A week is a long time in politics. We have gone from excoriating Italy and its demagogic Minister for Home Affairs Roberto Maroni, for its high-handed approach towards Malta in the matter of the Pinar E incident, to singing his praises for his enforced return to Libya of hundreds of migrants rescued at sea off Lampedusa. Having succeeded in off-loading the problem of asylum-seekers onto Malta in the first incident - despite Italy's clear breach of international search and rescue obligations - it now seems that Italy, by agreement with Libya, is despatching migrants back whence they came.

In deciding how it should react, the Maltese government should beware how close it gets to this unreliable partner. It should sup at the Italian table with a long spoon. While the initial reaction of our beleaguered Home Affairs Minister to the news of the enforced return to Libya - "we are in tandem" - was understandable, as was Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat's own approval, there is also a need for the initial euphoria to be tempered by reality. A number of questions have to be faced and cool heads must prevail.

First, is what Italy is doing legal under international law? President Emeritus Fenech Adami rightly cautioned Malta and warned that sending all migrants rescued at sea straight back to Libya would breach their fundamental human right to ask for protection.

The Council of Europe and the UNHCR also have their doubts. But then the UNHCR has not exactly covered itself in glory in reacting to Malta's problems. The way it handles this particular issue will, therefore, be a test of its credibility. It can either, as it has done thus far, shout from the safety of Rome that "this development is definitely not positive, governments are abdicating their responsibilities".

Or, it can pick up the constructive suggestion which Malta has put forward of having a "check point" established in Libya to handle the cases of genuine asylum-seekers. The latter - manned by UNHCR officials - would demonstrate that it is there to deal with international humanitarian issues in a practical way, not simply to police the letter of an outdated 1951 Convention. The UNHCR cannot hide behind the excuse that Libya is not a signatory to the UN Convention. Its job as a humanitarian organisation is to work around such a formality and seek solutions to the problem.

Secondly, what is happening in the European Commission and the EU more widely? That Italy is behaving this way is prompted no doubt by the fever of the forthcoming European Parliamentary elections. It is playing to the domestic gallery. The elections will be over in less than a month. Libya may or may not by then still be in a cooperative mood with Italy.

But the issue of illegal immigration for both Italy and Malta will still prevail and can only ultimately be resolved with the help and support of other members of the Union.

Diplomatic efforts to ensure an equitable and workable long-term burden-sharing agreement must continue to be the paramount priority if the international and humanitarian imperatives owed by rich countries to the poor are not to be swept away in a fit of self-righteous xenophobia emanating from Italy.