Yet another wall
7/11/13 14:11![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
htpcl.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsWelcome to my mid-20th century world, you fellow chauvinistic xenophobians (sic?!) peace-loving tolerant folks who want nothing but love and harmony throughout the Universe! Let's begin today's rant with a picture. Yep, this is a wall. OK, let's say it's a fence. But we call it a wall. Anyway. Could you try to guess where it's located? Palestine? North Korea? Arizona?
Nah. I won't torture you any longer. The wall/fence/whatever is on the Turkish-Bulgarian border. Riiiight here. Or somewhere there. ---> WIKI-LINKY.
It's being built by the Bulgarian government in one of the most critical sections of the border, where the most frequent violations of the so called "green line" seem to occur (that's how the loosely secured middle part of the Turkish-Bulgarian border is called). We used to have some intrusions in that area from foot-and-mouth infected cows in recent years, but although we were seriously "considering" the option, we never built any fences anyway.
But now things have changed. There's a much greater threat to the national security, you know. By raising this facility, our authorities are hoping to redirect the flow of Syrian refugees toward the border checkpoints. Our minister of the interior justified this measure with the statement that, if Bulgaria doesn't manage to contain and control the influx of refugees, that could "cause a humanitarian crisis, and threaten the very functionality of the country's social system". He also expressed concern about a potential rise of crime, and a possible sneaking in of terrorists along with the rest of the refugees. You know, bad apples.
In my book, all of this is just another bullet point in the ever increasing list of examples of failed policies. Somehow we always turn out to be completely unprepared for anything that's coming to us. Walls against people flows have been raised elsewhere, too, granted. Like that other, much bigger wall, which Turkey is building along its entire border with Syria. Officially, its goal is to stop the human trafficking. But naturally, the Kurds are seeing political motives behind all this. They call it "the wall of shame". There's a concern that such sort of defensive barriers could bring exactly the opposite effect. They could prompt more and more Syrian refugees to rely on smugglers, and go the wrong way. And that's not just some speculation, it's actually what the UN refugee agency is warning about.
In Europe (at least among those Europeans who are still not shaking in their boots at the thought of a horde of Syrians flocking into their precious prosperous, and might I add, geographically favored societies), some allusions are being made to other such nice facilities like the infamous Berlin Wall. If I recall correctly, it was Walter Ulbricht who promised at the time Berlin was being partitioned between the allies, that "nobody has any intentions to build any walls here". Not so long thereafter, the wall was a fact. The similarity is very clear with the present promises of the Bulgarian ministry of the interior that nobody has any intention of shutting the doors to those Syrians who are fleeing from all the death and devastation in their country. Meanwhile, the wall is already under construction. And the Turkish authorities are swearing in Allah and His prophet that the wall along their border with Syria has only one goal: to contain and control the refugee flows.
And the parallels don't stop there. At least nominally, the Berlin Wall was meant to "provide protection to the citizens of DDR". Instead, it caused the deaths of hundreds of them. And because of the failing peace process in the Middle East, Israel is trying to stop Palestinian extremists with concrete walls with barbed wire that keep thousands of people blocked within a narrow patch of land in their own country. And the failing struggle with the flood of Mexican immigrants has prompted the US, this mightiest of all mighty world powers, to raise grandiose walls along its southern borders, where scores of brownish-looking, funny-talking folks are finding their bloody end as we speak.
In this line of thought, the planned 30 km wall along our south-eastern border is a testament to the utter failure of the politicians. And not only our own politicians, but the European politicians even more so. For example, the German minister of the interior Hans-Peter Friedrich categorically refused to admit that there's an urgent need for reviewing of the Dublin accord, which is throwing all responsibility for the refugees on the country where they've first entered EU territory (as was recently so aptly elaborated in a post here that, curiously, remained largely ignored). Such disconnect is bewildering, especially in the wake of the drama at the shores of Lampedusa.
