The paper addresses the migrant-refugee debate in relation to recent refugee flows from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries gaining unauthorized entry into Europe. This is compared with the accusations (and denials) that the wealthy countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council ( GCC ) states have not accepted any refugees from Syria in particular. It is argued that the definition of migrants and refugees is problematic in that they often converge with respect to livelihood needs and rights. Current provisions should adapt to contemporary circumstances as in the current refugee ‘crisis’ and perhaps more regard by Muslim states in the use of Islamic ethical principles applicable to the treatment of migrants and refugees. In this sense, there is a serendipitous convergence of recent arguments about refugee livelihood requirements and practices of Muslim countries such as the GCC. The primary difference is that for refugees, resettlement is assumed to be permanent, while the GCC states only offer temporary residence status. © Authors
Year
              2017
          Language
              English
          Abstract
              
      
        English
        
ISSN/ISBN
              2213-1418
          No. of Pages
              pp. 224-247
          Number
              4
          Volume
              5
          Select type of work
              
          Name of the Journal
              
          CIS Program Old
          
      Full-Text (PDF)
          
      CIS publications
              No
          CIS Thesis
              No
          CIS Cluster
              
          QF Thematic Areas
              
          CIS Program
          
      CIS Research Foci
              
          