Which countries get the most asylum seekers in Europe

[TiphEret 1,320]

I have only found this article in French but I can highlight the main point. I would suggest to look at the article anyways because there are some graphs and a map showing where asylum seekers are asking asylum the most and which countries accept the most.

In 2014, there were about half a million of demands of asylum so twice as much as in 2011. Especially from Syria, Afghanistan and Kosovo (didn't expect that one). However not all countries in Europe are receiving demands equally nor in relation to their population so for example Norway is one that gets the more demands per inhabitants whereas France not so much.

The 4 countries that got the most demands in 2014 were:

Germany far ahead if the others

Sweden

Italy

and France

 

However country, like Hungary, Austria and Montenegro are also receiving a lot considering their population. This is due to "travelling routes": basically migrants should ask asylum in the country they arrive to , that's why France doesn't receive so much demands comparing to Italy a lot closer. Then you can see how politics regarding immigrants are different with Germany accepting around 30% of demands, France only 20% and Hungary less than 10%.

Due to the high numbers of migrants and dangerous conditions of them coming here it's urgent that Europe organize it's immigration better especially with the high number of death; recently a 3 years old was found on a beach (of the pic is NSWF).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/aylan-kurdis-story-how-a-small-syrian-child-came-to-be-washed-up-on-a-beach-in-turkey-10484588.html

http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2015/09/03/demandeurs-dasile-carte-les-chiffres-comprendre-261038

 

I found the figures very interesting, I can't believe that because of a silly rule (that asylum seekers should ask in the country they first arrive) it has become such a mess, it puts such a burden on some countries , while some won't never have any problem due to that (and they are usually the one b---hing about it like France or the UK)

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

Sweden  and Germany take together the most

[ShockPop 7,747]

I have only found this article in French but I can highlight the main point. I would suggest to look at the article anyways because there are some graphs and a map showing where asylum seekers are asking asylum the most and which countries accept the most.

In 2014, there were about half a million of demands of asylum so twice as much as in 2011. Especially from Syria, Afghanistan and Kosovo (didn't expect that one). However not all countries in Europe are receiving demands equally nor in relation to their population so for example Norway is one that gets the more demands per inhabitants whereas France not so much.

The 4 countries that got the most demands in 2014 were:

Germany far ahead if the others

Sweden

Italy

and France

 

However country, like Hungary, Austria and Montenegro are also receiving a lot considering their population. This is due to "travelling routes": basically migrants should ask asylum in the country they arrive to , that's why France doesn't receive so much demands comparing to Italy a lot closer. Then you can see how politics regarding immigrants are different with Germany accepting around 30% of demands, France only 20% and Hungary less than 10%.

Due to the high numbers of migrants and dangerous conditions of them coming here it's urgent that Europe organize it's immigration better especially with the high number of death; recently a 3 years old was found on a beach (of the pic is NSWF).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/aylan-kurdis-story-how-a-small-syrian-child-came-to-be-washed-up-on-a-beach-in-turkey-10484588.html

http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2015/09/03/demandeurs-dasile-carte-les-chiffres-comprendre-261038

 

I found the figures very interesting, I can't believe that because of a silly rule (that asylum seekers should ask in the country they first arrive) it has become such a mess, it puts such a burden on some countries , while some won't never have any problem due to that (and they are usually the one b---hing about it like France or the UK)

uk b---hing? We are already over populated and we're tiny compared to those other countries. Where everyone will physically go is a mystery.

[Melech 9,900]

uk b---hing? We are already over populated and we're tiny compared to those other countries. Where everyone will physically go is a mystery.

C'mon Germany is not that large too. As well as Hungary or Italy

 

[TiphEret 1,320]

uk b---hing? We are already over populated and we're tiny compared to those other countries. Where everyone will physically go is a mystery.

This is the point look at the size of Hungary, they can't take too much either. France would argue on the fact we have economic problem and already too many muslims (which i don't agree with btw). The point would be that if we would split migrants according countries possibilities it would be easier for most people. So Uk wouldn't have "too much" if you know what I mean and personally I think that Europe shouldn't be the only one to get asylum seekers maybe countries like Canada or the US could get some but honestly I don't know the technicals about it. Don't take it personally, I love the UK, I have lived there and it's one of the country I like the most in Europe but when you have a crisis and if we are all in the EU together then we have to deal with it.

