8 false or illogical statements about migrants and NGOs

news Publish tags Sources about us privacy
GratisForGratis

ValigiaBlu

https://www.valigiablu.it/migranti-disinformazione/

Yesterday the ship Eleonore of the German NGO Lifeline, at sea for 8 days with 104 people on board, he forced the ban on entering Italian territorial waters and was headed to the port of Pozzallo.Until two days ago the ship was near Malta awaiting instructions from the German government.Then, during the night, the declaration of a state of emergency on board and the route to Italy.Despite the alarm raised by the ship, however, the Italian search and rescue center (MRCC) had reiterated the entry ban.The ship decided to force the blockade.

In the meantime, the 31 migrants still present on board Mare Jonio, the ship of the Mediterranean humanitarian project, they were disembarked to Lampedusa for "health reasons" after an inspection on board carried out by a group of doctors sent by the Ministry of Health to check the conditions of the migrants, who on Sunday had announced a hunger strike to protest against the refusal to assign them a "port Safe".

Last week the ship had help a group of migrants crammed onto a damaged dinghy 70 miles north of Misurata.Many children under ten years old on board (many even just a few months old).After the request for a safe port by the Captaincy, the outgoing Minister of the Interior, Matteo Salvini, had signed the ban on entry, transit and stopover in territorial waters for the Mediterranea ship.The NGO had rejected the invitation to turn to Libya:"It's not a safe haven, there's civil war."Subsequently, the transhipment of 64 people (women, children and sick people) was authorized and another 31 survivors remained on the ship.

With the ban on entry into territorial waters against the ships Eleonore and Mare Jonio, comment ISPI researcher, Matteo Villa, we have reached the twenty-first "crisis at sea" since June 2018.And together with these crises and the "closed ports" strategy, some arguments periodically emerge (often without any foundation) on migratory flows, on the risk of invasion and on the alleged incentive exercised by NGOs.

Yesterday during the broadcast of A7 “L’aria che tira”, hosted by Myrta Merlino, we witnessed to a sort of compendium of all the slogans on immigration which without any supporting evidence are spread in a deadly disinformation combo involving politicians, mainstream information and social media.During the program, the deputy of the League, Dario Galli - debating with Alessandra Sciurba of Mediterranea ONG - argued in order:that he is in possession of an unspecified video which appears to show crew members from some NGOs helping smugglers;that in Italy there are 5 million poor people (ed, data reported correctly as show the 2018 poverty statistics from Istat) "because we pay for hotel accommodation for 3 - 4 million people who arrive from other countries";that migrants, looking for work in our country, embark knowing they will be saved;that we must not create the conditions to accommodate 5 billion people who are worse off than us.None of the journalists present in the studio immediately interrupted him or pointed out the untrue things said.And above all it should have been the presenter who did it.Only after about ten minutes did Federico Geremicca intervene to underline to Galli that there is no evidence to support NGOs' aid to smugglers and that the investigations in this regard have never proven any contact of this type.

Without prejudice to the fact that the migrants present in our reception system do not reside in hotels but in structures chosen by the Prefectures and Municipalities, and that, based on the data most recent releases in report from the Ministry of the Interior of last August 15th, we are not talking about 3 or 4 million people (ed, in Italy the beds in hotels I am 2 million and 300 thousand) but 102,402, Galli's statements have reiterated some arguments that we also identified in the comments on a recent one of ours item from the title Saying "we can't welcome everyone" justifies the failure to help.

We have selected some recurring statements showing their arbitrariness, from the point of view of data and/or argumentative logic.

1) “Without the NGOs they don't start and there are fewer deaths” 

The belief that NGOs are a pull factor is not new.Since 2017 the ships of non-governmental organizations (ed, since spring 2015 operational in rescue and rescue operations in the Mediterranean after the closure of the humanitarian military operation Mare Nostrum, led by Italy, the launch of the military mission financed by the European Union Triton and, subsequently, of Sophia) have been accused of encouraging departures from Libya by pushing almost close to the Libyan territorial sea.

The data, however, show that there is no correlation between the rescue activities at sea carried out by NGOs and the landings on the Italian coasts.In other words, writes ISPI, NGOs have not had and continue to have no influence on departures from Libya.Determining the number of departures between 2015 and today they appear to have been other factors such as the activity of traffickers on the coast, the request of migrants for boats with which to leave for the various Libyan locations and, also, the weather conditions.

