Academic Response to "The Global Refugee Crisis: What's Next and What Can Be Done?"
Response Paper
Response
In his article "The global refugee crisis: What's next and what can be done?" David Miliband combines a high government leader's account and an activist's dynamic policy agenda pedigree. He employs his Britain's refugee contribution and Anglican Salvation Army information to educate government learning about foreign policies. His note falls short of critical immigration review by narrowly focusing on areas marking UK and American differences on refugee cases, returning home, and travel certificates. HSBC research indicates that return migration records increased between 2013 and 2019 by fifty-five percent (Miliband, 2022). A significant share of returnees also likely holds refugee status in their destination countries (Miliband, 2022). For example, UNHCR reported that one-third of the refugees in Jordan, Uganda, Kenya, and Lebanon returned home to Syria despite the inroads of disaster, violence, and corruption. The author's work lacks significant analysis of refugee case implications globally as he highlights the return migration rate without aptly determining the sound reasoning for the move without becoming preconceived.
Need original Essay?
The author's research presents various facts about immigration status in different world parts. For instance, he indicates that Africa hosts one million refugees more than America, with Russia granting refugee status to many people as France over the same period (Miliband, 2022). Also, he supports the notion that asylum seekers and refugees endure the brandishing punitively and exploitation politics as they both navigate borders and the asylum petition drive. He states that people petitioning for asylum are accorded fifty-five American bucks on a monthly basis, compelling three-quarters of adults to explore ways to boost their livelihoods. Accordingly, any significant way to rescue and support affected asylum seekers will be an vital policy initiative to navigate the current political unrest in the world (Miliband, 2022). The article's significant argument is that an international convention is needed on how refugees can be treated considering the current worldwide crisis. Also, refugee wars can cost the world a publicity of two trillion dollars (Miliband, 2022). With the high debts that refugee cases owe, the author proposes reasonable taxation and regulatory reforms as a remedy to reduce the refugee debt crisis. However, the author's argument fails to include refugee status implications in America, where asylum petitions and their enduring disputes have become politicized government discourse.
Reflection on the Arguments From a Critical Social Theory Perspective
Applying Karl Marx's criticism to Miliband's social critique will help understand the imploring conclusions on ISIS and other issues discussed in the article. Marx approached economic crisis concerns, prompting World Bank and IMF dominance as a malaria-free trade agenda. The Marxist theory lacks political theory but critiques capitalism by suggesting that profit-seeking lead to roads that exhausted Earth-Apple. Marx primarily focused on faction illusion dynamics and ideology, substantiating an utterly negative evaluation (Yeni, 2022). The author poses a problem with fewer solutions and limited implementation boundaries. Another critique Kant's triplet delineation perspective provides concerns Miliband's political opinion on worldwide treaty dynamics on refugees. Immanuel Kant described that perpetual peace could be achieved via three avenues, trust, morals, and law, expressed in Dove and Newman interpretations as state, commerce, and calendars respectively (Chimeli, n.d.). Miliband's international diplomacy on refugee politics is rooted in mundane state dynamics and lacks intrinsic ethics to ameliorate the refugee terror problem.
The article supports the present-day refugee discourse on profitability as the underlying cause for the uninterrupted war without demonstrating strategies to tackle profitability via tax and legal frameworks reforms. Situating expense in an excluded place in the analysis brings riddle since this would alter from national and international governance to revenue-maximization. Within this situation the riddle fundamentally lies within "matters that are excluded and could be merely an phase that leads to understanding the modern dynamics of refugees and partly refugee dynamics (Chimeli, n.d.)." Although without immunity regimes are workable, Miliband deals with the invisible expenses and sparsely have suggests that estimations would augment refugee viability. Although called cowardice, the lack of out
Place your order