What's new

Does Trump know this??? Refugees held in Australian offshore detention to be resettled in US

AndrewJin

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Feb 23, 2015
Messages
14,904
Reaction score
23
Country
China
Location
China
This is a great gesture from US.
Those thousands of people still waiting in Indonesia for taking refuge in Australia via boats should consider it.

屏幕快照 2016-11-13 12.13.35.png
屏幕快照 2016-11-13 12.13.29.jpg


The Australian government has announced a landmark “one-off” resettlement deal to the United States for some refugees held at Australia’s remote offshore detention facilities on Nauru and Manus Island.

On Sunday the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, and the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, announced a deal that would prioritise families, women and children for settlement with “the prospect” that others in offshore detention would be resettled in the US.

“I can now confirm that the government has now reached a further third-party resettlement arrangement,” Turnbull said. “The agreement is with the United States. It is a one-off agreement. It will not be repeated. It is only available to those currently in the regional processing centres.”

“It will not be available to any persons seeking to reach Australia in the future. Our priority is the resettlement of women, children and families.”

At the press conference, at Maritime Border Command in Canberra, Turnbull refused to say how many refugees the deal would apply to but said the deal showed the government “can source and provide alternative resettlement options”.

The remaining refugees on Nauru will be eligible for 20-year temporary visas on Nauru.

The US resettlement would be contingent on vetting by the United States Homeland Security agency.

Turnbull said that the scheme would be endorsed by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Speaking in New Zealand before the announcement, US secretary of state John Kerry said the US had agreed to “consider referrals from [the] UNHCR on refugees now residing in Nauru and Papua New Guinea”.

But a statement from the UNHCR said while it welcomed the deal and would endorse referrals to the US, it was “not a party to it” and had no formal role in processing.

“The arrangement reflects a much-needed, long-term solution for some refugees who have been held in Nauru and Papua New Guinea for over three years and who remain in a precarious situation,” the statement said.

“It is on this basis that UNHCR will endorse referrals made from Australia to the United States, on a one-off, good offices, humanitarian basis, in light of the acute humanitarian situation. The full details of the agreement are not yet known, and UNHCR is not a party to it.”

Australia’s opposition leader Bill Shorten also offered his cautious support for the resettlement deal.

“It has taken the government three-plus years to negotiate this deal, but we are pleased if it is an end to indefinite detention,” Shorten said.

“We will certainly in principle work with the government. But we do welcome this. We do want to see people moved out of these facilities.”

If the government’s resettlement plan succeeds it is likely to reduce the populations of Australia’s notorious regional offshore detention centres.

Over the last three years the remote facilities have been plagued by reports of shocking conditions, poor management and deteriorating mental health of asylum seekers.

The Guardian’s publication of the Nauru files showed the devastating trauma and abuse inflicted on children on Nauru.

An asylum seeker was beaten to death by guards in a wave of unrest on Manus Island in February 2014, and on Nauru in May 2016 an asylum seeker self-immolated in front of staff from the UN high commissioner for refugees.

Asked about the potential closure of the Manus Island detention facility in the wake of the announcement, Dutton noted Papua New Guinea had announced it would close and he had nothing to add.

But he said that “no element” of the government’s policy on offshore detention will change, and Australia will “still rely on regional processing which is why Nauru will remain in its current status forever”.

According to the latest figures from Australia’s immigration department there are 872 people held in the Manus Island detention centre and 390 held in the Nauru facility.

A number of refugees are also currently on the mainland in Australia undergoing medical treatment for serious physical or mental conditions who may be eligible for the resettlement deal.

The Australian government’s deal will only apply to those who have received positive refugee determinations on Manus Island and Nauru. On Manus Island there have been 675 positive refugee determinations out of 1,015 and on Nauru there have been 941 positive determinations out of 1,195.

Turnbull said he anticipated people smugglers would “use this agreement as a marketing opportunity” but the government had “put in place the largest and most capable maritime surveillance and response fleet Australia has ever deployed” to stop journeys by sea.

“Any people smuggling boats that attempt to reach Australia will be intercepted and turned back.”

Speculation the Australian government was preparing to finalise a resettlement deal with the US was sparked by the announcement in September it would take refugees from camps in Costa Rica.

It ramped up two weeks ago when the government proposed a lifetime travel ban on resettled refugees visiting Australia, a measure Dutton said needed to be in place to facilitate third-party resettlement.

Labor has opposed the measure, labelling aspects of the plan “ridiculous” because it would prevent a refugee resettled in a third country from coming to Australia as a tourist or on a business trip.

