 |
| Human Destabilisers: Russia now has a new strategic weapon – migratory waves of unwelcome human-beings. Desperate people with different coloured skins and different religious beliefs arriving at, or actually breaching, the national borders of Russia’s enemies can wreak as much havoc, culturally and politically, as a hypersonic missile exploding in the middle of a Ukrainian power station. |
THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT has uncovered what it believes to be a new layer of mendacity in the Russo-Ukrainian conflict. Thousands of kilometres to the south of the fighting in Ukraine’s eastern provinces, deep in the anarchic wilderness of Sub-Saharan Africa, there’s been a grim addition to the criminal infrastructure of human-trafficking and people-smuggling. Russians.
Displaying that formidable mixture of state and private interests the world has learned to recognise in the Wagner Group’s fearsome mercenaries, new groups of highly organised Russian smugglers are hard at work. Unquestionably, these men are motivated by the huge profits to be made out of human suffering and desperation. But, they have not set up shop in these lawless lands entirely of their own volition. Somebody sent them there.
Moscow may not have intentionally propelled a vast wave of Syrian refugees in the direction of the European Union back in 2015. Indeed, it was most likely the German Chancellor’s, Angela Merkel’s, open arms of welcome that caused so many tragic columns of humanity to come bursting through Europe’s border fences in search of “Angela’s Country”. But Moscow looked on with considerable interest as this great wave of refugees broke over the nations of Western Europe.
Startled, at least initially, by the extraordinary welcome extended to the refugees by Europe’s most innocent and idealistic citizens, Russian cynicism was all-too-swiftly confirmed by the vicious racist backlash unleashed against the newcomers. Russia saw Germany riven by animosities its leaders had believed long buried. It watched the rise of far-right political parties disturb the civilised equilibrium of the Federal Republic. With a mixture of horror and delight, Moscow watched the eager ghost of Nazism break free of the stones piled upon its tomb.
Putin’s advisers now had a new strategic weapon to work on and perfect – migratory waves of unwelcome human-beings. Desperate people with different coloured skins and different religious beliefs arriving at, or actually breaching, the national borders of their enemies could wreak as much havoc, culturally and politically, as a hypersonic missile exploding in the middle of a Ukrainian power station.
The first inkling that Moscow had drawn a devastating lesson from the “Syrian invasion of Europe” came at the border of Belarus and Poland in 2021. Operating through his most trusted lieutenant, the Belarusian President, Alexander Lukashenko, Vladimir Putin arranged for Middle Eastern economic refugees, hungry for the peace and abundance of Europe, to be flown from their homelands and bussed to the frigid forests straddling the border of Belarus and Poland. “Over that fence lies freedom and prosperity!”, cried the freezing refugees’ minders – pointing westward.
The Poles, all-too-familiar with mendacity of the Russian bear, were having none of it. Crossing the border in significant numbers, the refugees would find themselves swaddled in the proudly humanitarian laws of the EU. The Polish government decided that under no circumstances could that be allowed to happen. Batons, tear-gas, and the use of water cannons in sub-zero temperatures ensured that the refugees did not make it across the fence.
Two years later, with Europe united against Russian aggression in Ukraine, the next great human wave of refugees is coming up out of the South, crossing the Sahara Desert, setting sail in frail and dangerously overcrowded boats from the coast of lawless Libya for the toe of the Italian boot – where gangsters every bit as ruthless as their Russian confreres are waiting to welcome them ashore. Twenty thousand illegal arrivals this year alone.
Giorgia Meloni, Italy’s first woman prime minister, may now be regretting the strong stand she and her country took against Russian aggression. As the leader of Brothers of Italy, a party of the Italian far-right, she is well aware of the political utility of illegal immigrants. Without them, and the racist tempers they inflame, she and her coalition could not have won power. Meloni promised to turn back the boats, but still they come: more and more. Putin has made a liar of her.
