Refugee policy — Should all unauthorized refugees be forced to return? Statement: Should all refugees who make unauthorized entry into a country be forced to go back to their homeland? Arguments: I. Yes. They build colonies and occupy a lot of land. II. No. They leave due to hunger or terror and, on human grounds, should not be forced to return.
-
AOnly argument I is strong
-
BOnly argument II is strong
-
CEither I or II is strong
-
DNeither I nor II is strong
-
EBoth I and II are strong
Answer
Correct Answer: Only argument II is strong
Explanation
Introduction / Context:This question contrasts security/land-use concerns with humanitarian imperatives in refugee policy. We evaluate which argument provides a principled, broadly applicable rationale.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Refugees often flee persecution, conflict, or famine.
- International norms (e.g., non-refoulement) discourage forcing return to danger.
- Strong arguments should rest on human rights or robust public interest, not stereotypes.
Concept / Approach:Argument I is a generalized claim about land occupation; it neither addresses refugee protection nor proposes lawful integration/processing. Argument II aligns with humanitarian standards and recognizes the moral/legal dimension of forced return.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Argument I: Weak. Overgeneralizes and ignores due process, asylum procedures, and human rights.Argument II: Strong. Emphasizes human grounds for not forcing return to danger; consistent with ethical governance.Verification / Alternative check:Practical policy involves screening, asylum adjudication, and international cooperation rather than blanket expulsion.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
- I strong: not supported by principle.
- Either/Neither/Both: do not match the clear superiority of II.
Common Pitfalls:Letting broad fears override humanitarian and legal considerations.
Final Answer:Only argument II is strong