The potential Pol Pots of this world － yes，the planners and not just the perpetrators － must be deterred by the prospect of criminal justice.
And is it fair and realistic to expect the survivors to forgive and to cooperate if there is no justice？
In the absence of justice，private revenge may prevail which will spread fear and undermine the possibility for reconciliation.
Every traumatized society has to find its own compromise between justice and reconciliation when these two compete.
Let me now turn to the second question I raised.
If we do not or cannot prevent massive human rights abuses are we at least offering a safe haven to those escaping and knocking at our doors？
In looking back，the refugee issues of the 1930s and 1940s seem simple＝2E While some desperate Jews were admitted to safety abroad，there were also many more who were stopped in their tracks.
In light of the current debate in the United States about asylum－seekers without proper documents，I must note that those who managed to escape often did so by using fraudulent documents，issued and accepted by sympathetic officials.
It may not be so widely known that the Japanese Consul in Estonia，Chitoshi Suhigara，issued hundreds of visas to allow Jews to leave Europe.
Also Consul Ryoichi Manabe provided residence permits to Jewish refugees to protect their stay in Shanghai.
You know of course about Raoul Wallenberg.
These episodes of personal courage are important reminders that individuals can make a difference.
From our vantage point in the 1990s，this haunting memory of people trapped behind borders was simply part of the world's larger moral failure to confront persecution and genocide.
Yet at the time，the issues seemed to be as complex as they appear today.
High rates of unemployment，suspicion towards foreigners － especially those with unpopular religious beliefs or political views，exaggerated fears of the floodgates being opened，and foreign policy considerations had a higher priority than the lives of the persecuted.
In our own time，these concerns are very similar.
The end of the Cold War has meant that refugee protection no longer ③dovetails so neatly with strategic imperatives.
Nevertheless，the need for asylum has not diminished.
On the contrary，the persecutors，torturers and ④warmongers of the world have flourished in the current state of flux.
But the doors are closing around the world.
Refugees are seen primarily as a political，economic and environmental burden.
They also represent security hazardsIIn the developed world，while we realize that there are some economic migrants who abuse the asylum system，we must insist that each asylum－seeker has his or her case duly considered and that the refugee definition is not stripped of its meaning by a restrictive interpretation.
One month ago，a new expedited removal procedure was instituted at US ports of entry for those arriving without proper documents.
Many refugees will have trouble articulating their claim under the conditions of detention and the short time frame that are now in place.
The new fast－track procedure will be particularly difficult for survivors of torture and other extreme trauma.
In the meantime，interdiction of boats at sea continues，bringing to mind the voyage of the St. Louis.
We should work to prevent the deportation of Bosnian refugees who cannot yet return to their own homes.
It is wishful thinking to assume that my Office can make repatriation possible if political leaders in Bosnia are allowed to pursue their heinous policies of ethnic division and if shelter is not reconstructed more quickly.
Premature returns will cause great human suffering and may de－stabilize a fragile peace.
Elsewhere it is vital that the civilian and humanitarian nature of refugee camps be maintained.
The Rwandan refugee camps in Zaire and Tanzania were controlled by armed men，many of whom were probably guilty of genocide.
We asked for international help in getting these people out of the camps.
No country offered to get involved.
My staff had to continue feeding criminals as the price for feeding hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children.
We should not have been left in that position.
Unarmed relief workers are expected to face increasing danger in many situations.
Why do we still care about asylum？
Because，as in the past，it is the safest mechanism when all other human rights protections fail.
I have three pleas.
First，while managing immigration as a legitimate concern，do not shut out those fleeing for their lives and freedom.
Unlike others，refugees do not have a choice.
Second，I urge opinion leaders such as yourselves to de－dramatize and de－politicize the asylum debate.
Do not let racists and xenophobes set the agenda.
Asylum issues are manageable，particularly in western countries.
The total number of asylum－seekers in the West has been falling.
It is neither necessary nor helpful to invoke an atmosphere of crisis in setting refugee policy.
Third，I would ask you to maintain perspective.
Throughout the ages，many refugees have enriched societies.
Einstein was a refugee.
Madeleine Albright was one.
And refugee problems can be solved.
Millions of people do find refuge and millions eventually do go home.
Most refugees want desperately to go home，and their return is the most gratifying sight I see as I travel the world. (하략)
