Indus Special with Meshal Malik|US: Strict Measures Against Migrants| EU to Share Immigrants|Ep 177|

Indus Special with Meshal Malik|US: Strict Measures Against Migrants| EU to Share Immigrants|Ep 177|

hello and welcome to in the special I'm Michelle Malek now as US president Donald Trump's administration continues its crackdown on undocumented immigrants it now has has introduced a fast-track deportation process that will bypass the courts and allow the government to send undocumented migrants back to their country of origin this is just the latest in a series of moves aimed at undermining human rights and denying asylum to those who need it the most on tonight's show let's find out more about this developing story joining us for this discussion is mr. spine a former associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States and constitutional an international law expert and lawyer he's joining us from the city is District of Columbia we're also joined by mr. Anthony Lowenstein who's a journalist joining us from Jerusalem thank you both for joining us now mr. fine let me begin with you give us a sense of how this new policy is going to change the already very confusing and complex crisis at the southern border and across the United States when it comes to migration want to begin by identifying what the current law is with regard to seeking asylum status under international conventions and United States law an immigrant would need to show by a preponderance of evidence that there's a likelihood of persecution if they were returned to their country of origin based upon race religion ethnicity nationality or membership in a social group now that determination is highly fact-specific and under traditional enforcement protocols that decision is made by an immigration judge and the change that the Trump administration is inaugurating and it is authorized by a 1996 law passed by a Democratic Congress when President Bill Clinton was present authorizes a more expedited review process of an asylum claim made by persons who are lower down on the official rung than a judge for those who cannot prove that they have been in the United States for at least two years or more that often times is very difficult if you're in an immigration status you don't necessarily are collecting rent stubs and things like that right the idea is to accelerate the decision-making on deportation which now has got a log jam of approaching a million cases so this means that you're taking out the courts rule completely from this picture well it means that there is when the legal terminology less due process you're entrusting the decision whether or not a valid a column claim has been made to lower-level officials who are probably less schooled in the law and I think given the administrative sting goals the Trump administration is sending they're being encouraged to err on the side of denying asylum than accepting claims of likely persecution if returned to the country of origin right mr. Lanson on the pointman rights and basic human rights how important is due process and reducing this in this system in this manner knowing that these migrants many of which are fleeing from Central American countries from conflict what impact does that have on the very basic fundamental human rights it's a huge difference and I think it's important to put the context into this question that what the US is doing in fact sadly plays into a broader global role the u.s. obviously the world's biggest most powerful nation so of course what happens there is covered around the world including on this program what the US is doing is not the first place to be doing that I'm from Australia that I live in Jerusalem now and Australia's immigration policy and parts of European refugee policy is remarkably similar in the last 10 20 years to what the US is doing I think it's important also to remember that increasingly Western states are keen to get rid of people who they view as unwanted undesirable brown or Muslim that is the basic ugly fact and in Australia we've seen that for two decades where refugees are held off on for years and years and years and Pacific gorlags the European Union is increasingly not putting any boats to patrol the Mediterranean people are drowning in the sea who are trying to escape from the Middle East or Africa and what the US is doing is willfully and at the Trump administration ignoring the fact that its own country and foreign policy where the Democrat or Republican has deeply affected the reason why people are fleeing Central America in the first place I was in Honduras as a short example of years ago for work and many of the refugees who were coming into the US are at least trying to are from Honduras and in the last roughly 35 40 years u.s. foreign policy in Honduras has made that country into one of the most violent nations on the planet gang violence driver violence etc it makes perfect sense that someone wants to flee a country like Honduras and come say to the US so the effect of a trump administration making it more difficult for people to come doesn't actually solve the problem it simply keeps it potentially out of US borders but it moves the problem somewhere else right and that is a very very essential point that should be remembered in debates and arguments such as these that you should contextualize where these people are coming from who is behind the problems being created in those areas another update from what is happening on the migration front is that Trump has announced to a place sanctions on Mexico and Guatemala who are pulling out of a previous agreement they had with the United States a tell us more about that well I think what's what you've seen here is Mexico are being totally and frankly an impossible position and this is not to the fairly Mexican policy by any means but essentially this did not start with the Trump administration about during the Obama years there were massive pressures by the Obama team on Mexico to try to keep refugees from entering the US Mexicans were sent back and the truth is just in fact last month in June 2019 figures released by the Mexican government said that it's one of the most violent first six months ever recorded in Mexican