An Introduction to International Relations

Introduction

The first section of this chapter looks at how the two terms ‘migrant’ and ‘refugee’ came to be defined as distinct from each other in the context of the modern state. As the reification of borders intensified in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, citizenship became an essential part of ‘belonging’ to a state as well as indicating the strength of the state itself. Hence, the categorisation of those ‘outside’ the state developed as a way of ascertaining who belonged and who did not. The second section examines how states define and categorise refugees through laws that seek to contain and limit their flow. The third section is concerned with the consequences of limiting the definition of a refugee, which has led to an unequal burden between developed and developing states. The final section canvasses the various options presented to reduce the present imbalance, where the vast majority of the world's refugees eke out an existence in refugee camps in developing countries. Ultimately, this chapter seeks to demonstrate that the choices made by states in border protection become the key determinants of how refugees will be accepted. Adherence to international refugee law will not necessarily address all the problems associated with refugees, but nor will seeing refugees as unwanted intruders in contrast to ‘desirable’ migrants.

States, refugees and immigrants

Former Australian Prime Minister John Howard campaigned in the 2001 federal election under the slogan ‘We will decide who comes to this country and under what circumstances’ (Marr and Wilkinson 2003: 277). As this demonstrates, there is arguably no greater control than determining who is a ‘legitimate’ citizen of the state – that is, determining who can and cannot live within your borders. Being able to secure borders and identify when they are being breached is essential to state sovereignty. Consider how Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban recently called Syrian refugees attempting to enter his country ‘a poison’ that his country ‘won't swallow’. Orban went on to describe refugees as migrants that the country did not want or need, because ‘every single migrant poses a public security and terror risk’ (The Guardian 2016). The determination of whether an individual's crossing of a border is illegal, whether they are crossing as a migrant or a refugee, is part of how a state constructs its identity and territoriality.