Your feedback is important to us!
We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments about this article.
Disclaimer: Comments submitted by third parties on this site are the sole responsibility of the individual(s) whose content is submitted. The Daily Star accepts no responsibility for the content of comment(s), including, without limitation, any error, omission or inaccuracy therein. Please note that your email address will NOT appear on the site.
Alert: If you are facing problems with posting comments, please note that you must verify your email with Disqus prior to posting a comment. follow this link to make sure your account meets the requirements. (http://bit.ly/vDisqus)
Earlier this spring, I drove to a beautiful spot on the southern bank of Lake Geneva.Its disastrous outcome needs to be recalled in the light of Europe's current migration crisis.Throughout Europe, the refugees faced rejection.The outcome of the meeting was clear: Europe, North America and Australia would not accept significant numbers of these refugees.It was an absurd thing to say, of course, in 1938, given the size of Europe's populations today.Yet Europe's current proposals on migration leave much to be desired.Francois Crepeau, the U.N. special rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, observed in a recent interview that Europe, Australia and Canada could easily resettle 1 million Syrian refugees over the next five years, and they could add Eritreans to that list and extend this policy to seven years. So why is Europe proposing to accept a paltry 20,000-40,000 people annually for resettlement?
FOLLOW THIS ARTICLE