history that's from gun gun and drug violence in other words putting aside refugees who are entering Mexico we're talking about Mexicans themselves who are being violently abused and killed for a range of reasons gun violence drug violence that sort of thing so I think there's new policies by a trump administration essentially is trying to push the problem away from US border so the Trump administration coming up to the 2020 election can say you see America we've solved the problem we're kicking at all these unwanted and brown people frankly and then our Mexican or Guatemalan a problem which doesn't solve anything except it potentially allows Trump to push a very harder white nationalist agenda right and that's a very dangerous path that the country seems to be going on on but before that I want to talk more about what is happening at the border and mr. fine I want to get you on this now a lot of analysts a lot of people are saying that the Trump administration is manufacturing a crisis something that mr. Lowenstein also talked about here but I want your take on it he certainly inflated the description of the problem of immigration that has been long-standing from prior administrations and claiming it's a crisis well most people don't perceive it as a crisis whatsoever including those who are on the border I do think however it's important to be complete and understanding the problem even if person is fleeing a country because there's violence there's death threats under the current Asylum law that was drafted in the conventions after World War two that doesn't qualify as a justification for a refugee status if that were to occur it is requires a an act of Congress or a change in the convention so I think a lot of the criticism really and I'm certainly not a defender of mr. Trump there's a criticism of the existing law that is at as been applied in is too narrow in its application if you're just trying to create refugee status for people who are fleeing great danger and to blame it all on mr. Trump I think is an incomplete assessment here even under President Obama he was decently the same thing but having a little less aggressive of enforcement now what does this say about you know the problem itself it has been around for at least 40 or 50 years when I first came to the Department of Justice in 1975 I sat on a group called the interagency Commission on illegal immigration the dimensions of the problem were virtually the same the fact is that people will come just like drugs well if it's necessary to her survival and if they have a financial need and because employers in the United States like cheap labor they will they will have the demand so that most of these immigrants do come they're not on welfare they have jobs they send remittances it's a little bit like trying to fight the international drug trafficking trillions of dollars but the international drug trafficking cysts there are some problems that you can only muddle through with there isn't any real solution right right we've talked about how the law plays into this something I do want to touch upon and I want you to enlighten the viewers and myself more about it is what rights in the United States specifically do undocumented migrants actually have I mean there's a campaign going about by Democrats Young Democrats know your rights right before the ice raids began what does this entail are there any rights for undocumented migrants yes there are in fact there is a famous case called Plyler video which I was involved in at the time which holds that if you're an illegal immigrant child you still have a right to free public education now with regard to deportation hearings you have rights as an immigrant you haven't been determined illegal until there's been due process to have your case adjudicated by an immigration judge it's not an independent article 3 judge it's part of the administer Machinery but at least have an opportunity to prove that you fall within one of these Asylum categories now what the administration is doing is scaling back somewhat the level and the intensity of that due process hearing but that is enshrined in the law and in fact several of the Trump initiatives are now being stalled because federal judges have held that they transgress on due process that's in the immigration statutes right mr. lahnstein let's just oppose what mr. fine told us about all the legalities all the laws all the protections all the complexities with the human picture of this matter let's put it side-by-side with what we hear about the frightening stories coming out of the detention centers at the southern border what do people need to remember about this you know that no the detention camps that exist not just along the border but also across much of the US has been a blight on the u.s. for decades and in fact similar policies in the u.s. are copied in the UK Europe and my country Australia these often are privately run they run for profit and in fact during the 2016 US election the private prison and immigration companies in fact were excited about a Trump victory because they knew that if Trump won they would have far more people to actually house in their facilities and they were correct their share prices have gone through the roof and what does that mean practically that means of these facilities often are poorly run food is bad health care is often non-existent children often are separated from their parents very very young children separated from their parents to the point where still today after was a big scandal in 2018 last year of all these kids who are separate hearing to this day the Trump administration had mitts in bits in various court done filings they actually don't know where some of the children are who are separated from their parents that doesn't mean the children are dead it simply means that the parents are not with their kids which is outrageous to put it mildly and although there were definitely a degrees of family separation during the Obama administration as mr. fine rightly says trumpets that have put it on steroids accelerated this kind of brutality so the facilities themselves are brutal but of course this in some ways is the point that is exactly what the system is