Economic Migrant or Refugee? A simple definition
A metaphorical chasm has opened up in Libya allowing the possibility of access into Europe to those from Africa and the Middle East who are striving for a better and more secure life. With limited and strained resources throughout the countries of Europe, the question arises as to what differentiates an economic migrant from a refugee. Indeed, is there a difference and does it matter? All presumably are hoping to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the tolerant and relatively affluent democracies of Europe, upholding principles of human rights so often denied to those in the countries they hope to leave.
The definition of a refugee is one who seeks refuge, in another country, from the potentially life-threatening situations of political oppression, religious persecution, war or a natural disaster. Economic migrants want a better life for themselves and their families, arguably no less noble an aspiration than trying to escape from persecution. The aim of economic migrants is therefore to seek out a destination that they think will offer the best prospects. This is different from refugees, who for their own security, just want to escape from where they currently inhabit. It would therefore seem that refugees, unlike economic migrants, would be much less concerned about the specific destination as long as they could live in security and peace.
As a result, in terms of numbers of refugees applying for asylum, it would seem likely that there would be little or no preference shown for the UK. It would therefore be a mistake to confuse this particular situation with the numbers of economic migrants who clearly do show a preference for the UK. And further, it would be wrong if any measures were put in place to discourage genuine refugees.
It therefore appears that those travelling from Africa and the Middle East, and across Europe to attempt to enter Britain, practically define themselves as economic migrants. Their security would have been guaranteed when they first set foot in Europe, without further travel to a specific country. Many are well-qualified men, have paid for all of their passage and have the vigour and strength of youth to bully their way into Britain. Ironically they would probably contribute greatly to British society. However, with a concerned public demanding that even quotas for genuine refugees be more rigorously enforced, it could be argued that for every economic migrant reaching Britain and successfully fighting deportation back to an admittedly questionable regime, a life-threatened refugee could be denied.
So the burning question of the day is, should Britain and Europe be doing much more to discourage economic migration?
