As the anti-Trump resistance movement finds its feet after a dizzying first 11 days, it’s hard not to notice how well women are playing offence. I can think of no more perfect distillation of Trump’s presidency than German chancellor Angela Merkel explaining the Geneva convention to him over the phone after he attempted to alpha-male his way past it. Of course, the world’s most extravagantly unqualified man – who was only able to defeat his peerlessly qualified female opponent through a combination of voter suppression, weaponised misogyny, Russian propaganda and a constitutional technicality, and still managed to lose by 3m votes – had to receive on-the-job training, pro bono, from a female world leader.
He fought the election under the rules that exist. He won under the rules that exist.
That’s, you know, democracy.
That he ain’t perfect is glaringly obvious. But think what that says about his opponent?
And at the risk of mansplaining, the Convention on Refugees is not the Geneva Convention, it’s the Convention on Refugees. And it also does not state that the US or anywhere else must take in refugees from anywhere at all. What it does state is that refugees have the right to enter, and be safe in, the first country they can get to which they are safe in. Thus, a Syrian refugee, assuming they will be safe in Turkey, has a right to go and be safe in Turkey. This is not the same thing at all as stating that said refugee does or should have the right of entry into the US. Or the UK, Oz or places further afield than the first safe place that a refugee can get to.
That refugee right, as with any rights to asylum over things not caused by a shooting war, applies to the first safe place, no more than that.
And it’s still not the Geneva Convention.