Just as the Italians are today, the Romans were very proud of their possible Trojan origin. (1) Virgil is the most celebrated supporter of this theory and his epic poem the Aeneid describes the journey and the adventures of King Priam’s son Aeneas and other survivors of Troy whom he finally connects with Romulus, Remus and the founding of Rome.(2) It is therefore ironic that the Romans who were proud of their refugee origin and conscious of the fact that their nation was formed due to the tragedy of war, went on to conquer and make thousands of refugees as soon as they had the possibility.
It is even more ironic that as soon as the Romans conquered a great city like Troy, they behaved in exactly the same manner the Greeks did when they finally conquered Troy; sacking burning and cursing the city of Cartage. An even more ironic and tragic example of human nature’s lack of understanding and short memory, is that of the Jewish people. Since Abraham left Ur more than 3000 years ago the Jews, being one of the oldest nations on earth have spent more then two thirds of their history as refugees.(3) As soon as the Jewish state was re-formed in 1948 the new Israeli government made one of the worst refugee blunders.
The 800 000 Palestinian refugee exodus in 1948 is one of the most obscure and discussed periods of Israel’s modern history. Those who defend a radical Israeli point of view will say that those people were scared away by their own leaders so the Jews could later be blamed for the exodus. Those who have a radical view point on the Arab side say that those people fled in panic in front of pillaging and raping Israeli troops. Of course, any objective person should know that the truth is somewhere in the middle.
The revisionists of Israeli history claim and offer proof that Israeli troops did attack the villages, not openly and it was concealed from the Israeli people, but the attacks did take place and that is a fact. (4) On the other hand, Arab community leaders did add to the panic and behaved irresponsibly in many cases. Some go as far as to accuse the Palestinian leaders of taking money from the Israelis or say that they contributed to the panic in hope to attract international attention and then just couldn’t believe it when the Israelis imposed a return ban.
The issue is still unresolved and one of the most difficult matters regarding the international law regarding refugees. (5) The 1951 convention is a direct product of the refugee crisis that followed WWII. And has been legal reference regarding the fate of millions that were forced to leave their homes. One cannot say that the convention is infallible and as a mater of fact it has undergone many changes especially regarding the obligations of countries in relation to the acceptance of refugees. (6) The dry foot law in the US regarding the right of any Cuban that touches US soil the right to asylum has been severely criticized by those who are afraid of the criminal elements that come with the masses of refugees.
The same fear was expressed by many in the European Union during the Balkan wars; many criminals did get refugee status and have abused it. Another big problem regarding the convention is how to determine whether a person is really in danger and needs asylum or is just looking for a way to immigrate into a host country. In other words if someone can prove that his/her life is in danger due to direct or violent opposition to the regime one is pretty much obligated to grant asylum but when it comes to the matter of political opinion the matter becomes more complicated.
The following are three examples show three ways in which the 1951 UN Convention works, might work and works half ways. The example of how the Convention works in order to protect those in danger due to political opinion is the Goodwin Gill precedent. In the case of Canada (Attorney General) v. Ward in 1993 several precedents were established that define the right of a person to seek refuge due to political opinion.
Read More