It's true that my country is the weakest and poorest EU member state, and it has requested an urgent 6 million euro aid package that would help it cope with the rising tide of refugees from Asia. Up to this point about 8 thousand of them have poured into the country, and we've exceeded our capacity to manage the situation on our own a long time ago. And comprehensive, adequate aid is still nowhere in sight. With a few notable exceptions from tiny countries like Slovakia, of all places. So you may forgive our leaders for kind of freaking out and responding to the situation with the first measure that comes to mind. Namely: putting a wall where no wall had ever existed, even at the times when we used to look across the border and see a potential enemy there.
But there's also this other dimension of the issue, one which very few people ever venture to explore. You see, all the politicians' statements about controlling the refugee flows and the pathetic chauvinistic rhetoric of "mildly extremist" populist parties notwithstanding (endlessly yelling and spilling spittle around streets and squares about terrorists and "aliens" threatening the very existence of our cute idyllic society), no one could conceal the fact that we've proven to be totally unprepared for what had been coming for quite some time. In fact the minister of interior himself admitted that "this is the biggest challenge our country has faced in recent years", and that says a lot, given our extensive history of plunging from one political and economic crisis right into another.
So what's this other dimension that I'm talking about? Well, the personal one. First of all, let's clear out some misconceptions that have plagued the debate on these issues since day one. Who are actually those 5-6 thousand people whose arrival has proven our institutions completely incapable of addressing urgent situations? These people are often called "refugees", but that'd technically be true only in case the state had already granted them refugee status, declaring with this act that their request for protection and asylum has been granted, and the authorities are prepared to fulfill their international commitments related to this sort of protection. Until that actually happens, the people who are packing up our refugee camps are "asylum seekers".
If they get a refusal of refugee status, they'd become "irregularly residing migrants". Not "illegal immigrants", as they're often erroneously called. The UN refugee committee defines migrants as people who temporarily reside in a foreign country for a longer period of time (a year or more, unlike tourists or business travelers). And immigrants are defined as persons living in a foreign country who have the intention to settle and live there permanently. Thus, refugees, i.e. those extremely vulnerable people who are fleeing a place where their life has been under threat, or where they've been persecuted or threatened with violence and abuse, and who've already been granted asylum, actually turn out to be just a tiny fraction of all the migration flows that constantly move along this ancient and very overused axis between the Middle East and the Balkans (I did tell you some European societies are more geographically favored than others).
Then, there's the problem with obtaining a clearer view of the whole picture. The access of journalists to the refugee centers is very restricted, practically banned. And almost all the information the public is getting comes from the reports of the ministry of the interior, and the local refugee agency. The indications that prosecutors and police officers are being sent to these camps rather than social workers, psychologists and doctors, suggest that these people are being viewed as a potential danger first and foremost, and a threat to the national security, and should accordingly be treated as potential criminals (there've already been some cases of refugee-related crime and violence, which is inevitable - and only adds more fuel to the hateful extremist rhetoric of xenophobic populist political formations scrambling for cheap points).
But why are those who call them "aliens" getting so frequently and enthusiastically applauded by large chunks of the public? Well, the purpose of this sort of rhetoric is clear: it's aiming to provoke fear and hatred and xenophobic moods among the locals toward people coming from elsewhere. The definition "aliens" bears connotations of something that poses a threat to the established order, something that steals and sucks national resources, something that's completely, well... alien. This notion that's being so hysterically propagandized by the more extremist nationalistic elements in our society has actually been in place for many years here, mainly directed against ethnic and cultural minorities that are supposed to be perceived as "incompatible" with the rest of society: culturally, and in any other respect. This sort of propaganda is a well rehearsed and very handy tool for dehumanization of those who seek help at a crucial moment, because it puts the emphasis on select characteristics (perceived or real) of those groups that are over-exposed in order to distinguish them from the rest of society, and ultimately isolate them. The purpose? Sweeping the more meaningful discourse about problems that do really matter under the rug, through finding an external foe and crafting a threat against which the "good" part of society could rally, and be united. The leaders of those chauvinistic parties gaining immense influence and power in the process, of course.