designed to do it's designed to make it hard it's designed to make your life impossible and why because then immigrants who are in the u.s. in this Center say to their family back in Honduras do not come that's the theory and that's the theory the so-called deterrent theory that the US has been using for years that's the UK Australia now I would argue that doesn't particularly work in the short term potentially it can you can literally shut the border for example the u.s. can do that Australia of course is an island but the US could theoretically shut its border I don't think it's about although Trump has threatened that but doesn't solve any of the problems the UN released us recently but I think there's over 70 million refugees in the world today it's the highest number since World War two now these figures are because of a range of reasons the wars in Afghanistan Syria Iraq a countless other reasons these issues are not going anywhere so yes the u.s. can build higher walls and borders and more surveillance all that kind of stuff you can do that it doesn't solve any of the problems unless you're simply doing it which a political corn to which namely is I would argue a white nationalist agenda right mister fine going back to you and putting out a very large question but also wanting to get a get an answer to it finding an answer to it during all of this during all the laws all the policies that the Trump administration has placed on migration and those that existed previously before Trump and have continued to be a placed how many of these are infringing upon the basic human rights and freedoms that the u.s. prides itself on well the u.s. prides itself on subscribing to the rule of law and I don't believe that simply applying the law even though it's too narrow necessarily is a renunciation of universal human rights the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was a dog that in 1948 which is the so-called gold standard if you will of human rights gospel does not prescribe you know a right to asylum that is a right that came about by a separate convention it's a treaty and we have adopted statutes that implemented but they say that convention confines the asylum right to those who are fleeing persecution based upon race religion ethnicity political opinion or membership in a social group it doesn't it doesn't apply to the substantial number who are fleeing just dangerous conditions in their own countries because of drug trafficking lawlessness are those dangerous conditions actually in fact a threat to their lives I mean isn't that what persecution and conflict is when it's threatening your life and your existence it is persecution but it's not persecution based upon race nationality political opinion religion or membership and a social group because the international conventions don't cover all threats all egregious circumstances now you can change it to be definitiely revisited excuse me would you say that this definition needs to be revisited and we worked yes I do believe that's true I think that the initial Convention was drafted with the idea in mind of the Jews seeking refuge from the Holocaust if you will the persecution of the Nazis and it was drafted I think narrowly to meet those circumstances I would agree with you I think that anybody who is fleeing for their life ought to be welcomed as long as they come in they're a law-abiding and they want to be a citizen and subscribe to the the Constitution of the United States but we still have to stick with a rule of law that's up to Congress to be certain and the Congress of the United States even the house controlled by the Democrats right not proposed such an extension right and on that note thank you so much mr. fine for joining us and talking to us we're going to take a short break when we return we're going to continue our discussion with another topic stay with us welcome back to IND especial following a meeting amongst the Foreign Affairs and interior ministers of the EU in Paris earlier this week French president Emmanuel macron announced the 14 member states agreed upon mechanisms to deal with migrants coming to Europe now since the start of the year the International Organization for Migration estimates that some 700 migrants died while trying to come to cross the Mediterranean while the number of migrant deaths is declining in comparison to past years human rights organizations say that the European nations continue to turn a blind eye to the plight of those thousands of people who risk their lives while travelling across the Mediterranean leaving everything behind on today's show we discussed whether this agreement between the EU states will change anything for the migrants at sea or will this just turned stale while no practical steps are taken joining us for this discussion today is mr. Doyle shalid who's a journalist and editor special hydration and diversity politics in Europe he's joining us from Berlin thank you so much for joining us and welcome to the show mr. shalid now what do you make of this decision of the French government with 14 other European states do you think this will change anything when it comes to migration policies all over the EU no no I don't think so I think what it's doing is it's codifying the fact that there will always be a limited number of EU member states who take in migrants and the states that lined up officially lined up that have been disclosed in the in the McCrone plan are typically more liberal more cosmopolitan center-left countries than those that are currently known to reject immigration outright whether they be refugees or or you know or regular economic migrants the Portugal is an exception progressive country by EU standards right now so it's no surprise that they would indicate that there that they would welcome refugees and migrants for example from the Middle East Poland obviously has not lined up and it is not expected that it will there is a east-west divide on the migration question in Europe Italy is the only country which approximates politically the eastern side of the of the political divide on migration and it is a relatively new positioning for Italy Italy was not known for its fierce anti-immigration politics under