Welcome No More? Shifting Attitudes towards Ukrainian Refugees in Europe

Almost seven million Ukrainians have fled Ukraine since Russia’s large-scale invasion in February 2022. Seeking refuge in other European states, they were welcomed. However, recent analyses have emerged which point to an increasing discrimination against Ukrainian refugees who were displaced by Russia’s aggression, including in previously supportive nations like Poland. The shifting treatment and belonging of Ukrainians could therefore become a pressing issue, both as the war continues and once it ends.

This can be linked to the idea of welfare deservingness which helps us to elaborate on the connections between individuals’ demographics, behaviour and attitudes, and the extent to which they are deemed acceptable to receive society’s support through, for example, granting refuge and access to healthcare or other benefits. But, how can welfare deservingness contribute to understanding the status of Ukrainian refugees in host societies today? How does their reception in host nations differ from previous refugee movements, such as of Syrians during the 2015 Migrant Crisis?

Refugee crises and the UK

Our recent study examines these questions regarding the United Kingdom and the language government ministers used around the peak movement periods immediately following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine and towards the latter half of 2015. Since Russia’s invasion over 200,000 Ukrainians, predominantly women and children, have arrived in the UK. This was facilitated through bespoke visa routes like the extension, family and sponsorship schemes. Meanwhile, in 2015 around one million individuals, mostly Syrian men, entered into European Union territory; at that time still including the UK.

Contrasting language was used by UK ministers, however, with many 2015 arrivals portrayed as illegitimate migrants and linked to crime through human trafficking gangs. On the other hand, Ukrainians were met with a warmer language of victimhood and legitimacy. They were also discussed more in terms of making direct contributions to society through access to work, while Syrians were identified as requiring more immediate investment via state-provided education and training activities.

Applying the ideas of welfare deservingness, it is possible to understand that this softer language towards Ukrainians could reflect how they were largely women and children with these individuals seen as more vulnerable in situations of war than men who may be expected, such as through conscription in Ukraine, to participate directly in conflict. It could additionally speak to racialised differences between White, traditionally Christian arrivals compared to largely Muslim males from Syria and surrounding countries around which an anti-Muslim bias has been constructed over time, linked to terrorism, for instance. Another possibility for this difference could also reflect the perceived attitude of refugees grounded in the means by which they arrived, with Ukrainians entering through legal visa schemes and Syrians linked more with illegal smuggling gangs and informal border crossing.

All of these factors could combine to demonstrate a greater deservingness for White Ukrainian women and children in the UK and other European societies who are consequently more open to providing support, such as accommodation and benefits. The contrasting language used around Syrian men who are also Muslim may thereby demonstrate what can be discussed as a welfare chauvinism toward Syrians. This chauvinism represents the view that benefits should not be granted to those different from the host nation’s native majority, reflected in an unfavourable language and treatment of arrivals.

But for how long?

That said, Ukrainians were explicitly discussed as being supported ‘until they are able to return’ and that they ‘do not want to be refugees…[they] want to be Ukrainians living in Ukraine’ by ministers. In other words, there was an expectation that they are deserving of support now for the short-term until they can return to Ukraine, contributing through work and taxes in the meantime. Indeed, in Poland and Czechia similar language and support was found related to this contribution, yet reduced willingness to host Ukrainians has also begun to emerge in numerous European nations, UK included.

It may be, therefore, that although Ukrainians are not portrayed through the lens of anti-Muslim bias, or as less deserving on the basis of their other demographic characteristics (as women and families, rather than men), the warmer welcome and support levels granted toward them could notably reduce into the medium- and long-term. Indeed, the short-term scope of support for Ukrainian refugees is reflected in the bespoke visa schemes noted above, with many already closed to new applicants and the newer ‘Ukraine Permission Extension Scheme’ permitting an extension of only 18 months to those already holding a UK visa. This is resulting in concern and uncertainty among Ukrainian refugees, including around their continued access to accommodation and work opportunities.

In other words, on the basis of their demographics Ukrainians were more warmly portrayed by UK government ministers, especially contrasted to the language used for non-White Muslim men in 2015. However, this may only be a temporary overcoming of welfare chauvinism and this could be revealed more the longer Ukrainian refugees remain in the UK and, indeed, other European nations. There is a consequent need to account for Ukrainians’ continued presence within host societies and to guard against possibilities of increased discrimination towards them as their perceived deservingness declines in the near future.

Author Biographies

Juhyun Lee is a researcher with experience analysing welfare states, migration and labour market integration, and gender dynamics in society. She investigates these themes by using quantitative and qualitative methods, including advanced multilevel modelling. She has published on these themes in journals including The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics, the Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy and The British Journal of Sociology.

Joshua Garland is a researcher whose interests centre on environmental politics and climate change. He has experience using multi-method approaches, including original survey design and implementation alongside qualitative techniques. He has published in The British Journal of Sociology, Visual Studies and Social Movement Studies.