Why the Australian Migration Model is Not the Solution

With the election approaching, we are increasingly hearing reports about the need for an Australian migration model for Europe. It is a tempting idea for many, but if you look deeper, you will quickly see that this is not only a highly unrealistic but also an undesirable proposal.   

Australia has had a strict migration policy since 2012 to prevent asylum applications on its soil. Central to this are pushbacks at sea and the holding of people in 'offshore' detention centres such as on the island of Nauru and in Papua New Guinea. Refugees who arrive there in search of a better and safer life have no chance of asylum and are locked up indefinitely, often for many years.  

The situation in Australia is in no way comparable to that in Europe. While the EU alone received 2023 million asylum applications in 1,14, Australia received an average of only a few thousand per year before the introduction of its strict migration policy. With the exception of one year: 2013, when just over 20.000 asylum seekers arrived by boat. At its absolute peak, this represented less than 2% of the applications faced by the EU.

The EU would therefore have to find a partner country that is prepared to receive more than one million people per year. The countries that were initially considered (Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Egypt and Turkey) made it clear one by one that they were not prepared to cooperate. It is important to know that the Australian partners Nauru and Papua New Guinea, where only a few thousand people were received, are completely dependent on Australia financially and politically. This is a situation that is completely different from the many North African countries that the EU is considering as potential partners and that are already critically examining European migration policy.  

Australia is not constrained by international legal treaties and can implement its policies without challenge. In the EU, a similar policy would be in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU Trade Mark. These treaties protect fundamental human rights and are therefore of great importance. Leaving these treaties would have enormous implications, including for the protection of fundamental rights that are not directly linked to migration.  

Although proponents of the Australian model claim that it has stopped illegal migration completely, the reality is different. People are still arriving, although the numbers are limited. For example, 40 people have arrived this year. This is a low number, but certainly not insignificant when we look at the already low numbers before the introduction of this policy. In addition, there are also thousands of asylum applications from people who do not arrive by boat, but on a work or tourist visa.  

In addition, Australia continues to push boats back at sea. The 'deterrent' effect of the model is therefore not effective.  

The Australian model comes at a huge human cost. People are often stuck in poor conditions for years. Families are often separated. This has a huge impact on their physical and mental health. Doctors Without Borders reports indicated that a large number of people who are stuck have suicidal thoughts and that many of them have actually attempted suicide. In addition, many have been victims of physical violence by the authorities. This situation is completely inhumane.  

Furthermore, this policy is also very financially burdensome. It cost Australia a staggering $2013 billion between 2016 and 9,6. In 2023, offshore processing in Nauru will cost $485 million, or $22 million per person detained.  

If Europe adopts the Australian migration model, it will have a negative impact on the international protection of refugees. If rich countries, which currently host only a small minority of refugees, shift even more responsibility to other countries, those countries will also be less willing to host refugees. We are already seeing European countries pushing refugees back to Turkey, which in turn is pushing people back to Iran, which in turn is pushing people back to Afghanistan. This race to the bottom will only be exacerbated. This could lead to closed doors for refugees all over the world, with nowhere to go. 

The Australian migration model is not only unrealistic and unachievable for the EU, it would also be a disaster for human rights. Instead, we need a policy based on solidarity and human rights that delivers real solutions for those who are most vulnerable. 11.11.11 therefore pleads for a bridge model, because we need a policy that benefits everyone. For that we don't need walls, but bridges. Because bridges help us move forward, as people and as a society.  

Read here. more about the bridge model