Cyprus-Forum.com

[Maximus]

You can turn up at one boarder and ask for permission to travel through it in order to seek asylum in a country further on. It is up to that country to decide if it will allow such or not and that is the same principal of rights of states to control it's own boarders. If a state wants to allow that, other states can not tell it it is illegal to do so, outside of any bilateral agreement between such countries. Many countries did just this in 2015 including EU states and states that were signatories to the Dublin agreement.

This is the way to illegal and irregular migration.

Your argument is full of contradictions by the way. You are blaming the EU and Greece for closing its borders, with "legal" arguments and then saying it is up to them to keep them closed if they want to.

The confusion is all yours in your inability or unwillingness to be able to distinguish between and asylum seeker and an illegal migrant. You are way to intelligent for lack of intelligence to be the cause of this confusion of yours which makes it appear to me to be confusion with intent.

I know the difference between an illegal migrant and an asylum seeker.

But Turkey should be doing the distinctions between migrants and refugees (asylum seekers) on entry in to Turkey.

Person A turns up at the Turkish / Syrian Border. Person A request entry as an asylum seeker. The Turkish authorities process the application and judge person A's case whether it is legitimate or not. If it is, Person A is granted asylum in Turkey.

If person A choose to apply for asylum in another country, they can but that other country has a right to deny the application. In this case, it can simply be denied on the grounds that they are in a a safe third party country. (vis-a-vis EU and Turkey).

if person A is an illegal migrant looking to cross Turkey to get to the EU, then Greece has the right to deny entry.

Now, if a horde of people turn up at the Greek-Turkish border, facilitated by Erdogan. Throwing petrol bombs and stones and being helped by Turkish authorities with tear gas and wire cutters to storm past border authorities and in to Greece. Then this is an entirely different matter. These people should not be granted asylum. If they persist, with violent means they should more than likely be shot than to have a request for asylum looked at.

it really is as simple as that and you are contradicting yourself.

Because you are basically saying in the same breath, that Greece is acting illegally by not allowing this horde violent horde entry and " You can turn up at one boarder and ask for permission to travel through it in order to seek asylum in a country further on. It is up to that country to decide if it will allow such or not and that is the same principal of rights of states to control it's own boarders."

So Greece is fully within its right and you dont know how to correctly assess a situation. Someone could probably tell you he was Chinese but looks like a Nigerian and you would believe him.

If turkey wants to have open borders, that is her problem and since you care so much about these people, then you should be happy that Turkey is taking care of them Even with the EU's financial assistance. There is absolutely no further reason that they should go to EU member states if it is their protection we are primarily concerned about..

[Paphitis]

As Canada virus cases pass 1,000, asylum seekers to be turned back; jobless claims soar

David Ljunggren, Jeff Lewis

OTTAWA/TORONTO (Reuters) - Canada will turn back asylum seekers who walk over the U.S.-Canada border, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Friday, as economic damage from the coronavirus outbreak intensified and a ban on non-essential travel across the world’s longest undefended border was set to come into effect.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2171M8

Australia also just past 1000. We are now getting 150 new cases per day.

All foreign travel to Australia is now barred to all none Australian Citizens and permanent residents.

Definitely no asylum seeking here.

One state has even barred cross state line travel.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tamarathie ... af8a155418

[Paphitis]

Hollywood celebs having a meltdown.

[erolz66]

No Erol, it is not correct that I do not believe in the International law. What you have not demonstrated so far, that all those people sent to the Greek border by Erdogan are actually refugees to begin with, and I’ve stated that we don’t know what their status are until they have been processed.

I have not demonstrated that because it is nothing to do with the points I am making.

The problem is, they cannot be processed if the Greek border is closed with Turkey and Greece is not able to process 10’s of thousands of people just showing up on the border. I agree, that the EU can process them on Turkish soil, so what is the difference by the EU having one processing center in Turkey representing all it’s 27 member states and each 27 EU state using their own embassies to process them? There are more than just 27 countries to choose from for these people to ask for asylum, which makes all the more sense for them to apply at at embassy of their choice, does it not?