One can only speculate as to whether the British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, has been made aware of exactly who the gangster wolves driving Africa’s immigrant lambs over Europe’s borders are working for. Meeting this week with his AUKUS partners in San Diego, did he pull aside Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, and whisper:
“Tell me again, Tony, how Australia stopped the boats.”
This essay was originally published in The Otago Daily Times and The Greymouth Star of Friday, 17 March 2023.
22 comments:
An interesting post, but one small query.
How much was ‘vicious racist backlash’ against refugees, how much a reasonable response to a foreign invasion by young men with significantly different mores taking advantage of their hosts? I didn’t follow this closely enough then to hold a dogmatic opinion now, but news photos of the newcomers and reports of their criminal and violent behaviour left me sympathetic to the locals.
Chris, you don't need to be a Nazi to not want your country to be over run with welfare seeking refugees straining ytour already run down infrastructure.
I remember the labour promise of 2017, immigration to be reduced to no more than 30,000 per annum. Completely ignored by ardern etc of course once in power. Oh and the NZ First "bottom line", immigration to be reduced to 10,000 per year. Pretty sure winston thinks a bottom line is merely a crease in his trousers to be ironed out at a later date.
“Desperate people with different coloured skins and different religious beliefs arriving at, or actually breaching, the national borders of their enemies could wreak as much havoc, culturally and politically, as a hypersonic missile exploding in the middle of a Ukrainian power station.”
Doesn’t this say it all? Mass immigration from the third world is not a benefit to anyone in the countries subjected to it, except to the immigrants themselves and to the capitalists who get their endless supply of cheap labour, keep house prices up and increase consumption of their products, and the ideological social engineers who get to further reconfigure the Western world in a way that suits them. What does it tell us about mass immigration when it can be used as a “weapon”?
Has decades–this isn’t a recent phenomenon, of course–of mass immigration into Europe, particularly from Africa and from the Middle East and sub-continent, been of any net benefit to anyone but those I mention above? It’s hard to see how it has been. Europe is more fragmented than ever. To call people’s natural inclination to favour their own group over others (despite how offensive this instinct is to progressive constructivists) “racist” is to deny and dismiss the attitudes and practices of thousands of years of human experience. Public opinion has been consistently opposed to the program for decades, yet the public is ignored because those who fund politics and political parties want it. So much for “rule according to the will of the people” (aka democracy).
“Diversity is a strength” is a popular mantra and empty slogan, but in reality, diversity is a weakness, not a strength. As a thought experiment, in a hypothetical society where everyone is exactly the same in every aspect in a qualitative sense, there would be no friction or conflict – how could there be, because there would be a complete absence of diversity of any kind, and diversity is the source of conflict. Naturally, such an ultra-homogeneous society could never occur, and nor would it be desirable, but the point is to illustrate that to the extent that diversity increases (religious, ethnic or otherwise), so does conflict increase.
To the extent a society contains difference, the weaker it is. The more moving parts, the higher the likelihood that it will encounter problems. Moreover, if every human being is essentially the same (as the egalitarian ideology tells us), then what does it even mean to “increase diversity”? If we are all the same, then why the need to import outsiders? On the basis that we are all the same, wouldn’t a completely homogenous society be indistinct from a highly heterogeneous one? That conclusion is where the egalitarian logic leads. But we are being lied to – those pedaling this idea don’t seriously believe that we are all equal. In fact they know full well that radical demographic change will radically alter the social fabric (which is the goal), but people might be hesitant and sceptical about the project if they appreciated this inevitable outcome – so let’s just pretend that we are all interchangeable. By the time it dawns on the masses that people aren’t interchangeable, it will be too late.
By the time millions more immigrants from, in Chris’ words, “the anarchic wilderness of Sub-Saharan Africa” and places like it have made their way into the West and “culturally enriched” it beyond all recognition, then the job will be done. The idea that people who haven’t been able to add much to their own societies will miraculously start to add great benefits to the countries they emigrate to, simply as a result of being on the land, is completely fanciful. It’s not the land that makes a country what it is (whether good or bad), it is the people who live there.
