Sweden plans to expel up to 80,000 asylum-seekers: minister

[MowCowWhoHow III]

Source: AFP

Stockholm (AFP) - Sweden intends to expel up to 80,000 migrants who arrived in 2015 and whose application for asylum has been rejected, Interior Minister Anders Ygeman said Wednesday.

"We are talking about 60,000 people but the number could climb to 80,000," the minister was quoted as saying by Swedish media, adding that the government had asked the police and authorities in charge of migrants to organise their expulsion, likely spread over several years.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/sweden-plans-expel-80-000-asylum-seekers-minister-234848888.html;_ylt=A0LEVzQnWKlWd3MAnrZXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByMjB0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--

[KamaAina]

1. So what's Swedish for "Trump"?

[iandhr]

5. Sweden has taking in more refuges than any other EU nation in population to it's population

They are expelling those who's applications have been rejected. They are not saying put of a fence and no one else can come in.

[Lazy Daisy]

6. I hope you're not equating the two

unless you're really familiar with what is going on there you shouldn't judge.
Sweden is having a real problem. Besides financial problems trying to keep up with the need of refugees, there are problems arising with cultural differences.

[KamaAina]

7. Certainly not.

Merely pointing out that this is something I would expect the vulgar talking yam to do, not Sweden.

[Yo_Mama]

11. What the heck? These are peoole whose asylum applications have been rejected.

That only happens when they determine that the person didn't need refuge. It's not like they are going to be throwing out Syrians.

What they are saying is that they are going to follow through and deport individuals who were never legally entitled to be there, which, btw, does free up resources for genuine refugees.

[840high]

12. That's not a fair comment.

[jonno99]

2. Wow, I wonder how this will play out? How are they going to get 60-80k refugees to leave -

without being "heavy-handed"?

If the Swedes actually follow through with this plan, I don't think it will end well...

[flamingdem]

3. Exactly. Where will they go?

Germany?

[Yo_Mama]

13. They are not refugees. They are more likely economic migrants.

Please, don't misuse the term "refugee".

I could show up at the Swiss border and claim asylum, but in the long run my application would not succeed, due to the fact that wanting to live in Sweden doesn't imply that I actually face persecution in the US.

Some of the "Syrians" showing up in Europe don't even speak Arabic.

[Nihil]

24. On the serious side, you are correct.

On the not so serious side ...

> I could show up at the Swiss border and claim asylum, but in the long run my application
> would not succeed, due to the fact that wanting to live in Sweden doesn't imply that I
> actually face persecution in the US.

... at least you would be amusing the border guards in Switzerland while
they find you a map ...

[Yo_Mama]

36. Yeah, you're right - And That IS FUNNY.

I got stuck in the NE for this snow event. After three days of snow removal, the South seems even sweeter. ...

To be honest, I wouldn't show up at either border, due to the fact that I am sure both countries have snow. It will take me until Friday probably until I am sane again.

[Xithras]

20. Well, their choice is to leave or become part of a permanent underclass.

Unlike the United States and many other nations that use "jus solis" citizenship (those who are born here, belong here), Sweden uses "jus sanguinis" (only the children of citizens can become citizens). If they attempt to avoid deportation and stay in Sweden, their descendants will never have Swedish citizenship unless they marry a Swedish citizen.

They won't have access to any government benefits, they won't be able to legally work, and their children and grandchildren face the danger of being stateless.

It's a fairly dire situation, and I doubt that many will willingly choose that route. It's more likely that they'll try to flee Sweden to try again in another European country.

[Quantess]

22. Don't worry Swedes are total wimps, anything but "heavy handed".

There are so many immigrants abusing the system, and voters are getting fed up with it. The politicians know they need to do something if they want to keep their jobs, because the RW Nationalists are gaining popularity.

[pampango]

4. BBC: 55% of Swedish asylum applications accepted, 45% rejected.

Sweden to expel up to 80,000 failed asylum-seekers

Sweden intends to expel up to 80,000 asylum-seekers whose applications have been rejected, the country's interior minister has announced.

Anders Ygeman said that charter aircraft would be used to deport the migrants over several years.

Some 163,000 migrants and refugees applied for asylum in Sweden in 2015, the highest per capita number in Europe.

Of the approximately 58,800 cases processed last year, 55% were accepted.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35425735

It would seem that Sweden is implementing a liberal refugee policy in an effective manner. It will be a challenge to implement returning the failed applicants. This will probably not satisfy the Swedish far-right since they want them all gone.

[smirkymonkey]

8. Are they sending them back to their country of origin or just out of Sweden?

Because if it's just out of Sweden, another European country will just have to absorb them. Not sure if anyone knows. The article doesn't say.

