The global refugee crisis is a pressing issue that has generated significant debate across the

world. Some people would say we have the moral obligation to help those fleeing
persecution and violence, while others would say it is more important to ensure the well-
being of one's own citizens.
On the one hand, taking in refugees can have several positive impacts on the host country.
Firstly, hosting refugees can enhance a country's international reputation. It demonstrates a
commitment to humanitarian values and can lead to diplomatic and economic benefits.
Secondly, while refugees may initially strain resources, they can become contributors to the
host country's economy over time. Many refugees bring skills, talents, and a strong work
ethic, filling labor gaps and stimulating economic growth.
On the other hand, accepting refugees, especially when a country is already struggling to
provide for its own citizens, can pose certain challenges and negative consequences. Taking
in refugees places additional pressure on already limited resources. This can lead to
overburdened public services, including healthcare, education, and social welfare systems,
making it difficult to adequately meet the needs of both refugees and citizens. Furthermore,
in a country with high unemployment or underemployment, the arrival of refugees can
intensify job competition, potentially resulting in job insecurity and wage stagnation for both
refugees and native citizens.
All things considered, the moral obligation to help those in need is undeniable and can lead
to many benefits, such as diplomatic and economic benefits. However, it can lead to further
deterioration of public services. Striking a balance between compassion and national welfare
is the key to addressing this challenging dilemma.