And our media are doing these haters a great favor by readily adding more voices to the chorus of indifferent, callous tunes that dehumanize the "aliens" for the sake of the domestic consumption of well regurgitated patriotic talking points. "Aliens - go home! Kick the Syrian criminals back to where they belong!" Yep, those were slogans we all saw on the protest parades the other day. The personal stories of these vulnerable newcomers are almost never presented to the public, the context of the reasons why they came to seek refuge in the first place gets torpedoed at the minute someone tries to bring up the issue, etc.
Instead of speaking of the grave risk those people had been exposed to in their country, and understanding what they've been through after they took a leap into the unknown, we're preoccupied with freaking out about the risk they may or may not be posing to us, the "indigenous", anointed ones. Apart from being utterly egoistic and staggeringly primitive, all of this has nothing to do with what a presumably modern, civilized society should be about. Right now I'm ashamed to be part of this nation.
Nah. I won't torture you any longer. The wall/fence/whatever is on the Turkish-Bulgarian border. Riiiight here. Or somewhere there. ---> WIKI-LINKY.
It's being built by the Bulgarian government in one of the most critical sections of the border, where the most frequent violations of the so called "green line" seem to occur (that's how the loosely secured middle part of the Turkish-Bulgarian border is called). We used to have some intrusions in that area from foot-and-mouth infected cows in recent years, but although we were seriously "considering" the option, we never built any fences anyway.
But now things have changed. There's a much greater threat to the national security, you know. By raising this facility, our authorities are hoping to redirect the flow of Syrian refugees toward the border checkpoints. Our minister of the interior justified this measure with the statement that, if Bulgaria doesn't manage to contain and control the influx of refugees, that could "cause a humanitarian crisis, and threaten the very functionality of the country's social system". He also expressed concern about a potential rise of crime, and a possible sneaking in of terrorists along with the rest of the refugees. You know, bad apples.
In my book, all of this is just another bullet point in the ever increasing list of examples of failed policies. Somehow we always turn out to be completely unprepared for anything that's coming to us. Walls against people flows have been raised elsewhere, too, granted. Like that other, much bigger wall, which Turkey is building along its entire border with Syria. Officially, its goal is to stop the human trafficking. But naturally, the Kurds are seeing political motives behind all this. They call it "the wall of shame". There's a concern that such sort of defensive barriers could bring exactly the opposite effect. They could prompt more and more Syrian refugees to rely on smugglers, and go the wrong way. And that's not just some speculation, it's actually what the UN refugee agency is warning about.
In Europe (at least among those Europeans who are still not shaking in their boots at the thought of a horde of Syrians flocking into their precious prosperous, and might I add, geographically favored societies), some allusions are being made to other such nice facilities like the infamous Berlin Wall. If I recall correctly, it was Walter Ulbricht who promised at the time Berlin was being partitioned between the allies, that "nobody has any intentions to build any walls here". Not so long thereafter, the wall was a fact. The similarity is very clear with the present promises of the Bulgarian ministry of the interior that nobody has any intention of shutting the doors to those Syrians who are fleeing from all the death and devastation in their country. Meanwhile, the wall is already under construction. And the Turkish authorities are swearing in Allah and His prophet that the wall along their border with Syria has only one goal: to contain and control the refugee flows.
And the parallels don't stop there. At least nominally, the Berlin Wall was meant to "provide protection to the citizens of DDR". Instead, it caused the deaths of hundreds of them. And because of the failing peace process in the Middle East, Israel is trying to stop Palestinian extremists with concrete walls with barbed wire that keep thousands of people blocked within a narrow patch of land in their own country. And the failing struggle with the flood of Mexican immigrants has prompted the US, this mightiest of all mighty world powers, to raise grandiose walls along its southern borders, where scores of brownish-looking, funny-talking folks are finding their bloody end as we speak.
