European Refugee Crisis
Introduction
A migrant is defined as any individual moving or has moved across an international border that is away from their original place of residence regardless of the individual’s legal status, length of stay or reason for relocation be it on a mandatory or voluntary basis. Despite the various reasons why people opt to migrate to different countries, the issue of immigration is often regarded as a problem that needs fixing. Often times, migrants are either considered as people escaping a crisis or whose relocation is likely to cause problems in the country they settle in. This is despite the human history of migrating from one place to another for various reasons not limited to escaping a crisis. In most countries, people have a primordial attachment to their natural habitat which creates the illusion that existing in a specific area makes one providential to it. The idea that people belong in specific places has greatly contributed to the restrictions imposed to curtail immigration. Although different countries have the right to protect their land, the use of borders in Europe and other parts of the world to stop refugees from migrating is unjust as it denies them access to basic rights and freedoms while exposing them to life-threatening conditions and should, therefore, be abolished.
Problem statement
It is estimated that there were 272 million refugees globally in 2019, a figure that had increased by 51 million people compared to those that immigrated in 2010 (UN 1). Immigrants, therefore, accounted for about 3.5 of the global population thus prooving the serious nature of the immigration issue (UN 1). The increasing number of migrants, combined with the assumption that immigration is a problem in need of fixing has pushed different nations to advocate for stricter measures aimed at controlling migration across borders. Countries in developed parts of the world such as Europe have imposed stricter immigration policies in an attempt to control illegal immigrants from entering their borders. In 2016 however, almost 5.2 million migrants reached Europe from regions such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. In 2018, 138000 individuals risked their lives coming to Europe by sea and over 2000 drowned before reaching their destination (UNHCR 1). Out of those that made it to Europe, 32400 were helped by the UNHCR and relocated to 20 countries across Europe (UNHCR 1). Despite the strict restrictions, people continue risking their lives and a lot of them end up dying due to the challenges involved such as crossing the sea to reach Euorpe.
The policies overly focus on restricting access to the country but fail to take into consideration why some people risk their lives while fleeing their country. Often times, the decision to relocate is based on the desire to access better opportunities and resources that may not be present in the migrant’s country of birth. There are migrants who choose immigration as a way to seek out a better livelihood or the desire to live close to family and relatives in the country of choice (Omidvar 1). In such cases, the borders that restrict refugees from migrating are unjust as they act as a restriction to the migrant's right to movement. Since human rights are universal, people’s freedoms out to be respected across different borders (Omidvar 1). While governments have the right to control entry in and out of the country, denying migrants entry on the basis of their country of origin is discriminatory and denies them the same opportunities offered to those in the country the individual is trying to relocate in.
Analysis and Discussion
Borders that stop refugees from relocating to new countries should be abolished because they are relatively ineffective and only make the migration process more dangerous for refugees. It is estimated that over 200 million migrants make their way into the United States from different parts of the world every year (Brouwer & Kumin 3). In Europe, there were over 28000 refugees arriving to the region by sea from Greece, Italy and Malta among others. There were also 584 individuals who were reported as either dead or missing due to the dangerous conditions experienced trying to access Europe either by sea or land. Despite the various restrictions aimed at preventing border crossings, migrants are forced to seek out alternative ways to make it past the borders and into the shores of Europe. One of the negative effects of border restrictions is the increase in cost needed to secure passage across the border. Migrants are often forced to seek out third parties that now their way across the boundaries and can help them across the borders. The third parties, however, require a mode of compensation and this is often monetary or forced labor for their role in helping migrants cross the border. In cases where crossing the border is difficult due to the policies imposed by the government, migrants are forced to pay more and this often places them at a disadvantage (Brouwer & Kumin 10). Instead of saving resources to start living in a new country, most people spend their money paying smugglers to get them across the borders. Once in the country, the migrants have to struggle before finding employment with some being forced to go hungry or perform menial jobs just to get by.
Another negative consequence of restricting migration is the increasing number of temporary camps used to hold refugees before deportation or while they wait to be legalized as is the case in Europe. Since the border restrictions do little to prevent legal entry into a country, those that make their way into the country often end up in temporary camps that detain illegal immigrants. Immigrants detained in the nominal temporary camps are exposed to inhumane living conditions (Hayter 13). This is especially because the borders act as a line to determine whose human rights are important and which can be waivered. Since illegal migrants come from different countries nationals in charge of the temporary camps tend to treat them as criminals rather than human beings. The camps are often crowded, unsanitary, and unbearable for human beings. While at the camps, the immigrants’ right to movement is curtailed and some immigrants are placed separately from their families (UNFPA 23). The policies used to control immigrants often focus on the issue of immigration and fail to take into consideration the negative impact that the restrictions have on individuals.