Turnbull ramped up pressure on Labor, accusing it of opposing the ban due to “theoretical possibilities” that refugees would want to visit Australia as tourists in 30 or 40 years.

The opposition should instead focus on “the security of Australia’s borders today and tomorrow”, the prime minister said, describing the travel ban as important to send the “strongest and most unequivocal message to people smugglers” that no refugees would reach Australia.

Among those on Manus and Nauru are people from Iran, Syria, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Iraq, as well as some who are stateless.

Behrouz Boochani, an Iranian journalist detained on Manus Island, told Guardian Australia refugees he had spoken to would be happy to go to the US.

“Be sure that most people would love to go to America, but some people need to join their families in Australia,” he said. “I think Australia has to respect them because they want to join their families.”

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...lian-offshore-detention-to-be-resettled-in-us
 
.
wonder why must to go to Australia or evil USA?
 
.
屏幕快照 2016-11-13 12.27.07.jpg


Australia and the US are poised to announce an immigration deal that could clear up to 1800 refugees from Nauru and Manus Island — thereby effectively ending the offshore detention of asylum-seekers.

For months the Coalition has been in negotiations with third countries in an attempt to get asylum-seekers who tried to enter illegally by boat off Nauru without providing “backdoor” access to Australia.

It is understood the US has agreed to help Australia deal with the people on Nauru and Manus Island in Papua New Guinea by taking refugees, some of whom have been on Nauru for more than two years.

An announcement of the arrangement is expected within days, possibly from the Obama administration in the US over the weekend, only days after Republican Donald Trump became president-elect.

Yesterday, the Coalition’s bill to place a lifetime visa ban on adults who attempted to enter Australia illegally by boat since July 2013 was passed by the House of Representatives and is now headed to the Senate.

Malcolm Turnbull and Immigration Minister Peter Dutton have argued that the lifetime visa ban, which is subject to ministerial discretion, is necessary to prevent people-smugglers claiming that those who arrive by boat can eventually settle in Australia.

The bill passed the House of Representatives after some passionate speeches opposing the legislation by 73 votes to 69.

Labor, Greens MP Adam Bandt, Nick Xenophon Team MP Rebekha Sharkie and independent MPs Cathy McGowan and Andrew Wilkie voted against it. With the combined opposition of Labor and the Greens in the Senate, the government needs the support of eight of 10 crossbenchers for the legislation to pass the Senate.

Bill Shorten has described the measure as “ludicrous” because someone who was a valid refugee who went to the US or Canada couldn’t come to Australia in “40 years” as a tourist.

The Opposition Leader also said the government should concentrate on getting people out of “indefinite detention” on Nauru instead of playing politics with the visa ban.

Yesterday, Mr Dutton said Labor had broken its “unity ticket” with the Coalition on border protection.

“The Labor Party has today rejected strong new border protection laws designed to keep the boats stopped and prevent deaths at sea,” Mr Dutton said.

“The legislation before parliament is an important measure which sends a clear message to the people-smugglers and their clients that should they attempt to come illegally by boat that they will never settle in Australia.

“It would prevent any illegal maritime arrival taken to a regional processing country since 19 July, 2013, from ever coming to Australia and warn the estimated 14,000 people in Indonesia and the thousands more beyond that any illegal boat journey to Australia would be futile.

“People-smugglers will be heartened by Mr Shorten and Labor, who should be held accountable for their weakness on border security, particularly if the boats recommence.”

The Prime Minister and Mr Dutton have refused to confirm talks have been under way with any specific country in recent months, but US officials suggested there had been discussions with Australia about the possible resettlement of refugees from Nauru and Manus.

Last week, the US State Department’s East Asian and Pacific Affairs Bureau spokeswoman, Connie Paik, told The Australian: “We are in regular contact with Australia and other countries that support humanitarian organisations and accept refugees for resettlement on a number of refugee-related issues”.

In New York in September, Mr Turnbull announced that Australia would take refugees from Central America as part of its annual intake, which will remain at the 2018-19 goal of 18,750, but denied there would be any “people swap”.

屏幕快照 2016-11-13 12.30.10.jpg
屏幕快照 2016-11-13 12.30.27.jpg
 
.
wow, do people in the Trump Tower know this?
What a great nation US is!
So generous and internationalist!
Asylum seekers waiting in Indonesia and India, pls do not wait!
Get a boat to Oz, Trump will take care of you guys!
He will give you Obamacare and food coupons!

