Divisions along the lines of politics and religion have torn the world apart and pitted different groups of different backgrounds against each other, as world leaders and think tanks shed light and debate at length on the host of issues facing the world and its its many parts have to face. One such problem is the mass migration of Middle Eastern and North African Muslims from their countries of origin and their flood into the European Union as refugees and asylum seekers. The question often raised by intellectuals and thinkers is whether or not this represents a threat to the political, as well as moral, establishment that is a traditionally Christian Europe. Founded on a Western value system that leans in the direction of gender equality, sexual liberation, and meaningful religious freedom, fewer and fewer would argue that because the core values ​​advanced by Islam are diametrically opposed to those of Europe, a laissez-faire Politics in granting asylum left and right to these refugees is playing a dangerous game. Those who take an anti-immigration position argue that while they empathize with migrants seeking asylum, they are still the proverbial rats escaping from a sinking ship and could bring the plague of Islam with them, with terrorists following suit leaves. While most European countries are far from this far-right Islamophobia, this movement to stop Muslim immigration into the EU has gained momentum and some world leaders are starting to listen. While these right-wingers have argued that the moral character of these immigrants in desperate need of refuge after the implosion of their home countries is flawed and does not meet the standards needed to assimilate into European society, the philosophy of virtue ethics can argue the case differently, and perhaps demonstrate that the brazen acts of a few bad apples do not mean that the entire tree is rotten to the core. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Virtue ethics can be defined as a moral code “that emphasizes virtues, or moral character, in contrast to the approach that emphasizes duties or rules (deontology) or that emphasizes the consequences of actions ( consequentialism).” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) While he does not reject the other approaches mentioned above and recognizes that they can all play a role in an individual's morality, he simply gives command to someone's moral character. Rather than saying that virtues are this because of that, virtue ethics asserts that the virtues and vices in themselves lay the foundation upon which subsequent ethics will be structured. Virtue in this context refers to a praiseworthy trait of one's character and is considered a predisposition rather than a habit as it is innate and acquired later in life. A virtuous person is someone who does not justify a virtue through the consequences of his vice, or by advocating another value alongside it, but because not practicing a virtue would itself be non-virtuous. Therefore, one should be honest or kind to others simply because not doing so would be the opposite, i.e. dishonest or rude. Virtue is also gradual, and while only a few possess a predisposition for perfect virtue, the rest of us fall short and our virtues are a constant work-in-progress. Another important fruit of virtue ethics is phronesis, or moral/practical wisdom, that lack of will leads those pursuing full virtue astray. European leaders must strive to exercise this moral wisdomand practice in their policies and decision-making processes and pay no attention to the extremism of an insignificant few prone to xenophobia and racism. Migrants from Muslim-majority countries are trying to escape the radical Islamists and oppressive governments of their countries, not impose them on the countries they hope will welcome them. Anti-immigration activists attest that “the 2015 migration crisis was unexpected” and that “laws to combat anti-Muslim hate speech tend to repress freedom of expression and exacerbate tensions” (Murray). A couple of unfortunate truths, these are just broad strokes that have not captured all the details of this migration crisis, such as the fact that the recent terrorist attacks did not come from the migrants themselves, but from their children born and raised in Western countries as well as Britain and France, raised in a climate of politicized anti-Muslim sentiment and educated on the horrors of Western interventionism in Middle Eastern affairs. This breeds resentment and this individual's moral character slowly crumbles, and before long he sees a friendly face in ISIS and al-Qaeda and finds himself recruited to their cause. The blame necessarily falls on these migrants uprooted from their homes and seeking help in these high-income countries or the EU and other Western countries should share some of the blame in highlighting this suspicion towards people of color through their own social channels. Virtue ethics states that to acquire virtue we must practice it. So, while European leaders are closing their borders and limiting the population of accepted refugees to appease the few citizens whose bark is bigger than their bite, what does this say about their moral character? Virtue ethicists would urge these leaders to look at the moral character of these migrants as a whole, who are suffering, have not committed any crimes so far and should not be judged on the basis of the heinous crimes of the few who have decimated their countries. Virtue ethics “gives us guidance for living life without giving us specific rules for resolving ethical dilemmas” (Business). The migration crisis of hundreds of thousands of panicked North Africans and Middle Easterners is a complicated issue that many parties debate how to manage and ultimately resolve as soon as possible. However, one can agree that these migrants are indeed in crisis, “risking death in fleeing Syria they are fleeing morally questionable circumstances.” (Blake) We should share our sympathy with them, for it would be immoral for us not to do so. So, wouldn't it also be immoral to do nothing when we are capable of doing something? Needless to say, this is where many diverge. Compassion as a virtue, European leaders should practice it in the hope that it strengthens their moral code and the virtues they value. European movements against the mass migration of these groups to their homeland and so close to their homes could justify the logic of closing their borders by claiming that states have no moral or legal obligation to accept immigrants, and that such acceptance it is at their discretion. . But what if refugees were placed in a separate category, as displaced persons and victims of oppressive regimes? Virtue ethics would argue that no matter how you compartmentalize them, these migrants have a strong moral claim to ask these countries for help, and that exclusionism will inevitably lead to the degradation of the basic human virtues on which these European leaders have supported themselves. It will be an empty promise made to open the arms of their countries in response to the devastation wreaked on these people and theirs.