http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3983324.html
A question of character or racism?
JOSEPH WAKIM
Last week, Prime Minister Julia Gillard pondered what the “character and conduct” of the Anzac legend “did to shape our nation”, and how “a worthy foe [Turkey] has proved to be an even greater friend”.
This all sounds noble until we learn that the sixth question in the “character assessment” for those seeking to enter “our nation” appears to be shaping a new enemy: “Are you of Arabic descent?”
The question leaps loudly from the page and is also striking because of the silence surrounding this slur on our national character. There are no other questions pertaining to descent, race or religion.
Imagine someone wanting to visit our home, and we swiftly check if they are of Turkish or Japanese descent.
Surely, if we have serious concerns about someone’s character, there are many sophisticated and subtle ways to assess their “personal particulars” through their criminal records and Interpol.
The front page of the character assessment declares that the information may be disclosed to relevant law enforcement agencies in Australia and overseas, and should render the Arabic descent question redundant.
The last section of Form 80, question 57, is a checklist of “character details”. It asks if the applicant has ever had training from an organisation engaged in violence, involvement in insurgency, freedom fighting, terrorism or protests?
If answered honestly, surely these questions should be sufficient to filter out criminal characters after corroborating with relevant intelligence agencies internationally.
The checklist even asks about involvement in a “program related to the development of weapons of mass destruction”. Given the current fears about Iran and North Korea, neither of whom are Arab states, the descent question appears removed from reality, and a hangover from the Howard era “alert but not alarmed” Arabphobia.
With Al Qaeda’s ‘birthplace’ being in non-Arab Afghanistan and its net spreading to non-Arab countries such as Jamaa Islamia (translates as the Islamic Society) in South East Asia, the descent question drifts from seriousness to silliness.
The character assessment is guided by the Public Interest Criteria 4001 of the Migration Act regulations which never mention Arabic descent.
The regulations broadly outline the ‘discretionary powers’ of the immigration minister to grant or refuse a visa on character grounds on a case-by-case basis. The minister may weed out persons whose presence may be “contrary to Australia’s foreign policy interests … vilify a segment of the Australian community … incite discord in the Australian community … represent a danger … pose a significant risk … hold extremist views … or insensitive in a multicultural society”.
This is ironic given the insensitivity of the Arabic descent question to citizens in our multicultural society.
In the aftermath of the Al Qaeda attacks of 9/11, the immediate reaction by the USA and its allies was understandable with enhanced security, border protection, racial profiling and strategically recruiting Arabic employees.
But more than a decade later, should Australia’s official checklist to weed out bad characters include such a blunt question? Not once but repeatedly – asking for the ‘full name of your father’s father’, and then the same questions repeated for the applicant’s partner, mother, father, brother and sister. This is bizarre as surely if a parent is of Arabic descent, so is the applicant.
This question was brought to my attention by an American seeking to enter Australia. The message it sent her was that our lucky country, one of the most multicultural societies in the world, advocates racial profiling rather than fair go.
What it implied is that while applicants must be of good character to enter Australia, anything Arabic must be of suspicious character or the antithesis of the Australian character.
While nationality is a characteristic of a person – as is marital status, age, sex, visa class, and occupation – it certainly should not define the character.
Arab as a characteristic may be a question of race, but Arab as a character is a question of racism.
The defenders of the Arabic descent question would presumably argue that most terrorists are of Arabic descent, that the question is merely filtering suspect characters to refer to our anti-terrorist agencies on the balance of probabilities, and that the question is hurting no-one but protecting everyone.
Really? Try replacing question six with Jewish descent to assess character. The silence will be replaced with screams of anti-Semitism and Nazi branding.
An Immigrant Department spokesman advised me that this descent question “should be viewed in the context of clear identification of an individual where there are diverse naming practices”. This explanation is illogical as questions of linguistics are completely different to questions of ancestry.
Such antagonistic messages on such official documents are tantamount to a declaration of an anti-Arab foreign policy. They wave a welcoming Australia flag with one hand but a red flag to Arabs with the other. They fuel the friction and propaganda between otherwise friendly nations and render them a “worthy foe”.
The question needs to be removed as redundant and ridiculous.