the previous I think the Democratic people that government that was replaced last year year ago a straight and especially I do want to talk about how this demonstrates this migrant agreement might demonstrate actually a deep deep divide amongst the European states but before that I want to jump to mr. Anthony Lowenstein and talk to him about the crisis at sea the numbers we hear are appalling the pictures we see are frightening so many people gathered on these boats crossing over risking their lives tell us about what is happening on that front what the EU has sadly adopted what I would call offshoring Australian style policy and Australia sadly were masters of this animal last 20 years what I mean is that they've outsourced their refugee problem to countries in Africa Libya being the most obvious one but also in Asia and what that means is that they've massively reduced the amount of money they're willing to spend on rescuing people at sea in the last few years they've decided after the huge influx of about a million or so refugees in 2015 many of whom were welcomed of course by Germany that politically that's become unattractive now so the EU believes and as mr. Shelley Riley said there's no consensus in Europe and there won't be any consensus about this for the foreseeable future because of the east-west divide so therefore what that means is that the was decide to offshore its problems so to speak to Libya Libya is a failed state it's in the middle of a war zone many refugees are sent there to Libya to be housed in literally torture camps there are slave markets in Libya the EU is funding these facilities that's what the EU think should happen to refugees if you ask them directly of course they say there are posts of Libyan abuses that's terrible and they would never support that that's where European money is going so on the one hand they're offshoring their problem to a non European country and France is also a my dad trying to refugee manage refugees in news year another very poor African country well at the same time they're reducing the amount of money they're spending on sea rescues the effect of that's very obvious right a lot of people are dying and frankly the European you think European authorities want to send out to these migrants there has to be a message behind this when they are doing all of this so rashly the message to me is an ugly one it's basically don't come don't come stay where you are stay in danger whether it's actually in the Middle East ignoring as we talked about before the role of the u.s. in Latin and Central America who do things causing so many of the problems in Africa in the Middle East it's not solely Europe of course it's not but a lot of the wars that have caused these problems in much of the Middle East have European and British fingerprints on them and I simply Afghanistan or Iraq didn't suddenly to start a war for no reason we all know how that happened in the last 15-20 years so the message from the EU is very clear yes we welcomed many of you know last four or five years those days are over the walls are going up surveillance is going up and the fact is we don't want you here and the truth is that's going to make it increasingly difficult for people trying to enter from Africa in the Middle East but like we see in the u.s. it won't stop people crying because often they're really desperate to do so right that's really going from everything that mr. Lowenstein has pointed out here it seems like the message is loud and clear then when our European states try to work out a policy work on their immigration stance is that just a facade no it's not not I worked in Brussels during the height of the refugee crisis and while I had many disagreements with the European Commission's proposed refugee policies I do believe that if the European Commission had had its way and had prevailed over the heads of the Eastern member state governments that opposed any kind of quota system for refugees arriving in southern Europe and the Balkans the situation today would be significantly better and the policies that the Commission would have moved to adopt would have been different I don't necessarily believe that the European Commission is a benign liberal institution but it it would have executed more liberal policies if it in the political room to do so at the time of the refugee crisis the fact of the matter is that the European Commission has to reflect the consensus of the member states of the European Union and the newer member states are politically to the far right their nationalists their racist and their politics on the refugee question determined the European Commission's ultimate policymaking decisions particularly as mr. Lowenstein put it offshoring in terms of offshoring the refugee crisis the major problem for Europe that particularly the Americans don't seem to quite understand is that whenever there's a crisis in the Middle East the Europe tends to feel it first in terms of the human cost let me put this question to use picking off from some of the last words he mentioned here that whenever there seems to be a crisis in the Middle East of Americans don't understand the cost that the Europeans will have to suffer now we talked earlier about how the US might be inflating the crisis at hand when it comes to its borders do you think Europe inflates in any way the migrant crisis or is there in fact a crisis I would say there is a crisis I guess it depends how you define what crisis means but the truth is that in the last years have been major Middle Eastern African Wars and famine and the cause of either man-made Wars or climate change or a range of other reasons people are fleeing for a reason I think it's important that is to note one thing the majority of refugees do not flee to Europe or the u.s. or the West they stay in their own countries well they're staying within their countries nearby not every refugee from say Syria is aiming to go to New York or London it doesn't work that way yes many people want to have a better life for their families and I've got no problem with that whatsoever but it's a myth that you have millions and millions of people who are you know sort of banging on the door of Europe to try to