The Syrian crisis has seen the largest movement in recent history of people entering into Europe, many risking their lives to travel by boat across the Mediterranean in search of sanctuary. The conflict has generated over 5 million refugees, with a further 7 million internally displaced – 12 million people in total are affected by the crisis as of 2019, with Syrians forced to flee persecution and conflict in their home country, many escaping to camps or urban centres within Turkey, Lebanon or Jordon, with a minority (roughly 10 per cent) undertaking the journey west, towards Turkey and onwards to Europe (UNHCR 2016b). Of those people entering into the EU seeking sanctuary, Syrians represent roughly 50 per cent of arrivals, but they are not the only individuals displaced; for example, 20 per cent of EU arrivals hail from Afghanistan and 15 per cent from Iraq, all refugee producing countries. Indeed, the crisis is not just a Syrian one, albeit it has been framed as such. Rather we are witnessing multiple emergencies from three different continents. As 2015 progressed and Europe witnessed an unprecedented rise in asylum and migration movements into and across Europe, the British government found themselves slowly and reluctantly embroiled within what has been termed the Mediterranean crisis, the European crisis, or in the words of Alison Phipps (2019), a ‘crisis of reception’.

However, a geographical distinction has emerged in relation to the labelling of these individuals – especially when they enter into European territory. The framing of the debate that emerged surrounding the Mediterranean crisis has focused on the labelling of these individuals. Who are they? What are their intentions? Why are they travelling? What do they seek? One of the labels that has come to dominate within the British narrative, be it within the government or media rhetoric, has been the label of migrant.