[Miker 5,683]

I choke up when I see children lose their lives like this. I understand the desperation but when the decisions to take these kind of chances are made by the parents, you have to wonder if it worth the risk. You can't expect the burden for safe travel of migrants be the responsibility of other countries to where they are seeking asylum.  

[Qualle1 1,385]

I choke up when I see children lose their lives like this. I understand the desperation but when the decisions to take these kind of chances are made by the parents, you have to wonder if it worth the risk. You can't expect the burden for safe travel of migrants be the responsibility of other countries to where they are seeking asylum.

This is a current picture of the city Kobane in Syria:

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/80718000/jpg/_80718787_kobane8.jpg

Do you really think, you can live in such an awful environment with two little children?

In Syria is WAR!

 

 

[Luc 4,776]

uk b---hing? We are already over populated and we're tiny compared to those other countries. Where everyone will physically go is a mystery.

Size of the country is the worst excuse possible. There's PLENTY of land in the UK.

If you'd say lack of houses and asylum centres then I'd understand, but there is no real overpopulated country at the moment besides maybe Bangladesh. The UK is actually a very big country, with tons of free space. Build some big apartment buildings (costs money, the UK has money) and you can house thousands of people.

And wow at Sweden! That's a lot. I'd wish the country I live in would take about 50 to 70k. I think 100k is the max for one year. 

[Goosey 3,017]

Build some big apartment buildings (costs money, the UK has money) and you can house thousands of people.

But they could also rent those apartments to well-off English people and make millions. 

[ShockPop 7,747]

Size of the country is the worst excuse possible. There's PLENTY of land in the UK.

If you'd say lack of houses and asylum centres then I'd understand, but there is no real overpopulated country at the moment besides maybe Bangladesh. The UK is actually a very big country, with tons of free space. Build some big apartment buildings (costs money, the UK has money) and you can house thousands of people.

And wow at Sweden! That's a lot. I'd wish the country I live in would take about 50 to 70k. I think 100k is the max for one year. 

I'm sure the national Trust are happy to have the countryside made into high rise buildings.

The UK doesn't have money. That's a common misconception. The people that are able to build homes do so for profit (obviously) and thus refugees cannot afford them.

The practicalities are just impossible.

[Guest]

The UK may not take as many as other countries but does provide the most foreign aid in the world, second only to the US.

 

[AdAstra 2,649]

I really don't understand why the United States and Canada aren't taking more refugees than we currently are...it's not like we don't have the resources and land. Plus, the U.S. is a nation built on immigration with a strong history of assimilating peoples of all kinds into American society. If the U.S. can spend billions upon billions of dollars a year on the military we should be able to help out other human beings in need. 

[TiphEret 1,320]

I really don't understand why the United States and Canada aren't taking more refugees than we currently are...it's not like we don't have the resources and land. Plus, the U.S. is a nation built on immigration with a strong history of assimilating peoples of all kinds into American society. If the U.S. can spend billions upon billions of dollars a year on the military we should be able to help out other human beings in need. 

Interesting! I definitely agree with you, I don't know what is the position of the USA regarding taking more refugees. I just moved to Canada as a student, I have seen it a lot on the news, I don't know what is the position of the government either but I agree that Europe and neighbourhing countries of Syria can't take that burden alone and we can't say USA and Canada lack space...

The UK may not take as many as other countries but does provide the most foreign aid in the world, second only to the US.

 

That's true, but maybe the money for foreign aid directed to Syria could be invested in hosting refugees? Just a suggestion not b---hing or anything.

I'm sure the national Trust are happy to have the countryside made into high rise buildings.

The UK doesn't have money. That's a common misconception. The people that are able to build homes do so for profit (obviously) and thus refugees cannot afford them.

The practicalities are just impossible.

I don't know about the wealth of the Uk, but France is saying the same, honestly I think it's BS that politicians are saying because public money sin't well invested and there is a lot of corruption. A few years ago I was living in England, they could afford to send us volunteering (DFID so the money is suppose to be for international aid) for 3 months in a developping country. The money for us to go there, be trained and such could pay a worker from the country for 2 years! An expert! When I arrived and discover that I felt like a cheater. They think that it's a we-ay to give skills to their youth, but I don't think that money was invested properly if it's for international aid. That was a joke. I am not tryongt o put the blame on the UK here but just saying that every country has it's problems and there is never a good time to have refugees. Look at Lebanon they have so many Syrian and unfortunately they can't take care of them. If they get so many it's because they have the border with Syria.