!

Meanwhile in Australia: Sending Refugees to Kyrgyzstan?

Cecilia Diemont is a recent graduate of Kings College London (MA International Peace &
Security, War Studies/Dickson Poon School of Law). She tweets @ceciliadiemont

Yes, Kyrgyzstan, the country bordering Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, China and Tajikistan, and
no, this is not a joke.

Apparently intent not to backtrack on its 2012 promise that asylum seekers attempting to get
to Australia by sea would never make Australia home, the Australian government has
reached new heights of desperation/creativity.

Asylum seekers found to be refugees in the Australian-run detention centres on the Pacific
Island state of Nauru and on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea (PNG) need to be resettled,
and Australia seems to be running out of options of where to send them.

While reports the government is considering Kyrgyzstan as a so-called third country

resettlement option have not been officially confirmed, it would not be the first time countries
with no logical connection to Australia have been considered. A controversial $55 million deal
in 2014 gave refugees the voluntary option of resettling in Cambodia. To date it has been
taken up by only four individuals, one of which has since opted to return to his countries of
origin (i.e., the very place from which he was fleeing persecution in the first place).

In October the government confirmed that they were in dialogue with the Philippines about
possibilities of resettling asylum seekers found to be refugees on Nauru or Manus there.
Despite the economic incentive offered by Australia ($150 million spread over five years), the
Philippines rejected the proposal a few weeks later, saying it was challenged to meet the
needs of its own people without having to permanently resettle Australias refugees.

The Pacific states of Nauru and PNG, on which Australia currently hosts two offshore
immigration detention centres, have both been reluctant in agreeing to provide permanent
resettlement. While Nauru has made clear it does not want to resettle refugees permanently,

PNG recently announced that it would resettle a selected number over the coming years.
Given the past threats and bleak prospects of integrating into the community and building a
safe and prosperous life on the island, it remains unlikely that many will take up the offer.
While Australian Immigration Minister Peter Dutton promoted PNG as a dynamic nation
with a growing economy, his own governments travel advice warns Australians to exercise
a high degree of caution, to be aware of ethnic disputes that may quickly escalate into
violent clashes, and of opportunistic sexual crimes that take place across the country in an
atmosphere of lawlessness. A promotional video shown to refugees now held on PNG
promises that refugees who take up the offer will live safe and successful lives in a country
with great opportunities.

Resettlement in developing countries has been justified as part of a regional burden sharing
mechanism. While it was already a far stretch to claim that Cambodia, PNG or Nauru should
bare any responsibility for Australia-bound refugees, sound arguments for Kyrgyzstan or the
Philippines are nonexistent, and sustained efforts to outsource Australias responsibility to
refugees surely will have a lasting impact on the countrys reputation as a friendly, human
rights respecting nation. And it is exactly this reputation that Australia is relying on in its bid
for a seat on the UNs Human Rights Council.

Project for Study of the 21st Century is a non-national, non-ideological, non-partisan

organization. All views expressed are the authors own.

!
!