Australian Government Under Attack over Comment on "Persecuted" White Farmers

"Persecuted" South African farmers deserve the protection of a "civilised country."

NYT Article
IOL Article
Bloomberg Article- Why Land is Back in News in South Africa

April 24th 2018

In March, Minister Peter Dutton made a controversial comment to the UN stating that South African farmers should seek refuge in Australia due to thier "persecution" in South Africa.

This comment comes at a stage where under the colonial Native Land Act stripped millions of Black South Africans of their land which the democratic elected government has been under discussions on how to deal with the immense inequality 75% of the land belongs to less than 10% of the White South African population has been an issue which is has been under addressal for the past 25 years (since democracy.)

Dutton has been under scrutiny for this comment as his behaviour towards refugees has not been as welcoming as his towards the South African Farmers. Australia's immigration policy has been under international scrutiny for its mistreatment of refugees, resulting in the government paying $53 Million in damages to migrants who had said they had suffered both physical and mental abuse in the camps.

Protesters in Pretoria, South Africa, raising awareness of attacks on farmers at a demonstration in November. The killings of white farmers have been a hotly debated issue in the country for years, though government statistics on whether they are racially motivated remain thin. CreditGianluigi Guercia/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

South Africa's Relations and Co-operations minister Lindiwe Sisulu requested of an immediate retraction of the statement stating that "no one is being persecuted in South Africa, including white farmers. We call upon all non-governmental organisations to desist form spreading untruths and misleading information."

The IOL article was able to articulate the issue in a way which did not give as much background information as the NYT articles did; which I assume is based off of the assumption that most of its readers are of South African desent. However, the NYT article was able to give a full sypnosis of the statements made by the Australian minster, providing substatial information on previous human rights violations against immigrants which the Australian governmemt has commited, giving the reader an opportunity to understand why the South African government was against these statements.