Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
CLOSE TO 200 shocked survivors were plucked from the sea this morning after their overloaded boat sank, claiming more than 30 lives in the latest deadly migrant tragedy to hit the Mediterranean.
The sinking on Friday killed mostly women and children when the boat went down off Malta near the Italian island of Lampedusa packed with some 230 people desperate to reach European shores, according to officials.
The Italian navy said 34 people, including infants and children, were known to have died. Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat had given the figure of 27 at a press conference on Friday night.
Exhausted after a 10-hour journey from the wreck site, some 143 survivors arrived in Valetta on Saturday morning on board a Maltese naval vessel. The migrants, thought to come from the Horn of Africa, were escorted onto buses to be driven to shelters.
Fifty-six more survivors were being escorted to Porto Empedocle in Sicily on an Italian naval vessel. Another nine were airlifted to Lampedusa, including a couple with a nine-month-old-baby whose three-year-old brother drowned, emergency services said.
The sinking came just over a week after a similar tragedy killed more than 300 Africans in the deadliest refugee disaster to date in the region, prompting the European Union to call for sea patrols to cope with the flood of migrants knocking on its doors.
The Maltese navy had dispatched rescue ships and helicopters and diverted commercial vessels to the area, around 100 kilometres south of Lampedusa and 110 kilometres from Malta, while Italy sent two naval vessels and helicopters carrying inflatable life rafts.
European Union Commissioner for Home Affairs Cecilia Malmstroem said she was following the rescue operations “with sadness and anxiety” and praised Italy and Malta for their swift response.
“These new horrible events are happening while we still have the shocking images of the tragedy in Lampedusa in our minds,” she said, adding that the latest disaster highlighted the need for expanded search and rescue operations “to better detect and assist boats in distress”.
‘European problem’
The Commission has been urging EU states to pledge planes, ships and funds for EU border guard service Frontex, whose budget has been cut.
Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letta called the latest tragedy “a new and dramatic confirmation of the state of emergency”.
“Italy and Malta cannot be left all alone, this is a European problem,” said his Maltese counterpart, Joseph Muscat, who spoke with Letta by phone.
The migrants in Friday’s disaster alerted the authorities using a satellite phone when their boat got into difficulty in Maltese waters.
The boat, bound for Lampedusa, capsized after those aboard attempted to catch the attention of a military aircraft flying overhead by gathering at one end of the vessel, the Maltese navy said.
The sinking came as Italian divers found another body from last week’s refugee shipwreck off the coast of Lampedusa, raising the death toll in the tragedy to 312.
Only 155 survivors were rescued out of an estimated 500 people, most of them Eritreans and Somalis, on the boat which departed from Libya.
The disaster has shown up the EU’s asylum policy, which has been criticised for being overly restrictive and forcing refugees to resort to desperate measures to reach Europe.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Countries will just claim they didnt know they were going to be used to carry out crimes
There is too much money involved, business wont let this get off the ground
Sadly you are probably right:-(
Its a shame its taken this long to actually happen.. Endless lives lost that could have been somewhat prevented a long time ago.
Do u really believe that Arms tRading will stop -
— it would ruIn – or atleast badly affect many economies – notably USA/UK/France .
Stop sales of Arms to Israel or SA – well of course if push came to shove they could send them as a gift .
Too much world trade on all sides ihas to do with weapons industry .
Its just more junk from UN
It still won’t make a blind bit of difference , the un is a toothless animal as we have seen in the past
Agreed, I would describe them as “impotent “
So they’ll sell to an intermediary instead….
Like in that Nicholas Cage movie… Where he was an arms dealer… What was it called again?? He was some kind of War Lord…. Oh yeah, City of Angels, that’s the one….
You’re right Brian. Hopefully they’ll have that covered.
Thats called the Lord of War…And the best line in it was ” One in eleven people are unarmed on this planet.How do we arm the other ten?”
Well ,watch plenty more genocide and massacres happen because of this stupidity on a global scale from the One world Govt.This has given dictatorships and tyrants a charter to massacre unarmed pouplations as they know now the unarmed will never be able to get enough defensive weaponry to defend themselves.When it does happen the UN will be in talking mode and call for restraint on both sides..Nice,if you are trying to counter a helicopter gunship with a muzzle loading shotgun.
The UN ,the worst organisation that was ever dreamed up by mankind! It has more blood on its collective hands thru inaction in the last 60 years than some countries.
Iran, North Korea and Syria are the only countries that voted No.
Not surprising.
It’s amazing how people actually make North Korea (referring to the government/military of course) out to be as the victims of American/South Korean “bullying”. America and South Korea don’t put their own people in concentration camps. No one should even recognize North Korea as a legitimate state as the North Korean people have absolutely no rights. There goals of a United Korea are absolutely delusional.