get in right and oh thank you so much mr. Andrew and we loewenstein for joining us and taking out the time to talk to us especially going back to you and talking about this divide in Europe tell us more about it and how its deepening through the with the coming years how is the issue of consensus how is the issue of actually having a debate and discourse about immigration migration just becoming more and more complex the whole point of problematizing immigration in Europe at present particularly in terms of far-right political parties and far-right political you know political leaders like Matteo salvini is is to problematize cultural pluralism Europe is becoming increasingly diverse it's looking more and more like the United States and that's something that far-right political leaders in you're continually boom on the the the reason why they have to problematize immigration is to make a case for sending people home who already live here and who might be considered Europeans there is a fear that Europe is culturally disappearing under the weight of its diversity and the Italian government sounds like it has a lot less experience dealing with diversity than Italy actually has Italy is internally a very diverse country already and it always has been right mom and mr. shillitoe hold on to that thought I introduced another guest who's joined us mr. mr. le breton er who was a political analyst he's joining us from Berlin thank you so much mr. Bruckner for joining us on the show now while we're talking about this divide and how there is this fear of being invaded by the Outsiders in Europe it's growing when you talk about migrants the political right is always fuelling a fire and making people fear the other now let's talk about the moral responsibility if there is any on Europe when it comes to housing these migrants I mean we talked earlier about how these countries in Europe have had an imprint on many countries from which migrants are coming from how do you think there is a moral responsibility here well of course there is a moral responsibility given the fact that we have hundreds of years if not thousands of years of colonial history but we are talking about the European Union that is trying to coordinate an integrated migration policy and that also includes countries that are very young that certainly do not have a colonial history and we have to also take their point of view into consideration and it is never a good idea to just and what is their mining moral pardon what is those younger nations of role and what are they saying about this well we have something like a divide between Western European countries including Britain France Belgium Germany were being really see a moral obligation and also a discourse to address this while on the former eastern side of the Iron Curtain we have countries like Poland and the Czech Republic or former Soviet Union countries republics of the Soviet Union like Latvia Estonia and Lithuania and you cannot really tell their population that because of the moral obligation of Europe at the whole they have to do things that are against their interests right actually just the last question to you before we progress with this discussion when we talk about the migration crisis we're hearing about Italy Italy also seem to oppose this latest move they said that they don't want to be a part of it but at the same time do you think that there is a legitimate reason for them to reject trying to find a solution because in the past they have been responsible for housing a very very significant amount of refugees and migrants coming from the shores Italy's refusal to back the new agreement and take part in the discussions what is in fact a refined ideological objection while Italy in the past has demanded an equitable redistribution of migrants who land on its shores it is increasingly saying that it objects to redistribution because it does not want Africans and Middle Easterners arriving in the arriving in Europe period it would prefer to pursue a policy of repatriating everyone that lands on its shores to Libya which has been a long-standing Italian policy which long precedes the current government it was this this this policy was inaugurated by my my Tarasov a nice mentor Silvio Berlusconi mr. should leave very quickly so when Italy is talking about the fact that it has a beard the brunt of all these migrants and other European state offers supported it should the outside world believe it should be to people in Europe that narrative no I've worked covering Italian politics for almost 20 years and I know that's our salvini rhetoric quite well and I think the best the best approach to understanding where salvini is coming from is to simply doubt him on these matters most if not all of the time – Lavinia is a very clever politician and everything he says has several layers to it that you have to write analyze for their nuances right and thank you so much mr. Julie for joining us and talking to us and mr. Louie Bruckner on that point that at least narrative about bearing the brunt of migrants and refugees should be taken with a pinch of salt do you agree with that well Italy has a point that we didn't really work in the last 20 years when problem like this was on the horizon a coherent European solution that takes into consideration that the immediate effects of migration are at the border and not in the mainland of the European continent and this has never been addressed and specifically not in the so-called Dublin agreement in which countries in the center of the European Union do not even take have to take asylum seekers because they have to apply for asylum in so-called safe third countries and for example in Germany every country around Germany is considered safe so they have a case on the other hand populist government's instrumentalized migration and the reason why they are in power is that they play with the fears of people and they essentially need a migration crisis or construct one to stay in power right on that point I'd also like introduce another guest who's joined us mr. Alexis Poland who's a political analyst he's joining us from Ferris welcome to the show mr. Poland now while we're talking about this new policy that