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