That UN Global Compact for Migration could crumble as more countries signal they won’t sign the document in Morocco in December.
We told you about it here recently. President Trump took us out at the very beginning and then Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban also said no way.
Sounds warm and fuzzy, so what is the problem? Those who have studied the draft say it would make migration a human right. In other words everyone would have a right to move wherever they wish. There would be no more legal migration process.
From the liberal Irish Times(so they don’t clearly mention the real crux of the problem):
Poles and Czechs follow Austria and Hungary in rejecting UN migration pact
Anti-immigration leaders in central Europe follow US lead in opposing global framework
Poland and the Czech Republic are set to join Hungary and Austria in pulling out of a United Nations pact on migration, as populist central European governments attack the deal before it is even signed.
The Global Compact For Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration was agreed in July by all UN members except the United States, and sets out norms for protecting and integrating people who migrate and ways to help them return home.
The pact is non-binding and recognises each state’s right to its own migration policy, but a growing number of anti-immigration leaders in central Europe are now rejecting it ahead of next month’s signing ceremony in Morocco.
“It is very likely that, like Austria, the Czech Republic and the United States, we will not be part of the UN global compact,” Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki said on Friday.
“We believe that here our regulations, our sovereign rules on border protection and migration control are our absolute priority.”
A day earlier, Czech prime minister Andrej Babis declared that he also opposed the pact.
“It’s not clearly interpreted and it could be abused. The United States has pulled out, Hungary too, now Austria, and Poland is debating it as well,” he said.
“I don’t like the fact that it blurs the distinction between legal and illegal migration. . . I will propose to partners in the government that we should do the same as Austria and Hungary,” he added ahead of cabinet talks on the pact next week.
I would like to know exactly what was left out of Babis’s statement in that previous quote!
The United Nations is demanding that we follow international law and let those fleeing violence in their Central American countries (not a criteria for granting asylum) into the US. What happened with that supposed effort to tell Mexico to grant them asylum—that is what international law says!
The first safe country asylum seekers reach is where they must ask for asylum.
Clearly the UN is endorsing the concept of “asylum shopping” a term used around the world where migrants are on the hunt for their best deal.
But, you know all of that.
The caravan is an anti-Trump public relations stunt in the run-up to the midterm elections and it seems the whole world is in on it.
UN: Countries Must Allow People at Risk to Request Asylum
The U.N. refugee agency is urging Washington to allow people fleeing persecution and violence, including those who are traveling with the Central American caravan, to request asylum on U.S. territory.
U.S. President Donald Trump has vowed to prevent a caravan of thousands of immigrants from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador from entering the United States. The Pentagon has announced plans to send hundreds of troops to the border in what is described as a support role.
The U.N. refugee agency will not weigh in on whether it is legal for a country to close its borders to refugees and asylum seekers. But it says international law clearly states any person whose life may be in danger has the right to seek asylum and benefit from international protection.
What you see happening with gobbledygook in that previous paragraph is a strategy to make you think that every person on the move anywhere is a legitimate refugee. We aren’t there yet, but the UN is driving public opinion in that direction.
There has to be a reason for “danger,” generalized danger is not a reason for granting asylum. To be granted asylum a person must prove that he or she would be persecuted for race, religion, political views if returned to one’s home country. Running from gang violence or poor job prospects does not make someone a refugee!
“Our position globally is that the individuals who are fleeing persecution and violence need to be given access to territory and protection including refugee status and determination procedure. And, if the people who are fleeing persecution and violence enter Mexico, they need to be provided access to the Mexican asylum system and those entering the United States need to be provided access to the American asylum system,” he said.
But to get to the US they must pass through Mexico!
So that (above) tells me that any migrant caravan marchers who didn’t ask for asylum in Mexico when they crossed in to that country are admitting they aren’t asylum seekers after all.
Hence when they reach the US border they will all be illegal aliens and we can keep them out!
Mahecic keeps trying to send his message:
He said it is urgent to stabilize the situation, to provide proper reception and to improve basic conditions for people on the move. In regard to people seeking asylum, he says their international protection needs must be properly assessed before any decision is taken on their return or deportation.
Remember that Mahecic and his bosses are trying to drive public opinion world wide to their view that migration is a human right. If they succeed then obviously that spells the end of the concept of national sovereignty.