Border crossings should also be abolished because they are the major cause behind the high number of people that lose their lives trying to cross the border. When refugees are unable to immigrate to a country legally, they seek out the services of people who sneak them in illegally. Some of the routes chosen by the smugglers are however dangerous and most people lose their lives in the process (Hayter 17). In cases where the decision to immigrate is unavoidable, the restrictions at the border force people to seek out alternatives that often put their lives at risk. Some smugglers, for instance, rely on routes that cross desserts or mountain passes that are covered in snow. Others are ferried across oceans and hid in boat compartments where living conditions are unbearable. Although some immigrants manage to survive the journey, a significant number lose their lives (UN 1). Various bodies have been discovered in desserts and mountain peaks where the migrants either froze to death or died of dehydration. Others wash up on beaches after being discarded from the boats carrying them at sea because the smugglers care little about their lives.
Objections in support of border restrictions
An argument can be made in support of the restrictions at the border with the claim that each country has to bear responsibility for its citizens. The argument has a basis in that, the border restrictions only prevent foreigners from entering another country. In such a case, the need for border restrictions is practical as it ensures that the opportunities that exist in the border country are reserved for only its citizens (Anderson et al 7). While it is true that countries should protect the interests of their citizens, countries in the developed world have a moral responsibility to look after the interests of people in countries that are not well off (Anderson et al 7). Instead of enforcing strict restrictions, nations should seek better ways to manage how immigrants enter the country so as to help them without affecting the livelihood of the nation’s residents.
Defence against border restrictions
The assumption that border restrictions are meant to protect the interests of the citizens is based on the misinformed idea of the life that refugees live once they migrate to another country. Other than restricting movement at border crossings, governments have taken an extra measure to curtail the rights and freedoms that migrants enjoy even after they settle into a new country (Anderson et al 14). Some of the rights that protected migrants after relocation such as a permanent residence or refugee status are now being denied and migrants often work as temporary foreign workers. The migrants are considered illegals and this denies them access to some of the opportunities and resources that made them relocate from their country in the first place. Regardless of whether an immigrant enters the country legally or illegally, the policies enacted to regulate migrants are designed with the same intent as those that stop border crossings as they all aim at ensuring that refugees do not make it inside the country they choose to relocate to (Anderson et al 15). The border restrictions have created an environment where immigrants are no longer treated as a human with rights once they enter a foreign country.
Conclusion
Borders that stop refugees from migrating into different countries are unjust because they deny people access to basic human rights and freedoms. The restrictions fail to prevent migration but end up making the migration process more dangerous. Refugees who try to work their way across borders despite the restrictions are forced to endure inhumane conditions and at times risk their lives. The tough restrictions mostly favor smuggles who end up hiking the cost of being smuggled across the border. in cases where people flee their country as a means to save their lives, the high cost and risks do little to discourage illegal crossing because the threat to one's life is more serious. While some do make it across, the frequent loss of life as a result of the dangerous paths that smugglers use only prooves the unjust nature of border restrictions. Instead of approaching immigration as a crime, more efforts should be placed towards solving issues that force people to become refugees. The border restrictions ought to be abolished so as to ensure that every human being has access to basic human rights and freedoms, regardless of their country of origin.
References
Anderson, Bridget,. Sharma, Nandita,. and Wright, Cynthia. “Editorial: Why no borders?” Refugee Research, 2009, retrieved from, https://refugeeresearch.net/wp- content/uploads/2016/11/Anderson-et-al-2009-Why-no-borders_.pdf
Brouwer, Andrew,. and Kumin, Judith. “Interception and asylum: When migration control and human rights collide” UNHCR, 2018, retrievd from, https://www.unhcr.org/afr/4963237d0.pdf
Hayter, Teresa. “Open Borders: The Case against Immigration Controls.” Critical Social Policy, vol. 21, no. 4, Nov. 2001, pp. 544–546, doi:10.1177/026101830102100421.
Omidvar, Ratna. “The biggest issue facing migrants today and what we can do to solve them” World Economic Forum, 201, retrieved from, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/the-biggest-issues-facing-migrants- today/
UNHCR, “Refugee crisis in Europe” 2020, retrieved from, https://www.unrefugees.org/emergencies/refugee-crisis-in-europe/
United Nations Population Fund, “Meeting the challenge of migration: Progress since the ICPD” 2020, retrieved from, https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub- pdf/migration_icpd.pdf
United Nations, “Migration” 2020, retrieved from, https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues- depth/migration/index.html
