When Czech national television ran a story on the leniency of British asylum laws in 1997, hundreds of Gypsies entered Britain asking for recognition of refugee status.

By claiming ethnic oppression in their countries of origin, they brought the issue of discrimination against the Roma minority in Central and Eastern Europe into question. Although Gypsies do face discrimination within their home region, they are often perceived as deliberately applying for asylum in countries with the most favorable conditions for the claimants rather than desperately seeking refuge from persecution. Many EU countries have recently tightened their asylum laws in order to prevent migration that is not based on persecution. Instead, the Gypsies’ countries of origin should work on improving the living conditions for the Gypsies and end the discrimination that does in fact still prevail.

The Czech Republic is one of several Central and Eastern European countries struggling to define its relationship with the large Roma minority. Living in their own communities in poorly built rural housing and accounting for disproportionately high shares of unemployment and petty crime, the Roma population is sometimes viewed with contempt by the larger public. Bulgaria and Romania have the worst problem with Romas committing 20 times as many crimes as non-Roma citizens. In Central Europe, many of these tensions are caused by a lack of education and employment. In the Czech Republic, for example, the general unemployment rate currently stands at 5 percent compared to 70 percent among the Roma citizens; only about 1-2 percent of Romani children complete a full secondary education, with less than 0.5 percent receiving a college degree. With the demand for unskilled labor constantly falling, the Roma are increasingly dependent on government unemployment benefits. This strains the countries’ budgets and is an additional factor behind the widespread prejudices and anti-Roma sentiment.

Due to their problematic status in these countries, Roma communities often face verbal abuse by the general public as well as physical attacks by Neo-Nazi and skinhead groups. The Roma are often simply stereotyped as lazy and prone to crime, and the atmosphere is further exacerbated by open expressions of hate and prejudice by many prominent political figures. In the August 2001 conference of the Slovak National Party, a representative openly criticized Roma citizens for their relatively high birth rate.

However disdainful the politics may be, they do not pose the only real danger for the Roma. The most radically racist and nationalistic individuals, especially among the young, have created groups that constantly seek targets for violence, directed generally against people with dark skin, the Roma in particular. In the Czech Republic, for example, an estimated 5,000 active skinheads often attack individual Roma citizens in groups, brutally beat them up, and cause deaths in many cases. Over the past eight years 1,800 racially motivated attacks have been reported, in which more than 32 people died.

It is for these reasons that large groups of Roma families have left their home countries, basing their claims for asylum on ethnic oppression. According to the 1998 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Guidelines Relating to the Eligibility of Roma Asylum Seekers, the Roma may well be able to substantiate refugee claims based on severe ethnic discrimination, together with discrimination by authorities in areas such as housing and education. Nevertheless, the vast majority of applications in Britain, Denmark, and Finland was regarded as manifestly unfounded.

The problem is that many believe Roma citizens are seeking refugee status for economic reasons. Asylum seekers receive benefit payments that are far above the unemployment support of their “home” countries. Even though British asylum laws were significantly restricted recently, asylum seekers are still treated relatively well. They receive food vouchers, accommodation, and £10 a day, in absolute terms much more than what they receive in their countries of origin, which usually does not exceed the equivalent of £100 per month. Despite the low quality of the temporary accommodation for asylum seekers within the countries of destination, it is superior to the housing the Gypsies used to occupy.

People with an overwhelming case for asylum generally apply for it in the first safe country they reach. Economic migrants look for a country that offers the best treatment of the claimants. The Gypsies from Central and Eastern European countries seem to deliberately apply for refugee status within countries with favorable asylum conditions and relatively high benefit payments. While they are undoubtedly able to receive protection in countries like Germany or Austria, which are much closer, they choose to apply for asylum in Britain or Scandinavian countries. Rather than leaving their country because of direct threats, they simply seem to look for a better and easier life. “Something is going badly wrong when migrants are prepared to cross the length of the continent of Europe, without once being detained, in order to lodge their asylum claims in the United Kingdom,” argues William Hague, the former opposition leader in Britain. “For every genuine refugee, the priority is surely to get out of a particular country, not to get into one.”

By rejecting the vast majority of asylum claims, Western European countries have judged that the Roma citizens are not subject to direct political persecution within their countries of origin. Out of 5,000 Slovaks, for example, who made their claims in several European countries, most notably Belgium, Denmark, and Finland, only one family was successful in obtaining refugee status. Most countries treat the Roma simply as standard immigrants and, after deciding neither to grant refugee status nor to allow permanent residence, simply order their deportation to the country of origin.

This treatment does not mean these governments do not acknowledge the discrimination against the Roma of Central and Eastern European countries. Instead, the rejection of asylum claims is based on the conclusion that despite the groups that carry out violence against the Roma, the actual laws and practices of their home countries are not directed against them. However, it is questionable and dangerous to disregard a threat to the Roma population simply because the threat is not posed by the government but by radical groups.