Effectively, continues ISPI, a decline in departures was recorded from 2017 onwards, that is, since some Libyan militias that managed or tolerated irregular trafficking began to collaborate with Italy and the European Union.From 2018 onwards, the M5S Lega government led by Giuseppe Conte has implemented deterrent actions and policies against NGOs and merchant ships providing assistance in the Mediterranean Sea.

The data collected by ISPI researcher Matteo Villa show a greater reduction in landings when Marco Minniti was Minister of the Interior:

However, compared to landings in Italy, departures have not fallen as rapidly.Between 1 January and 20 August 2019, 9,492 people left Libya.With NGOs there were 35 departures per day (1961 people).Without them, there were 43 departures (7531 people).

In this graph you can see how between 1 May and 19 August 2019, a period marked by at least three critical situations between NGOs and provisions of the Ministry of the Interior, the surges in departures from Libya were recorded when the NGO ships were absent from the central Mediterranean.

And therefore, Villa further underlines, rather than the presence of NGOs, it is the weather conditions that are decisive in encouraging departures from Libya:

As regards landings, 4,826 people have arrived in Italy to date:410 with NGOs, 4,416 independently (i.e. all landings for which rescue was not necessary, beyond Italian territorial waters) or rescued by others.To these we must then add the people who arrived through "ghost" landings, counted when they are traced back to the mainland.

In this frame i data they say that the mortality rate has increased and not decreased (despite NGOs being less present in the Mediterranean) and "the soaring risk of death at sea it was not a deterrent sufficient number of departures".

2) “Since Salvini has been here, deaths at sea have been eliminated”

It is not correct to say that since Matteo Salvini became Minister of the Interior, deaths at sea have dropped to zero.Before 2017, the deaths at sea were 4049, which dropped to 1168 when Marco Minniti was minister and then rose to 1369 in the period in which Salvini was at the Viminale.

Comparing the data with departures from Libya, we realize that the percentage of deaths at sea rose to 6% during the "Salvini period".

Read also >> How to stop deaths at sea.Proposals for a different management of migratory flows

3) “NGOs actually help traffickers” 

Behind this statement there is the hypothesis that NGOs, due to their presence in the Mediterranean Sea alone, encourage departures from Libya because migrants know that they will be saved by the ships of humanitarian organizations.

As we have seen (and how we reported in a previous article), the data do not support this hypothesis, raised in the report Risk Analysis 2017 of Frontex (ed, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency).

One was also raised alleged collusion between NGO ships and smugglers but also this hypothesis did not find a match in the investigations launched in recent years.The prosecutor of Agrigento Luigi Patronaggio at a hearing in Parliament he explained that «according to the relevant jurisprudence formed before the courts of Trapani, Catania, Agrigento and Siracusa, the activity of NGOs can be consolidated as illicit if it is proven that there is a prior agreement between human traffickers and non-governmental organizations» .This prior agreement, however, must not be limited to a simple contact - «that is, if there is a phone call such as 'There is a vessel in danger, intervene'» -, but must be a strengthened and particular contact «such as "We are making them leave, come closer and pick them up".Patronaggio stated that from the Agrigento Prosecutor's Office, as well as from the other Sicilian Prosecutor's Offices, so far no contact of this type has ever been proven between NGOs and human traffickers.

4) “We can't accommodate them all”

When it comes to saving shipwrecked people at sea has become It is now common practice to resort to the "we can't welcome everyone" argument, put into the mouths of one's political antagonists by those in favor of closing the borders.A mechanism that consists in extremizing and distorting the opponent's argument to attack it better.

Although no one who asks to save lives at sea has ever talked about welcoming all migrants who set foot in Italy, this mystification allows us to question rescue and rescue operations at sea.If anything, what is claimed and which cannot in any way be questioned - unless we want to renounce the founding principle of our own humanity - is that we have a moral duty to save them all.

