Turks are accusing Syrian refugees of knife attacks, sexual harassment and looting. Scuffles have ensued. The same is happening in other countries too. Groups of different ethnicity, nationality, culture and religion can, when mixed, lead to stress… and also to clashes.

For a successful mixture, the ground and the seed must be prepared. What will our immigrants’ (the issue also affects other arrivals) - and Malta’s - future be? Will they mix or constitute a nation within a nation?

But what constitutes a ‘Maltese’?

In the 1950s, the Maltese were a homogeneous people practically all professing the same religion and culture. Now, we have schools with 35 different nationalities.

This mixture started with Mgr Philip Calleja’s Emigrants Commission helping people from the Middle East come to Malta; with the Malta Women Association justly requesting that Maltese women married to foreigners be entitled to have their husbands live here (as was the case with the partner’s country of origin); with the Nationalist election victory in 1987 and legislation granting foreigners marrying a Maltese person immediate nationality.

Foreign men in Malta (some at a cost) married Maltese women and obtained Maltese nationality. They then divorced their Maltese wife, registered same in Malta, brought over their foreign girlfriend married her and lived off local social security.

Thus, we have a home-grown (and imported) population of different origins, religions, ethnicity and cultures. Some say this had to occur. Perhaps, but maybe not, however, facilitating it is a different matter.

Some argued such an influx can be of benefit. Indeed, it may, if such individuals are morally upright, qualified and competent or willing to learn and to provide services and if the host country has enough resources to cater for them.

Law reports show that many criminal cases involve non-Maltese. We must not be taken over by undesirables; we should sift and select (as others do) and ensure that the chosen ones integrate well.

Some claim that multiculturalism and diversity are beneficial but this has not been always so in other countries; we must learn from their experience. ‘Diversity’ is, to some extent or another, contrary to the essential concept of ‘unity’ and while reciprocal respect and tolerance may allow diversity, human nature being what it is may not always allow this to be practised.

I do not know of any integration process by the government. Such a necessary process must include unifying factors like language, fundamental human rights, respect and tolerance. However, we cannot escape the fact that, notwithstanding our well-intentioned (non-compulsory) acceptance of immigrants, this country has its limits (possibly already exceeded but certainly will if the matter remains unchecked).

We can decide to accept immigrants but I see no end to arrivals and, if recent rates persist, realistically I cannot think that we can carry the burden. Unless certain regimes are replaced, then the unlucky immigrants will continue to come. The dilemma stage will be reached.

We have a home-grown (and imported) population of different origins, religions, ethnicity and cultures

Will the Maltese look upon them benignly if certain choices have to be made, say in the medical field? This scenario is possibly an extreme example but the principle applies and has manifested itself elsewhere, with the resultant strife. Are we so special that it cannot happen in our beloved Malta?

Perhaps this is all unnecessary alarmism. I pray to God it is. However, an economic/social impact assessment should be carried out (I know of no such study, even if statistics exist).

No doubt, we are at a crossroad. Our fathers have passed on to us a safe and civilised country and they expect us to pass same on to our children, as we are in duty bound to do.

We have the potential of either setting off a time bomb or defusing it.

We cannot be naïve.

The decisions we have to take do not have their basis in religious teachings (even if these are influential) but on economic, social and political considerations that have been thought and fought over, rebutted and adopted, tried and honed over these past centuries in Western civilised countries.

Our unlimited generosity, within our limited means, do not give us free rein to accept the unlimited. The meritorious individuals who are accepted should be well integrated into our society. Otherwise, we would have failed in our duty to our children and grand children.

And the bomb’s fuse will tick on…

Hugh Peralta is a lawyer.