Refugee Migration Is The Negligence And Violation Of Human Rights

Throughout the world, there is an estimate of about 65.3 million refugees that have either been forced out of their homes or chose to willingly escape the violence or corruption they faced in their homeland. Of those millions of people, only a small percentage are given the status of refugee as many nations have strict requirements and only allow a specific amount each year. This leads to an increase in the amount of illegal immigration as many are desperate to risk their lives to for a better one then they had back home. Even as refugees are given asylum, many often face difficulties such as discrimination due to the racial stereotypes that exist as a result of negative depictions in the news and media. Although nations have generally become more open to receiving and providing aid for a significant amount of refugees seeking asylum, people’s ideology of race and the misrepresentation of the media towards immigrants prevent an even larger amount of refugees from being accepted into society.

The article, “Refugees: Who, Where, and Why” by Catherine Gevert is about different refugees in the world, where they are from and why they became refugees in the first place. The first concept the author talked about was, around the world, many refugees have had to flee, to escape to safety after being mistreated in their own country. Refugees are protected by law and given basic civil rights when going to different countries. Another key point she talks about is where these people are and in the article shows us that refugee camps are located throughout the world, but are not the best living conditions. Many refugees go here for asylum. Furthermore, some reasons people can become refugees are because of, war and “ethnic cleansing”, also known

A refugee is a person who was forced to leave their country. Whether it be from warfare or natural disaster, their homes are no longer safe to live in, so they need to relocate elsewhere. Once someone sets foot on the journey of becoming a refugee, they become vulnerable and dependent with no sense of what the future will bring. In an attempt to accommodate them, first world countries with the resources necessary to assist these refugees, are struggling to determine whether or not they should step-in and help. Some argue that taking them in could come with excessive consequences, while others believe they could be assets. Although there may be a few consequences, they are outweighed by the benefits and undeniable severity of the situation.

The dilemma regarding the American refugee policy and America’s stance on refugees at this point in time is a challenging topic for many to discuss. Not only is this controversy affecting Americans, it is also hurting refugees in desperate need of our help. America needs to start handling the emerging refugee crisis by first working to remove the stereotype associated with refugees, then the U.S. needs to assess which refugee countries should (if any) actually be banned, and after accomplishing those-- America needs to work to help the countries in need by letting refugees in, and working to help the refugees live happily in their country of origin.

Has United States or Canada been more effective with implementing and abiding by refugee rules and laws? Before discussing and comparing which of these countries had been more successful, the historical context of refugees needs to be explored. Although refugees have existed throughout the course of history, the definitions of what a refuge is had shifted and evolved over time. The League of Nations in the 1920s defined refugees “by categories, specifically in relation to their country of origin.” Up until 1950s, the League of Nations, which later became the United Nations, “established and dismantled several international institutions devoted to refugees in Europe.” After World War II, creating and facilitating solutions for refugees were of high importance internationally. This is evident in the first session of United Nations General Assembly in 1946 when it adopted the principle that no refugee who had “expressed valid objections to returning to their countries [sic] of origin ... shall be compelled to return.”

In this paper, I will argue that the United States should accept more Syrian refugees by analyzing Miller and Kukathas’ arguments to reach the conclusion that Kukathas makes a more convincing argument because the freedom of movement argument and the humanity obligations of the United States outweigh the risks of a threatened cultural identity and economic state. The Syrian refugee crisis started in March of 2011 when anti-government groups began to protest against the government. These protests quickly became violent as the government turned to armed opposition groups to quiet the rebellion. This violence has created chaos in Syria as human rights are being violated everywhere and necessities are becoming scarce. There is no sign of an end approaching as the death toll reaches over 250,000. Syrians are escaping after seeing the destruction around their homes from airstrikes and bombings, killing many friends and family members. The U.N. estimates, a potential 11 million people are displaced, fleeing to nearby countries with refugee camps or Europe in hopes to gain citizenship. The journey to escape Syria is not an easy one with the threat of snipers and kidnappings for young men to fight for either cause. The need for aid continues to grow as humanitarian organizations attempt to keep up.

Humanity as a whole is deceived by our governments that in an event of a humanitarian crisis we will take in the refugees and provide a safe and secure environment. At this very moment millions of refuges are fleeing their countries because of a fear of persecution due to religion, race, nationality, political views or membership to a social group. Internationally displaced people, whether they are fleeing their country because of natural disaster or generalized violence, are considered under the 1951 convention as refugees have the right under United Nations law to enter a country of choice seeking asylum. All countries that have signed the United Nations contract have to abide by this law, but in the extreme case countries are denying the basic right of living to a group of persons trying to enter their country.