In this line of thought, the planned 30 km wall along our south-eastern border is a testament to the utter failure of the politicians. And not only our own politicians, but the European politicians even more so. For example, the German minister of the interior Hans-Peter Friedrich categorically refused to admit that there's an urgent need for reviewing of the Dublin accord, which is throwing all responsibility for the refugees on the country where they've first entered EU territory (as was recently so aptly elaborated in a post here that, curiously, remained largely ignored). Such disconnect is bewildering, especially in the wake of the drama at the shores of Lampedusa.
It's true that my country is the weakest and poorest EU member state, and it has requested an urgent 6 million euro aid package that would help it cope with the rising tide of refugees from Asia. Up to this point about 8 thousand of them have poured into the country, and we've exceeded our capacity to manage the situation on our own a long time ago. And comprehensive, adequate aid is still nowhere in sight. With a few notable exceptions from tiny countries like Slovakia, of all places. So you may forgive our leaders for kind of freaking out and responding to the situation with the first measure that comes to mind. Namely: putting a wall where no wall had ever existed, even at the times when we used to look across the border and see a potential enemy there.
But there's also this other dimension of the issue, one which very few people ever venture to explore. You see, all the politicians' statements about controlling the refugee flows and the pathetic chauvinistic rhetoric of "mildly extremist" populist parties notwithstanding (endlessly yelling and spilling spittle around streets and squares about terrorists and "aliens" threatening the very existence of our cute idyllic society), no one could conceal the fact that we've proven to be totally unprepared for what had been coming for quite some time. In fact the minister of interior himself admitted that "this is the biggest challenge our country has faced in recent years", and that says a lot, given our extensive history of plunging from one political and economic crisis right into another.
So what's this other dimension that I'm talking about? Well, the personal one. First of all, let's clear out some misconceptions that have plagued the debate on these issues since day one. Who are actually those 5-6 thousand people whose arrival has proven our institutions completely incapable of addressing urgent situations? These people are often called "refugees", but that'd technically be true only in case the state had already granted them refugee status, declaring with this act that their request for protection and asylum has been granted, and the authorities are prepared to fulfill their international commitments related to this sort of protection. Until that actually happens, the people who are packing up our refugee camps are "asylum seekers".
If they get a refusal of refugee status, they'd become "irregularly residing migrants". Not "illegal immigrants", as they're often erroneously called. The UN refugee committee defines migrants as people who temporarily reside in a foreign country for a longer period of time (a year or more, unlike tourists or business travelers). And immigrants are defined as persons living in a foreign country who have the intention to settle and live there permanently. Thus, refugees, i.e. those extremely vulnerable people who are fleeing a place where their life has been under threat, or where they've been persecuted or threatened with violence and abuse, and who've already been granted asylum, actually turn out to be just a tiny fraction of all the migration flows that constantly move along this ancient and very overused axis between the Middle East and the Balkans (I did tell you some European societies are more geographically favored than others).
Then, there's the problem with obtaining a clearer view of the whole picture. The access of journalists to the refugee centers is very restricted, practically banned. And almost all the information the public is getting comes from the reports of the ministry of the interior, and the local refugee agency. The indications that prosecutors and police officers are being sent to these camps rather than social workers, psychologists and doctors, suggest that these people are being viewed as a potential danger first and foremost, and a threat to the national security, and should accordingly be treated as potential criminals (there've already been some cases of refugee-related crime and violence, which is inevitable - and only adds more fuel to the hateful extremist rhetoric of xenophobic populist political formations scrambling for cheap points).
