This assignment is for my unit 'Asylum Challenges in Australia and Asia'. Please use Australian sources as it is for an Australian University. Assessment guide is attached, please have a look.
A1: Ethics Paper Who, how many, and under what conditions should outsiders in need be granted entry into a nation state? This assessment task gives students the opportunity to consider the two key classic texts that build ethical arguments addressing these questions. This task should take the form of an essay, with an introduction, a body and conclusion, and a reference list at the end (using Harvard referencing style). The task is worth 25% of your overall mark. The word-count is 1000 words, excluding references. Submit your assignment as a word document to the relevant dropbox. The task: Read and consider the arguments put forward by Michael Walzer and Peter and Renata Singer in the readings set for Week 4. Note that there are two sections of the Walzer reading. The task has three steps. 1. First, in a paragraph each, summarise the key arguments presented by Walzer and the Singers in the selected readings. 2. Second, consider and discuss the ethical implications for each position. In this part of your answer, you might want to consider some of the following questions: · Which social group do the authors privilege in their ethical arguments? · What special allowances, if any, do the authors make for non-citizens in need? · What would be the real-world implications for citizens? For non-citizens? · If taken to their logical conclusion, what would be the implications of these two positions? · Can you see evidence of one position (Walzer’s, or the Singers’) in Australian asylum policy? 3. Third, provide a reference list, using the Harvard style of referencing. As this task is a close examination of the set readings, your reference list should only include two references (the chapters by Walzer and the Singers), or maybe three (if you decide to refer to the Gibney chapter as well). Tip: It is strongly recommended that you read the reading by Matthew Gibney in your preparation for this task. The Gibney reading will help you understand Walzer and the Singers' ethical positions, and put them in context within broader debates. It will also assist you to answer the questions relating to the ethical implications of these positions. You may refer to this reading in the body of your assignment if you find it useful to do so. No further reference material is required. Marking criteria: When marking, the assessor will consider the following: · Has the student followed the instructions and guidelines? · Has the student correctly identified and summarised the key arguments in the two readings? · Has the student demonstrated a thoughtful approach to the different ethical positions and their implications? · Is the task well presented, including clear written communication, and the correct use of the Harvard referencing system? COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA WARNING This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Deakin University in accordance with section 113P of the Copyright Act 1968 (Act). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Do not remove this notice Course of Study: (AIP209) Asylum Challenges In Australia And Asia Title of work: Population and political theory (2010) Section: The ethics of refugee policy pp. 285--304 Author/editor of work: Fishkin, James S.; Goodin, Robert E. Name of Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell Commonwealth of Australia Copyright Act 1968 Notice for paragraph 135ZXA(a) of the Copyright Act 1968 Warning This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Deakin University under Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (the Act). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Do not remove this notice. 13 The Ethics of Refugee Policy Peter Singer and Renata Singer The Shelter It is February 1998 and the world is taking stock of the damage done by the brief nuclear exchange between the United States and the Soviet Union at the close of the previous year. Although a belated outbreak of sanity on both sides stopped hostilities before more than a few warheads had been deto- nated, the level of radioactivity now and for about eight years to come is so high that only those living in fallout shelters can be confident of surviving in reasonable health. For the rest, who must breathe unfiltered air and con- sume food and water with high levels of radiation, the prospects are grim. Probably 10 percent will die of radiation sickness within the next two months; another 30 percent are expected to develop fatal forms of cancer within five years; and the remainder will have rates of cancer ten times higher than normal, while the risk that their children will be malformed is fifty times greater than before the war. The fortunate ones, of course, are those who were far-sighted enough to buy shares in the fallout shelters built by real estate speculators in the early 1990s. Most of these shelters were designed as underground villages, each with enough accommodation and supplies to provide for the needs of 10,000 people for twenty years. The