Imagine that you are in your home, and you hear a bomb go off. You then hear countless horrific sounds of guns going off and explosives detonating. You look outside and you see your home, your country, ruined. Then you realise that you can;t stay in your country much longer or else you and your family will get killed. You know that you are about to become a refugee. Believe it or not, this is not uncommon. According to Al Jazeera, over 5,000 men, women and children have died on their search of protection and a better life in 2015. This is a shocking and horrible number that will sadly raise in 2016 because countries are not being open to letting in refugees. This is disturbing, because these refugees are going to seek better lives, and escape wars that they were never part of. It is unfair and immoral to deny refugees a home in your country. It goes against the Declaration of Human Rights. Refugees deserve a better life, and it is unfair and immoral to deny them. Resolved: countries denying the entry of refugees should be denied of their membership to the United Nations. Although many people don’t want to get involved with helping refugees find new homes, it is everyone’s responsibility and the countries should lose their Membership of the UN by refusing to help.

In recent decades, many people have sought refugee status and this has caused a lot of discussion on the issue. Many argue that refugees should not be given priority in gaining entry to democratic countries, while others believe they should. The purpose of this essay is to point out that democratic countries should have an obligation to accept refugees. To support this position, the following areas will be examined: firstly, the reason why those countries are called democratic countries. Secondly, refugees are under the difficult situation. Thirdly, countries can take advantage of accepting refugees.

In this policy paper, I will be focusing on refugees and the laws, policies, and programs that affect them. As I analyze these policies I will compare policies from various countries, that have been created to achieve similar goals. Many countries accept refugees and have adopted and/or created laws to regulate them. The three countries that I will be analyzing are the United States of America, Germany, and Turkey. These three countries are unique in their characteristics and geographic locations but all face the same risks and circumstances as it relates to refugees.

Refugee issue is a global issue mainly due to wars, conflicts or environmental, political, religious and racial reasons (Gibney & Gil, 2010). In recent years, the turmoil triggered by the "Arab Spring" in many countries in West Asia and North Africa causing numerous refugees, so it has once again attracted the attention of people（Grossman, 2017）. People forced to relocate their homes and even renounce their nationality by war or natural disasters are defined as refugee（UNHCR，2017）.The influx of refugees brings cheap labor forces reducing the cost of productions ,and causes the promotion of economic development. In addition, the increasing population leads to an increase in demand which can increase the income of the host countries and the state tax. It can be argued that refugees are unable to benefit the host nations because refugees increase unemployment rate and occupy resources in education. Although it may be true that there are some negative effects caused by refugees, refugees can benefit the host nation in terms of economy and social advancement.

It is all the more important to think about refugees as more than just helpless people who will drain the resources of new countries but as hard-working and skilled people with unique cultures who want to thrive in new lands until they can return home. The Syrian civil war is going into its sixth year. With over 4.8 million externally displaced, the Syrian Refugee Crisis is becoming a massive international

This issue was chosen due to its scope. The Syrian refugee crisis is among a list of issues that will not only shape the world in 2016 but also dominate news outlets in upcoming years. Because of the despairing situation, many governments are struggling to find ways to handle the rush of individuals seeking asylum, for the fact that it seems the crisis is worsening. In addition, the media coverage on the topic sparked my interest and led me to research information because I had no idea what was occurring and the detriment of the issue.

Since 2011, Syria has been engaged in a Civil War with protestors against the government and members of the extremist group ISIS, and approximately 7.6 million people have been displaced from their homes (usnews.com 2015). As the conflict destroys more homes and livelihoods each year, an increasing number of civilians have been forced to leave Syria and try to find safety elsewhere. Already a contentious issue, the Syrian refugee crisis has awakened tensions, both economic and social as debate erupts over what to do with the refugees.In response to the crisis, while some countries like Germany have pledged to help the refugees, (New Statesman 2015 1) only 2,340 have been admitted. Clearly, more needs to be done in order to help the refugees. Although there are economic and population concerns to be considered, the humanitarian conflict that faces the refugees and solutions already available are reason enough for Europe to increase the numbers of Syrian refugees allowed in.

The United Nations endeavors to protect the rights of the refugees in the world is phenomenal. The author clearly outlines the dilemmas facing the refugees when it comes to the protection of their human rights. In the midst of some nations regarding the refugees as unauthorized refugees, the United Nations Human Rights Declaration helps the asylum seekers enjoy full human rights, and the protection of the country the refugees are situated. It is sad though that many countries do not abide by the already existing standards set by the United Nations to protect the refugees. The author has clearly outlined that the United Nations Convention set out clear rules that seek to protect the asylum seekers so that they also enjoy the human rights even if they are not citizens of that particular country. Regardless of the dilemma that that arises regarding the human rights of the refugees they have the right to enjoy humanitarian protection and equal treatment from the host country.