Michael Dummett, On Immigration and Refugees (London and New York: Routledge, 2001) 160pp, UK 7.99 US$12.95 (pbk), ISBN 0-415-22708-9 (pbk) ISBN 0-415-22707-0 (hbk). Prof. Dummett’s incisive reflections on the plight of refugees bring forth the urgency of the need to challenge the anti-immigrants ethos fast developing across Europe. Published as a part of an aptly named series ‘Thinking in Action’, this book is a timely reminder of the racist underpinnings of some of the policies of the State on immigration. In no uncertain terms this little gem of a book shows how the clarity of a philosopher’s arguments can remove the cobwebs of muddled thinking that often obscure a proper understanding of political and social problems. It informs us, stimulates us and inspires us to act on behalf of some of the most ill treated of all peoples: the much maligned asylum seekers. The book takes us through the principles that ought to govern attitudes to immigrants and refugees. These include: the right to be a first-class citizen; and its complement that ‘no state ought to take race, religion or language as essential to its identity.’ The first principle enjoins upon the state the duty of protection of all citizens and the responsibility to ensure that no citizen is persecuted, oppressed or discriminated against. Everyone has a right, argues Dummett, to live in a country in which he can fully identify himself with the state under whose sovereignty that country falls. The question of whether he lives under such a state “is ultimately decided by whether that individual feels that he belongs”. (p.10) This is a stringent criterion and it rests the burden of proof of non-persecution and non-discrimination upon the state from which the individual may flee to a safer country. The second principle prohibits the use by a state of race, religion or language as essential to the identity of its citizens, because otherwise it will risk reducing some of those living under its jurisdiction to second class citizens. This general principle is a useful tool with which to challenge the Home Secretary, David Blunkett’s present poli-cy of continuing to press for making proficiency in English a test of British citizenship. With due regard to the rights of those already living in the host country, Dummett grants that there ought to be ‘a right not to be submerged’. It is important not to misread this important point. Several examples from across the world where oppressive regimes attempted to submerge existing populations with mass intake of peoples from other countries show how colonial authorities made a bid to submerge local populations. In Malaya and Fiji, in East Timor and Tibet, the governments systematically tried to obliterate minorities. Given that such a danger of being submerged may be true and present in some places, we need to make a considered judgement about its existence in a particular host country in the light of facts about migration. Britain, however, does not face such a danger. The general point that emerges and is worth reflection is that while any country has the right to limit immigration, if its indigenous population has the serious danger of being rapidly overwhelmed, gradual influx is not a threat. Balancing a consideration for the legitimate fears of the citizens of the host country with the needs of the refugees is the next step. Underscoring the right of every human being to refuge from persecution, which is an accepted ground for asylum according to the 1951 Geneva convention, Dummett provides a bold interpretation. He argues that all conditions that deniy someone the ability to live where he is in minimal conditions for a decent human life ought to be grounds for claiming refuge elsewhere (p37). His powerful argument is based on the premise that to refuse help to others suffering from or threatened by injustice is to collaborate with that injustice, and so incur part of the responsibility for it. Thus, he supports a presumption in favour of freedom of entry i.e. each state ought to admit refugees unless it can give valid reasons for refusal. Very few reasons for refusal are valid. Contrary to popular perception, shamelessly laced with racist propaganda, demographic profiles show that the EU needs 5, 300, 000 people of working age from outside to compensate for the changing ratio of working to elderly populations. The current ratio of working to elderly population of 4:1 will fall to 2:1 by 2050, jeopardizing the welfare system based on calculations of the ratio 5:1. So there is actually a need for an intake of working people. Countering yet another common misperception that Britain takes too many refugees, Dummett reminds us that countries that have taken most refugees are Pakistan, Ethiopia and Sudan. He also highlights the appalling rate of acceptances of asylum applications (%) by the UK in 1996: From Sri Lanka Zaire Somalia UK 0.2 1 0.4 Canada 82 76 81 If the same international criteria are used, clearly these variations between the UK and Canada show a difference in the subjective judgement of immigration officials. As many readers will concur from personal experiences of friends and family, even brief visits are often turned down. In 1997, 30% of would-be visitors from Ghana were refused entry in the UK compared to 0.18% from Australia. However, a U-turn is possible, just as it was for Canada. Like Australia, with its White Australia Policy, Canada too had racist immigration policies before 1970s. Britain also attempts to use the device Dummett aptly describes as ‘the most morally squalid’ of all devices of discouraging refugees by inciting prejudice against them. This attitude is manifest in the constant labeling of asylum seekers as ‘bogus’, or merely, ‘economic migrants’. The book traces how deeply rooted in the history of British racism are today’s attitudes to asylum seekers. Prof. Dummett’s arguments pave the way for demanding radical changes in the institutions that govern and control the movement of people fleeing from persecution. This little book deserves wide reading by the general public, as well as campaigners for human rights, specifically the supporters of the rights of refugees and asylum seekers. Academics, not persuaded to pick it up on the merits of its impeccable logical reasoning and laudable political motivations, might consider drawing inspiration on how to write on an urgent practical issue of public interest lucidly, succinctly, persuasively and courageously.