Human security is not about gratitude but a necessity

TLDR

Rebecca Buxton and Matthew J. Gibney argue that refugees are not obligated to be grateful to countries offering them asylum. They critique the expectation of refugee gratitude, highlighting that asylum is often a legal obligation or compensatory justice for past harms, not a discretionary gift. Refugees frequently face harsh asylum systems, which undermine genuine gratitude. The authors propose that gratitude is more appropriately directed toward individuals or organizations offering genuine aid, not states complicit in creating the conditions for displacement. Their analysis challenges societal assumptions and emphasizes justice over performative gratitude.

Rebecca Buxton and Matthew J. Gibney explore the ethical complexities of expecting gratitude from refugees. They challenge the notion that asylum seekers owe gratitude to host countries, emphasizing that this expectation often ignores the systemic injustices and legal obligations underlying asylum. The authors outline three philosophical criteria for gratitude:
 
(1) a benefit must be received
 
(2) the benefit must be freely given
 
(3) the benefactor must not be obligated to provide the benefit.
 
They argue that asylum rarely meets these criteria. Asylum is often a legal duty under international law or a form of reparative justice for past harms, such as colonialism, military interventions, or climate change contributions. This undermines the premise that asylum is a freely given gift deserving of gratitude.
 
 
Buxton and Gibney critique the harsh realities of many asylum systems, including detention, punitive measures, and restricted rights. Such policies create resentment rather than fostering genuine gratitude. They also highlight that states providing asylum are frequently complicit in creating the crises driving displacement. In these cases, asylum becomes an act of justice, not generosity.
 
 
The authors suggest that gratitude is more appropriately directed toward individuals or organizations that provide meaningful support, such as NGOs rescuing migrants or community groups aiding integration. They argue that societal expectations of gratitude often serve to perpetuate power imbalances, silencing refugees and framing them as dependent rather than autonomous.
 
Ultimately, Buxton and Gibney advocate for reframing the asylum discourse around justice and equality, challenging performative and conditional expectations of gratitude.
 

Concluding Reflections

Buxton and Gibney’s analysis invites reevaluating the moral assumptions surrounding asylum and refugee gratitude. They emphasize that asylum is often a legal or ethical obligation rather than a discretionary act of kindness. By critiquing punitive asylum systems and highlighting the systemic factors driving displacement, they shift the focus from gratitude to justice. Their work underscores the need for a more equitable and respectful discourse around forced migration, centering the dignity and agency of refugees. Moving forward, societies must prioritize fairness and accountability over performative expectations, fostering a genuine commitment to global solidarity and human rights.
 
Thanks for reading. Please follow my blog and write your feedback.