villages are self-governing, with democratic con- stitutions that were agreed to in advance. They also have sophisticated secu- rity systems, which enable them to admit to the shelter whoever they decide to admit and keep out all others. The news that it will not be necessary to stay in the shelters for much more than eight years has naturally been greeted with joy by the members of an underground community called Fairhaven. But it has also led to the first serious friction among them. For above the shaft that leads down to Fairhaven, there are thousands of people who are not investors in a shelter. These people can be seen, and heard, through television cameras installed 286 Peter Singer and Renata Singer at the entrance. They are pleading to be admitted. They know that if they can get into a shelter quickly, they will escape most of the consequences of exposure to radiation. Yet at first, before it was known how long it would be until it was safe to return to the outside, these pleas had virtually no support from within the shelter. Now, however, the case for admitting at least some of them has become much stronger. Since the supplies need last only eight years - or even if we are conservative, certainly no more than ten they will stretch to three or four times the number of people presently in the shelters. Accommodation presents only slightly greater problems: Fairhaven was designed to function as a luxury retreat when not needed for a real emergency, and it is equipped with tennis courts, swimming pools, and a large gymnasium. If everyone were to consent to keep fit by doing aerobics in their own living rooms, it would be possible to provide primitive but adequate sleeping space for all those whom the supplies can stretch to feed. So those outside now do not lack advocates on the inside. The most extreme, labeled "bleeding hearts" by their opponents, propose that the shel- ter should admit an additional 10,000 people, as many as it can reasonably expect to feed and house until it is safe to return to the outside. This will mean giving up all luxury in food and facilities, but the bleeding hearts point out that the fate for those who remain on the outside will be far worse. The bleeding hearts are opposed by some who urge that these outsiders generally are inferior people, for they were either not sufficiently far-sighted or not sufficiently wealthy to invest in a shelter; hence, it is said, they will cause social problems in the shelter, placing an additional strain on health, welfare, and educational services, and contributing to an increase in crime and juvenile delinquency. The opposition to admitting outsiders is also sup- ported by a small group of philosophically trained members of the commu- nity who say that it would be an injustice to those who have paid for their share of the shelter if others who have not paid their share benefit by it. These opponents of admitting others are articulate, but few; their numbers are bolstered considerably, however, by many who say only that they really enjoy tennis and swimming and don't want to give them up. Between the bleeding hearts and those who oppose admitting any outsid- ers stands a middle group: those who think that, as an exceptional act of benevolence and charity, some outsiders should be admitted, but not so many as to make a significant difference to the quality of life within the shelter. They propose converting one of the five tennis courts to sleeping accommodations and giving up a small public open space which has attracted little use anyway. By these means, an extra 500 people could be accommo- dated, which the self-styled "moderates" think would be a sensible figure, sufficient to show that Fairhaven is not insensitive to the plight of those less fortunate than its own members. The Ethics of Refugee Policy 287 A referendum is held. There are three proposals: to admit 10,000 outsiders; to admit 500 outsiders; and to admit no outsiders. For which would you vote? The Real World The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) estimates that there are at least 10 million refugees in the world today. 1 The great majority of these refugees are receiving refuge, at least temporarily, in the poorer and less developed countries of the world. For instance, in 1988 Pakistan and Iran together host nearly 5 million Afghan refugees. More than half the nations of Africa harbor refugees, the greatest number being of Ethiopian origin and concentrated in the Horn (Djibouti, Ethiopia, and Somalia) and Sudan. There are also refugees from Uganda, South Africa, Chad, Mozambique (over 200,000 in recent months and increasing) and from Zaire. In Central America there are thought to be 2 million refugees, though only about 120,000 benefit from UNHCR assistance. The refugees include Guatemalans, Nicaraguans, and Salvadorans and are mostly in Mexico, Honduras, and Costa Rica. What is the effect on a country like Pakistan of receiving a sudden influx of 2.8 million Afghan refugees, mainly in the North West Frontier province? Pakistan does get some outside assistance: the World Food Program pro- vided 3 70, 000 tons of food for refugees in Pakistan during 19 86.