This is not about the Syrian refugees. I sometimes think that the boundaries (or obstacles) that limit the migration of people makes migration more attractive. In the olden times when imported fruits were a rarity, apple was so expensive and people were salivating over apples. But now that apples are available all year round, the sales are down. Same thing with migration, if you take away the fence, the cows may sooner or later realize that the greener pasture on the other side is not really that green. Asean countries have removed visa requirements. That boosted the tourism in the region and I have not read cases of illegal immigrants even in Singapore which seems attractive. So maybe if the legal boundaries are removed, illegal migrants will be lessened.
Nor should we forget that many national boundaries were arbitrary lines imposed by colonial powers. A good example of this absurdity is the way that imperialism carved up Africa. There is little logic to the dividing lines between countries other than that which serves the needs of the colonists.
I found this site of interest, when you think of where all the new refugees are trying to get to, this list makes a lot of sense. Those refugees are headed for the money, not so much for countries that could use them. If they were true refugees, wouldn't their priority be to find a country that needed new citizens such as themselves. http://www.worldsrichestcountries.com/