Attitudes towards refugees in Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia

As refugee flows have increased, western attitudes towards them have become conflicted. Attitudes towards refugees in non-western and in Muslim nations are rarely studied, though these nations accept most refugees. This study of attitudes towards refugees among tertiary students in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), Lebanon, Russia and Kyrgyzstan used Appraisal and content analysis frequencies and co-frequencies. Results showed that the Lebanese realised greater affect, possibly due to their experience of refugees. More generally, nationality shaped attitudes more than religion, tertiary students favour technocratic solutions by government actors despite realistically estimating the challenge, and while students critically analyse the problems created by refugee inflows, they retain a nativist stance and seem unaware of the optics and politics of this stance.


Introduction
Western nations receiving refugees fleeing the Syrian civil war are debating their commitment to their humanitarian obligations to receive and shelter refugees.This debate reflects the unprecedented scale of displacement and the ructions of the neoliberal western world order, and has called into question national identities, and shaped political leadership.The Syrian refugee crisis is often taken as a precursor to the anticipated refugee flows which will accompany future climate change.Tertiary students will be the decision-makers handling future refugee flows.This study explores the subjective attitudes and content they realise about Syrian refugees.

Literature Review
Contemporary western attitudes towards refugees are controverted, with popular anxieties contesting established policies.Muslims refugees have been linked with terrorism since 9/11, which has shaped the reception of Syrian refugees (Eid, 2014).Refugee health has highlighted the burden on welfare and medical systems (Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, Loescher, Long & Sigona, 2014).Poor integration is one cause of western-born Muslim youth embracing jihad (Franz, 2015).The proliferation of jihadist groups has highlighted security issues (Lazaridis, 2016).Thus, the west has become reluctant to accept Muslim refugees, despite their 1949 Geneva Convention obligations.
Anxieties about refugees reflect popular xenophobia, but also problems arising six decades after Geneva, in a world that includes massive population flows due to globalisation, and extensive government responsibilities.The Geneva Conventions arose in a period of global carnage but not global migration or global media.EU governments must manage security and cost-sharing issues arising from free movement in the Schengen zone (Ahrens, Kelly & Liempt, 2014).They must detect which global financial remittances support terrorists abroad (Zhirkov, Verkuyten & Weesie, 2014).The media problematise issues such as gender tolerance (Joly, 2016).While governments articulate integration measures, social media amplifies negative views of the burden on western economies (Hervik, 2014).These new realities tend to undermine Geneva's moral vision (Winter, 2015).
Western media, policy-makers and intellectuals now question whether they can accept refugees (Geiger & Pecoud, 2010).These questions will not subside when peace comes to Syria: climate change will increase refugee flows in coming decades (Tacoli, 2009).Thus, it is important to study refugee reception.
Studies of western attitudes towards refugees are numerous (Davidov & Meuleman, 2012).Many use cohort theory to explore how values change within groups and in response to contextual factors (O'Rourke & Sinnott, 2006).Many connect economic stress with xenophobia (Strabac & Listhaug, 2008).Some frame multiculturalism as bringing groups into conflict, challenging western nativity, and impacting social cohesion (Meuleman, Davidov, & Billiet, 2009).Comparative studies have focused on European national attitudes.Yet Middle-eastern nations are managing the burden of the current crisis, with Lebanon and Jordan, not Geneva signatories, as well as Turkey, Egypt and war-torn Iraq, each taking more than a million refugees (UNHCR, 