The Complexities of Migration: Refugee Status and the Vulnerability of Migrants
The International Diploma in Humanitarian Assistance, hosted by Fordham University’s Institute of International Humanitarian Affairs, was fortunate to host Christophe Lobry-Boulanger for a lecture on trafficking and migration. Lobry-Boulanger is the former head of Migration — Europe for the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Lobry-Boulanger’s experience in facilitating, regulating, and addressing migration throughout his career set the stage for an informative and intriguing lecture on the varying and distinct definitions of migrants and refugees, as well as the current global trends of migration.
The current global political landscape, from the vilification of immigrants and migrants in the United States to the backlash of migration in Europe, has created a toxic environment for migration. The politics associated with migration has transformed it into a contentious fringe issue that many want to reform. Yet, migration is a naturally occurring social phenomenon that has existed throughout human history. Therefore, migration is not something to get rid of or fix but rather to manage properly. To do so requires a long term response through social change rather than addressing migration as a short term issue. Lobry-Boulanger emphasized this as the avenue for humanitarian assistance. Humanitarians are not meant to address the complexities of migration itself but rather to treat and aid the most vulnerable migrants with dignity.
Migrants’ vulnerability is based on their push factors from their home country, the status of the country they are entering, and the characteristics of their journey. A migrant tends to be more vulnerable if they do not qualify for refugee status. There is a distinct difference between a migrant and a refugee. The International Organization for Migration defines a migrant “as any person who is moving or has moved across an international border or within a state away from his/her place of residence” regardless of the reasons for migration. However, the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees defines a refugee as “a person who, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion” and has moved across an international border. Therefore, there are two significant differences between migrants and refugees. For a migrant to qualify as a refugee, they must have crossed an international border, and the reasons for migration must be related to fleeing from persecution for the reasons stated above. These requirements for refugee status leave many migrants in a state of limbo with no legal rights outside their own country. If the migrant has only traveled within their home country, they can be protected under The Guiding Principles of Internal Displacement if their fleeing was a result of armed conflict, generalized violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters. Therefore, for IDPs, the legal approach is within the national context, but, for refugees, the legal approach benefits from international instruments.
There are significant challenges that arise based on the narrow framework of the definition of refugees. There are many reasons that people choose to migrate across borders that the refugee definition does not formally address, like economic constraints and climate change. In particular, there is a rising recognition of climate-induced migration. Since this mode of forced migration is relatively unrecognized in the international community, refugee status does not protect those fleeing because of drought, desertification, sea level rise, and other implications of climate change. This lack of protection presents a significant challenge that major stakeholders in humanitarian affairs must address as estimates of migrants due to climate-related reasons range from 250 million to a billion people by the middle of the 21st century.
Even without recognizing those displaced due to climate change, the numbers of migrants and refugees worldwide has been increasing in the last decade. By the end of 2017, 70 million individuals were forcibly displaced worldwide by the result of persecution, conflict, violence or human rights violations. That was an increase of 2.9 million people over the previous year. Due to the legal definitions as they currently stand, there will always be more migrants than refugees. The total number of international migrants is around 258 million people: many of these individuals are in an incredibly vulnerable state due to the characteristics of their migration. This state of migration is where Lobry-Boulanger recognizes the need for humanitarian assistance, acknowledging the flaws within the current system and mentions the Global Compact for Migration as a potential remedy.
In September 2016, the 193 UN member states adopted the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants. In doing so, the UN General Assembly set the stage for negotiations to develop and implement the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. The Compact is a non-binding agreement that respects the sovereignty of states while also setting the stage for international cooperation on migration. The goal of the agreement is meant to more adequately regulate migration on an international level while also aiming to respect the dignity and human rights of all migrants. The Global Compact, in some form, can be viewed as an addition to the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
IDHA students challenged Lobry-Boulanger as he explained the Global Compact. Many students found the effort to be inadequate and too vague to make substantial change. In addition, many showed concern over the Compact’s non-binding status, believe that would tamper with the agreement’s effectiveness. In fact, this concern has come to fruition as both the United States and Australia, among a group of Eastern European countries, have refrained from signing onto the Compact out of concern for their own sovereignty in terms of immigration and border control. Lobry-Boulanger began his lecture by stating that migration should not be prohibited but rather managed correctly; however, it seems that current agreements and recent proposals fail to address the scope and magnitude of migration appropriately.
Written By Charles Beauregard, Refuge Press Intern, Summer 2019
About the IIHA
The Institute of International Humanitarian Affairs (IIHA) prepares current and future aid workers with the knowledge and skills needed to respond effectively in times of humanitarian crisis and disaster. Our courses are borne of an interdisciplinary curriculum that combines academic theory with the practical experience of seasoned humanitarian professionals. The IIHA also publishes on a wide range of humanitarian topics and regularly hosts a number of events in the New York area, including the annual Humanitarian Blockchain Summit and Design for Humanity Summit.
For media inquiries, please contact: Camille Giacovas, Communications & Research Officer, IIHA
cgiacovas@fordham.edu
For IDHA Inquiries please contact: Laura Ortiz, IDHA Administrator iiha.course.adm@gmail.com