The source material for this opinion deserves a closer look and some context is warranted.
Italy’s government was formed six months ago by a coalition of parties with a common commitment to stop the flow of migrants into the country.
The commitment hasn’t gone well. Figures from the Italian Interior Ministry have revealed that the number of illegal arrivals in Italy has risen by nearly 200% in the first three months of this year compared to the same period last year. The largest nationality has been migrants from the Ivory Coast, at 13%, followed by nationals from Guinea, at 13%, Bangladeshis, at 9%, and Tunisians and Pakistanis, both at 7% although Italy’s security services have warned that some 685,000 migrants in Libya are waiting for a window of opportunity to leave North Africa.
Domestically Italy’s new government is under pressure. Like the rest of the Eurozone, it's economy is facing recession. Thousands took to the streets 3 weeks ago calling for an end to arms supply to Kiev and an end to the sanctions on Russian oil and gas. Last week Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her ministers were met by protestors in Calabria where bodies of drowned immigrants, including many children washed ashore amidst govenment policies that criminalise proving humanitarian assistance to the boats.
The suggestion that the Russian PMC Wagner is responsible for the problems facing Italy come from comments made by two government ministers and even those statements don’t say much.
Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani stated many migrants came from areas "controlled by the Wagner group" while stressing "There's a complicated international situation and things happening at the same time that create migratory pressure". Tajani listed these migratory pressures as primarily coming from an “unprecedented economic crisis” in Tunisia, an earthquake in Syria, and the ongoing exodus from the failed state of Libya.
Defence Minister Guido Crosetto stated that in Libya: “We have indications that (Wagner) are very active and in contact with gangs of traffickers and militiamen interested in the smuggling of migrants. Wagner has a direct role in the destabilization of Libya.”
The Brothers of Italy are currently calling on the European Union “to block the departures of illegal migrants” with some suggestions of a NATO naval blockade of refugee boats from Africa. These vague suggestions linking Wagner with Northern Africa and the Middle East are an attempt to rally NATO in stopping the boats as if it’s another front in NATO's proxy war against Russia.
In the countries highlighted by the Italian Ministers, NATO was directly responsible for the overthrow of the government of Libya and failed overthrow of the government of Syria. Suggestions that PMC Wagner is the real reason for regional destabilisation is laughable.
What is undoubtedly frightening for Europe are the recent diplomatic successes of Russia and China in consolidating support in Africa and the Middle East through BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation expansion. In the past week, China having brokered a normalisation in relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran and we saw a remarkable public rebuke of visiting European politicians in both Congo and Namibia. Instead of destabilising the regions, Russia and China appear to be doing the opposite as western influence declines.
I seem to recall that the allegation of Russia's 'weaponising illegal immigration' just months after NATO's destruction of Libya and the US semi-destruction of Syria. I thought it a load of tripe then; and I reckon it's a load of tripe now. It was Col. Muammar Qaddafi himself who called it - and it might as well have been a figurative repeat of some of the words attributed to Louis XV of France: 'Après moi, le déluge'. He saw it coming, were he to be removed. He was right, wasn't he?
As far as I am concerned, the United States and the rest of the NATO membership is wholly and bloody near solely responsible for the tide of refugees coming out of the Middle East and Africa. You can blame Russia and Belorussia all you like - and there is little doubt that probably neither is making it any easier for Europe - but all that comes to is Europe - as members of NATO - shifting from its own shoulders its own responsibility towards the crisis. Talk about projection! Australia, and even this country, must bear some of that responsibility as well. To give our country some credit, New Zealand has shown some willingness to do so. Australia's attitude, as is the UK's and the rest of the NATO membership, utterly reprehensible and cowardly.
