Asylum, as well as democracy, is being abused
Writes: Denko Maleski
In a debate at the German Bundestag Foreign Policy Committee, Josip Juratovic, a Social Democrat MP, comments on Gruevski’s escape and asylum in Hungary:…”The Gruevski system” uses democratic means. And that’s what is really upsetting in this chain of events – the way democratically dubious powers are abusing democratic instruments. I can only hope that Hungary in this case acted the same way as in the case of all asylum-seekers. The Gruevski case becomes a litmus test of the credibility of the rule of law in Hungary.” Yes, one of the most important instruments of the human rights of the modern world is the right to asylum. And, yes, that, like everything else, can be abused. People in distress have the right to seek protection from other countries, and they, in particular the democratic ones, are obliged to provide the protection. But what happens when “democratic dubious forces abuse democratic means”? That is the question asked in the German Bundestag.
In fact, the answer is only an international extension of a national theme that I wrote about several years ago, dedicated to the so-called “antisystem parties”, an expression that appears in political science in the sixties, referring to the behavior of the fascist, Nazi and Communist parties. Namely, political party researchers, analyzing their behavior in their country’s political systems in the period between the two world wars, have noticed that they been involved in the democratic process in order to destroy it. I put those findings into the analysis of the behavior of the then ruling VMRO-DPMNE party, for which I said that it participated in the Macedonian democratic system in order to destroy it. A few years later, the leader of that party, Nikola Gruevski, finds shelter with his ally, Viktor Orban, who also uses the freedom provided by the liberal democracy in Hungary to undermine its foundations. Today, the two authoritarian leaders undermine the foundations of the asylum system for people in distress. Namely, although the German MP says that “he can only hope that Hungary acts in the same way as it does with other asylum seekers” and that “the Gruevski case becomes a litmus test for the credibility of the rule of law in Hungary”, his words only want to embarrass the country and its political leadership for their inhumane behavior towards the true refugees, asylum seekers, compared to the asylum for the former Macedonian prime minister.
Allies defend and help each other, Hungarian Prime Minister Orban said. What else, apart from autocracy, unites these two persons? The barbed wire of our border and theirs, and the inhumane treatment of people in need. Both we and the Hungarians became “popular” in the world through footages that were identical on both borders: shock bombs and batons with which, in fact, we defended Hungary too. The attempt to correct the image for ourselves did not change the general policy that the Macedonian leadership was proud of for many years: that we are defending Europe and for that purpose we will make our border impenetrable for the Middle Eastern and African poor people. This is how Hungary and Macedonia have been treating asylum seekers, something well known to the members of the German parliament. Democratic Europe should be worried about the special treatment that the leaders of the “anti-system parties” provide each other. The cynicism to use such guaranteed human right in order to protect autocratic leaders who raise barbed wires against those who really need asylum is evident. While those who are fleeing wars are rejected with a cold heart, “the allies” who are fleeing justice, are warmly welcomed.
*The text is written exclusively for the purposes of Inbox 7. For each republishing, a consent by the editors must be obtained. Inbox 7 does not always agree with the opinions and views of the authors in the debate section.