2016).Negative stereotyping exists among Muslim co-religionists, along the Sunni-Shi'i divide (Jones, 2007).Muslim women stereotype others by their hijab choices (Funk, 2015).Poor Muslim economic migrants face discrimination in wealthier Muslim countries (Jureidini, 2005).Saudi Arabs discriminate against Egyptians, Omanis, Bahrainis and Indians (Al-Rasheed, 2007); Iranian immigrants against non-Iranian Muslims (Moallem, 2005), and Turkish immigrants against non-Turks (Hopkins, 2016).Non-western nations such as Russia and Kyrgyzstan face the same challenges as western nations, in handling massive refugee flows.Thus, the attitudes of non-western and non-Muslim nations help us understand refugee reception more broadly, and forecast reception of future refugee flows.
In this study, attitudes were taken from Saudi, Lebanese, Russian and Kyrgyz university students, about refugees and border control.Data from these nations allows us to compare attitudes in several ways.Linguistically rich data builds a nuanced understanding of non-western attitudes.As Muslim-majority nations, KSA and Lebanon offer important contrasts.Oil wealth makes KSA the world's 20 th largest economy, where Lebanon ranks 91 st (IMF, 2015).KSA holds a central cultural position through the holy cities Mecca and Medina, and ensures social stability through policing (Niblock, 2004).Saudi youth under 25 are 45% of the population; 82% are urbanised, 35% receive tertiary education (Forstenlechner & Rutledge, 2011).Lebanon is culturally diverse, with long-established Orthodox, Maronite, Catholic, Druze, Sunni and Shia communities (Cleveland, Laroche, Takahashi & Erdoğan, 2014).With 19 official identities, Lebanon suffers from chronic sectarian tensions (Gordon, 2016).Beneficiaries of a globally-connected diaspora, Lebanese students are liberal and individualist (Kraidy, 2007).Lebanese and Saudi youth share elements of history, culture, language and religion, but not wealth, social or conflict experiences.
Russia is a western nation outside "the west", Kyrgyzstan a Muslim nation outside the Middle-East.They offer a valuable comparison with Saudi and Lebanese attitudes.Russia gained Kyrgyzstan in 19 th century wars with China, but Kyrgyzstan has reclaimed its identity since its 1991 independence (Kosmarskaya, 2014).Russia, spanning Europe and Asia, incorporates 185 official ethnicities, and 35 regional and 100 minority languages (Pavlenko, 2006).A Geneva Convention signatory, Russia is for 20 th century geopolitical reasons not included in what is termed "the west".Its centuries-old relationship with Middle-eastern nations developed separately (Donaldson & Nogee, 2014).Kyrgyzstan's alliances are eastward-looking (Smallbone & Welter, 2012).Russian majorities express negative attitudes towards Muslims (Mayda, 2006).Multiple varieties of Islam are accepted among Kyrgyzstan's 80 ethnic minorities (Montgomery, 2014).Russia ranks 73 rd , Kyrgyzstan 181 st for GDP (IMF, 2015).Kyrgyz education is dynamic and reform-minded, with an internationalised public and private university system (Heynemandan & Young, 2004).Russian youth distrust globalisation, and nostalgically imagine bygone soviet economic certainties (Pilkington, 2002).Reform in 2007 brought Russian in line with western educational standards (Shenderova, 2011).As western hegemony has declined, Russian and Central Asian stances on global issues have become more important globally (Tsygankov, 2016).This article explores attitudes towards refugees among students in these four nations.All face refugee issues: Lebanon hosts Syrian refugees, KSA's war with Houthi rebels has generated an influx of Yemeni refugees across its uncontrolled Empty Quarter border, and Russia and Kyrgyzstan must manage jihadi returnees.Research questions addressed in this study included: How do non-western Muslims and extra-western westerners respond to closing borders to refugees?What attitudes are shared among the educated non-western Muslim and non-Muslim westerner youth who will become global entrepreneurs, professionals, media managers, policy-makers and business decision-makers in a decade's time?What are the impacts of being culturally central or less so, economically stronger or less so?

