The 20th century was termed as the century of the homeless man

The 20th century was termed as the century of the homeless man

The 20th century was termed as the century of the homeless man. In the 1970s, America withdrew from Vietnam. Later on, an anti-communist regime began in South Vietnam in 1975 (Lipman). In reaction to that, a program was set by Vietnam called the south programme to integrate two distinct socio-economic systems that affected particularly traders from various ethnicities, the military personnel who served in the American army, and the civil servants. The traders were majorly the Chinese who happened to have been sympathetic to the communist regime.

Regarding the Chinese, who in this case were foreigners in Vietnam, they had a fear of appearing in the losing side based on the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation signed in 1978 between Hanoi and Moscow. The treatment that the Chinese received from the citizens of Vietnam was described to be worse than that of Hitler on the Jews. The latter is according to Hoan Van Hoang, the Deputy Chairman of the National Assembly of Vietnam. Although it was not an obligation of the Vietnam government to consider the ethnic Chinese’s welfare, the New Economic Zones (NEZs) was formed as a measure to develop the underdeveloped areas. That, however, came as a rescue for the ethnic Chinese who ended up doing “tuff-jobs” which were never part of their economic activities initially. Such were the kinds of jobs which the Chinese were not accustomed to, including farming (Lipman).

Setting up of re-education camps to teach those who never believed in the communist South Vietnamese government that opposed communism. However, the asylum set was never bearable for the reason that life in the camps was intolerable. In the end, many people chose to flee the camps. As part of the asylum, America took part in a vicious campaign to show concern for the refugees, but in the end, that never added up to anything of substance to the refugees (Nguyen, 95). Since life in the camps was intolerably bad, many preferred to flee. Following the international attention that the Boat People were receiving, the American government under President Carter ordered that the distressed vessels in the South China Sea be sought out (Lee 79). The president ordered the 7th Fleet to carry out the latter task (Nguyen, 107).

As a result of the fall out of the Saigon government in 1975, many Vietnamese asylum seekers were forced to flee in large numbers to the neighboring countries, especially those in South East Asia. These countries include Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, and Hong Kong. Eventually, the Bat people crisis rose. The crisis worsened following the promises of asylum by the French, Australian, and US governments. The promises were unprecedented hence deepened the crisis. Living among the sea vessels, the Vietnamese refugees drastically added up to 200,000 by 1978 (Casella). At the time, they had already gone as far as reaching the ASEAN countries and Hong Kong. The ASEAN countries became asylum countries for the first refugee arrivals. However, compounding the rate of entries to that of the available settlement came along as a problem. An instance of 5,100 Boat People arriving in asylum countries in 1979, and only 8,100 settlements available is a reflection of the state of accommodation as far as asylum countries were concerned (Lee 77).

I guess it came along as a burden afterwards, especially for the asylum countries, the ASEAN countries, for this case. That is because, in 1979, the same countries cried foul claiming that they were unduly victimized. As a result, they held a “Special Meeting” from which they resorted to returning any further inflow of refugees in their territories. As an example, Malaysia returned 25,000 Boat People out of her shores (Casella). These countries, however, were protesting against the asylum because they were already becoming transit nations. Moreover, their economies were seriously deteriorating out of the asylums.

I believe a hope of refuge, at last, came in 1989 when the United Nations, through its Secretary-General Javier Perez Cuellar, held a meeting attended by 59 nations in Geneva to discuss the matter. The main discussion was to find a way in which the Boat People’s problem was going to be contained, and maybe the United Nations could consider taking control of the situation. During the meeting, UNHCR offered to chip in. At the same time, the Comprehensive Plan of Action (CPA) draft was adopted. The draft encapsulated the return rights for the Boat People as well as other refugees who never received the effect of asylum. A Steering Committee based in Southeast Asia was also formed to oversee the implementation of the CPA (Nguyen, 105).

Luckily enough, 43 countries offered resettlement support for the Vietnamese who had been supported by the first asylum countries. Vietnam also agreed to return the economic refugees to the country. On the other hand, CPA was sufficiently affected by 1995, and complete resettlement alongside the end of asylums in almost all the first asylum countries occurred in 1996. The UNHCR also withdrew from the issue in 1996 (Nguyen, 111). In the long run, I believe the United Nations played a significant role in ending the declaration as well as easing the asylum, which had turned out a burden for the first asylum counties.