Illegal immigrants in Italy and Libyas Embargo. This post has two prologues.

If you know the matter yet, and/or are bored by long posts, you can just jump to the topic question at the end. [b] Prologue 1: The United Nations Sanctions[/b] Even before United Nations sanctions were imposed following the Pan Am flight explosion over Lockerbie, Libya was the subject of bilateral sanctions. In 1982, the United States imposed a full trade embargo, because of Libyas support for the Islamic revolution in Iran, for extremist movements in the Middle East and for the destruction of the American Embassy in Tripoli. However, United States oil companies were allowed to continue operating in Libya. In 1984, the United Kingdom suspended diplomatic relations following the assassination of a British police officer in St. Jamess Square in front of the Libyan Embassy in London. In 1985, the United States extended its embargo to Libyas financial holdings abroad, on the grounds of its presumed involvement in the activities of Abu Nidals group. This was followed by United States air strikes against Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986 and the withdrawal of United States oil companies from Libya in June 1986, leaving behind investments worth US$ 2 billion. The investigations carried out by the United States, the United Kingdom and France into the bringing down of two aircrafts, a Pan Am airliner over Lockerbie (1988) and a UTA DC-10 over the Tnr (1989) unearthed evidence pointing to Libyan agents. The United States and the United Kingdom brought the case to the United Nations Security Council, which adopted two resolutions, 731 in December 1991 and 748 in March 1992, the effect of which, if Libya refused to hand over the two Libyan nationals accused of the Lockerbie bombing, was to: impose an embargo on air links, equipment for oil exports and refinery supplies; ban the supply of arms; reduce diplomatic relations. The sanctions were reviewed and renewed every four months and finally extended by Resolution 883 of 1993 to financial holdings and resources of the Libyan government abroad. On 28 August 1998 the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1192 that would suspend sanctions immediately if the Libyan authorities handed over the two suspects for trial in The Hague under Scottish jurisdiction. After a flurry of mediation efforts, Libya did deliver the suspects to the UN Secretary-General, who notified the Security Council by letter on 5 April 1999, so suspending the sanctions imposed under Resolutions 748 and 883. Yet, bilateral sanctions are still operating. On August 2001 US president Bush extended the embargo for five more years. As to EU, while the lifting of embargo to Libya was repeatedly proposed, it is still operating. [b] Prologue 2: illegal immigration in Italy[/b] Illegal immigration is a relatively recent phenomenon in Italy, a traditional land of emigrants, due to two main factors: the relative prosperity Italy reached in the past 20 years, and its membership in the European Union: many immigrants, in fact, consider Italy just a door to Europe, a first step in their travel to Germany, The Netherlands, Belgium and other countries, where they could find friends or relatives previously immigrated there. Illegal immigration to Italy usually take the forms of old, barely floating, overcrowded boats that reach (or try to reach) our shores. [center][img] http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39191000/jpg/_39191182_boat_203_.jpg[/img][/center] In the past the smugglers of people tried to land their passengers on some desert beach at night or so, but our coastguard became so skilled at tracing and capturing them they changed system . Now they usually fill of people a sea-cart, and abandon it close to our territorial waters, waiting for the Navy or the Coastguard to find and save them, before of a probable shipwreck of those absurd vessels. This system can work because, while last year's new immigration law makes expulsions much easier, when migrants are without documents, or if their home country is not co-operative, repatriation can be extremely difficult. Sadly, our (or other countries) Navy do not always arrive in time. Recently a boat full of would-be immigrants, headed to Italy, capsized in the middle of the Mediterranean, near to Tunisia, because of bad weather. Tunisian Navy managed to save 41 people, and recovered 12 corpses, but about other 200 are missing, presumably dead.

Recently, illegal immigration reached a peak. Italian Government is in trouble, because the Northern League, the separatist/federalist/xenophobe party which is part of the government coalition, menaced to leave and withhold its support to the government if immigration is not stopped at any cost. A suggestion by Northern League leader Umberto Bossi that the navy use cannons to deter them was greeted with general indignation. The opposition, the Catholic Church and human rights groups, say it is nonsense to suggest that Italian officials could board overcrowded, unsafe vessels and send them back to Africa. There actually happen to be one effective way to counter the smuggling of human beings without risking human life, as it has been successfully experimented in Albania, Tunisia and other countries. Many countries were illegals pass through have no real interest to stop them, whether they are nationals or coming from abroad. In fact, by letting them go they free themselves from unsatisfied people, i.e. possible sources of troubles, and allow an activity (smuggling of persons), that, while illegal, is still lucrative for their countries, usually poor ones. Italy reached some agreement with the a/m countries, according to which they would receive subsidies, and other economic gains, with the condition to cooperate to stop the traffic. My country also provided to supply means, police personnel and trainers, etc. [b][i] The topic question[/i][/b] Recently, after many other ones were made unavailable because of the a/m policy, the main base of operation for those smugglers of people became Libya. Italy proposed a similar agreement to Libyan government but they objected they have not enough modern motor-boats or electronic individuation devices to efficiently patrol their waters. Point is, at present, Italy cannot legally supply those items to Libya, nor Libyan can purchase them from any country which has the technology to produce them because of the embargo. In fact, such articles are among those which have a double use, civil (for police or sim.) and military. Italy is currently asking EU authorities to derogate on embargo rules about those items. Whats your opinion? [*] Do you think the Italian approach about illegal immigrants is correct? Or should they try a different one? [*] Should embargo to Libya be maintained? Should just be done some exception for those patrol boats and such? Should the embargo be lifted altogether (BTW, Libya cooperated about the Lockerbie, and a lot of time passed since then. [*] How do you think the European authorities will answer to Italian request? How do you think they [b]should[/b] answer? [*] In case Europe will partially or totally lift sanctions on Libya, do you think that could be a further cause of attrition with USA? Some sources and probing about these facts: http://it.news.yahoo.com/030409/201/28tcp.html (in Italian) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1523167.stm http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/lybia/intro/ http://www.news24.com/News24/Africa/News/0,,2-11-1447_1376856,00.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3009666.stm http://www.sundayherald.com/34765 http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=CAC62215-755B-4AF9-86E7E5F8F3C25C89