The recent political unrest, war and the rise of a few terrorist groups have made many people become refugees and this is a global problem. As an immediate solution, many express their view that rich countries should allow more evacuees to enter their border to reduce the severity of this crisis. However, accepting a higher number of migrants by the developed countries is not a viable solution to this refugee crisis, in my opinion.
Worldwide refugees and their constant sufferings are often reported on TV. At a first look, it might seem that industrialised countries can easily solve this emergency and sufferings by allowing more refugee immigrants to enter their countries. In reality, this is certainly not an easy solution. If we only look at the few recent catastrophic events that the migrant refugees have caused, it would become clear why the governments in developed countries are unwavering to accept more people to their countries. Besides, historically, it is evident that only granting more refugees in other countries does not solve the problem, in some cases, it actually deteriorates it.
Due to the humanitarian reasons, developed countries should help destitute and needy people. It is no longer possible, unlike the past, to ignore what happens on the other side of the world. This is partly a moral issue and partly because it is in the self-economic interest of the industrialised countries. Considering this, a practical way of reducing the severity of this crisis would be to accept more refugees, particularly when it is caused by a natural disaster and civil war.
From a more practical point of view, mass immigrations would bring more negative effects. Solving the root cause of the outbreaks of refugees is a far better way than allowing them freely migrate to developed countries. On a practical level, homeless refugees are sometimes better off receiving aid in their homeland than suffering racism and begging on the streets in a country where they cannot speak the language.
To conclude, affluent countries should take refugees but only in extreme cases and should focus on solving the primary reason behind the refugee issue. Sometimes funds and aids for refugees in their local area are far more beneficial than accepting them as migrants and finally forcing them to beg on the street.
The recent political unrest, war and the rise of a few terrorist groups have made
many
people
become
refugees
and this is a global problem. As an immediate solution,
many
express their view that rich
countries
should
allow
more evacuees to enter their border to
reduce
the severity of this crisis.
However
, accepting a higher number of migrants by the
developed
countries
is not a viable solution to this
refugee
crisis, in my opinion.
Worldwide
refugees
and their constant sufferings are
often
reported on TV. At a
first
look, it might seem that
industrialised
countries
can
easily
solve this emergency and sufferings by allowing more
refugee
immigrants to enter their
countries
. In reality, this is
certainly
not an easy solution. If we
only
look at the few recent catastrophic
events
that the migrant
refugees
have caused, it would become
clear
why the
governments
in
developed
countries
are unwavering to accept more
people
to their
countries
.
Besides
,
historically
, it is evident that
only
granting more
refugees
in other
countries
does not solve the problem, in
some
cases, it actually deteriorates it.
Due to the humanitarian reasons,
developed
countries
should
help
destitute and needy
people
. It is no longer possible, unlike the past, to
ignore
what happens on the other side of the world. This is partly a moral issue and partly
because
it is in the self-economic interest of the
industrialised
countries
. Considering this, a practical way of reducing the severity of this crisis would be to accept more
refugees
,
particularly
when it
is caused
by a natural disaster and civil war.
From a more practical point of view, mass
immigrations
would bring more
negative
effects. Solving the root cause of the outbreaks of
refugees
is a far better way than allowing them
freely
migrate to
developed
countries
. On a practical level, homeless
refugees
are
sometimes
better off receiving aid in their homeland than suffering racism and begging on the streets in a
country
where they cannot speak the language.
To conclude
, affluent
countries
should take
refugees
but
only
in extreme cases and should focus on solving the primary reason behind the
refugee
issue.
Sometimes
funds and aids for
refugees
in their local area are far more beneficial than accepting them as migrants and
finally
forcing them to beg on the street.