I had once written in an article a few months ago, when southern tourists were arriving daily in Malta to provide the entertainment of pleasant surprise, that one way of reducing – though not eliminating – the illegal immigration problem (which worried over 90 per cent of The Times readers and probably not much less of the general population) was to reduce Malta’s Search and Rescue Area and place this responsibility on European countries that had visited large unexploited regions everywhere to teach new ways of enjoying Western decadence.
The monetary and social consequences of the implementation of such a decision cannot be measured precisely but the first is possible and the latter probable. In other words, the difference between financial loss and social loss analysed in financial terms is worth examining.
One must not, after all, ignore the possible truth in the gossip about frequent invitations by these tourists to keep their means of marine transport to ourselves and utilise it for our own cruising desires.
Some time later, I was pleasantly surprised to read that Foreign Minister Tonio Borg also believed that Malta’s SRA should be reduced to our general benefit. Others in the governing party agreed with this but the majority did not. And the idea was shelved.
Some people say that Silvio Berlusconi’s painful agreement with Libya makes the SRA issue less important nowadays. It is true that this agreement benefitted Malta but some pro-immigration persons in a tiny minority in Malta said that Mr Berlusconi and all the Maltese who agreed with his Italo-Libyan agreement should be ashamed of themselves even if it saved us increased unlimited invasion.
There was also, for some time, talk about refugee camps being organised in the Vatican state. Probably, any person in Vaticanist administration who repeated this idea was told he was dreaming – if not instigating. Maybe, but he was putting the greenbacks where dogmatic effusion originated.
I have not yet heard those who shrieked at this agreement say that they were ready to take illegal immigrants into their homes.
Honestly, I would consider them credible if they did. I am sure that permission by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority for this initiative would not be too slow in forthcoming if it involved the construction of bedrooms in private gardens.
Sometimes, I have the impression that “colonial” comes also from “colonel” not only from “colony” but a long discussion on this would be too linguistic and pedantic. In any case, a colonel from the south, during a session of practice of international diplomacy, advised Europe to become Muslim. This may have been as much an undesired a piece of advice as the one which encouraged Africa to become Christian – as the pontificating missionaries attempted to do while the inquisitorial crusades forced themselves upon uninterested populations. However, it reminded sceptical Europeans and Maltese that this is not some remote, exaggerated wish of patronising, invasive confessionalism. Perhaps it made some persons usually referred to as “do-gooders” or “excited, abstract hosts of illegal immigration” (that is, without the physical hosting in their houses) in Malta to reflect on the permanent passion of the southern colonel to make the European continent adore otherwise.
Europeans were also told they must listen to colonial advice if they wanted to avoid a flood of millions of “ignorant Africans” (colonial words not mine) waiting in VIP lounges in North Africa to be given the opportunity to experience strange European cradles and cultures and landing on European shores to assist with the struggle against the relentless exigencies of new technology.
In order to show appreciation for this free socio-economic advice with a spiritual basis, Europe was kindly invited to fork out not five grand per year but five très très grand, also sometimes referred to as five billions in simple arithmetical terms.
Surely, European taxpayers may wish to make some more sacrifices during their struggles with various financial crises. They may, thus, decide that this annual sum to neutralise the perception of blackmail only adds a little weight to their burdens. This is not an impossible thing as new spiritual orientation often creates increased physical and mental energy. Thus, advice on spiritual revival tied to a little contribution is much more valuable than the common sceptical commentator may wish to admit.
If, on the other hand, Europeans want to be hard-headed and refuse the initiatives of those who wish them a world of good, they may experiment with the risky business of exhorting the EU to improve its southern security while remaining Christian.
Dr Licari is a researcher in multiculturalism.