Do We Owe Refugees a Duty of Care? A Question of Duty or Choice
According to the United Nations, every minute, 20 people are forced to flee their homes due to conflict, persecution, or disasters. One minute. Truly think about how short a minute is. For every TikTok you watch, for every Instagram reel, 20 people leave everything behind - not as a choice, but as a necessity.
Yet, those very people are neglected and rejected. Many countries have a strong stance on refugees, stating their primary obligation is to safeguard national sovereignty and prioritise the welfare of their citizens. The world seems to be spending more money and resources on removing refugees rather than finding sustainable solutions. To me, this is proof enough that, as a society, we are failing. The definition of what it means to be human has become more political than ethical. Refugees are not a choice but a shared responsibility - one that both individuals and nations have an undeniable duty to uphold.
Sovereignty is a word that’s lost its meaning. In today’s world, it is often invoked to justify personal pursuits that sideline international obligations and humanitarian principles. Governments claim, “Our priority is the civilians” or “We’re doing this for the people”, but this is always far from the truth. Instead, sovereignty is used to justify the abandonment of international obligations. The 1951 Refugee Convention, signed by 149 nations, guarantees refugees the right to seek asylum and prohibits their forced return to danger. Despite this, countries such as Hungary have purposefully invested in anti-refugee measures such as razor-wire fences. Moreover, they close their borders to those desperate in need. Refugees who do reach Hungary are often detained in transit zones, where they face poor conditions. Many are ‘pushed back’ to neighbouring countries without proper processing, a violation of international law according to the UNHCR, the ECHR, and the HWR.
Hungary has purposefully marked Serbia as a ‘3rd safe country’ forcefully allocating them to a country that does not have the resources for such a large amount of asylum claims. These refugees are left in limbo, not knowing what to do or where to go. Where are our morals? We must at least provide refugees guidance on what to do next and where to go. They’re lost, searching for help that might never come. Speaking of sovereignty, politicians like to vilify refugees, claiming they can be a threat to our people and our country. They invoke an “us versus them” narrative. However, evidence contradicts that claim. A study by the CATO Institute and the NBER shows that refugees are significantly less likely to commit crimes than native-born citizens. Refugees are not perpetrators of crime; they are victims of it. They want to escape it, so why are we not helping them? Is a life of lesser value because they hold refugee status? When we push a refugee away, and they die trying to reach their next destination, is it even fair to hold their native country responsible - the very country that neglected them is the very one responsible for their death, and they become a statistic. Their life could’ve been saved, and now, there is no undo button.
Let’s take a moment to consider the other perspective. Welcoming people with different languages, customs, and ways of life could potentially alter the country’s way of living. For those who are content with their lives and the culture they’ve always known, the arrival of individuals who bring entirely different traditions and beliefs might feel unsettling. Will this influx influence their way of life in ways they didn’t ask for or expect? It’s not just about the strain refugees put on resources, but there are concerns that the cultural identity of the host nation, formed over centuries, may erode. Some question why should we owe a duty to those who are nothing like us. This view suggests sovereignty is of utmost importance and this apathetic perspective is problematic. From this perspective, refugees are not seen as individuals fleeing the horrors of back home, but as a faceless wave of ‘the other’. They are simply a force or entity that will upset the balance of the country’s already existing issues: unemployment, inequality, political divides. In all honesty, this perspective is not baseless. You wouldn’t want strangers in the comfort of your home either, would you
However, though it isn't baseless, it is still contradictory. The erosion of culture does not come from inclusion but from exclusion. History provides countless examples of societies enriched by diversity. Consider Paris, a city whose vibrancy is built on a foundation of cultural fusion, or the US, a ‘melting pot’ where the contributions of immigrants have defined the nation. Moreover, refugees often express deep respect and admiration for the countries that offer them sanctuary. They are eager to contribute, not to conquer. Take the story of the Hadhad family. They were Syrian refugees who resettled in Canada after their chocolate factory was destroyed in Damascus. Arriving with nothing, they established Peace by Chocolate, a thriving business that creates unique chocolates. Their story is not unique. Refugees can bring so much with them; they have their own stories to tell. It might not come with a chocolate factory, but it will be told beautifully and in their own way. Most importantly, cultural preservation should never come at the expense of human lives. Can a culture truly be proud of its identity if it is built on the rejection of others in need? The true measure of a nation’s strength lies in its ability to embrace, protect, and integrate, not in closing its doors out of fear.
This issue is a global one. Developed countries need to step up as the less developed countries cannot contribute as many resources to the refugee crisis. Why is it, then, that reality is the complete opposite? Countries like Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan host millions of refugees, often with inadequate support from wealthier nations. For instance, Lebanon, a country of 6.8 million people, hosts over 1.5 million Syrian refugees. About 20% of their population is Syrian refugees. On the other hand, powerhouses such as the US have only 0.3% of their population being refugees. China and Japan are even worse, with China having 0.02% and Japan at an abysmal 0.0024%. The Global Compact on Refugees, adopted in 2018 by the UN, was supposed to create change and promote burden sharing. Yet, none of the powerhouse countries are willing to make the first move. To make matters worse, the UNHCR is in desperate need of funding, putting them in impossible positions and having to pick between cutting food rations and healthcare.
Moreover, the idea that refugees are an economic strain is false. Yes, while hosting them requires an initial investment, the return is tenfold. Take Germany in 2015, they brought in over one million refugees, which in turn caused an initial blow to the economy. However, it quickly became a long-term investment. They filled labour shortages and contributed to tax revenues. In contrast, policies focused on exclusion and deportation are not only inhumane but also wasteful. Deportations cost governments billions annually, resources that could be better spent on integration programs and education.
Ultimately, most of what I said above doesn’t matter. The refugee crisis isn’t a political one. It is about humanity, morals, and ethics. Why do we need reasons to help one another? Why does a country need economic gain to save thousands of lives? Refugees are a direct reflection of who we are as a society; they’re vulnerable people stripped of their rights and freedom. Denying them aid is denying our shared humanity. Refugees aren’t a minority in the sense that at any given moment, any one of us can become a refugee. All it takes is one declaration of war, one natural disaster, and even one wrong thing. You never know what can go wrong in life.
That is the issue: on a moral scale, this argument is unassailable. Each of those people had a family and a dream. Regardless of whether you can put a value on a human life, the least you can do is admit that they are just as human as you or me. We must do better.
By Markos Grigoriou