Trump’s America First! message is completely antithetical to the UN’s objective, thus their on-going effort to destroy him.
Don’t you just feel like telling the UN to shut up! Of course, using only non-violent means by cutting off their funds entirely!
That would mean there would no longer be various migrant categories like refugees, asylum seekers, economic migrants and certainly no more illegal aliens. If the UN-supported planners have their way, anyone can move anywhere effectively, of course, wiping out borders.
The last is what they have been after for eons. No borders.
UN will soon try to enforce open borders as a ‘human right’
German AfD MP Markus Frohnmaier says he is most disconcerted by the latest developments. Piled up on his desk, is a mountain of papers with the headers showing the logo of the United Nations.
“Every MP of Europe, every MEP and even every mayor should be forced to read this”, says 27-year-old Frohnmaier, one of the youngest deputies in the Bundestag.
In September 2017, he was elected to parliament on the list of the Eurosceptic party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD). “If there had not been the AfD in the German parliament, no other political force would dare to criticise this monstrous document.”
The document in question, is the draft text for the so-called Global Compact for Migration for UN member states.It is more or less a globalist project where all signatory states declare their will to abolish the current different categories of migrants in order to declare migration a blanket “human right”.
The only leaders unwilling to go along are US President Donald Trump and Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban. They have both declared that they would not sign the Global Compact.
“This document will enforce migration to Europe. It is open-border propaganda on steroids,” says Frohnmaier. The young politician is part of a European alliance of politicians of sovereignist conservatives who have been organising the political opposition against the “crazy concoction” as Frohnmaier calls the final draft of the Global Compact.
Indeed, if this international agreement is implemented by signatory states, it practically means an end to controlled migration and borders as we we know it.
The agreement does not distinguish between refugees and migrants anymore.
Thus even illegal migrants can no longer be deported. In fact, it will be the end of the very notion of an “illegal migrant”. Illegal border crossings will no longer be considered a crime – since migration will be considered to be a “human right”.
The starting point for the Global Compact was a summit on flight and migration that took place under the aegis of the UN in September 2016, with Barack Obama issuing the invitation.
The Inter-Governmental Conference to Adopt the Global Compact for Migration will take place in Marrakech, Morocco on the 10th and 11th of December. Most of the European states will sign the document there.
For Americans watching the violent 4,000-strong caravan headed for the US, if this compact were to be accepted as international law, those illegal aliens could keep right on marching to your towns and cities because they would have a human right to be there.
As for Europe, countries like Hungary, Poland, Austria, and Italy better get their fences in place and build their military!
There is exciting news daily coming from Europe where leaders with backbones are emerging to try to stem the tide of migrants from the Middle East and Africa flooding the continent.
First in Italy, Interior Minister Matteo Salvini is pushing back against France and Germany who want to send migrants back to Italy to be processed presumably because those migrants first entered Europe through Italy.
Salvini Blocks Migrant Agreement That Could See Germany Send Tens of Thousands to Italy
Italian populist Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has blocked a migrant deal with Germany and France that could see tens of thousands of migrants sent to Italy as his party’s popularity soars across the country.
The populist League leader is said to have put the migrant deal on hold as some estimate that Italy may be forced to take as many as 40,000 migrants from Germany and a further 20,000 from France under the proposed agreement, Il Giornale reports.
Salvini has said that he will only accept a deal in which Italy sends as many migrants as it takes from other countries, but German Interior Minister Horst Seehofer is pushing for the current proposal.
Rumours have even circulated that Germany has started to charter flights to Rome and although the German interior ministry denied the rumours, Salvini threatened to close Italian airports to any such flights.
Austria has concerns about U.N. migration pact, might back out
VIENNA (Reuters) – Austria may follow the United States and Hungary in backing out of a United Nations agreement on migration, its government said on Wednesday, citing concern about its sovereignty and potential restrictions on its freedom to act.
The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration was approved in July by all 193 U.N. member nations except the United States, which backed out last year.
Hungary’s right-wing government led by Prime Minister Viktor Orban, an immigration hard-liner, has said it will not sign the final document at a ceremony in December. Poland, which has also clashed with Brussels by resisting national quotas for asylum seekers, is considering taking the same step.
