The drama created by the High Court decision on the Government’s “Malaysian solution” for asylum seekers highlights the troubling bind Western nations have got themselves into.
Many of those pushing the successful legal challenge were concerned to “protect” asylum seekers – adults and children – from an unsafe, violent and oppressive world. We have a moral responsibility to intervene.
The vast majority of these same people, however, are likely to be against any military involvement designed to make countries like Afghanistan safer and more democratic places. Some of this sentiment stems from a belief that Western nations should not interfere and that the over-reaching is costly and futile, if not counter-productive. Let’s get things right at home, help our citizens feel safe and secure, before we go about saving the rest of the world and imposing democracy on others.
Yet when it comes to the asylum issue, there’s a flip-flop. Suddenly, Australia can save the day. Afghans and others don’t have an ultimate responsibility to sort out their own back yard, just as Western nations have done over centuries and centuries. Intervention is a solution after all.
Using guns to protect a community is misguided hubris; while using the law to protect people is humanitarian!
Right on the money.