[FLPanhandle]

9. It would have been smarter not to open the doors to so many without first vetting them

But at least they are trying to correct the mistake.

[MrChuck]

15. Lives may well have been saved

by this action.

I don't think it's fair to categorize their deportation as harsh OR to say that they never should have allowed them to enter the country. Their lives could have been at risk and their time there may have saved them.

[FLPanhandle]

17. Lives have been lost because of this.

Just this week a young woman was murdered by one of the refugees, add in the rapes and sexual assaults.

The Swedish governments first responsibility is to it's own citizens.

[smirkymonkey]

18. I agree, they really weren't thinking when they allowed this many young, single men

into the country without vetting them in the first place. Their first duty should have been to their own citizens. Instead it seems like they are bending over backwards to accommodate immigrants at the expense of their own people.

[christx30]

25. And there is this stuff too:

http://www.thelocal.se/20160128/staff-at-asylum-centre-attacked-by-rioting-youth

Swedish asylum staff attacked by rioting youth

Staff at a home for refugee children in southern Sweden were forced to barricade themselves in a room on Wednesday night, after 19 young men in their care rioted and attacked them with weapons.

[smirkymonkey]

28. WTF?

"John Nilsson, also with the local police, told the Barometern newspaper that the riot had started after staff refused a request from one of the home’s residents.

"One of them was refused to buy sweets and became furious with the staff member. He collected together around fifteen friends and the staff were forced to shut themselves in while they broke windows and did what they liked."

Police last night seized two of the young men. One, a 16-year-old boy suspected of starting the riot, is still being held. The other has been released.

The local municipality in Emmaboda, near Kalmar, which oversees the home, has moved some of the children to another location to calm down the situation. "

Because the staff refused to buy them sweets? These ungrateful little bastards! They should have been arrested, instead they were just moved to another locacation. Only one of them is still being held. I really can't believe the Swedes are still putting up with this shit.

[leftynyc]

33. All 16 should be brought

to the airport and put on a plane to someplace else (their place of origin would be ideal). It's time to show that generosity only goes so far and any attack will be dealt with harshly. The fucking nerve - attacking because he couldn't buy sweets.

[LanternWaste]

37. Imaginary red and blue lines are much more important than actual people.

Imaginary red and blue lines are indeed, much more important than actual humans from the other side of those imaginary lines.

[christx30]

41. Would you want the entirety of

the refugee/migration to go to your state?
There have to be some limits. And refugees have to take priority over economic migrants.
Those red and blue lines stop chaos.

[beaglelover]

10. Good for Sweden.

[Dawson Leery]

14. They are right.

America and Canada have strict standards as to who is accepted. Europe would be wise do the same.

[Dems to Win]

16. Need to end the chaos of the ocean crossing to Greece, the trek to the border

If Europe would announce all refugees will be brought to Europe from the UN camps only, it would be better for all parties.

It would discourage people from the dangerous, chaotic trek, and the receiving countries could be guaranteed they are only getting vetted refugee families. No free riders from 40 countries looking for the chance to make it in Europe if they can only get to the Germany or Swedish border, which include lots of scammers and shysters.

Its much better to prevent entry of those who don't qualify, than to try to deport them later.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

26. What should Greece do with an approaching boat?

Sink it? Send it back into the unpredictable Med?

It would be nice to control the flow of people, if only to have an opportunity to weed out the few embedded terrorists. But what's a practical solution that doesn't cause the deaths of innocents?

It's a puzzle. The U.S. and Canada have an advantage, with an entire ocean as a barrier.

[pampango]

27. Trump would build a magnificent wall in the ocean. Cruz would carpet bomb them.

I trust that liberals have better ideas.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

29. Yeah, liberals should have better ideas.

But so far, the only "solution" is to pluck them from their overloaded boats, bring them to Europe, and turn them loose.

I don't have a better idea, but the current approach seems reckless.

[pampango]

30. By the EU's own rules, arriving refugees should be processed in the country where they first enter

the EU - which would be Greece in the vast majority of cases. Obviously Greece is a relatively small and poor country and should be getting lots more help from the EU and the rest of the world than it has been getting, in order to handle the arrival of 1,500 new refugees every day (45,000 a month).

I don't think they are just 'being turned loose'. Aren't they being housed and their applications for refugee status or asylum being processed? At least that seems to be what is happening in Sweden - based on the OP - which has accepted the most refugees (on a per capita basis).

[EL34x4]

31. Do you honestly think this?

1,500 hundred each day? Do you honestly believe Greece is putting them up in housing, feeding them, treating their medical needs, while carefully processing their refugee status? Look at the men on that boat. Do you think they're arriving with documents and passports?

