Connect with us


Australia Has Been Holding Refugees As Hostages For The Past Eight Years Now Is The Moment To Consider Who Has Benefited Boochani Behrouz

More than 3,000 refugees were sent to Nauru and Manus Island in Papua New Guinea after the Australian government legislated offshore confinement for all asylum seekers arriving by boat eight years ago.
Since then, we’ve heard other horrific stories about stranded refugees, including death, violence, child detention, family separation, and numerous human rights violations.
We’ve heard the experiences of hundreds of people who have been traumatized, as well as the 14 people who have been slain.
Reza Barati, who was beaten to death by a bunch of guards, was brought to our attention.
We were told about Hamid Khazaei, who had a leg infection, was confined to a wheelchair, and died while in detention.
In a Brisbane hospital, Faysal Ishak Ahmed also died.
The first thing that comes to me when I think about the stories of these migrants, including my own, is the abduction of human beings at sea.
We were kidnapped and taken to an island we had never heard of before.
Our identities were stolen from us.
In a meticulously orchestrated process of dehumanisation, we were reduced to a series of statistics.
We were duped into joining an evil system that was designed to suffocate our individuality.
The offshore detention strategy was a sort of state-sanctioned kidnapping.
The Australian government has refused to accept us for years, preventing us from being relocated.
Even after it caved in to public criticism and signed a resettlement agreement with the US, the government delayed the transfer.
Several refugees are still kept indefinitely after all these years.
The offshore detention program is a hybrid of hostage-taking, deception, secrecy, corruption, populist propaganda, and systematic torture. In addition to serving as a platform for the spread of populist beliefs and false claims, the strategy served as a type of government hostage-taking.
For example, Kevin Rudd introduced this policy immediately before the 2013 federal election, and Scott Morrison went to the Christmas Island detention center in 2019 with a dozen reporters and posed heroically against the sea.
They led the public to believe that the offshore detention strategy was like a building that would fall apart if just one brick was removed.
They warned of a boat invasion on Australian coasts, yet no boats showed up.
What, exactly, are boats?
Every single one of them was repatriated to Indonesia.
This is significant because, since 2013, whenever the public has put pressure on the government, officials have emphasized the dangers of opening the borders.
This turned out to be a complete fabrication.
The government has done this by instilling unfounded fear while cloaking itself in the guise of national security.
The truth is that they required our bodies in order to maintain their political power.
They established a $12 billion detention industry along the way, which has enriched politicians as well as some security and medical firms.
The contracts signed with Paladin are the only ones that have been released to the press, but I believe this is just the beginning.
The Australian government has gone to great lengths to keep its incarceration business afloat.
When tens of thousands of refugees were sent to the United States, the government brought in a group of New Zealanders who had been detained in Australia.
Human bodies are, at the end of the day, fuel for this money-making torture engine.
Hostage-taking, deception, secrecy, corruption, populist propaganda, and, of course, systematic torture are all part of the offshore imprisonment regime.
It’s cruel, expensive, and pointless.
After all these years, Australians must get the fortitude to look in the mirror and ask themselves, “What have we gained?” and “What have we lost?”
It’s past time to call into question the policy’s fundamentals.
Human values have been eroded during the last eight years, more than $12 billion has been spent, and Australia’s worldwide standing has suffered greatly.
“Who has profited from this policy?” is the crucial question to address right now, according to Behrouz Boochani, adjunct senior fellow at the University of Canterbury.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Must See

More in News