he thinks Ireland’s reputation among liberal internationalists is more important than the welfare of the actual Irish people. He should take a look at Sweden; that country has long purported to be a humanitarian superpower with ultra-generous provisions for asylum. Now, however, even Sweden is reasserting border controls because the influx of migrants has outstripped the resources and patience of even the most politically correct state and society on Earth. – Yours, etc,
Dr FRANK GILES,
Ballsbridge,
Dublin 4.