They don't even want to stay in Greece! It's just as well. Greece doesn't want them either. You can bet your next paycheck they're being turned loose. They're high-tailing it north as soon as their feet touch land. Let them be some other country's problem.

That's why this whole thing is falling apart. Merkel said, "COME!" and they're coming.

"By the EU's own rules." What a joke. They're overwhelmed. There are no rules anymore.

[pampango]

32. Of course Greece is not doing this. It is too small and poor to handle the massive influx of refugee

without much more outside help than it is receiving.

My point is that EU rules (which are being ignored) are that refugees and asylum seekers are to be processed in the first EU country they enter. That would be and should be Greece in the vast majority of cases. But Greece needs a tremendous amount of help to do this. An organization such as the EU - representing 500,000,000 well-off (by global standards) people - should be able to help them.

If you have an alternative for dealing with the influx of refugees to Europe that would be great. The real problem is that this massive number of refugees exists at all. Unless we deal with that we are faced with the question of "Whose problem are they?"

Should Europe and the West use harsher measures to bottle them up in the Middle East? Maybe sink a few boats? Or just ignore international law and deport people as fast as their boats land in Greece whether they are genuine refugees or not?

I'm not sure that processing refugees in Greece (with help from the outside) is the best solution. If Greece does not have the resources to handle it, perhaps a larger, richer European country could handle it. In any case, unless the world deals with the reason that the huge number of refugees exist in the first place, we are left with the question "Whose problem are they?"

[christx30]

34. Greece is really getting screwed.

They can't possible process everyone, no one is helping them stop the tide from coming in, and the EU is thinking about kicking them out. The EU's handing of this whole problem has been disasterous. And they are using Greece as a handy scapegoat.

[pampango]

35. I tend to agree. It's a tough situation for Europe.

With an unending flow of refugees and others making the short trip from the Turkish coast to nearby Greek islands, Europe's choices are limited. The EU has patrols in the eastern Mediterranean. They could use those to sink the boats rather than rescue them but that seems immoral.

The EU could force people who land in Greece to return to Turkey immediately but there are international laws that apply to those claiming to be refugees that they would have to ignore.

They could provide the resources to Greece to house and feed the arrivals and process their applications for asylum or refugee status, deport those who do not qualify and allow qualified refugees to move to other EU countries.

Or the EU and the rest of the world could deal with the cause of the continuing flow of refugees instead of arguing over what to do about them.

[Nihil]

38. If the gateway countries find that they are prevented from just forwarding everyone along ...

... then yes, you would find that they suddenly become far more diligent about
accepting all & sundry.

For example, if Greece suddenly finds that their borders are closed to the North,
they will start to do what they should have been doing all along and send the
"unending flow of refugees and others" back to Turkey.

As it is, Turkey is having a great time of it as they turn a blind eye to (or, worse,
actively encourage) migrants as long as they just go to the coast to get to
Greece - their long-time enemy. It's a win-win for Turkey as not only can they
happily continue causing mayhem in Syria but they get to ship off the human
cost to places who they can't stand anyway.

[pampango]

39. Greece and other countries might become more 'diligent' but refugees are protected by

international law once they arrive in a country. They cannot (if one follows international law) just be sent back to Turkey if they are genuine refugees.

IMHO, it makes more sense for the EU to provide the resources to Greece to process the arrivals, accept the genuine refugees, come up with a plan for the countries to share their acceptance and return the others to Turkey or their country of origin. The EU has more than 500 million people and the biggest economy in the world. They can handle it.

Once others see the non-refugees being returned in large numbers, there should be a significant decrease in the arrival of non-refugees. Who wants to pay smugglers large sums of scarce money only to end up back where you started?

While Turkey could certainly be doing more to prevent smugglers from using their coast but there are still 2 million or more refugees in Turkey and it is not getting as much help from other countries as Greece is. Turkey is getting paid now by the EU to stop migrants (like Gaddafi back in the day). I don't see that is having much effect so far.

Some of the more RW governments in Europe have already refused to take any of the refugees. Germany, Sweden and other more liberal countries who have accepted many of them sound like they want to halt the flow for the time being.

[Little Tich]

19. that's a lot of people. I wonder where they will be deported to? n/t

[pampango]

21. If they are determined not to be genuine refugees/asylum seekers, they are probably not from Syria

but are economic migrants. In the past Sweden has sent people back to Pakistan, Turkey, Algeria, Iran, Bangladesh and other countries. I suspect that is what will happen this time, too.

[w0nderer]

23. comment to keep eye on thread and kick and recommend n/t

[Quantess]

40. .

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3422000/Just-old-think-migrant-children-Alarming-pictures-shed-light-growing-scandal-amid-asylum-crisis.html