The first step is to take an extreme position - total closure of borders - and summarize it in slogans that foment public opinion - for example "stop invasion", "immigration business".Then, to polarize the debate, these slogans are contrasted with others, exaggerating or completely inventing antithetical political positions - for example "the left wants to welcome everyone", "the left wants ethnic replacement".All this creates a framework in which we will end up saying that on the one hand we cannot close the ports, on the other we cannot welcome everyone, causing the terms through which to understand and analyze migratory flows to be mystified, making saving all lives at sea is impractical because in this way we would end up encouraging departures and giving the message that we want to welcome all those who leave.

5) Don't save them to send a message to smugglers

An example of this argument is an article by Angelo Panebianco on Corriere della Sera, who wrote:

“One way or another we need to send the message to human traffickers all the way down in Africa that we are not willing to welcome all those they want to send us.”

A narrative scheme that rests precisely on the artfully constructed slogan of welcoming them all.As if the traffickers, when they organize the departures, face the problem of reception and choose Italy as the preferred destination for migrants.Since when are smugglers interested in the fate of their victims?Their business is not based on "satisfied or refunded".Traffickers have no interest in migrants being rescued or if and how they will be welcomed.Let's say it's not part of their offer.

6) “Real migrants are not arriving but illegal immigrants”

According to this argument, no people fleeing from wars or conflicts would arrive in Italy, who would thus have access to a form of international protection, or migrants holding a work contract, but only illegal immigrants who take advantage of the trips on dinghies and the rescue of NGO to be able to stay in Italy without any permit.As if it were possible to establish in advance that a person who is migrating from Africa is automatically an illegal immigrant.An immigrant can only apply for asylum once he has set foot in our country and his status will be recognized or not only after the evaluation of his application.Therefore, it makes no sense to talk about illegal immigrants in advance.

Read also >> Migrants, reception and integration:the system must be changed

The term "clandestine" – reports OpenPolis – does not exist either in international definitions or in European Union law.It has spread in Italy since Bossi-Fini law introduced some provisions against illegal immigration.It is used to identify those who have violated the rules on entering the territory and have no legal right to remain there.

Furthermore, according to the predictions made by Matteo Villa on Twitter, the data does not support this statement either:by the end of 2019 we expect the arrival in Italy of 270 thousand regular entries, compared to 6500 landings (of which a small part from NGO ships).

Currently, explains on Refugees Deeply Mattia Toaldo, analyst and scholar of the Middle East and North Africa, it is "practically impossible" today for "Africans or Asians to migrate legally to most European countries", while "until the 1990s, when visa regimes were always adopted more restrictive, migrants arrived in Europe by plane".

“If in 2007 – they write Matteo Villa and Paolo Magri of ISPI - 90% of immigrants entered Italy through regular channels, between 2014 and 2017 irregular immigrants accounted for just under 40% of the flow" and this happened, continue the two scholars , because we have reduced or completely eliminated the annual fees foreseen in the “flow decrees” for non-EU economic migrants, with the exception of seasonal workers.

7) “We cannot accommodate all of Africa”

It is one of the narratives that is cyclically re-proposed despite has been amply demonstrated that a large part of the migrations remain within Africa and that a small part arrives in Italy.

Although immigration from Africa is thought to be an uncontrollable and destabilizing phenomenon for the countries of the European Union, only a small part emigrates to Europe.Most people remain on the African continent.For example, only a quarter of African migrants registered in 2015, writes Luca Misculin on The Post, reporting official data from the United Nations and UNHCR, lived in a European country.And of the entire African population, less than 3% (32.6 million), had left Africa.93.6% of African migrants coming from West Africa (Mali, Senegal, Gambia, Nigeria), Misculin continues, do not leave Africa and go to another country in the same area, while 40% of migrants who leave from Central Africa it emigrates to East Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia).

In 2017, explains Riccardo Barlaam on Il Sole 24 Ore, reporting the data of Global report on internal displacement (Shout) of the Norwegian Refugee Council, out of 10 million migrants who have fled from various African countries, just over 172 thousand have reached Europe.North Africa and the Middle East have welcomed 4.5 million refugees, to which must be added the so-called economic migrants.

By analyzing data on migratory flows towards Italy, they write again Paolo Magri and Matteo Villa, in the last 10 years net immigration (European and non-European) has remained almost constant, fluctuating between 300 thousand and 500 thousand entries per year.

8) "We must intervene in Libya"

Arguing that we should intervene in Libya to make the North African state a safe place for migrants rather than having them land on our shores does not take into account the geo-political chaos the Libyan country is currently experiencing and the humanitarian drama it is experiencing.