Preaching to the choir here Kevin.
North Korea is only a buffer zone between the US and China and in some messed up way has to be legitimate to act as such. Just crazy. When power remains in the hands of the few the many will continue to suffer.
I wonder who the 23 abstentions were ? Anyway, positive move forward.
Full breakdown of the vote here, Mark – http://twitdoc.com/upload/marcellehopkins/voting-record-of-the-att-reso.pdf Most notable are China, Russia and Egypt.
Cheers
To Little To Late as the UK has sold most of these arms the the worst regimes in the Middle East and India.
India?
Quite amazing that states have to be told not to sell to these places!
it means nothing there still going to be sold under the table out of site out of mind .
You know what will really stick in the throat of B. Lowe and the rest of his cronies is that they can’t even point at America or the Western Allies and say “Look they abstained”.
Where’s petr tarasov these days? Thinking up a new identity?
Banged up in either Russia or the US I belive.
Took years to formulate, no doubt will take days for states to find a way around it. The permanent members of the security council all happen to be the largest arms exporters in the world.
Long time coming – has the potential to make a real difference once it enters into force.
Quite amazing that states have to be told this!
Lol.
Any comment on the fact that Syria, Iran and NK are the only countries that voted no, and Russia and China both abstained? Does that tell you anything about which states commonly carry out human rights abuses and who might arm them?
Remember there is nothing in this treaty to prevent arms sales for legitimate use…
We both know he is running for cover on this one.
BLowe bashes American/Western media constantly while worshipping RT (the Russian station not RTE), Al Jazeera, and any other anti-American media group. While pointing out the bias/bigotry of any news organizations is good; its hard to take someone seriously when they apply different standards depending on the country that media is from. I can say one thing Russia and Qatar would never allow FOX to set up a Russian or Qatari version of their station in their countries. Meanwhile RT and Al Jazeera have US versions of their channels and constantly spout anti-American rhetoric.
Yes, b Lowe can you explain why your 3 favorite regimes have said no?
B Lowe, did Venezuela abstain as well?
Have you been to Venezuela Declan ?
John, it’s looks to me that Venezuela abstained. Correct me if I’m wrong. Venezuela is another of b lowes fave places.
”Does that tell you anything about which states commonly carry out human rights abuses and who might arm them”
No – it just tells us who are the most clever at hiding what they do . The US cant do without its Arms trade – which in the end may be a seriuos Achiiles heel – and the idea od US/UK not supplying their proxy countriees for self defence is not on .
Remember the US claims the right to a Pre-emtive strike – and this follows thro to its ”Allies” .
This is the get out cluase – as if it was needed
”from selling arms to countries when they know those weapons will be used to carry out genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes”
this bit of paper – well the best that can be said for it – it gave Employment to some for a few days / weeks .
Jim, the best Defence is to have a better offence. That’s what preemptive strike is all about.
The US learnt that lesson at pearl harbour.
After WW2 and during the Cold War and beyond the US has stuck to that strategy.
It’s not about attacking a defenceless country. It’s about being on guard against a country that wants to harm you.
Hit them before they hit you.
Simple.
I do hope that North Korea, Iran and Syria are exempt from this. … you know with them being such shining examples of responsible thinking and out standing members of the global family we should, rightly so, cut them some slack
Is there a use for arms that’s not criminal? They should go a step further and retract and recycle the lot!
To stop criminals……..
To defend yourself from criminals wether petty theives or genocidal Govts.
Imagine if six million Jews each had in the 1930s a single shot .22 pistol. Nazism wouldnt never have happened, or 26 million Russians had had the same…Stalin would have never massacred them either.
Thats one of the benefits of gun control and arms control in the 20th century , over 100 MILLION civillian DEAD! That were either disarmed and massacred by invaders or by their own Govts before hand.
Why o why , a man needs his arms…..
Come on Declan , Australia warned the US of the pearl harbour attack , it’s a well known fact so maybe the best defence would have been to get their men out of there before it happened , don’t you think
Actually Britan knew about it but on Churchills orders kept very sthumm as Churchill needed the US iin the war with the UK as an ally.But there was alot more to it too, Washington was hardly going to belive the UK ,a nation at war with Japan that an attack was iminent,despite plenty of Japanese provacation for at least five years before hand in the Pacific .The complete secrecy and surprise that the Japanese carrier fleet operated under on the Pearl Harbour strike.The “Aw shucks nuthin will happen here in Hawaii.”Attitude shown by the top brass in Hawaii,even when the radar picked the entire Japanese air fleet on the way in on n attack a half hour out,and ships could have brought to general quaters,planes got in the air,and guns manned.It was “dont worry about it,they are proably ours coming in from California!!!”
Funnily the same attitude prevailed that Wed in the US on 9/11.Same warnings,same indifference.
have your say