But why are those who call them "aliens" getting so frequently and enthusiastically applauded by large chunks of the public? Well, the purpose of this sort of rhetoric is clear: it's aiming to provoke fear and hatred and xenophobic moods among the locals toward people coming from elsewhere. The definition "aliens" bears connotations of something that poses a threat to the established order, something that steals and sucks national resources, something that's completely, well... alien. This notion that's being so hysterically propagandized by the more extremist nationalistic elements in our society has actually been in place for many years here, mainly directed against ethnic and cultural minorities that are supposed to be perceived as "incompatible" with the rest of society: culturally, and in any other respect. This sort of propaganda is a well rehearsed and very handy tool for dehumanization of those who seek help at a crucial moment, because it puts the emphasis on select characteristics (perceived or real) of those groups that are over-exposed in order to distinguish them from the rest of society, and ultimately isolate them. The purpose? Sweeping the more meaningful discourse about problems that do really matter under the rug, through finding an external foe and crafting a threat against which the "good" part of society could rally, and be united. The leaders of those chauvinistic parties gaining immense influence and power in the process, of course.
And our media are doing these haters a great favor by readily adding more voices to the chorus of indifferent, callous tunes that dehumanize the "aliens" for the sake of the domestic consumption of well regurgitated patriotic talking points. "Aliens - go home! Kick the Syrian criminals back to where they belong!" Yep, those were slogans we all saw on the protest parades the other day. The personal stories of these vulnerable newcomers are almost never presented to the public, the context of the reasons why they came to seek refuge in the first place gets torpedoed at the minute someone tries to bring up the issue, etc.
Instead of speaking of the grave risk those people had been exposed to in their country, and understanding what they've been through after they took a leap into the unknown, we're preoccupied with freaking out about the risk they may or may not be posing to us, the "indigenous", anointed ones. Apart from being utterly egoistic and staggeringly primitive, all of this has nothing to do with what a presumably modern, civilized society should be about. Right now I'm ashamed to be part of this nation.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 12:43 (UTC)That is all of us, from time to time, in the "developed" world: only partially assuaged during the few occasions when we get things right.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 18:05 (UTC)BTW, it is funny that I am too young to remember the construction of the Berlin Wall and I now work with people who are too young to remember its destruction.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 19:41 (UTC)Unlike the walls you're complaining about, the Berlin Wall was to keep people in, not out, like the Great Wall of China.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 19:58 (UTC)The East Germans (dark color) were trying to get INSIDE the white area, and thus find a way OUT of East Germany.
I didn't get your Great Wall of China reference. Did you mean it was also meant to keep people in? If so, who were those people, and inside where were they supposed to be kept?
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:31 (UTC)What was it for?
It was built by the Soviets to keep East Germans from escaping into West Germany.
Four astoundingly ignorant replies. Awesome day.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:35 (UTC)I'm beginning to sense a few hundred brain cells dying the more this conversation proceeds.
I suggest you have some geography for dinner. It's delicious.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 21:03 (UTC)You told me that? Thanks. Now what did I say?
Unlike the walls you're complaining about, the Berlin Wall was to keep people in, not out
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:04 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:49 (UTC)So I guess if that hypothesis is true, the wall was meant to both keep people out (invaders) and keep people in (invaders who were fleeing with plunder.)
What this has to do with your OP, I have no idea.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:54 (UTC)Apparently, technically the Chinese Wall was also meant to keep people in, if at least for a few minutes (until they got caught). So, if we're to remain "technical" about these things, the Berlin Wall was meant to keep East Germans out of West Berlin, no? I mean, just technically.
Therefore I win one Internets! Or something.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 21:16 (UTC)To quote Rush (the band): "The way out is the way in."
