Title: From White Australia to Woomera

Author: James Jupp

Year Published: 2010
Course (Week): Asylum & The Modern State, Week 5
Main Arguments:
- In Australia, from 1947-1972 Australia had accepted 260,000 refugees as permanent settlers
- Almost all were fleeing communist regimes (Hungarians, Czechs, Russian Christians, Jews)
- Australia, accepting refugees from communist states, were acceptable because they were
Europeans within the definitions already used for the White Australia policy
- From 1972-2002 at least 320,000 arrived under various refugee and humanitarian programs
- Combined these two flows comprise 5% of the Australian population; at the heart of
opposition to refugees has been lack of experience and understanding, James Jupp argues that
rather than racism or even xenophobia arguing that most of the Australian-born have lived very
sheltered lives...cannot be expected to fully understand experiences contends Jupp
- Jupp argues that refugee intake is not a form of charity, although it is often seen as such
- Argues Australia has taken refugees because of international obligation (signing CSR and
Protocol, cooperative image in the world community, refugees can constitute a useful addition to
workforce (often young and active) and because some religious and ethnic groups want relief for
compatriots overseas
- Australia has adopted a literal approach and argues that court has been too lenient in accepting
appeals (does not accept the forced implementation of Chinas one-child policy constitutes
persecution) and has not incorporated CSR or Protocol into the Migration Act
- Australia has tried to restricted appeals to courts, but final appeal remains with High Court as it
was deemed to be constitutionally protection
- 1991 policy of mandatory detention remains for asylum seekers unauthorized
- Refugees accepted offshore by Australian migration do not pose a problem unless refugee
quota is overfilled, but onshore arrivals mean that Australia has had little option but to include
- Tampa incident of late August 2001, wherein Australia declared some offshore parts of
Australia not to be part of the migration zone
- Howard Governmetn of Australia denies Norweigan ship which rescued 438 Afghan refugees
from a distressed fishing vessel in international waters, permission to enter Australia waters
- Afghans wanted passage to nearby Christmas Island, Australian government sought to prevent
this but refusing Tampa entry; Australia denied any obligation under international law as
Christmas Island it argued was not part of its responsibility for rescue it was Indonesias
- Tampa entered Australian waters, Australia troops boarded ship to prevent unloading
- Border Protection Bill 2001 was brought by Howard but opposition Labor Party blocked bill

- Howard government acted to excise Christmas Island and large # of other coastal islands,
effectively meaning that asylum seekers who did not reach mainland would not be able to apply
for refugee status; Labor party supported some of the islands excise but not all
- Pacific Solution was name of this policy that also removed asylum seekers to detention centers
on Nauru (where the Tampa refugees were eventually sent) and Papau Neu Guinea while refugee
status was determined); rationale was these would deter people...
- Australian electorate largely supported government; some TV stations claiming 90% support
- 2013 Operation Sovereign Borders (Coalition government lead by Abbott) involving transfer of
refugees to Sri Lanka (which High court placed injunction on this transfer arguing that breached
non-refoulement)
- Australia has taken very few refuges since 1975: kept very close to the planning level of
12,000 of whom 4,000 are normally Convention refugees
- Since 1996 Howard Government, European arrivials have ben 48% of the total
- 1975-1987 were refugees fleeing Indochina, Lebanon, and from Asia & Middle East
- No clear line which distinguishes refugee communities from migrants official classification of
two streams--migrant and humanitarian--is based only on visa category
- Immigrants settling for political purposes over last 50 years were overwhelming Europeans and
Asians escaping communism
- Unauthorized arrival of asylum seekers from Timor and Vietnam (1975 and 1976) involved
only 2000 people arriving by boat but reactivated historic fears of a flood moving down from
Asia towards weakly defended Australia (which is why White Australia policy was introduced, in
part, in 1901); Australia reaches agreement with Vietnam in 1979 with orderly departure
program but ends up taking large number of refugees coming in orderly fashion -- Detention
system emerges in early 1990s
- Mandatory detention did not discourage boat arrivals initially, but in 1997 control was
transferred to a private American prison corporation wherein
-there was a 1999 opening of a South Australian detention center and a change from permanent
for permanent to temporary visa for authorized arrivals deemed to be refugees
- Move to temporary protection extended to asylum seekers awaiting processing; if successful
became permanent residents; prior to Sept. 2001 those arriving by boat giving temporary visas
when released from internment (by January 2002 there were 3200 with this status offered a
financial incentive to return home after the defeat of the Taliban)
- Afghans constitued 200 permemant settlers and 650 temporary protected settlers in the year
2000-2001; very small problem to inspire a very radical and controversial shift in policy -- at
the height of the Tampa crisis Australia was taking a grnad total of 4000 refugees as defined by
the UN
- Rationale for clamp down was integrity of the system must be maintained and supported by
popular relevance; yet as Jupp notes overlook that the rational for having a humanitarian
program at all is a belief in human rights