Given to accommodate the influx of refugees, arguing that

Given
the current political climate, migration remains a prominent issue of
contention under the Trump administration, with arguments for and against the
restriction of migration across borders. Michael Walzer asserts that liberal
states have the right to restrict migration across their borders, making
various cases for this restriction. More specifically, Walzer (183:32) defends
a case for restriction by presenting country borders as that of elite
universities, by saying “affluent and free countries are, like elite
universities, besiege by applicants” where it is critical for respective
countries to “decide on their own size and character” who to allow and who to
restrict. This case for restriction calls on countries to decide on what basis
to allow migrants to enter their country and under what rights and limitations,
realizing that countries cannot accept every migrant that wishes to move to
their country.  the the the the the the

            However, Walzer modifies this case
for restriction to accommodate the influx of refugees, arguing that countries
must take in people when that country has turned those individuals into
refugees, such as the Vietnamese and Cambodians, and accept individuals when
they are like them—especially shared political communities. According to Alexander
Betts (2015:2), Walzer believes countries should admit people in dire need
insofar as cost remains low for the receiving country, indicating his case for
restriction to be on a conditional basis.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

            Following Walzer’s sentiments in regards
to refugees, Betts (2015:2) follows a humanitarian and global stability
approach in his reasoning to accept refugees, arguing that “we have particular
obligations toward those in need as well as an ethical commitment to help others
fulfill their basic needs if they cannot be met in their home country.

Furthermore, Betts believes it is in the interest of international security
that people have a safe place to go when they are forced to leave their
countries. Betts (2015:3) also asserts that states benefit from refugee
protections as it is a “global public good” to have one’s basic needs met.

            In essence, Walzer presents various
cases for restriction, one of which advocates for countries to implement an
admission process similar to that of elite universities, with prospective
migrants and prospective students both hoping to be accepted. Walzer also
modifies his cases for restriction to accommodate the influx of refugees on a
conditional basis, whereas Betts takes a humanitarian approach in which to
accept refugees, pointing out the international security benefit attached to
offering a place for individuals to have their basic needs met.