“We view some of the points in this agreement very critically. We will therefore do everything to maintain the sovereignty of our country and ensure that we as the Republic of Austria can decide for ourselves on migration issues,” Chancellor Sebastian Kurz told a news conference.
Kurz led his conservatives to victory in last year’s parliamentary election by pledging to prevent any repeat of the European migration crisis that began in 2015, when Austria took in more than 1 percent of its population in asylum seekers.
Kurz went into government with the anti-Islam Freedom Party and together they have agreed to restrict immigrants’ access to welfare payments as part of an agenda that is also heavy on law and order.
By all accounts (from people I politically agree with!) Trump gave a great speech at the UN yesterday. And, although we stepped back from one of two new compacts related to refugees under construction in the world body, we participate in this one. (See herethat Trump removed us from a second UN compact deliberation.)
Writing at the Center for Immigration Studies, Nayla Rush, tells us what is wrong with the deliberations that would actually expand the protection the 1951 Refugee Convention presently offers to supposedly only legitimate refugees.
(See wikipedia for more on the 1951 Convention and don’t miss the definition of who is a ‘refugee.’)
In my view, these negotiations are one more way to expand the definition of what constitutes a ‘refugee’ which then would allow more people from the third world to move to the first without them having to prove that they would be persecuted if returned home.
By the way, this discussion of a new refugee compact was launched at Obama’s UN pow-wow in the fall of 2016 when they all were assuming Hillary was moving to the Oval!
U.S. Continues to Back UN Refugee Compact that Contradicts Administration Goals
Despite announcing a lower refugee-resettlement ceiling for the coming fiscal year, the Trump administration continues to support the UN’s Global Compact on Refugees, which is in total contradiction to the administration’s refugee policies.
The final text of the Global Compact on Refugees was released late July. This refugee compact was expected to be adopted by UN member states (including the United States) at the 73rd General Assembly in New York later this week; but the vote is now expected to take place in December. The UN refugee compact seeks for more resettlement places while using expedited processing modalities; facilitating access to family reunification for resettled refugees and encouraging complementary pathways for refugees through private sponsorship programs (such as student scholarships, employment opportunities etc.) that would be additional to regular resettlement and are harder to monitor.
The Trump administration, on the other hand, announced the FY 2019 refugee ceiling of 30,000***, down from 45,000 for 2018 (both ceilings count as the lowest ceiling determinations since the creation of the refugee resettlement program following the Refugee Act of 1980). The reasoning behind such low ceilings is two-fold: Improving the screening and vetting of resettlement candidates (which means slower admissions) and reducing the untenable asylum backlog by reassigning refugee officers to asylum cases.
The Trump administration’s continued commitment to the UN agreement is puzzling.
Beware COMPLEMENTARY PATHWAYS!
UNHCR’s Protection head, Volker Türk, insisted on the need for a new international agreement on refugees other than the 1951 Refugee Convention.
According to him, the 1951 convention, while focusing on rights of refugees and obligations of states, does not deal with international cooperation; it “does not specify how you share the burden and responsibility, and that’s what the global compact does. It responds to one of the major gaps we have faced for decades.” Türk added: “Also, we would aim [through the Global Compact on Refugees] to get more resettlement places and find more ways refugees can move to third countries – such as through family reunification, student scholarships, or humanitarian visas, so that refugees can travel safely (what we call ‘complementary pathways’).”
You can readily see how the UN wants an expansion of the definition of the 1951 definition of refugee protection to family members (who may not be legitimate refugees in their own right), students, and whatever that broad new category called humanitarian visasmight allow.
Rush has many more details,click here to read it all.
I’m assuming the Trump Administration stayed involved in this series of meetings so they would continue to be informed. I guess we will find out in a few months how serious the President is about not letting the rest of the world dictate who the ‘new Americans’ will be.
***I’ve been arguing for a refugee cap of zero for the coming year. It would be the only way to force Congress to review the program with an eye to serious reform. I would argue that the United Nations should be completely removed from our decisions on who comes to America and who doesn’t.
At the present time the UN is dictating that we take theDR Congoleseand the Burmese Rohingya. Before that it was the Bhutanese camps they wanted cleared and we said ‘yes master’ and did it! They pushed heavily for us to take the Syrian Muslims from their camps too, but Trump managed to stop that.
If we are going to take any refugees, we should demand that we pick only those we want!