Currently Libya it is not considered a safe place where to land migrants rescued at sea who embark towards Europe.As European Commission spokesperson Natasha Bertaud recently stated:"All vessels sailing under the EU flag are obliged to respect international law when it comes to search and rescue, which includes the need to bring rescued people to a safe port.The Commission has always said that these conditions currently do not exist in Libya."

In fact, the Libyans have never signed the 1951 Geneva Convention on the rights of refugees and, according to a December report by the United Nations, based on various inspections, migrants and refugees are subjected to "unimaginable horrors" in various detention camps in Libya. and “violations and abuses” by state officials, armed groups, smugglers and human traffickers.

Furthermore, for over three months it is underway an internal conflict to gain control of the country.Due to clashes between rival groups in conflict it was recently closed the only functioning airport in Tripoli.Since the beginning of the war, when Marshal Khalifa Haftar's militias attempted to conquer the seat of the Government of National Accord, led by Fayez al-Sarraj and recognized by the United Nations, over a thousand people have died.

"Rethinking migration as an action that every person in the world could choose to do"

Below we report one comment on our page by Natasha Curto who suggests a different way of approaching the issue of migration and those who migrate:

“I would also add that, I believe, thinking in the terms we can/can't welcome everyone (whatever "everyone" means) directs the discussion towards a distorted representation of migration.Within the reception frame, the person who migrates instead becomes structurally needy, to be cared for, an object to be taken care of - or not to take care of - but never a subject.

The story of each person, the life plan, what each person thinks, dreams and ultimately is is crushed on the moment of their life in which they are asking for help at sea.Furthermore, it is precisely the framework of reception that opens the way to counting:of beds, of Caritas packages, even in pieces of bread.From here we start counting and end up finding ourselves discussing whether there are enough or not enough for everyone, but we have already missed the point.

Someone says that they are not enough, someone says that it is those who say that they are enough who have to do their part (the famous:why don't you host them in your home), someone who, if you count carefully, is enough, but the frame is never questioned.If I choose to emigrate I don't wonder if the people born in that country will be willing to "welcome" me.I prepare my suitcase choosing what to bring with me, I look for a place to stay in the city where I will land, I look for contact with someone I know in the country.Yes, it's true:if I emigrated I would try to do it legally, do you know why?Because I can, we Europeans can.I have a red passport, because they grant me a visa.

Instead, we focus on this narrative which has as its indisputable cornerstone the welcome (the good welcome, I welcome and all very laudable initiatives compared to someone who says let them die) but as a consequence we lose sight of the heart of the matter:Italy - and obviously Europe - decided over 25 years ago (when Salvini was in the seventh grade) that coming to live in Europe would be, at various and progressive levels, forbidden to those born outside the continent.The European Union decided shortly after its foundation that, after two or three centuries of colonial history (appropriately and systematically removed, at least in Italy), there are a series of people who could not do what we usually do:let's go to another country to see if there is a job, a climate, a political situation that makes us feel better.

People obviously, as many of us would do and as all migration studies show, migrate anyway.However, we have decided that they cannot do it by plane, as we do, but are forced to come following risky routes, which prevent them from taking anything with them, which destroy their physical and mental health, which reduce them to asking for help at sea hoping not to be returned to a concentration camp where - always according to rules that we Europeans have decided, always not Salvini - they have been and would be tortured again.Which reduces them to the status of "crowd of the needy" in which we are used to thinking of them.

Downstream - and often largely unaware - of all this, we find ourselves here asking ourselves whether we should save them from drowning - but don't let them get into the habit of these drownings - and whether we can or should welcome them, to my house or to your home, and what model of cell phone they are allowed to own to be considered worthy of survival.I believe that the degeneracy of violence, verbal and non-verbal, can only be stemmed by questioning the entire frame, and by starting to rethink migration as an action that every person in the world could choose to do".

Updates

Update September 5, 2019: In the piece we specified that the journalist Federico Geremicca pointed out to the deputy of the Galli League that what he claimed about the videos showing aid from NGOs to smugglers had not been verified.

Preview image via Repubblica.it

Licensed under: CC-BY-SA
CAPTCHA

Discover the site GratisForGratis

advertising

 

^