The EU has not and is not processing these people any where at a rate that is proportional to the need of those who ARE genuine refugees and they have not done and are not doing so with specific intent of trying to reduce the degree to which they have to meet their obligations under international law towards such people. Had they done so then the degree to which Erdogan is able to exploit these peoples suffering to pressure the EU politically would be entirely different if not zero. Had they done so the scenes we seen at borders between states would be entirely different. The EU's objective, brought in to sharp focus since 2015, has never been to ensure that refugees rights are protected and their suffering is mitigated, the core principal of the international laws on refugees. It has been entirely focused on limiting and restricting how many 'foreign' people end up in Europe. My point started with 'the whole issue of migration generally and refugees specifically is shrouded in hypocrisy from all parties'. I stand by that assessment.

One means of mitigating the suffering of refugees and protecting their rights would be concerted effort using all possible means and resources to shut down 'people trafficking for profit'. Yet the EU is funding and paying the salaries of the 'Libyan Coat Guard' that we know is made up in large numbers by people who were trafficking people for profit prior to being employed by the EU specifically to break international law and ride rough shod over the rights of genuine refugees. If this does not indicate to you what the real objectives of the EU are on this issue and the hypocrisy that surrounds issue of migration and asylum then I am not sure what ever would or could.

[erolz66]

If person A choose to apply for asylum in another country, they can but that other country has a right to deny the application. In this case, it can simply be denied on the grounds that they are in a a safe third party country. (vis-a-vis EU and Turkey).

That is not what the international conventions and protocols on asylum say. That is just what you say because it suits you and the EU objectives of reducing how many 'foreign' people end up in Europe regardless of international law and the rights of refugees.

if person A is an illegal migrant looking to cross Turkey to get to the EU, then Greece has the right to deny entry.

And if they are a genuine refugee and do such Greece has a legal obligations towards such a person but it and the rest of the EU want to subvert such obligations because they do not want 'foreigners' entering Europe regardless of laws they signed up to.

Now, if a horde of people turn up at the Greek-Turkish border, facilitated by Erdogan. Throwing petrol bombs and stones and being helped by Turkish authorities with tear gas and wire cutters to storm past border authorities and in to Greece. Then this is an entirely different matter. These people should not be granted asylum. If they persist, with violent means they should more than likely be shot than to have a request for asylum looked at.

The degree to which these things are happening and that Erodogan is able to exploit such is directly correlated to the degree to which the EU primary objective has been to limit ANY 'foreign' person they do not want from being able to come and live in Europe regardless of what that person's status is and what their rights are under the law. It really seems that simple to me.

So Greece is fully within its right and you dont know how to correctly assess a situation. Someone could probably tell you he was Chinese but looks like a Nigerian and you would believe him.

Am I arguing that I personally should determine a person status ? The issue is not that people's status is being determined incorrectly. The issue is that Greece and the EU do not want to determine these peoples status at all because they know that were they to do so large numbers would have rights that the EU does not want to respect.

[Kikapu]

No Erol, it is not correct that I do not believe in the International law. What you have not demonstrated so far, that all those people sent to the Greek border by Erdogan are actually refugees to begin with, and I’ve stated that we don’t know what their status are until they have been processed.

I have not demonstrated that because it is nothing to do with the points I am making.

The problem is, they cannot be processed if the Greek border is closed with Turkey and Greece is not able to process 10’s of thousands of people just showing up on the border. I agree, that the EU can process them on Turkish soil, so what is the difference by the EU having one processing center in Turkey representing all it’s 27 member states and each 27 EU state using their own embassies to process them? There are more than just 27 countries to choose from for these people to ask for asylum, which makes all the more sense for them to apply at at embassy of their choice, does it not?

The EU has not and is not processing these people any where at a rate that is proportional to the need of those who ARE genuine refugees and they have not done and are not doing so with specific intent of trying to reduce the degree to which they have to meet their obligations under international law towards such people. Had they done so then the degree to which Erdogan is able to exploit these peoples suffering to pressure the EU politically would be entirely different if not zero. Had they done so the scenes we seen at borders between states would be entirely different. The EU's objective, brought in to sharp focus since 2015, has never been to ensure that refugees rights are protected and their suffering is mitigated, the core principal of the international laws on refugees. It has been entirely focused on limiting and restricting how many 'foreign' people end up in Europe. My point started with 'the whole issue of migration generally and refugees specifically is shrouded in hypocrisy from all parties'. I stand by that assessment.