Cheers,
Ion A. Dowman
Chris
To understand the background to waves of economic migrants flooding into Europe, and now into the UK and Ireland beginning in 2015, you have to understand three things. First the European Governments could have stopped this migration very quickly if they had the political will to do so. It’s absurd to think that Britain could repell the Spanish Armada in 1588, a fleet of 150 ships and 18,000 men, but cannot stop small migrant boats crossing the English channel and landing on British soil today.
It is obvious there is no political will to stop the migration.
Second, the political elites of Europe and the UK view the nation state as a relic of the past, and are actively seeking its demise. They are globalists who believe that Nation states are the cause of war and by diluting national culture and customs with a flood of migrants, entire populations will cease to identify locally, and embrace their globalist vision.
Third, Europe is in a demographic death spiral, they are not replacing themselves and the migrants are the children they couldn’t be bothered having. They believe that the social disruption caused by mass migration is just the price they have to pay in order to have a future.
As author and columnist Mark Steyn says “the future belongs to those who show up for it”.
Unsurprisingly indigenous populations object to having this multicultural agenda imposed upon them, something they didn’t get an opportunity to vote for, or to discuss publicly or politically. Not that it matters, all the major parties in Britain and most of Europe are aligned with this process.
The two exceptions are the present Governments of Italy and Hungry. Victor Orban in Hungary has refused to take any Muslim immigrants, much to the chagrin of Brussels. Russia may be acting opportunistically, but the problem is with the EU and British leadership. You cannot blame the migrants for wanting a better life in the West.
Madame B, I tend to agree with you.
It seems to me that the design of Identity Politics and Global Capitalism is to cause chaos everywhere all at the same time whilst devolving the control of almost everything down to a mere handful of people. (When you peel back the layers eg: 3 Waters appears to hand control of water to 'Maori'. What people dont understand is that Maori will effectively hand control over to private megacompanies or potentially hostile governments as this will be one of the ways that they will be able to monetise water assets to their advantage}.
I have always thought that the conspiracy theories out there were way off but you have to ask, why is this is happening everywhere at the same time no matter how previously stable or economically sound the country has previously been.
Whether the outcome is by design or a natural result of the life stages of humanity, it is clear that almost all of us will lose the cultures we grew up with and the sense of pride and belonging that we once held so dear.
Image if I am right Chris.
The arguments being touted include NZ used to be deadly dull and boring and "Auckland is so small and yukky"
We would have to confront the question of "whose country?" and (hopefully) examine the foundations of our society; how power operates; the role of the media; and what right do people high up have to "boldly just do things" - "that's leadership" a "social experiment" . Jon Haidt says nationalism beats globalism but that other lot have no time for evolutionary psychology (group versus individual psychology).
"Chris, you don't need to be a Nazi to not want your country to be over run with welfare seeking refugees straining ytour already run down infrastructure."
Given that they don't tend to be welfare seeking, it probably helps.
https://deeply.thenewhumanitarian.org/refugees/community/2017/06/02/why-migration-will-not-destroy-the-welfare-state
Although ignorance may well be another excuse.
"The overestimates are largest among particular groups: the least educated, workers in low-skill occupations with lots of immigrants, and those on the political right. They overstate the share of immigrants who are Muslim and understate the share of Christians. They underestimate immigrants’ education and overestimate both their poverty rate and their dependence on welfare. Almost a quarter of French respondents, as well as nearly one in five Swedes and about one in seven Americans, think the average immigrant gets twice as much government aid as native residents do. In no country is this true."
"The source material for this opinion deserves a closer look and some context is warranted."
Ironic, considering the cursory investigation you undertake before you dismiss sources you don't agree with.
'@Guerilla Surgeon' - No post goes by that you don't confidently swagger into like a gunslinger of the Old West.
This entire story about Wagner "controlling" swathes of Africa and the Middle East originated from the simple comments of Italian ministers Guido Crosetto and Antonio Tajani that I quoted.
When a fantastic story, sourced upon Italian government comments, has concluded that Putin is the the Bond villain behind Europe’s refugees, reviewing what the government ministers really said is simply due diligence. How you can claim that bothering to read that source material constitutes an "ironic" "cursory investigation" is lost on me.