Method
Qualitative data was collected, and analysed in three ways.Appraisal analysis was used to identify directly inscribe an emotion: "I want to help to refugees".Or, one may indirectly invoke an attitude by distributing its elements among the components of a sentence: "[t]he dedicated volunteers' action should remind the world that people have a responsibility and natural or human mental tendency to help" (Scherer, 2005).
Opinion data may be aggregated into a corpus, and attitudes tagged to identify regularities (Read & Carroll, 2012).Text-tagging is widely-used in computational linguistics (Polanyi & Zaenen, 2006).Text-tagging softwares use concordances of hierarchically-defined word classes created through supervised classification tasks, and sophisticated using statistical machine-learning techniques (Pang, Lee & Vaithyanathan 2002).These programs efficiently sort corpus data into semantic classes (Bednarek, 2009).Subjective attitudes are easiest for software to identify (Oatley, Keltner & Jenkins, 2006)).Because Appraisal integrates valence with direct/indirect realisations of the twenty-four semantic subcategories, it offers highly-defined results.This study used the software CorpusTool (CT), which builds in the Appraisal system networks (O'Donnell, 2008).

Content Analysis
Content analysis represents extensive corpus data as content element frequencies (Bryman, 2004).As units are derived from the corpus, these scores represent content precisely (Roberts, 1997).Coding the complete corpus ensures greater accuracy than sampling (Krippendorf, 2004).In this study, the four national subcorpora were fully coded, generating an emergent coding frame of frequently-realised content elements (Weber, 1985).Elements were mutually exclusive but not exhaustive, focusing on issues relating to refugees only (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000).The clause formed the unit of analysis, as is conventional when analysing linguistic data (Babie, 2001).Element frequency scores used the clause as a boundaried coding unit.Cross-clause counts required lexical or syntactic connection to at least one distal clause (Carley, 1990).Clauses containing manifest content only were counted, with latent content disregarded (Stemler, 2001).In this corpus, the 5 content elements were each broken down into 5 subunits.

Co-frequencies
This study measured co-frequency as colligations of subunits with attitudinal word classes (Baayen, 2008).Collocations of lexical items were ruled out, as they often reflect idiomatic usage and morphosyntax, for example as "security" often collocates with "apparatus", and "man".Colligation of word classes supports interpreting co-frequencies as indexing culturally normative meanings (Hunston, 2002).The co-frequency measure used was Yule's Y, expressed as a value of -1 through +1, where positive values indicate co-frequencies of varying strengths (Gries, 2008).Only co-frequencies greater than 0.50, unlikely to be generated through morphosyntax or collocation, have been included (Chung & Lee, 2001).

Inter-rater and inter-coder reliability
The corpus was tagged for Appraisal and coded for content by the lead researcher and a research assistant.Cohen's κ was used to calculate inter-rater and inter-coder reliability, including percent-overall (p-o) and free-margin (f-m) (Lombard, Snyder-Duch & Bracken, 2004).

Data
The prompt generated a corpus of 64 776 words, in four national sub-corpora, as in Table 1.Attitude data in Table 2 is excerpted from Appendix A.

Attitude data
The subcorpora showed attitudinal differences.The Lebanese subcorpus was most positive, the Saudi most negative, though the range was moderate.Affect was infrequently realised, except in the Lebanese subcorpus.The Saudi corpus contained the most Judgment, which reframes emotions as evaluations of people and behaviours (Martin & White, 2005).Judgments of esteem assess people and behaviours with reference to social norms; judgments of sanction realise issues of law, religious creeds, rules and regulations, duties and obligations (Hunston & Thompson, 2000).For example, "It acted admirably and properly to give the refugees an education" reworks a positive feeling of pleasure as a positive evaluation of Saudi government actions.Positive Appreciations were found in all four, negative appreciations in all but the Russian subcorpus.The Kyrgyz corpus contained the most Appreciation, though the range was moderate.Appreciation reframes emotion as statements about the qualities of objects and events outside the self (Martin & Rose, 2003).For example, "This is a very controversial issue" reworks a negative feeling of disquiet as a negative quality of the event.