One means of mitigating the suffering of refugees and protecting their rights would be concerted effort using all possible means and resources to shut down 'people trafficking for profit'. Yet the EU is funding and paying the salaries of the 'Libyan Coat Guard' that we know is made up in large numbers by people who were trafficking people for profit prior to being employed by the EU specifically to break international law and ride rough shod over the rights of genuine refugees. If this does not indicate to you what the real objectives of the EU are on this issue and the hypocrisy that surrounds issue of migration and asylum then I am not sure what ever would or could.

Erol, let me start by saying that it admirable of you to be the guardians of the plights of all refugees all over and championing the International law on refugees. I am going to go on a limb here and say that you yourself has never been a refugee or an Internally Displaced Person in any country, but some of us have, some much longer and worse than others, therefore, some of us had/have real experiences in what these refugees face and understand their plight . Either one of the above definitions means the same thing in real life to those whom may have been affected, if not in legal terms, just as in real life, just like there’s no difference to those who were eliminated in the form of Genocide or Holocaust. In comparison to some of our childhoods in Cyprus between 1963 and 1974 era, yours growing up in the UK would be like as having a “Silver Spoon” in your mouth. Lucky you thankfully.

Now, let’s get down to the nitty-gritty of your arguments with the refugees in Turkey and the EU. You’re not saying that the EU is not accepting refugees into the EU in defiance of International Law because they have been in the hundreds of thousands and are still continue to do so. You are just arguing that the EU has not taken ALL of the refugees in Turkey, so to take away Erdogan’s blackmailing tactics by using the refugees to get what it wants from the EU. I think you are barking up the wrong tree my friend. Your anger should be with Erdogan and not with the EU or Greece by not opening the flood gates to the EU for anyone and everyone to march in, because if that were to happen, there will not be an EU left as we know it, as the right will rise up far more than they already have which there would be a backlash against ALL immigrants living in Europe.

It is not the EU’s responsibility to take ALL the refugees in from Turkey, just because Turkey is one of the main reasons why there are so many refugees in Turkey from Syria. If the EU were to do what you want it to do by accepting ALL the refugees in Turkey just to satisfy your understanding what International Law defines on refugees, it will only give permission to Erdogan to become even more reckless with it’s neighbours by making more wars and more refugees for the EU to take care of. Turkey and the EU had a deal in 2016 and Turkey has backed out of that deal, therefore Turkey cannot be trusted, which is why upgrading the 2016 deal was not given to Erdogan last week and which is why the Greece border will be fortified to prevent any illegal entry into the country. I am certain the same will be done with the Bulgarian border with Turkey. This is not to keep the refugees out, but to once and for all stop Erdogan’s blackmailing attempts in the future, who is acting like a mafiosi than a respected president. The genuine refugees in Turkey do have the option to make their claim for an asylum at any foreign embassies in Turkey, therefore just because the Greece/Turkey border is closed, their claims to an asylum is not.

[erolz66]

No where have I argued that the EU should or legally must take all refugees. No where have I argued that Turkey is without blame.

On the other hand you do appear to be arguing that Turkey must take all of these refugees. You do appear to be arguing only Turkey is to blame.

My point was that these issues are shrouded in hypocrisy and your responses to date only confirm and reinforce that view for me.

[Maximus]

95% of your posts have not been about condemning how these people are being weaponized and used to blackmail the EU with. Or how they were being shuttled and pushed in to another country by Turkish authorities..

Yep, nothing much from you about Turkey trying to wash her hands and obligations to these refugees.

Excuse us, but you have given the impression that the Eu and Greece are obliged to let these violent people cross the border because they are "refugees".

[erolz66]

Excuse us, but you have given the impression that the Eu and Greece are obliged to let these people cross the border.

I simply have not said that. I have said that the EU and Greece and many other states as well have clear legal obligations towards these people and it has been systematically seeking to avoid such obligations in a myriad of ways and that has also contributed to the situation as it is today along with Turkey's deplorable and cynical exploitation of these people's suffering. I am saying it is easy to simply criticise and blame Turkey alone whilst ignoring the failures of the EU. I am saying such is easy but is essentially hypocritical.

[Maximus]

it is the basis of your argument.

Hypocritical EU --> bad EU and Greece not letting in these "refugees".

Shows destroyed buildings and baron cities,

Says he knows the laws and their rights, They can choose where to go, where to seek Asylum.

Turkey can let them pass, Turkey has less obligations and legal agreements than the EU,, blah blah blah.

You are basically sticking up for Turkey 95% and blaming the EU 95%.