macron and 14 other states have come up with we don't know the details of it yet but our analysts before stated that it probably won't stick now when we talk about everything that is going on in the Europe we there be a solution when it comes to migration in the near future with this power struggle well well there has to be because migration is the biggest stake for Europe for the past years and it will be if nothing change there have been many summit European summit where we had this kind of declaration saying that all things will change we have an agreement with the 14 the 20 the 10 whatever and in the end what we've seen so far was inaction and after the words the actions were very far from from from the speeches and what has been the strategy of many European countries and and Brussels is not in India because the Commission has been trying to push to get a solution but each countries is very wary about having more migrants coming to their to their country so so far it's been a deal with Turkey on one side and a deal with no Libya on the other side and more from text people just oh man man disease and avoid people prevent people from entering Europe the problem is that in Europe you have countries like Italy or Poland or angery that are on the border of Europe and at the first front of migration and they have a very different vision of migration compared to Germany France and other and unless we find a solution with those very different countries that there is no solution right and mr. le Bruckner on that point unless there is less bound how do you think that's possible with so many competing ideologies they don't seem to be reconciling anytime soon whether you're the European Union has always been great to combine different topics and different understandings of in this case for example what is solidarity it's not about we find a solution or we don't find a solution but we keep working on the six let's say construction sites like a legal framework an approach to integration a resettlement of people who are already there and addressing the root causes in the country is where they come from to get closer to what could be considered an appropriate solution right when we're talking about asylum seekers reaching in Europe what does European law state about it right now what needs to be reworked about the legislation well as I pointed out before the so-called Dublin agreement with too much of a burden on the countries where refugees arrive and this is very unfair and it also doesn't address all the other related issues like what needs to be provided as integration policy which is even a question for generations not only the people who arrive but also what can we do as a teacher a nation to give them a chance to become active citizens in our democratic systems we also have to think about burden sharing and burden sharing is not just about money it's also about how many country or how many refugees can be integrated in what kind of socio-economic environment that needs to take into consideration how rich a region is or what the unemployment rate is or how homogeneous a society is so there are a number of unrelated topics at first sight that need to be addressed to make it an integrated migration policy concept right and mr. bone where we've been taught everything at a very state level when we talk about the culture culture individualistic culture of each European state what the people say their sentiments and as it's being talked about that people refugees don't shouldn't just be housed they should be integrated do you think there is widespread sentiment for that well there is the problem is what do you mean by integration I mean it's very tricky you can't just have someone who come for a country to just leave all the oldest culture and everything at the door and and turn to be a new person with a new culture integration is about the dialogue of culture so you have to respect the culture of the person coming in but you also have to explain what the culture of the contrarian is is about an integration also means full picture it's about education it's about employment it's about the state of welcome racism in each state it's the openness of the people and and it's it's very difficult balance to to strike every time because what you tend to do refugee or not I mean you have people coming from France or the UK where our diplomats and when they go abroad most of the time they stick together with people of their kind they might try some time to get there but trying to fully integrate the culture of the country you're in is very difficult it's not something that is happening in one day or in the hour it takes time and it's also depending on the way you perceive this country if you're welcome it help if you're not welcome it's very difficult then to just integrate the culture race and the dominant culture while we talk about how the right-wing governments are have gained so much power do you think that the culture is allowing for that any of that to happen at the moment of course not that's what that's the point I wanted to make is if you get these days of phobic leaders coming all over Europe saying that the problem is refugees the problem is the foreigners coming to steal our jobs then integration is impossible not because of the refugees coming but because of digs in of phobic people with their stance saying that we don't want to integrate these people we don't want these people coming from abroad we want to close the borders and kick these people out of our countries and if you say that then you've got a lot of people we will just stick to the rules and and be go even a little further and you get violence you get murders and you get all sort of things that prevent integration and and the country is burning right and on that note we've run out of time thank you so much this polling for joining us from Paris and thank you so much mr. le Bruckner for joining us from Berlin thank you for watching in this special we will see you again next week with more stories till then good bye and take care


4 thoughts on “Indus Special with Meshal Malik|US: Strict Measures Against Migrants| EU to Share Immigrants|Ep 177|”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *