Refugees and Migrants - Essay Example

Critically Assess the Proposition That It Is Essential To Distinguish Between "Refugees" And Other Migrants People who leave their own country to live in some other one are influenced by a number of reasons. They could be motivated to leave their homes due to poor standard of living in their home state, due to better prospects abroad, due to personal reasons or perhaps something else. It is the differences in leaving one's country which makes a person labeled as a refugee, migrant, immigrant, asylum seeker, or a safe-haven seeker. But they all share one common fact. They are aliens in a foreign country and hold second class status to the people who were born in that state. We should start of first by understanding what is basically a refugee and a migrant. A refugee is defined as an individual who has forcefully been made to leave his home country due to a fear of being persecuted or feeling his life to be threatened. Refugees are often outcasts in their home country due to a difference in race, religion, nationality, or being part of a social group which is not accepted by the current government. But not all refugees are in such a state due to human influences. People escaping famines and pestilence are also included into the broad category of refugees (NCCA 2008). A migrant, however, is defined as a person who leaves his/her country in search of better jobs (Dictionary.com 2008). They leave their country using their own discretion without any influences such as coercion or force. This can clearly give a picture between the distinction between the two groups of people. While refugees are fleeing their country to save their own lives and lives of their families, migrants basically leave their countries to find work. The difference lies in the motivation for leaving their country. Before basically delving into the argument as to why migrants and refugees should be handled differently we will try to see what arguments are placed for considering them as one and the same. Many sources, usually egalitarian in nature, argue that since both groups of people are displaced from their home countries they should be welcomed by any new society and provided support. A policy known as "non-refoulement" exists, an international policy, which aims at protecting the rights of refugees. According to this policy people who have become refugees and arrive at a new state are not to be returned back to their home states and should be openly welcomed. 140 states have signed the non-refoulement policy which makes them prime states for refugees to seek a new life in (Jose Riera). But that is one of the only few valid arguments given by anyone. Because other than that, in reality a feature noted in most developed nations is that their laws, if at best not hostile towards refugees, are often biased to the nature of being cruel. For example, in an article by amnesty international's Australian edition it states how even though Australia has signed a number of treaties which enforce it to treat refugees well but in truth these refugees are detained in places where the Australian law is not valid hence these refugees cannot even demand non-refoulement since the policy is not valid in that area (Mark 2007). The reason why we such instances in newspapers of people being detained and arrested when trying to cross the border into another country is that it is becoming more and more difficult for the host country's to manage the inflow of these immigrants/refugees. The sheer volume of the incoming people is a burden on most countries who now, not only have to meet the needs of their own citizens but must also take care of these new people who are not always productive factors for the country. The refugees require lodging, sustenance and shelter which are costs the host country must bear. Not only that, but finding new jobs and work opportunities for these new people is also a taxing job for the government. In recent years there is also a security risk in permitting foreign individuals with no proper documentation and records into one's country. Terrorist attacks and other terrorist activities have made certain country's wary of allowing the inflow of foreigners inside their territory as they are constantly being victimized by these harmful entities. In general it is very problematic for countries to just allow people to start living in its own boundaries due to the injustice caused by others. Due to these reasons there is a need to differentiate between migrants and refugees. Migrants as stated earlier want jobs and are willing to work and become productive members of the new community. They want to earn their keep and are often taxpaying individuals. Most countries encourage migrants as they offer professionalism and a benefit to the country accepting them. Many specialists find better suited jobs and can bring the knowledge they have learnt to new states. Sharing of information and sharing of knowledge develops and the spread of technological innovation is also noted in the trade-off from the migration process. Whereas the refugees usually demand something in return. They seek protection and shelter and are not often in such a state to offer anything back to the host. They have minimal skills and are often unskilled laborers. Countries are apprehensive of such people as every country has its own share of unproductive population which is already a burden on taxpayers. The addition to the volume of these people who scrape a living. But the reason border patrols are strengthened and border securities are tightened is not to keep out refugees. They are done to keep out illegal immigrants. Refugees are being persecuted and if the host does not welcome them then they are in fact condemning them to death. Illegal immigrants are not being persecuted. They are also not under any pressure by their local government or state to leave. They leave to improve their living standards. But they often do not go through the proper channels. They use trafficking and smuggling agents to help them pass through border patrols. These people are not welcome by the host because they are undocumented. They need all the resources which were also required by the refugees but they weren't being persecuted in the first place to start off. In today's times people are claiming to be refugees over the slightest things. Terms like "economic refugee" and "environmental refugee" are coined to actually provide a reason for migrants to gain same protection as that of refugees. If a flood devastates a village it does not mean that they have to move at the moment's notice. Their own government is responsible to restore the area to its original state. But using that excuse, the denizens of the area become "environmental refugees" and try entering other prosperous countries. Border patrols are meant to stop these individuals from entering their country's geographic boundary (Lubbers R 2004). Why is it so essential to distinguish between refugees and other forms of migrants' The fore mentioned factors were basically reasons why people would migrate from their country to the other nearest hospitable country. The latter part of the above document answers host countries attitudes to different groups of people. We could see countries were willing to accept refugees, and migrants but not illegal immigrants. Now in the final part I will answer the main question as to the reason why the different groups should be treated separately. When people hear the words migrants they immediately hold negative views about that group. The press and media has helped give migrating people a bad image in the press and now even refugees, who are basically desperate to save their lives and move for no other purpose, are often stopped by border patrols and sent back to inevitable death. Governments and citizens need to have a clear distinction as to who is coming to their country and for what reason. People who are in dire need of help should be offered it as it is the moral thing to do. This would give us a better understanding of their problems and would help us to support them and let the advanced country have the intelligence to reform the country of the fleeing people. Illegal immigrants have no valid reasoning other than to benefit themselves. They should try to go through proper channels to gain entrance into a country and if they do not have the proper documentation then they should rightfully be sent back to their home country. Legal migrants who gain access by informing the country of their arrival, their reason for arrival and possibly sponsors are granted with their own rights and protection. They must also abide in the state under certain guidelines and regulations which each country states in its constitution or other legal policy. Since these migrants are often permitted by state they get jobs and are not burden on the economy, they help out the host state. But the downside is when migrants start living off welfare. The state has to support them now and it is a encumber growth in the economy (John C 2005). In conclusion, it is my opinion that states should first speed up their immigration processing as it would help encourage people to use the proper channels for migration. Improvement in the system would help the selection of people who could be deemed to be valuable members to the society (for example doctors, engineers and other specialists getting work visas and permits). The cost spent on border patrols would be harder to cut down as people who do not have any specialties would still use the human trafficking and smuggling channels to gain entrance into the countries. More countries which have the ability to sustain a large volume of migrants should be more welcoming to the migrants. This would decrease the load of people entering particular countries and eventually making them hostile towards immigrants. Countries which have already reached the benchmark of being developed countries should concentrate their effort in improving the governments of the developing and lagging countries and improving living standards in those countries. This would decrease the number of people exiting those states and in the long run help sustain the growth of the developing countries. Refugees and migrants should be treated separately so that refugees are not deprived from safety and migrants do not abuse the rights and offers made to the refugees. Both parties are in a place to harm each other and if they can be distinguished then they would get the treatment that they deserve. Bibliography Definition 2008, NCCA (National Councils of Churches in Australia), viewed 12 October, 2008, < http://www.ncca.org.au/actforpeace/protect_refugees/education/definitions>. Migrant, Dictionary.com (WordNet' 3.0. Princeton University), viewed 12 October, 2008, . Riera, J, Migrants and Refugees: Why draw a distinction, UN Chronicle Online Edition, United Nations. Available from: < http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2006/issue4/0406p31.htm>'[12 October 2008]. Querycat. (n.d.). Retrieved October 12, 2008, from What is the difference between Migrants and Refugees: http://www.querycat.com/faq/dd1d1dc02050e5fa5e4efc0521a15b91 Mark. 2007, Unfair shores. 12 June 2007.Amnesty International Australia. Available from: http://www.amnesty.org.au/refugees/comments/2277/ [12 October 2008]. Lubbers, R 2004, 'Refugees and migrants: Defining the difference', BBC, 5 April, Available from: BBC News [12 October 2008] < http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/3516112.stm> John, C 2005, 'Long Tradition of UK Migration', BBC, 25 January, Available from: BBC News [12 October 2008] < http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4203587.stm> Zolberg, Aristide R., P. M. (2001). Global Migrants, Global Refugees: Problems and Solutions. Berghahn Books. Read More