The adoption in 2018 of two Global Compacts, one on Refugees and the other on Migration, has reinvigorated longstanding debates about the distinction between these two groups. On the one hand, differentiating between the two is crucial to ensuring that people forced to leave their homes are not removed to any place where they face a real risk of persecution or other serious harm. On the other hand, drawing a hard line between them does not reflect the current state of international law, nor the complex reasons that people move. This essay argues that, in the context of cross-border mobility, the most important distinction is not between refugees and migrants per se, but rather between those who require “international protection” and those who do not. Using the term “refugee” as shorthand for the former is no longer accurate or desirable, and risks arbitrarily privileging the rights of some forced migrants over others. A close reading of the Global Compacts reveals that both, in fact, recognize the importance of international protection and that States’ international protection obligations extend beyond any specific definition of a “refugee”. These obligations derive from the broader body of international refugee and human rights law that underpins, and should guide, the interpretation and application of the Compacts themselves. They include the core obligation not to remove (refouler) individuals to any place where they would face a real risk of persecution or other serious harm. Such principles must remain at the forefront of efforts to implement both Global Compacts, unobscured by nomenclature or neat categorizations.

2018年通过了两个全球契约，一个是关于难民的，另一个是关于移民的，这激起了关于这两个群体之间区别的长期辩论。一方面，区分两者对于确保被迫离开家园的人们不会被带到真正面临遭受迫害或其他严重伤害危险的任何地方至关重要。另一方面，在两者之间划一条硬线既不能反映国际法的现状，也不能反映人们迁徙的复杂原因。本文认为，在跨境流动的背景下，最重要的区别不是难民和移民本身，而是需要“国际保护”的人和不需要国际保护的人之间的区别。使用“难民”一词作为前者的简称已不再准确或不可取，并冒着任意剥夺某些被迫移民相对于其他人的权利的风险。对全球契约的仔细阅读表明，事实上，两者都承认国际保护的重要性，而且各国的国际保护义务超出了对“难民”的任何具体定义。这些义务来自更广泛的国际难民法和人权法，这些法则是《契约》本身的解释和适用的基础，并应为之提供指导。其中包括不可删除的核心义务（这些义务来自更广泛的国际难民法和人权法，这些法则是《契约》本身的解释和适用的基础，并应为之提供指导。其中包括不可删除的核心义务（这些义务来自更广泛的国际难民法和人权法，这些法律是《契约》本身的解释和适用的基础，并应予以指导。其中包括不可删除的核心义务（避开）个人到可能遭受迫害或其他严重伤害的真正危险的任何地方。此类原则必须始终处于执行两项全球契约的努力的最前线，且不受命名法或整洁类别的影响。