The Economist UK - 07.09.2019

50 Asia The EconomistSeptember 7th 2019

1

N

o australian governmentwants to

look weak on “border security”. Since

2001, when John Howard, a conservative

prime minister, turned back a ship which

had rescued hundreds of asylum-seekers

from a sinking vessel, most of them have

policed the country’s borders with ferocity.

Asylum-seekers who arrive illegally by

boat are carted off to camps in the Pacific

outposts of Nauru and Papua New Guinea.

Australia refuses to admit them, even if

they are found to be genuine refugees.

The “Pacific solution”, as this policy is

known, is popular with ordinary Austra-

lians, who fear armadas of Asian immi-

grants. When they learn the details of indi-

vidual cases, however, they often want the

government to be more lenient. For in-

stance, the government’s attempt, so far

blocked by the courts, to deport a happily

settled Sri Lankan family who arrived by

boat has prompted a public outcry. The

government insists that clemency would

only encourage human-trafficking. By the

same token, it argues that a law passed ear-

lier this year that allows sick asylum-seek-

ers in Nauru and Papua New Guinea to tra-

vel to Australia for treatment will beget

more boat people. It hopes to repeal it when

parliament reconvenes this month.

The government normally refuses to re-

lease information about “on-water mat-

ters”. Yet this week, to keep “the ever-pre-

sent threat of illegal arrivals to Australia

foremost in the public’s mind”, as Scott

Morrison, the prime minister, put it, it dis-

closed that a boat of asylum-seekers from

Sri Lanka had been intercepted off Austra-

lia’s coasts—reportedly the sixth from the

country to be turned back since May.

In fact, the threat is more of a trickle.

Parliamentary statistics show that mari-

time patrols turned back 33 vessels trying

to reach Australia, with a total of 810 pas-

sengers, between 2013, the year the current

government came to power, and June 2018,

when it last published any data. One hun-

dred times as many people—some

80,000—have entered Australia as stu-

dents or tourists during the government’s

tenure, only to claim asylum once inside

the country. This influx exceeds even the

surge in arrivals of boat people when a gov-

ernment led by the Labor party, now in op-

position, called off the Pacific solution be-

tween 2008 and 2012.

Most “plane people” hail from either

China or Malaysia, and unlike those who

brave the seas, few turn out to be real refu-

gees. But instead of being dumped in off-

shore detention centres, they can live and

work in Australia for the years it takes their

applications to be processed. This has giv-

en organised syndicates a reason to orches-

trate many such applications, knowing

they can funnel the applicants into low-

wage jobs in restaurants, farms and broth-

els while their cases are reviewed.

The government points out that most

plane people are eventually sent home. But

processing times have lengthened under

its watch, strengthening the people-smug-

glers’ business model, notes Abul Rizvi, a

former immigration official. It does not

help that the tribunal to which asylum-

seekers can appeal has been stripped of

lawyers and filled with former political

staffers. Its backlog has more than tripled

over the past three years, to 22,000 cases,

says Simon Jeans, a former employee.

For years, Mr Jeans argues, politicians

on both sides “have accepted the leakage

because the benefits of mass tourism out-

weigh the costs.” But Labor, which is trying

to convince voters that it is not soft on ille-

gal immigrants, is suddenly keen to make

hay. “If the government was serious about

securing our borders”, gripes Kristina Ke-

neally, its home-affairs spokesperson, “it

would be doing something about the blow-

out in airplane arrivals.” 7

SYDNEY

Far more would-be refugees arrive by plane than by boat

Asylum in Australia

Winging it

There’s an easier way

G

etting to therecent “Queer Culture

Festival” in Incheon was a challenge.

Upon emerging from the subway, partici-

pants had to pass through a large crowd of

protesters who wept, prayed loudly and

told passers-by that they would burn in

hell. One man had painted his face and bare

feet red and wheeled a large wooden cross

up and down the street, wearing a red

crown of thorns and a pained expression.

Lines of police officers and a barrier sepa-

rated the protesters from the square where

gay-rights organisations, a local left-wing

party and a handful of foreign embassies

had put up their stalls. Later in the day a

colourful parade of several hundred danc-

ing people, vastly outnumbered by heck-

lers, made its way down the surrounding

streets under heavy police protection.

That was an improvement on last year,

when protesters prevented the organisers

from setting up their stalls in the first place

and violently attacked the parade. Gay-

rights activists in South Korea often have to

contend with insults and threats of vio-

lence. The authorities do not seem to care

much. The organisers of a queer festival in

the southern city of Busan recently can-

celled a street party following a dispute

with the local government over permits.

They said they would hold a protest in-

stead. “We just don’t feel safe,” says Lee

Jong-kwan, who helped organise the festi-

val last year in Busan. “Rather than protect-

INCHEON

Hecklers outnumber supporters at a

gay pride festival

Homophobia in South Korea

Pride and protest