 
. .
wow, do people in the Trump Tower know this?
What a great nation US is!
So generous and internationalist!
Asylum seekers waiting in Indonesia and India, pls do not wait!
Get a boat to Oz, Trump will take care of you guys!
He will give you Obamacare and food coupons!


The US should stay open to refugees, after all, the country is founded upon the idea of land grab and survival. Besides, many brilliant minds among those refugees who can be the next potential NASA chief.
 
.
The US should stay open to refugees, after all, the country is founded upon the idea of land grab and survival. Besides, many brilliant minds among those refugees who can be the next potential NASA chief.
Yep, among 100 refugees ,there is at least one genuine hard-working person.
They should open their doors, the indigenous land is quite empty.
 
.
Trump to reject our detainees

MATTHEW KILLORAN

THE Federal Government says the US resettlement deal will proceed, despite President Donald Trump being expected to issue an immigration ban for a range of countries including Syria, Iran and Iraq.

Mr Trump’s executive order is reported to include a temporary ban on refugees until more strict vetting is in place, while also blocking visas to people from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.

The Turnbull Government reached a one-off deal with the Obama administration in November to resettle an unspecified number of detainees from offshore detention centres at Manus Island and Nauru.

Many of the 1300 detainees are from those countries on Mr Trump’s blocked list.

It leaves the possibility some detainees could still be resettled after the US changes its vetting standards or lifts any temporary ban.

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton said the Government continued to work with Mr Trump and Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly on the “unique arrangement”.
 
.
Very bad and unpresidented news for the xenophobic Trump supporters.
But, what a relief for Aussies!
@ahojunk @Gibbs


Trump’s Nauru call was favour for Turnbull

The Trump administration is believed to have included a special last-minute clause in its controversial executive order on refugees as a particular favour to specifically cover the Nauru deal with Australia only after intense lobbying by Malcolm Turnbull and diplomats in Washington.

But senior US sources have told The Australian that the White House was “not happy” about the conflicting message it sent in its final executive order and now regarded the Australian government as having expended significant political capital over the deal.

The Australian has confirmed with several official sources that clause 5(e) was drafted “to cut Australia some slack” and only after the administration was persuaded by the relationship between Canberra and Washington and the significance of the US-Australia alliance.

But it is believed Mr Turnbull was told that a condition of the deal was that the 1200 asylumseekers slated for resettlement would be subject to elevated security vetting.

Although the Prime Minister’s office refused to comment further on the deal, US officials privately have made no secret that Australia would ultimately be expected to reciprocate, most likely on issues of force commitment to Iraq and Syria in the fight against Islamic State or freedom-of-navigation exercises in the South China Sea.

President Donald Trump has made the war against Islamic State a priority, with the Pentagon working up military options.

The US source pointed to a purported draft of the executive order, dated and leaked on January 23, that made no mention of “pre-existing international agreements”.

The final copy of the executive order released at the weekend had been redrafted with a clause inserted to cover “pre-existing international agreements”.

The new clause 5(e) expanded the caveat of State Department and the Department of Homeland Security to make case-by-case decisions on refugee admissions, to include arrangements already in place through the existing international agreements. The lobbying by Australian officials intensified in the past week, with Foreign Minister Julie Bishop engaged in two phone conversations with Vice-President Mike Pence before the order was signed.

“It is very clear that it was a special favour to Australia,” the source said. “They changed the executive order specifically. The view was that they would cut Australia some slack.

“They didn’t like it as it sent conflicting messages.

“The favour won’t be called in straight away … but some sort of reciprocity will come eventually.

“And that is likely to come in the form of freedom-of-navigation exercises or the deployment of special forces to Iraq.”

Another source with links to the White House confirmed that the administration was concerned about the mixed message the Nauru deal would send and that it believed the US had gone out of its way to accommodate Australia for its own domestic political agenda.

While senior government sources claimed that the securing of the deal signalled the strength of the relationship and a sign that Mr Turnbull had “leverage” they acknowledged that Mr Trump was a transactional leader and that eventually Australia might be asked to “stump up” in return.

Bill Shorten yesterday repeated his calls for Mr Turnbull to condemn Mr Trump’s executive order, which placed a suspension of all refugee intakes into the US.

“When you are the Australian Prime Minister, you stand up for Australian values,” the Opposition Leader said. “Our Prime Minister, when he saw what was happening, he stayed silent. There isn’t much point in having the top job if you’re not going to back in what you believe.”

Mr Turnbull said it was not the Australian Prime Minister’s job to be making commentary on the domestic policies of other countries.

“When I have frank advice to give to an American president, I give it in private as good friends should — as wise prime ministers do — to ensure they are best able to protect Australia and Australia’s best interests,” he said.

