Abstract
This chapter proceeds in four sections. The first 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 examines how states define and categorise refugees through laws that seek to contain and limit their flow. The third 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 will canvass 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.
Journal
N/A
Publication Name
An Introduction to International Relations
Volume
N/A
ISBN/ISSN
9781009315227
Edition
N/A
Issue
N/A
Pages Count
14
Location
N/A
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Publisher Url
N/A
Publisher Location
N/A
Publish Date
N/A
Url
N/A
Date
N/A
EISSN
N/A
DOI
10.1017/9781009315234.039