"Given that they don't tend to be welfare seeking, it probably helps"
Yeah right.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1331677X.2021.1952089
https://www.winterwatch.net/2022/09/4-in-5-refugees-living-in-sweden-have-vacationed-in-the-country-they-fled-from/
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/11/17/even-sweden-doesnt-want-migrants-anymore-syria-iraq-belarus/
Ideology often masks ignorance.
First to acknowledge Brendon's balanced and thoughtful post. However, I wish to briefly make some observations as to other contributors starting points with their posts.
There seems a view that we have 'Christian Europe' and Muslim migrants. It is worth noting that Islam was established in Andalusia in the 8th century. Sicily was under Islamic rule from the 9th to 11th centuries. The Ottomans were established in Europe by the 14th century. Most historians today note the Ottomans as a European power as well as one of the near-east.
Today, over 81% of Albanians are Muslim. Over 50% of Bosnia and Herzegovina profess to Islam. 18% of the population of Cyprus, the majority of Turkish Cypriots, being Muslims. Obviously the Türkiye enclave of Europe includes Istanbul, one of the great European cities. When we look at the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, we should not forget Crimean Tartars, although many redistributed by Hitler and Starlin. We have an idea of Georgia or Armenia being European, but less so Azerbaijans.
We have large generational Muslim populations in Britain and France. Most generationally born in these nations and are as much British or France as any other. We seem to have a habit of making new migrant communities invisible when we envisage what is British or European. Christianity is practiced less by those traditionally seen as European, with the congregations being upheld by those with heritage in the Caribbean, Africa, the sub-continent and other parts of Asia.
When we use the phrase "European" we should acknowledge that it should include those that follow Islam and has done for 1500 years.
The other point I wish to touch on is the difference between migrant and refugee. Many of the correspondents have used this interchangeably. The simple definition being 'a migrant is someone who chooses to move, and a refugee is someone who has been forced from their home.' For refugees, we have global commitments and recognize if they are not allowed to remain in the country they have sought refuge, there are human rights issues and harm if they were to return to nation of origin.
I remember the labour promise of 2017, immigration to be reduced to no more than 30,000 per annum. Completely ignored by ardern etc of course once in power. Oh and the NZ First "bottom line", immigration to be reduced to 10,000 per year. Pretty sure winston thinks a bottom line is merely a crease in his trousers to be ironed out at a later date.
We did, of course, cut off immigration altogether during the Covid years, and the Right's response has been to be jump up and down to ask for more migrants to keep wages down. Almost as though you lot are completely insincere about such things.
My eurocentric view of the 'great peoples' -- Scots, English, Irish, Germans, Jews, Americans -- used to put the Irish at the top: no blood on their hands. Now I put the Germans highest, they alone of the bloody handed have addressed themselves fully and made foot to head to heart revision of themselves. Amongst that is Angela Merkel's admission of a million Syrian refugees.
Winter watch.
Bias Rating: RIGHT CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Factual Reporting: VERY LOW
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
You should maybe upgrade some of your sources of information?
The actual academic article doesn't do much to bolster your case either. At least if you read it to the end. I'm out of time but...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12115-019-00436-8
Claiming the ardern government "kept it's promise" because covid closed the borders is absurd. 2018 & 2019 had massive increases in immigration unbder ardern's watch.
The "right" are not crying out for more immigrants, employers are because of the 300,000 who refuse to work and politicians are merely responding to their calls.
I challenge anyone to provide proof that these "economic refugees" are genuine refugees, especially considering a majority of them return for visits and holidays to their countries of origin.
https://www.winterwatch.net/2022/09/4-in-5-refugees-living-in-sweden-have-vacationed-in-the-country-they-fled-from/
Much like our own "refugee" karel sroubek.
