The growing plight of asylum seekers

Listen to article

Migration has become a hot-button issue in many multicultural western societies, including former colonial powers in Europe, as well as in settler-colonies such as Australia, Canada and the US. These Western countries pay little heed to their own history of exploitation, which forged extractive economic and political structures that continue compelling people from the global south to leave their homes in search of better opportunities. Instead, populist leaders in the West have increasingly begun using xenophobia to distract and channel the frustrations of their own marginalised populations, to whip up hatred against migrants, including asylum seekers.

While acknowledging underlying factors which instigate economic migration from the global south needs much more attention, this article will focus specifically on the plight of asylum seekers.

There is an important legal distinction to be made between migrants and asylum seekers. Migrants leave their countries legally or illegally in search of better opportunities. Asylum seekers, on the other hand, flee home due to the threat of conflict or the fear of different types of persecution. A refugee seeking protection based on the fear of persecution due to their religious, ethnic, political or gender identities, must not be prevented from entering another country. This principle of?non-refoulement is a core international human right and refugee law prohibits any state from forcing asylum seekers to be sent back to countries where they may face persecution, torture or other forms of serious harm. This principle is recognised as part of customary international law and is therefore binding on all states, even if they are not parties to the 1951 Refugee Convention.

Yet, Western countries, which have also signed the 1951 Refugee Convention, have been putting in place a growing range of barriers to deter asylum seekers. The UK was controversially trying to settle its asylum seekers in Rwanda until this plan was deemed unlawful by its Supreme Court in 2023. Australia, on the other hand, has long been preventing asylum seekers to reach its shores by detaining them on small Pacific Island states instead. A UN watchdog has recently determined that Australia is violating the rights of asylum seekers by subjecting them to lengthy confinement at ill-equipped detention centres in Nauru. This UN observation should serve as a warning to other countries which have been trying to outsource asylum processing as well.

Yet, anti-immigration proponents have scored a major victory in the US, which also spells bad news for asylum seekers. The first Trump administration had already made it difficult for desperate people applying for asylum in the US, if they traveled through another country to reach the US. This time around, President Trump has gone further and issued orders placing an indefinite pause of the refugee system. Thousands of refugees who have already gone through significant vetting, including interviews, security checks, medical screenings and other forms of scrutiny required to gain entry to the US, are now in limbo. Funding for local refugee settlement agencies has also been halted. An order has also been issues to wrap up operations of the refugee settlement programme set up especially for Afghans who are now facing persecution from the Taliban due to their support of the American intervention in their country.

A coalition of some of America's largest refugee resettlement organisations have sued the Trump administration over its halt of its refugee programme, including assistance to Afghan refugees, but it remains to be seen how this issue will be resolved.

How the US contends with its obligations towards asylum seekers will influence the policies of other Western countries, which are also experiencing a surge in anti-immigrant sentiments, including a growing unwillingness to offer protection to people fleeing their countries due to the threat of serious harm.