In his response (June 16) to my letter titled ‘Another tragedy’ (June 7), John Homer states that “there is no way in which Europe can absorb the number of migrants who wish, for whatever reason, to come here”.  Such a sweeping statement does not help bring about a satisfactory solution.

Before trying to find a solution we have to agree who are we referring to. In our case, we are not dealing with ordinary irregular immigrants but refugees and asylum seekers fleeing from war and persecution.  Under international law, they have a right to be protected and provided with decent conditions.

Homer rightly reasons that it is a matter of pragmatism versus humanitarianism. But where are we going to put our emphasis?  Does dealing with one problem, in our case, the plight of asylum seekers, necessary imply ignoring the bigger picture, namely the consequences and problems a country has to face when it comes to resettlement and integration of such immigrants?

In order not to face more tragedies, the short-term solution should be a concerted effort by all members of the European Union to save lives.  The long-term solution would obviously need a greater political will.

In instances where tragedies are involved, humanitarianism should take over pragmatism.  The laws of love and compassion should supersede all other laws. What greater principle can we follow to safeguard the human family if not the one of solidarity?

Unfortunately, several countries in central Europe have been openly against the resettling of refugees and far-right anti-immigrant parties have risen in popularity across Europe.

We must keep on insisting that to reach a reasonable solution one must first believe in our common destiny and common human nature.  Segregation, isolation and exclusion will in no way help us come closer to one another.

As open society foundations hold, “Europe needs sustainable, affordable migration systems and popular understanding and support for safe and legal means of migration”.