The actual academic article doesn't do much to bolster your case either. At least if you read it to the end. I'm out of time but...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12115-019-00436-8
Even if these approximations are vague, it is still possible to suggest an over risk for the total group of migrants including unregistered individuals. In the table below, it has been suggested that unregistered migrants make up about 10% of Sweden’s total migrant population.
If unregistered individuals are left out in data since the 2005 report by the Crime Prevention Agency, the total over risk for migrants has decreased slightly. If they are included, however, it has increased. Various groups within the migrant population display notable differences. While the over risk has gone down among first generation migrants, it has increased among children to migrants born in Sweden.
...
One side thinks migrants recieve a favor when they migrate and should offer positives. The other serves a Deity.
Claiming the ardern government "kept it's promise" because covid closed the borders is absurd. 2018 & 2019 had massive increases in immigration unbder ardern's watch.
The "right" are not crying out for more immigrants, employers are because of the 300,000 who refuse to work and politicians are merely responding to their calls.
I couldn't care less about whether the Ardern Government kept its promise on this issue or not (hint - the Ardern Government was not exactly notable for achieving its claimed goals on anything).
No, my issue is quite simply the right-wing schizophrenia that applies to immigration. You decry it as culturally destructive... until it is cut off, at which point your business masters start whinging about having to pay higher wages to locals, so you demand more migrants. David Farrar has been very energetic about promoting increased immigration, for that very reason.
It's almost as though social conservatism and capitalism are actually enemies - not allies.
I can find numerous articles about how Wegner group controls parts of Africa – whether I'd described them as swathes or not I don't know.
And certainly the absence of Ukrainian grain has meant increased hunger and a desire to migrate north. Putin can hardly be unaware of these results whether he controls them or not, he's certainly pleased about it and taking advantage of it.
You dismissed a commentor on the Ukrainian situation simply because he used the "wrong map". You didn't bother to investigate his reasons for using that map and his caveats about using that map which he explained at some length. So yeah.
I agree with the Baron, Muslims aren't necessarily a disruptive force. In the US for instance 25% of Muslims leave their religion within 18 months of settling there. And surveys are shown that Muslims are proud of being British at roughly the same rate as non-Muslims.
On the other hand, as far as immigration to NZ goes I am in favour of us inviting skilled people here if there is a shortage. I have grave reservations about taking skilled medical people from underdeveloped countries where they may be needed more than they are here though.
And I fail to see a shortage of shop assistants, key cutters, and dairy owners.
They may well be a shortage of farmworkers, but I'm sure if farmers decided to revise upwards the rather risible pay that they tend to get, they'd get more volunteers from New Zealanders. Or as I said before if they got off their arses and got more efficient, because I'm pretty sure they're not nearly as efficient as they claim, they would employ fewer people, more skilled and on higher wages.
As it is they are relying on those "great little workers". Leaving aside the patronising "little", these are workers who can be sent back to the home country with one telephone call. No wonder they're good. And no wonder conservatives like them.
@‘Guerilla Surgeon’ – I admire your ability to bounce back no matter what. I was thinking that you were giving me a spray over the illegal immigration piece but instead, you’ve been brooding for 6 weeks over your “experts” and their US defence funded sources being dismissed as hacks & you were really just wanted to have a jab on that again. Your comments make perfect sense now. Thanks for explaining!
I'd never heard this story before: it hadn't come up in any of the news feeds I use. So I went looking. At first I found nothing, but finally this popped up:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/italy-blames-russias-wagner-group-for-surge-in-migration/a-64974923
Oh that dastardly Putin, eh! He's a clever one. Machiavellian, to be sure, but clever nonetheless. Of course nobody else would have thought of this, would they? Destabilizing polities by flooding them with refugees: it's a nifty strategy.
I linked this post to a young relative, who fell about laughing. Sums it up, really. Said young relative's observation: the citizens of the Donbass have never done anything to NZ. Yet our government gives aid to the regime which has been persecuting that region since 2014. You couldn't make this stuff up. But we suspect it's the price we pay for membership of 5 Eyes.
Post a Comment