So far none of the 1200 asylumseekers who are part of the deal have been resettled in the US.


屏幕快照 2017-02-01 12.37.06.png
 
.
Very bad and unpresidented news for the xenophobic Trump supporters.
But, what a relief for Aussies!
@ahojunk @Gibbs


Trump’s Nauru call was favour for Turnbull

The Trump administration is believed to have included a special last-minute clause in its controversial executive order on refugees as a particular favour to specifically cover the Nauru deal with Australia only after intense lobbying by Malcolm Turnbull and diplomats in Washington.

But senior US sources have told The Australian that the White House was “not happy” about the conflicting message it sent in its final executive order and now regarded the Australian government as having expended significant political capital over the deal.

The Australian has confirmed with several official sources that clause 5(e) was drafted “to cut Australia some slack” and only after the administration was persuaded by the relationship between Canberra and Washington and the significance of the US-Australia alliance.

But it is believed Mr Turnbull was told that a condition of the deal was that the 1200 asylumseekers slated for resettlement would be subject to elevated security vetting.

Although the Prime Minister’s office refused to comment further on the deal, US officials privately have made no secret that Australia would ultimately be expected to reciprocate, most likely on issues of force commitment to Iraq and Syria in the fight against Islamic State or freedom-of-navigation exercises in the South China Sea.

President Donald Trump has made the war against Islamic State a priority, with the Pentagon working up military options.

The US source pointed to a purported draft of the executive order, dated and leaked on January 23, that made no mention of “pre-existing international agreements”.

The final copy of the executive order released at the weekend had been redrafted with a clause inserted to cover “pre-existing international agreements”.

The new clause 5(e) expanded the caveat of State Department and the Department of Homeland Security to make case-by-case decisions on refugee admissions, to include arrangements already in place through the existing international agreements. The lobbying by Australian officials intensified in the past week, with Foreign Minister Julie Bishop engaged in two phone conversations with Vice-President Mike Pence before the order was signed.

“It is very clear that it was a special favour to Australia,” the source said. “They changed the executive order specifically. The view was that they would cut Australia some slack.

“They didn’t like it as it sent conflicting messages.

“The favour won’t be called in straight away … but some sort of reciprocity will come eventually.

“And that is likely to come in the form of freedom-of-navigation exercises or the deployment of special forces to Iraq.”

Another source with links to the White House confirmed that the administration was concerned about the mixed message the Nauru deal would send and that it believed the US had gone out of its way to accommodate Australia for its own domestic political agenda.

While senior government sources claimed that the securing of the deal signalled the strength of the relationship and a sign that Mr Turnbull had “leverage” they acknowledged that Mr Trump was a transactional leader and that eventually Australia might be asked to “stump up” in return.

Bill Shorten yesterday repeated his calls for Mr Turnbull to condemn Mr Trump’s executive order, which placed a suspension of all refugee intakes into the US.

“When you are the Australian Prime Minister, you stand up for Australian values,” the Opposition Leader said. “Our Prime Minister, when he saw what was happening, he stayed silent. There isn’t much point in having the top job if you’re not going to back in what you believe.”

Mr Turnbull said it was not the Australian Prime Minister’s job to be making commentary on the domestic policies of other countries.

“When I have frank advice to give to an American president, I give it in private as good friends should — as wise prime ministers do — to ensure they are best able to protect Australia and Australia’s best interests,” he said.

So far none of the 1200 asylumseekers who are part of the deal have been resettled in the US.


View attachment 373487

I dont understand why the opposition is having a go at Turnbull, Nauru deal is bilateral and they will abide by it.. As far as i know not a single govt leader has condemned an Executive order by the president of the the US done on one of his domestic affairs.. Noone does that

You have'nt posted the link mate but i bet it's from Fairfax, Wankers are not short of bull shyt
 
.
They'll take in a batch of those refugees from Nauru/Manus as a one off...Trump has already said he'd honor the agreement.
 
.
I dont understand why the opposition is having a go at Turnbull, Nauru deal is bilateral and they will abide by it.. As far as i know not a single govt leader has condemned an Executive order by the president of the the US done on one of his domestic affairs.. Noone does that

You have'nt posted the link mate but i bet it's from Fairfax, Wankers are not short of bull shyt
From the Australian

They'll take in a batch of those refugees from Nauru/Manus as a one off...Trump has already said he'd honor the agreement.
What bewilders me is why US wants them but Australia refuses them but Australia has way more resources on the per capita level.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom