Government should stand up to bullying - AN
Opting to bully a smaller neighbour which was also victim of illegal migration was not the right sign for Italy to give, Azzjoni Nazzjonali said.
It said that while it fully comprehended that the Italian authorities were duty bound to defend their nation's interest and had the right to act unilaterally if they deemed it important to do so, the way they elected to go about it was not impressive.
“By opting to bully a smaller neighbour which is likewise a victim of this influx is hardly the right signal to give.
“If Italy was really serious about addressing the issue of illegal immigration it should perhaps direct its resolve elsewhere - namely towards those countries which are the source of these migratory flows,” AN said.
It said Malta could be a more convenient target since it was neither a former colony nor a country where Italy had economic and geo-political interests at stake.
AN also said that illegal immigrants had no right to go to Italy, Malta or elsewhere, and it would serve both countries better to take a joint stand on this fact.
It called on the government to stand up to this bullying with an unequivocal and resolute stand.
“It has nothing to fear and since it is well within its rights it will find the public including AN right behind it.”
The issue, AN said, should serve as proof if any more were needed that burden sharing would never happen as Azzjoni Nazzjonali had long maintained, and the only option was for the government to expend it's efforts and persist in the demand for common EU repatriation agreements with third party countries.
Until such agreements were in place, if a bigger and wealthier nation like Italy could act unilaterally then so should Malta.
Enough time had already been wasted by the government by failing to see and admit the gravity of the problem and in chasing the wrong solutions.
More than ever, Malta needs representatives in the EU who had the conviction and resolve to do whatever it took to defend the country's sovereign rights and not individuals who invoked international 'obligations' to hide their inertia, ineptitude and appeasement, AN said.
3 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Victor Mamo
May 4th 2009, 19:25
I for one completely agree that the migrants should have been collected by Italy, but to be fair, it would have been irresponsible for us to just leave them to die, whether or not they were closer to Lampedusa or not. Remember, this is different to the Pinar case in the sense that the migrants were not on a ship, but on a rickety boat in the middle of the ocean which could have capsized at any time. At least like this, Italy is portrayed as the bad guy' to the powers that be in Brussels, and not Malta.
Charles Sammut
May 2nd 2009, 15:10
@ Frans Sammut
Agreed, but the line between State and Church is not distinct, it is not even blurred, in fact it is not existent. The prime minister acts like he is the archbishop and vice versa.
This is not a question of whether Malta or Italy takes these people. It is a question of turning them back come what may. We are also in Europe and so, damaging Europe is tantamount to damaging Malta. The time for expired conventions and treaties is long over.
Frans Sammut
May 2nd 2009, 14:33
I, for one, do not have the least doubt that AN is absolutely, categorically right. Everybody seems to be foursquare on this. Only the Church seems to be quibbling . Now the Church may have its own (secret) reasons for this and I would not like to enter into such merits. But voters must stick to their well-formed opinion and keep pushing Government (their Government, not the Church's) to safeguard national interests before all other interests. Someone might object that this is redolent of "Malta l-ewwel u qabel kollox." Well, so be it, when that mantra prevailed, Malta fared a lot better in the international sphere and consequently on the home front as well.