Inaction will not resolve this dilemma - Immigration crisis

ALL around Europe nasty, hateful little political parties and social movements are getting traction on the issue of immigration because mainstream politicians, and socially liberal societies too, are unsure of how to deal with the escalating, ever-more pressing question, one that seems set to become the challenge of our age. 

It is as if a potent mixture of race and religion has transfixed Europe and made it very difficult to advance an honest and humane policy. We are no different in Ireland and have fallen back on the tried-and-tested policy of ah-shure it’ll-be-alright-on-the-day. Something, anything, will turn up. Another Irish denial of another Irish problem.

This evasion was epitomised in recent weeks when Afghan stowaway Walli Ullah Safi, 21, had his arm broken and face slashed when he was imprisoned for the “crime” of being here illegally. That Safi — who can’t speak Engish — should be jailed in a country that is almost defined by emigration and the loss of millions of its citizens determined to make a better life elsewhere is more than sad, it is offensive, deeply hypocritical, and simply wrong — as is the practice of an individual being held more or less captive in our justice system, sometimes for years, while asylum applications are assessed. That Safi was jailed without being convicted of anything puts the outrage in another far darker category altogether.

Our and Europe’s — America’s too — dishonest, fearful response to imigration can only lead to less than optimal outcomes and ultimately conflict. Just like abortion, immigration is the won’t-go-away issue that no politician, at least a reasonable, humane one, wants to have to take a firm position on. This is especially so for the liberal-minded champions of free speech who quake, like most of us, at the idea of radical, intolerant, and violent Islam becoming a daily presence in our domestic lives.

Societies and individuals who wish to be welcoming, decent, and fair are happy to welcome individuals or families but shudder at the thought of some of the beliefs and practices that extreme individuals coming to their country consider immutable. They argue, with considerable rationale, that the beliefs, religious or cultural, of some immigrants are the very reason the societies they have abandoned have failed so dismally on so many fronts.

They argue too, again with considerable credibility and justification, that a society’s prevailing social ethos must prevail and that values or cultures that reject that consensus, or are deeply hostile to it, should not expect an unquestioning welcome much less permanent residence. They argue, too, and with considerable justification, that being accepted in a society can hardly be a process without a cost, without compromise, or at least the recognition of a value system that abhors some of the medieval strictures of fundamental Islam.

As an election approaches, political parties should clarify their position on immigration. The centre has been outflanked by the left on economic policies — or economic promises at least — and it would be deepen this tragedy if they were outflanked by the right on immigration, an issue that must be resolved sooner rather than later.