Should the Vietnamese be repatriated?
YES Because, honestly, what other options are there? China has made it an article of Sino dogma that the Great Repatriation Programme of 1997 will not encompass the Vietnamese. There are still 18,000 here (give or take a few roaming the byways of the New Territories), they are not endearing themselves to the local taxpayer and the chances of them being assimilated into the community are about as likely as me being named Chief Executive.
All of which is truly unfortunate. What started out as a maritime epic of dreadful suffering 20 years ago has become a sullen tale of bureaucracy and tabled resolutions, with the occasional lobbed canister of tear-gas to pep things up. Somewhere along the way the milk of human kindness seems to have curdled: now it's hard cheese for the boat people. As Jean Noel Wetterwald of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees wryly remarked earlier this year, 'We started out as the good guy and ended up as the bad guy because we are telling them they must go home. But there is no alternative.' He's right, of course. He's heard the stories of those boat people who have returned to a Vietnam which is no longer the shuttered place from which they fled. They have survived; some are thriving and have come to regret publicly the lost years in camps. Relief agencies hover around to keep an eye on subsequent events. There certainly appears to be no retribution, it being generally held that Vietnam has rather better things to do in the last few years of the 20th century than overly concern itself with its prodigal sons and daughters.
In any case, take it from this diabolical advocate: the saying which springs inescapably (so to speak) to mind is that it's surely better to live with the devil you know than the one you don't. The chances of picking up the shreds of a normal life, however patchy, must be much greater in a country where the language, geography and customs are familiar. If last week's riot proved anything it is that most Vietnamese people haven't a clue how to cope with the Gotham City called Hong Kong that exists beyond their imprisoning gates. Vietnam has changed, but not that much.
The boat people took to the sea to find freedom. They haven't found it in the camps; indeed, the criminal element which undoubtedly exists among them, has now reduced even that possibility to cinders. But they might find it in their own backyard. Last week, even Vaclav Havel - Czech president, playwright and former prisoner of Communism - finally accepted that repatriation is the only answer. He has asked Czech diplomats in Vietnam to monitor those who are sent back. Repatriation isn't a perfect solution but if the rest of the world keeps watch, the boat people might, just might discover a safe harbour.
NO Welcome to the Hotel Ritz-Whitehead. Stroll into the courtyard and cool down in the shadows cast by the watchtowers. Relax your eyes and enjoy the sight of the sun glinting off the razor wire. In the evenings, enjoy a traditional barbecue and grill steaks on the burning remains of Block C. When you leave, you'll cry with sorrow; you'll have no choice unless you own a gas mask. Ah yes, what I would give for a stay in the Hotel Ritz-Whitehead. And those lucky Vietnamese get to stay there everyday. No wonder they don't want to leave.
Let's dispel one myth right away. The Vietnamese are not on holiday. The majority of people in Hong Kong seem to think the refugees are living it up in the territory. Following the riots, public disapproval is running at an all-time high. There have been renewed calls for the Government to hire a very large boat and send them all back in one fell swoop: it's an option which has not been ruled out. This is the same Government, by the way, that has been accused of human-rights violations by the United Nations in its treatment of the Vietnamese refugees.
It is true that if we send all the Vietnamese back home, there will be no more riots. That may be a rigorously logical solution but it is ethically confused. Hong Kong people, more than any others in the world, should appreciate the plight of the refugee. This place was a bolthole in 1949 as people fled newly communist China. Those who left expected to be treated well, looked after and given an opportunity to make something of their lives. One look around the territory these days demonstrates they got all that and more.
How would they have felt to have been whisked back to China? How would they have felt to be forcibly returned to a country they had tried to flee in the knowledge that the authorities in that country may make them suffer for their infidelity? Would they have fought? Would they have rioted? Would they do everything in their power to retain some kind of self-determinism? I think they would.
But when the Vietnamese fight for these same rights, they are pilloried, maltreated and abused. Why? Not because they are refugees, but because they are Vietnamese refugees. Sorry to state it outright, but it is racism we are seeing here. The majority of the local population do not care simply because they are Vietnamese. The mainland Chinese do not want them because they are not of the motherland. The Government has to get rid of them because it knows come 1997 their situation will worsen rapidly.
I agree they should leave the territory, but not to be sent home. The Government should commit itself to finding them alternative residence somewhere else in the world. Britain is the obvious option, or the United States, or Australia - or anywhere. But if they do not want to go home, do not make them. It is their right.
