Chapter 6 looks specifically at Egypt and Morocco to assess whether various nationalities of migrants and refugees experience differential treatment from the authorities of their respective host states, and what this says about the role of culture in affecting engagement policy choice. The theory of cultural embeddedness tells us that individuals considered to be co-culturals due to religious or ethnic background are more likely to receive preferential treatment in a host state, and the perception of shared culture is cited in the migration literature as a strong indicator of successful socioeconomic integration outcomes. Chapter 6 finds that while the perception of a migrant or refugee as a co-cultural in Egypt and Morocco can have a bearing on de jure preferential policies and some integration outcomes, other factors better explain de facto treatment toward individuals of different nationalities; namely, the length of time a migrant spends in a host state and whether he or she has legal status. It also demonstrates that any privileging of co-cultural migrants may actually emanate from a state’s diplomatic and political interests rather than as a result of cultural factors, suggesting that policies may be driven primarily by strategic decision-making rather than essentialist notions of culture.

Chapter 2 elaborates the three-pronged argument of this book. First, classifications in the existing literature tend to describe engagement in a dichotomous manner—states are either inclusionary or exclusionary toward migrants and refugees—leaving no room for the possibility of state indifference as a policy choice by itself. Instead, this book argues that host states have three affirmative policy options: liberalism, repression, and indifference. A policy of indifference means that a host state refrains from directly engaging with or providing services to migrants and refugees and instead relies on international organizations and NGOs to carry out engagement on its behalf, which has tangential benefits for the host state. Second, while state capacity is one factor that should be considered in seeking to understand state decision making, geostrategic imperatives and international perceptions drive engagement decisions at least as much as the capacity of each host state. Third, when indifference becomes an untenable strategy a state will adopt a more liberal engagement policy in order to avoid international shaming or if there are diplomatic or economic benefits from doing so, or may turn to a repressive policy if migrant and refugee groups are deemed a security threat.

Chapter 9 revisits the central argument of this book: that we can better understand the migrant and refugee engagement strategies of host states if we account for indifference as a policy option, in addition to liberal or repressive policies. Identifying indifference—and considering the possibility that it is a strategic option utilized by host states, rather than the absence of state capacity—helps elucidate approaches that might otherwise be considered neglect or an absence of engagement. Chapter 9 also considers the generalizability of this study and its potential applicability to other regions such as South America or Asia where states are undergoing a similar transformation from countries of conduit to countries of settlement. Finally, the chapter considers the policy implications of this book. Taking the incentives of MENA states more seriously and finding ways to give them a meaningful and equitable seat at the table while still ensuring that they are abiding by international standards and upholding migrant and refugee rights is undoubtedly a challenging task. Yet only in doing so can we develop a more just and effective migrant and refugee protection system that addresses the well-being of migrants, refugees, and host country nationals at present and in the future.

The book begins with the stories of Sama, Abdou, and Ibrahim, three individuals residing semi-permanently in Egypt, Morocco, and Turkey, respectively. What Sama, Abdou, and Ibrahim have in common is that they are ‘stuck’ in countries thought to only be spaces of transit. Many migrants and refugees come to countries like Morocco, Turkey and Egypt intending to pass through on their way to Europe or other Western states, when in reality it is only a small fraction that successfully do. The majority of migrants and refugees find themselves lingering, perhaps indefinitely, in transit states that are rapidly becoming countries of migrant and refuge settlement. The chapter discusses assumptions embedded within the extant literature on migration to countries in the Global South that have prevented us from adequately understanding this phenomenon and presents the central argument: that Global South host states are strategic actors capable of choosing the migration and refugee policies that best fit their strategic aims. The chapter also describes the methods for case selection, data collection and analysis, and provides a roadmap for the rest of the book.