"to what extent does Australia's current approach to adressing the global refugee crisis uphold their international obligations under key human rights reaties and conventions

Question

This is a argumnetative esaay that is not to emotive can you give two opposing viewpoints please

Answer 1

Viewpoint 1: Australia's current approach to addressing the global refugee crisis upholds their international obligations under key human rights treaties and conventions. The country has signed on to various international agreements such as the Refugee Convention and the Convention against Torture, which outline the rights and protections that should be afforded to refugees. Australia's policies aim to ensure that refugees are treated humanely and provided with access to necessary services and support. By maintaining a strong border control and processing system, Australia is able to manage the influx of refugees in a way that upholds their obligations under international law.

Viewpoint 2: Australia's current approach to addressing the global refugee crisis does not fully uphold their international obligations under key human rights treaties and conventions. The country has faced criticism for its offshore processing of asylum seekers, particularly on Manus Island and Nauru, where conditions have been deemed inhumane and abusive. Australia's strict border control policies have also been criticized for deterring refugees from seeking asylum in the country, effectively undermining their right to seek protection under international law. By prioritizing national security and deterrence measures over the rights and well-being of refugees, Australia is failing to fully uphold its obligations under key human rights treaties and conventions.