Are they "migrants" or "refugees"? "Clandestini" or "illegals"? Deciding how to label the huge numbers of people moving around the globe has proved a thorny and politically-loaded question for governments and the media. Migration has rarely been out of the news in 2015, from the thousands of deaths in the Mediterranean; to Greek island authorities overwhelmed by arrivals from the Middle East, to record numbers trying to break into the Channel Tunnel. But how to describe the phenomenon is a delicate matter.
British Prime Minister David Cameron landed in hot water last month when he spoke of a "swarm" of migrants crossing the Channel. They are "not insects," blasted the opposition. In Italy, immigrant-bashing Northern League leader Matteo Salvini likes the sinister-sounding "clandestini", while Poland's PAP news agency tends to use "illegal immigrants" -- a term banned by many news organisations for making desperate people sound like criminals. Picking the right language can be a linguistic and moral minefield.
In theory, a migrant is anyone on the move; an asylum seeker has applied for asylum in another country on the grounds that they face danger or persecution at home; and a refugee is someone whose application has been granted, giving them specific rights and benefits. Confusingly, though, "refugee" is also used more generally for anyone fleeing war, persecution or natural disasters, regardless of whether they have applied for asylum. Politicians often try to avoid that word, fearing it may obligate them to help. "Migrant is not an accurate term to describe the flows of people who are fleeing violence and persecution," said Ariane Rummery, a spokeswoman for the UN refugee agency. "The majority of people arriving on Europe's shore are coming from countries of war, violence or persecution -“ Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and Eritrea."
But the Geneva-based International Organization for Migration (IOM) said many people fall outside the "economic migrant" and "refugee" categories, such as children trying to be reunited with their families, or trafficking victims. "To say they are all refugees and those who aren't need to be sent home is an extremely dangerous position to take," Leonard Doyle, IOM's head of communications said. So the IOM advocates the blanket term "migrant" for everyone.
Eve Shahshahani, head of asylum for Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture, wonders what happened to the word "exile", which she feels emphasises that people had no choice but to leave their country, "whether for economic or political reasons". And why are wealthy, white foreigners "expats", while other ethnicities are "immigrants"? It's a remnant of racism, says Mawuna Remarque Koutonin of the blog SiliconAfrica.com
Some countries have their own particular euphemisms. Swedish media regularly refers to "EU migrants", not in reference to the many Danes and Finns who come for work, but rather as a veiled reference to Roma gypsies who face widespread discrimination. Italy complicates the definitions around refugees and asylum seekers with a third, and apparently unique term -- "profughi" -- which describes someone who has arrived in a country but has yet to apply for asylum or gain refugee status. With more people on the move that at any time since World War II, the debate will not end soon.