Frequently-realised Attitude categories and subcategories
Realisations in six subcategories comprised 60-80% of all attitudes.Judgments were the most frequently-realised, across all subcorpora, particularly Judgments of capacity, positive and negative.Realisations of capacity express

Content element and subunit frequencies
Of 9,211 clauses in the four subcorpora, 8,003 contained content.Five frequently-occuring elements were identified: (1) problems caused by refugees, (2), ethical issues, (3) government obligations, (4) interpretations of refugees and (5) solutions.Four subunits were identified for each, and frequency scores obtained (see Appendix B).Differences between participant groups were evident, as in Figure 2. The Lebanese subcorpus had the most distinct profile, focusing on ethical questions over problems and government responses.The Saudi subcorpus focused strongly on ethical questions, and most on government.The Kyrgyz subcorpus focused most on interpreting refugees as persons, defining the problem and seeking solutions.The Kyrgyz and Russian profiles were similar to each other, with the Russian subcorpus focused more on government than ethics.The Lebanese and Saudi profiles focused on problems, solutions and interpretations.
Figure 2. Content element realisations for four national subcorpora All subcorpora had similar profiles for interpretations of refugees as people, and problems and solutions identified.Realisation frequency in these categories seemed to vary inversely with wealth.Kyrgyzstan, with a GDP 181 st in the world, had the highest values.Lebanon, with a GDP 91 st , and Russia 73 rd , had the next-highest values.Saudi, with the world's 20 th highest GDP, had the lowest values.

Inter-rater and inter-coder reliability
Inter-rater and inter-coder scores were calculated (Freelon, 2010), as in Table 3.These values are robust, and not attributable to chance.

Subunit-attitude co-frequencies
The most frequently-realised subunit across all four subcorpora was (5a Some explained terrorism as a psychological consequence of becoming a refugee.A Lebanese participant wrote: "You don't start out a terrorist, but you can[+capacity] become one due to unfair hardships of that life".This subunit (1d) co-occurred with positive (Kyrgyz 0.57) and negative normality (Saudi 0.53), and positive (0.63) and negative (0.60) capacity in the Lebanese subcorpus.Participants in all subcorpora asserted that terrorists were part of refugee populations.Mentions of judicial penalties (5c) for crime and terrorism were frequent enough to be a separate subunit.
The obligation of receiving governments to assess refugee claims (3b) was fourth most-frequently realised.
Participants in all subcorpora accepted that some refugees would be rejected or deported.A Saudi participant wrote: "Our government should[+propriety] strictly control the numbers entering, and limit[-capacity] where they can[-capacity] live, and according to what jobs are needed [+capacity]."Assertions that no nation could solve the refugee problem, and that governments had an ethical obligation to prioritise citizen rights, were frequent enough to be defined as separate subunits (5d, 3d).A Lebanese participant wrote: Our government has to[+capacity] organise Syrians to provide their own schools and doctors, as in the Palestinian refugee camps.This way, Lebanese who can now hardly[-capacity] take a place in university because of so many Syrians, can[+capacity] get their own education.
Subunit 3b co-occurred with positive (Russia 0.76) and negative propriety (KSA 0.65), and positive (KSA 0.60, Russia 0.56, Kyrgyzstan 0.58, Lebanon 0.61) and negative capacity (KSA 0.57, Lebanon 0.54).Participants in all subcorpora viewed refugees as imposing costs, which governments should control.A Russian participant wrote: "more refugees means more welfare (unemployment benefits, social housing, food stamps, etc) and thus more taxes."Healthcare and education were the most frequently-mentioned resources participants cited as requiring protection for nationals.
Assertions that refugees migrate to the EU for money (4b) was the fifth most-frequently realised, with terms such as "Harrods refugees" and "pseudo-refugees" used.A Lebanese participant wrote: "They come here, but most want to go to Europe because they can[+capacity] get good allowances.You can't[-capacity] get anything, even from the UN here".A Russian participant wrote: "The problem arises because there is a rumor that in Europe is provided high quality[+normality] of life for everyone".A Saudi participant wrote: "These Arabs run to Europe.And why is this?We can[+capacity] answer that they will not get the same[-normality] money if they run to Arab countries."This subunit (4b) co-occurred with positive (KSA 0.55, Russia 0.62, Kyrgyzstan 0.59) and negative capacity (KSA 0.65, Lebanon 0.53, Russia 0.60), and positive (KSA 0.66) and negative normality (Russia 0.55, Kyrgyzstan 0.61).The view that refugees do not want to work was frequent enough to be defined as its own subunit (4d), as was the case for the view that refugees do not want to integrate (4c).A Lebanese participant wrote: "Syrians always think they own Lebanon.But they follow their own customs.Soon there is no Lebanon."Participants in all subcorpora frequently asserted the view that governments should condition acceptance of refugees on employment with limited benefits (5b).
The view that refugees cause social stress (1a) particularly overcrowding and housing competition, as well as (1b) unemployment of citizens, were 6 th and 7 th most frequently mentioned.A Lebanese participant wrote: "How can we build our economy when we have as many[-normality] Syrians?They do the same[-normality] job but half[-normality] the pay, so our people lose jobs."Russian participants wrote: "[R]efugees of another culture always[-normality] cause tension[-impact]", and "If the refugees refuse to accept the culture of the countries, countries should not accept refugees".Subunit 1a co-occurred with negative normality (Russia 0.65, Kyrgyzstan 0.55) and negative impact (Lebanon 0.62).Anxiety over a loss of cultural identity (1c) and government obligation to preserve existing social norms, particularly language and religion (3c) were frequently-enough realised to be defined as separate subunits.
Understanding that refugees seek safety (4a) was eighth-most frequently-realised, compassionate interpretations of refugees (2a) ninth-most, and acknowledgement of an ethical obligation to provide food and shelter (2b) twelfth-most.The subunit 4a co-occurred with positive (Russia 0.57, Kyrgyzstan 0.51) and negative normality (Russia 0.52), and positive (Russia 0.51, Lebanon 0.64) and negative qualities (Russia 0.50).The subunit 2a compassion co-occurred with negative impact (Lebanon 0.62).The subunit 2b provision of food and shelter co-occurred with positive quality (Lebanon 0.56) and pleasure (Lebanon 0.67).

Discussion
Attitude data shows that refugees evoke little emotion among educated non-western Muslims and extra-western westerners.That Lebanon differed in this regard probably reflects its experience hosting 1.5 million Syrians in a tiny country.Appreciations of impact, high in the Lebanese subcorpora alone, are similar.Content analysis revealed that participants understand the refugee crisis to be about problems caused by refugees, the government's obligation to control them, possible solutions, negative stereotypes of refugees as people, and ethical issues.Across all four subcorpora, university students frame their response to these problems and solutions in terms of capacity, propriety, normality and worth.Capacity was most frequently realised, co-occurring with multiple subunits; handling terrorism, critically assessing refugee documentation and managing status claims, administering housing, health, education and other benefits, and excluding those who wanted not to work or to claim benefits unfairly.These show that participants focused on technocratic solutions to the refugee problem.Yet their use of capacity shows reification.Less than 1% were semantically-bleached as in "I can see your point" (Sweetzer, 1988), or constrained existential uses, as in the Russian corpus, "such measures [closing borders] can only have populist meaning").Few parsed the meaning of the attributed capacity, as did this Kyrgyz participant: [R]easons may be different diseases, religious differences or sometimes the hidden motives of refugees like terrorism (it is also possible), but the government can control them.For example, Slovakia receives only those refugees who are in Christian religion.
Most used universal circumstantial modal constructions, which do not restrict the degree of possibility (Portner, 2009), as in the Kyrgyz subcorpus: "[P]ut limitations for immigrants and create strict and serious rules for new comers in which our government can control any unexpected accidents".These realisations valorised national or foreign governments as agents, in a totalising, simplistic manner.This is surprisingly unrealistic: where Saudis may, Russians, Kyrgyz and Lebanese seem less likely to have a high estimate of their governments' efficacy.While a technocratic approach to problem-solving has merit, and attribution of government efficacy will moderate with work experience, this data identifies the lack of emotional engagement as a significant problem, for refugee reception in non-western and Muslim nations.
Direct realisation of emotion is a reliable indicator of personal engagement, as it represents the self and its experience, as for example in the Lebanese subcorpus, "I feel their fear".But most attitudes in the other subcorpora used lexicalised constructions, which place distance between the self and the experience.Nominalised constructions reframe the experience of emotion metaphorically as a noun, as in the Saudi corpus: "I have a poor opinion of these refugees".Shared subjectivity aligns the author with a specific group perspective, as in the Saudi corpus, "everyone knows that they harass women".Typification subsumes emotional experience within the formality of a category, as in the Russian subcorpus "Refugees should understand that it isn't a chance to increase their quality of life; it's just a kind of charity".Conditional constructions rework emotion as a hypothetical or potential, as in the Kyrgyz corpus, "I think if the only thing refugees want is safety, they could stay in Turkey, but they go further to have social benefits that Turkey will not give".Projection puts the ideas into other voices, as in the Saudi corpus, "We see on the news, how they do not accept to work".This suggests that actual experience of refugees may be more salient than university education in ensuring a positive reception of refugees.
The most common stand-in for emotional was ethical engagement.Propriety was used most after capacity, co-occurring with border control, crime control, and documentation, though Lebanon was again an exception.The majority of these realisations were directly inscribed (in the Saudi corpus, "They should not[-propriety] take anyone who has committed a crime") rather than indirectly invoked (in the Russian corpus, "If a newcomer commits an offence or disturbs others by his or her very bad[-propriety] behavior, this person must be extradited").This language dichotomises refugees into good and bad kinds, conditioning their fitness to receive assistance on their behaviour.It is understandable that participants criticise behaviours such as robbery and rape, and identify social problems associated with refugee populations.But their focus on these without a similar realisation of the obligation of care is troubling.While the 1951 UN Convention, Article 1/F specifies serious crime as a reason for excluding persons from refugee status, refugees also have the right of non-refoulement, or return to territories in which their lives or safety are endangered, and of freedom of movement within the host nation (Foster, 2007).This highlights the necessity to teach refugee reception to tertiary students.

Conclusion
This study has produced four main conclusions.First, national identity shaped the attitudes realised more than religious or economic factors.The Lebanese corpus was most positive, the Saudi most negative.The Lebanese corpus had the greatest congruency, affect and ethics content, where co-religionists in KSA realised more propriety and government content.The economies of KSA, Russia and Kyrgyzstan are very different, and yet their attitudes were more similar to each other than to those of Lebanese participants.This suggests that personal experience is more significant than nationality, religion or economic status in shaping attitudes towards refugees.
Second, tertiary students' response to the refugee crisis lacks emotion.Participants in all subcorpora most frequently realised capacity, propriety, normality and worth.Positive judgments of capacity in all participant groups suggest a belief that it is possible to handle the crisis effectively, but these were contradicted by judgments of tenacity, suggesting participants correctly perceive the challenge, perhaps indicating that they compartmentalise experiential and cognitive sources of understanding.This conclusion is supported by the distinct qualities of the Lebanese corpus.Participants from wealthier nations, KSA and Russia, realised government-related content more frequently, and have more effective governments than Lebanon and Kyrgyzstan.Yet Kyrgyz and Russian co-frequencies of propriety and government-related content were more similar to each other than to the Lebanese corpus, again suggesting that it was Lebanese participants' experiences of refugees accounts for their different responses.High reification and low semantic bleaching also supports this view.Overall, this suggests that university students place excessive faith in technocratic solutions, unless they have contrary personal experience.
Third, tertiary students seem underprepared to respond to future refugee flows.They assert the propriety of defending borders and social systems against refugees whom they stereotype negatively as lazy and greedy troublemakers and terrorists.The most common co-frequency was normality, for closed borders.The second most frequent was refugee crime with negative propriety.Responses lack compassion, and reflect nativist self-interest, consonant with group threat theory.The Lebanese corpus was the exception to this, suggesting experience of refugees elicits compassion, and counters defensive stereotyping.As future leaders and decision-makers, they seem not to appreciate the politics and the optics of nativism.Moral leadership requires that compassion is expressed, and enacted, for both communities.A nativist reception may be read as prejudice, exclusion, selfishness, ineffectiveness or isolationism (Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, Loescher, Long & Sigona, 2014).Refugee reception will retain political significance, as climate change increasingly shapes 21 st century politics.
Fourth, while students' focus on problem-analysis is valuable, critical thinking may not be sufficient to manage future refugee crises.Content analysis generated 20 subunits focused on practical challenges of refugee inflows, but only 5 focused on the ethical dimensions of the crisis.The relatively low realisation of solidarity with and compassion for refugees suggests contemporary students remain blind to their own positionality, which often undermines the reception of leaders and decisions.Cohort theory shows that attitudes change slowly, in response to changing contexts.This suggests the need to teach contemporary tertiary students greater critical awareness of nativism, emphasising the ethics and politics of national responses to refugee flows, but also teaching a critical awareness of positionality.The teaching of empathy and compassion has been extensively developed in healthcare contexts: these methods could be used more broadly in foundation year content, in order to prepare tertiary youth for a future in which refugees will become part of daily life.
This study has limitations.Sample size impacts the accurate representation of tertiary students' attitudes, particularly in the case of Russia, which has a large population.While the nations selected furnish useful comparisons, comparing mega-states such as Russia and micro-states such as Lebanon is difficult.This may be somewhat mitigated in the remaining four studies of hot-button social issues connected with refugees: contraception, employment, education and citizenship.These may provide a more accurate picture of non-western and Muslim attitudes.

Table 3 .
Inter-rater and inter-coder reliability scores for four national corpora Territory is one of the main[+normality] and the most important[+normality] immediate constituent of each country.Hence, safety of borders is point of honor[+propriety] of every nation.If military cannot protect[+propriety] boundary it means country does not stand[-normality] on its own two feet.
), closing borders and limiting numbers and kinds of refugees granted entry.While a majority of participants (314=92.90%)consideredboth pros and cons, clauses about closed outnumbered those about open borders.Concerns mentioned in all subcorpora included territorial integrity, undocumented persons, costs (guards, administration), and crime (smuggling drugs, weapons, sex-slaves).A Saudi participant wrote: "Borders are usually [+normality] closed.People don't [-propriety] just walk in if they want."AKyrgyz participant wrote:[T]here were a lot of[-normality] explosions by terrorists.Mostly, the terrorists were with Islamic origin.So, there emerged an odd convention[-normality] about them that every[+normality] Muslim can[+capacity] do terror.
A Kyrgyz participant wrote: "Every[+normality] human being wants to live in safety and peace.Refugees from Syria do the same[+normality]."ARussianparticipantwrote:"Weare all[+normality] human and whatever happen as human beings all[+normality] people should help each other in hard time[-normality]without paying attention to their race, religion, nation etc."A Lebanese participant wrote: "War is the most terrible[-impact] thing that can befall a person…We must offer simple[+quality] food and place."Theviewthatwealthy nations should financially support refugees was frequently-enough realised to form a separate subunit (3a).A Kyrgyz participant wrote: "I'm not saying that all[-normality] countries should open their borders to refugees but those governments that are able to support them".Participants rarely identified specific nations, more often acknowledging the difficulties faced by EU nations.A Russian participant wrote:Taxpayers of the richest[+quality] and most developed[+quality] countries as Germany, Norway, Switzerland are not able to maintain hundreds of thousands refugees.Many of them want to obtain European citizenship and don't plan to come back home.In my opinion such a situation could have a destructive[-impact] effect for European economy in the nearest future.European civilization is not so stable[-quality] ideologically and religiously as it looks like.If Europeans want to safe their material well-being they need to close country borders to refugees.