1

Has any country not had controversy about accepting refugees?

Criteria that I'm looking for:

  1. The immigrants are refugees, which I'll define broadly: fleeing persecution, conflict or poor economic circumstances. Any circumstance where the host country is acting largely out of altruism.
  2. The refugees aren't accepted because of other criteria, such as being skilled workers, guest workers, family reunion, or potentially increasing the population of a specific group (Ten Pound Poms and possibly the Law of Return)
  3. The intake is reasonably large-scale, and sustained, unlike Japan's.
  4. The refugees are from around the world, not just a nearby neighbour. So while Jordan has accepted refugees from nearby countries, as far as I'm aware they haven't accepted refugees from other parts of the world such as Vietnam.
  5. Refugees aren't a point of debate between major parties (such as Australia's election in 2001), or a major part of the platform of minor parties
  6. Major media outlets don't complain about refugees in the editorial sections nor highlight problems "caused" by refugees in the news section.
  • 1
    Immigration is always controversial, is it not? :) – user1530 Nov 27 '15 at 1:49
  • 1
    Why focus on refugees from afar? It seems pretty arbitrary. Also, what counts as large intake? Countries like France and the UK have had 50000+ applications a year (maybe a third are successful and not all of them are fresh arrivals) for one or two decades. Anything beyond that can usually be traced to a specific crisis (Yugoslavia in the 1990s, Syria now) and therefore not from “around the world”. – Relaxed Nov 27 '15 at 6:35
  • 1
    Some of your criteria are opinable (what is non-trivial, what qualifies as any controversy, which are ), but probably the Orderly Departure Program would qualify (about 460.000 Vietnamese emigrees into the USA in 17 years). No an answer because I do not want to read the hemeroteques of all USA nespaper looking for some opinion piece against resetlement. – SJuan76 Nov 27 '15 at 12:28
  • 1
    Ethnic Germans migrating to Germany post WW2? – liftarn Dec 3 '15 at 14:39
  • One possibility worth studying could be Israel. – SJuan76 Sep 1 '16 at 0:12
5

I don't believe that anything which isn't politically trivial can be without controversy, depending on your definition of what controversy is.

If fringe (or not-so-fringe) ethnic nationalist parties or groups kicking up a fuss about refugees amounts to controversy, then any non-trivial amount of refugees will result in that happening.

In basically every country and territory in the world, nationalism of some sort exists, and as long as it does, political groupings will have a hook to attract the support of the disenfranchised. Ethnic nationalism, by its nature, will always include kicking up a fuss about people of different nationalities and races (which refugees usually are, by and large).

| improve this answer | |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .