A Historiographical Approach to Resolving the Refugee Crisis

The global refugee crisis, with millions of people fleeing their homes due to violence, war and persecution, is one of the most pressing issues of our time. Although international law, especially the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol, provide a legal framework for the protection of refugees, many countries, especially former colonial powers, remain reluctant to accept their fair share of responsibility. A fresh approach to resolving the crisis suggests that former colonial powers should accept refugees from their former colonies as a way to address historical injustices.

Colonialism has fundamentally changed the political, economic and social landscape of many countries, including the Indian subcontinent, leaving behind deep-rooted problems that continue to drive migration and population displacement. Former colonies, exploited for resources and oppressed, now struggle with underdevelopment, instability and conflict factors that directly contribute to forced migration. A prime example of this is the plight of the Rohingya people. Myanmar, a former British colony, has become a hotbed of ethnic tension between the Burmese majority and the Rohingya minority. Colonial disputes had lasting consequences, culminating in violence, persecution and the displacement of more than a million Rohingya into Bangladesh. Similar colonial legacies are evident throughout the world, with migration patterns often reflecting the lingering effects of colonial rule.

Historical injustices perpetuated by colonialism, such as exploitation, violence and the deliberate subversion of local governance, contributed to the conditions that underlie forced migration in many contexts today.

International refugee law, in particular the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits the return of refugees to countries where they are persecuted, forms the basis of refugee protection. This principle, enshrined in the 1951 Refugee Convention, has become customary international law, meaning that even countries not party to the Convention are bound by it.

Beyond non-refoulement, the key to solving the global refugee crisis is the principle of burden sharing. Under the Global Compact on Refugees, adopted in 2018, burden sharing encourages richer countries to shoulder their fair share of responsibility, helping to alleviate the disproportionate burden on developing countries like Bangladesh. However, many former colonial powers, despite their wealth and potential, remain hesitant to fully embrace this principle when it comes to refugees from their former colonies.

Notably, burden sharing is not only a principle of international law, but also a necessity for visualizing a paradigm for equitable refugee protection. Currently, most refugees are hosted by neighboring countries, which are often themselves developing countries. Bangladesh, Lebanon and Jordan, for example, are hosting millions of refugees relative to their small economies, while wealthier countries have resisted increasing their intake of displaced populations.

When discussing whether former colonial powers could accept more refugees, two considerations arise: practical feasibility and theoretical feasibility. In practical terms, it may seem politically challenging for countries such as the UK, France and Spain to increase the number of refugee shelters. Rising nationalism, concerns about cultural integration and fears of economic competition are fueling anti-immigrant sentiment in many of these countries. But the practical reality is that these countries have the infrastructure and resources to take in many more refugees than they currently do. The burden on a country like Bangladesh, which has only a fraction of the wealth of many European countries, is exponentially higher. For example, Germany’s decision to accept more than a million Syrian refugees between 2015 and 2016 demonstrates that a developed country can accommodate a large influx of refugees with careful planning and international cooperation.

Theoretically, as argued earlier, there is a strong argument that former colonial powers have a moral obligation to accept refugees from their former colonies. Historical injustices perpetuated by colonialism, such as exploitation, violence and the deliberate subversion of local governance, contributed to the conditions that underlie forced migration in many contexts today. The international community needs a fresh, holistic approach to the refugee crisis that acknowledges the historical legacy of colonialism and emphasizes principles such as burden sharing, international solidarity and restorative justice. Only by adopting this approach can we begin to address both the immediate needs of refugees and the historical mistakes that continue to shape our world today.

The author is a lecturer at the Faculty of Law, National University of Ghazipur.