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:05 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 21:21 (UTC)The OP is whining about governments building walls to keep out illegal immigrants and whatnot, and tries to compare these walls to the infamous wall - the Berlin Wall. I'm pointing out that they are quite different. The Berlin Wall was like a prison wall, built to keep people from escaping the Soviet Union (keep people in). The walls in the OP are nothing like that. The walls in the OP are like the Great Wall of China, built to keep people out of the country that built it.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:10 (UTC)Ultimately, what's your end-game here? "The OP is stupid to whine about something that's unrelated to that other thing"? Well, boo-hoo, thanks a lot for pointing that out! I guess you should also write a very sarcastic and intellectually sounding letter to all those politicians and journalists across Europe who've made the allusions to the Berlin Wall that I was citing. I promise to be waiting with bated breath the result of your immensely precious feedback.
This conversation has been as worthless as a bored armchair-warrior killing a couple of hours by whining about people whining on the Internet. I guess I owe you gratitude for that, too. So thanks, and cheers!
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:24 (UTC)Is Assad building the walls? And are people not allowed to leave by air? If that were the case, then yes.
But hey, you have journalists on your side.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:30 (UTC)The ignorance radiating from this statement is causing me physical pain.
> Is Assad doing that?
This is plain dumb. It was fun playing for a while, now go play with someone else.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 23:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 23:24 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 23:19 (UTC)To your other staggeringly simplistic question. Assad is one half of the reason why these walls are being built in the first place, yes. The other half being the armed rebels.
As for the journalists who you assert are on someone's "side", those were mentioned as in "some allusions are being made to other such nice facilities like the infamous Berlin Wall". You know, context. Nevertheless, you may feel free to refer your objection to said journalists if you like. Look, there's even a link leading to those who've made said allusions. The parallel the OP was making is that these walls usually bring results that those who build them may've not anticipated. But something tells me you already knew all that, and I'm just wasting time. Please assure me that I'm wrong.
Now, would you like to discuss the refugee crisis for a change, or not?
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 23:33 (UTC)Um, I was thinking of places like Cuba and the former Soviet Union, places that actually are/were like prisons, in that the government doesn't let people leave. Cuba never built a wall, but I guess you could figure that one out.
And I didn't ask a question, I was answering a stupid one. Forgive me for not putting more time into it.
The parallel the OP was making is that these walls usually bring results that those who build them may've not anticipated.
Really? What results did the Berlin Wall have that the Soviets didn't anticipate?
(no subject)
Date: 8/11/13 06:41 (UTC)You were thinking of Cuba but you never mentioned Cuba. What's being discussed here is Syria. Only you know what's in your head while you speak of something else.
You did put an enormous amount of time into it, in fact. And I'm still trying to figure out why.
(no subject)
Date: 8/11/13 12:03 (UTC)Now perhaps you can go get five of your friends to post replies, maybe I'll respond to half of them, and then you can ask why I'm posting so many comments.
(no subject)
Date: 8/11/13 13:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/11/13 13:09 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/11/13 13:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/11/13 13:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/11/13 16:17 (UTC)The Berlin Wall was fundamentally different. That it why it is infamous, whereas the Great Wall of China is simply famous. It requires a special kind of dense to view this as nitpicking.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:18 (UTC)You're not entertaining. You're not even remotely adding anything valuable to the discourse. You're just wasting pixels on my screen.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:28 (UTC)* one might have substituted that term with 'unnecessarily pedantic'
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:11 (UTC)This is not just dumb. This is retarded.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:32 (UTC)Total nitpick.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:38 (UTC)See? This game is so easy to play.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:13 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:33 (UTC)The difference is the Chinese did it to keep people out, the Soviets did it to keep people in (the Soviet Union).
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:40 (UTC)And...?
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:47 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 21:08 (UTC)All your walls are not like that. They are built by governments trying to keep others from entering their country.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:21 (UTC)go awaymove on to troll the next post?(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:06 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 20:16 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/13 22:26 (UTC)I am talking of the ages-old attempts of Bulgaria to join the Schengen area. If what your authorities are doing for the Syrian refugees in this complicated situation proves that Bulgaria is capable of being a reliable partner in defending EU's borders, the mouths of the constant critics could be shut forever, and the doors to Schengen would finally be open.