A massive operation is under way to find and save a stricken vessel and its passengers. As time passes, anxious families and friends wait with growing fear. The US coastguard, Canadian armed forces and commercial vessels are all hunting for the Titan submersible, which has gone missing with five aboard on a dive to the wreck of the Titanic in the north Atlantic. The UK’s Ministry of Defence is also monitoring the situation.

It is hard to think of a starker contrast with the response to a fishing boat which sank in the Mediterranean last week with an estimated 750 people, including children, packed onboard. Only about 100 survived, making this one of the deadliest disasters in the Mediterranean. Greece and the EU blame people smugglers, who overcrowd boats and abuse those aboard them. But both have profound questions to answer about their own role in such disasters. Activists say authorities were repeatedly warned of the danger this boat faced, hours before it went down, but failed to act.

  • Exilfranke@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It is a policy decision. And sadly, it is a pretty popular one. Rescuing these people would mean that the rescuing country needs to grant them asylum. Doing so would incentivize more refugees to choose this dangerous path as it would be a passage to Europe.

    This is one of the reasons why the far right political parties in Italy are so successful. They promise Italians that they would stop this type of immigration. And the rest of the EU accepts this quietly because it solves their own issues with immigration.

    • PotentiallyAnApricot@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s infuriating. I think that tacitly allowing people to be hurt or die for personal/political gain is one of the worst things a human being can do. And yet so many people - from fascists to liberals- seem to be on board. It’s so normalized. It’s the same at every border. Completely preventable. Completely unnecessary. Insane that “I don’t want those people moving here so let them die instead” is seen as a normal and politically centrist take.

      • Novman@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You are right. The social situation with migrants ( mostly MENA ) is so bad that people is infuriating with far-right cause the number of migrants entering by sea is higher than previous government. The people read english and starting to blame european unions and mostly american government to force us to accept migrants cause their ideology. They see far-right government as a sort of a puppet of foreign interest. They say: why you send weapons to ukraine when we have an actual invasion and you help them? I understand that americans have different views, european point of view is starting to become really really different.

      • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think a lot of people are less “we don’t want those people too move here” but “we want those people to go though proper channels to love here rather than just turning up en masse in boats”.

        • PotentiallyAnApricot@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Disagree. There are no adequate proper channels, and at least in my country those have been narrowed and obstructed and restricted out of existence. The process is deliberately expensive, difficult, overly beaurocratic, and inaccessible for most people - and a lot of countries don’t take disabled folks or very poor people or [insert other indefensible reason]. Governments do that on purpose to prevent people from being able to come ‘legally’ at all. But presenting yourself at a border to request asylum is always legal under international law- that is a proper channel. So countries try to create ways to make that impossible, or very dangerous, or allow bad things to happen to those people, hoping it will dissuade people from coming to exercise their human rights. It doesn’t work, and people die, and we all say “how sad but they had it coming”. They didn’t! As human beings we have a responsibility to help other human beings, even if they broke a rule we made up on purpose to criminalize them and make them seem less deserving of our help. Being personally annoyed at a group of people isn’t a good enough reason to treat them the way most governments have. If they actually wanted people to immigrate “legally” instead, they’d open the borders and staff them adequately and fund programs for people to start their lives.

          Edited for typos.

      • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This completely misses some important points. First, most people don’t value human life infinitely other than maybe their own and close family. We don’t want anyone to die, but we don’t want to completely change our country and culture either. We don’t want to starve to pay for the entire world to be saved, and most of our interventions are controversial to say the least.

        You haven’t elucidated all points so I might be wrong here. Unless you think people should not as a community be able to have any rules (like HOAs or no homeless camps etc) then democracy has come out that extremely few people want to take on what seems like an infinite population that would like to come to the US and Europe and be taken care of by those governments. So why would democratic governments spend lots of money helping people illegally get here?

        Remember - the US and EU have been gutting social programs for citizens already here for decades, at least partially due to costs and an inability to raise taxes enough to cover them. I can argue that’s a problem all it’s own, and I don’t like it, but there is currently no capacity for migrants. I know very few people who would want to increase their taxes the substantial amount that would be needed to cover a large program for likely millions of migrants.

        We can make moral arguments here but not everyone has the same morals. And if you set democracy aside, I somehow doubt that is a trade people want to make.I also doubt a non democracy is going to do better for migrants.

        Then people will say we should fix the problem at the other side. How? Did you see the recent attempts at nation building? Do you want a western power to dictate to people how to run their countries? If we don’t do that (and even assuming we could somehow get them to be a US 2.0 or whatever) how do we fix up their countries? Presumably what they’re currently doing isn’t working hence the migration. I am sure we’ve tried asking nicely to not send migrants, to fix their countries, to get a better economy and whatever.