Friday, September 01, 2017

Netanyahu addresses 'pain' of south Tel Aviv Mizrahim

The question of what to do with African 'refugees' in south Tel Aviv is a burning one for the predominantly Mizrahi residents, as they are the primary victims of  local criminal activity and rape. Report on Netanyahu's tour of the area by Arutz Sheva (with thanks: Simone):
Netanyahu: 'Residents are afraid to leave their homes'
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu toured south Tel Aviv on Thursday afternoon and promised residents that he would take action to return illegal infiltrators to their home countries or other countries willing to receive them. Although his government built a fence to keep additional illegals out, there are close to 40,000 who managed to enter Israel before the fence was completed.
"We are here on the mission to bring the citizens of Israel back to south Tel Aviv. I listened to all the residents, and what I hear is pain and distress," Netanyahu said.

The Prime Minister toured south Tel Aviv against the backdrop of a Supreme Court ruling that illegal infiltrators cannot be detained indefinitely for refusing to be voluntarily deported. He promised to set up a ministerial committee to resolve the situation.

Netanyahu was joined by Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan, Culture and Sports Minister Miri Regev, and MK Miri Ohana (Likud). Earlier, Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely visited south Tel Aviv and spoke with residents.
Minister Regev said that the infiltrators are not refugees. "People who arrive here by passing through two countries (the infiltrators reach Israel by way of Egypt and the Sinai, ed.) are not refugees. They are infiltrators. It is the residents of south Tel Aviv who have become refugees in their own country."

Read article in full


Alex Stein said...

Can we surmise from your snarky use of 'refugees' that you would support Israel assessing the asylum seekers claims? Relevant background here:

"Between 2009 and 2015, 2,408 Eritreans requested refugee status in Israel. The state again has responded to 1.42% of these requests, or 45 people, also rejecting 40 outright, and granting temporary protection to five, while the Interior Ministry granted refugee status to four people.

Israel’s approval ratings for refugee status are drastically lower than international levels. According to the United Nation’s High Commissioner for Refugees, internationally, 84% of Eritreans and 56% of Sudanese asylum seekers received either refugee status or extended protection in 2014."

bataween said...

Netanyahu does not even use the word 'refugee' - his word is 'infiltrator'. It seems meaningless to talk of 'approval ratings being lower than international levels'. What are 'international levels'? (Much of the world consists of poverty-stricken and corrupt dictatorships.) Some western countries have better records than others - Germany better than the UK or US.
How do you know how many are genuine refugees, how many economic migrants?
International law says that genuine refugees should seek asylum in the first country they come to, which in most cases should be Egypt.Clearly that many of these people would prefer to end up in a prosperous country where they have a good chance of finding paid employment.

by Davsil said...

If the situation was reversed and it was Jewish refugees trying to seek refuge in Eritrea and the Eritrean government refused, everybody would be shouting "anti-Semitism".

bataween said...

If it were Jewish refugees seeking refuge in Eritrea I doubt if the Eritreans would have much sympathy for them if they caused the locals to fear leaving their own homes.

Alex Stein said...

1. Most asylum seekers don't remain in the first country they come to, particularly if their prospects are as terrible as they would be somewhere like Egypt. In any case, it's irrelevant, as not stopping in the first country you come to doesn't your claim for asylum is invalid Trying to make it to a country where you might have some prospects for building a life isn't a crime. 2. You know what is meant by international levels - other western democratic countries that Israel routinely compares itself to (although it's worth noting that there are plenty of much poorer countries who frequently take in much larger number of refugees). 3. "How do you know how many are genuine refugees, how many economic migrants." By assessing their claims, in the way the international treaties Israel is signatory to requires it to do. Which brings us back to the simple question you haven't answered. Do you or do you not think Israel should assess the claims of people seeking asylum? If not, why not?

Alex Stein said...

The claim that asylum seekers have to seek asylum in the first country they reach is a lie:

bataween said...

Of course Israel should assess the claims of asylum seekers. But would you respect its right to reject their claims? The refugee crisis poses dilemmas for all 'safe' countries. I see that the UK is not doing too well in this area.

Sylvia said...

Davsil wrote
If the situation was reversed and it was Jewish refugees trying to seek refuge in Eritrea and the Eritrean government refused, everybody would be shouting "anti-Semitism".

Actually, the situation was reversed, when Jews fleeing the attacks by nationalists in some countries sought refugee asylum status in France. But because they left penniless, had no sponsor, no domicile and no promise for a job, they fell under the French law called "delit de vagabondage", or crime of vagrancy. They were jailed for a little while, then deported back when they couldn't find a guarantor. Some went from there to Israel, others were simply put back on the boat.

Interestingly, that law was abrogated in 1994, just in time to welcome the new waves of refugees.

Yet, French hypocrisy is such that it didnt keep them from hauling off a 15 year old gypsy girl from a schoolbus just two years ago and deport her to Kosovo. So what the Europeans do, they do for their own interest. And so does Israel.

Sylvia said...

The above is the reason I am totally against jailing African illegals for two three months, as some in Israel have proposed lately. I find it absolutely repugnant to keep them more than 24hrs at a police station, which is the time needed to see what to do with them or if someone comes to vouch for them.