Materials Published on Information portal of 25th Economic Forum in Krynica:
Recently in Europe problem of immigration emerged on a new level. For European society the priority of which is to preserve their identity, development of effective migration policy is among the most important conditions for regional stability. An objective assessment of most of the problems of migration leads to the conclusion that many of them are largely the result of inconsistent policy of the EU countries, even though the need for interstate integration in the management of migration processes, harmonization of national legislation on this issue is recognized in the European community. For the EU member states adjusting migration policies – an essential condition to achieve economic and political integration and sustainable development of the European Community as a single center in the global geopolitical space.
Globalization is a contradictory effect on the character of immigration processes on the one hand promoting inter-civilizational exchange of cultures, and the other – eroding national borders and cultural identity, violate the established civilizations balance in the region and the world at large. National culture and historical values, symbols and customs are increasingly influenced by the nature of the political process. The increased scale of immigration from regions of Asia and Africa to the European Union and poor adaptation and integration of immigrants in the European cultural and political environment cause concern among the indigenous European population and contribute to the growth of extremist nationalist views, including on religious grounds. EU policy on the integration of immigrants into the European cultural and political space in the conditions of intensification of globalization has now become stalled. Bet on the principles of multiculturalism is not conducive to optimizing the relationship of immigrants and the indigenous population of Europe. On the one hand, there is isolation and self-isolation of immigrant communities and tensions between immigrants and indigenous population of Europe, on the other – economic difficulties in Europe, enhance the growth of nationalist and xenophobic attitudes among the indigenous European population towards immigrants.
Mass migration to Europe for inhabitants of Asia, Africa, the Middle East and the Caribbean began about 50 years ago. Before that, Europe invited workers for temporary work with no relatives. Now dominated moving with families. The migrants settle permanently in Europe, to bear and raise children here. As a result, the EU has already settled nearly 33 million. Immigrants (data of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in 2013: Germany – 465 000 immigrants, United Kingdom – 291 000, France – 258 900, Italy – 258 400). Europe's population is growing largely due to settle here family immigrants. At the same time indigenous people are not always happy to this neighborhood. Moreover, even internal migration can sometimes cause dissatisfaction of local residents. For example, a significant number of visitors from Eastern Europe, particularly Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania have prompted protests in the UK and the Netherlands. Local residents believe that the eastern Europeans create competition on the labor market.
From the above-mentioned 33 mln. of immigrants now living in the EU, 12 mln. of people – from EU Member States, i.e. internal migrants in relation to the Union. The total population of the EU as for 1st of January 2014, according to Eurostat, was 507.4 mln. of people. But, regardless of the growth of immigration, unemployment is also rising in all EU countries.
Almost in all European countries unemployment rate is quite high. In France, it is 10.5% of the workforce in Germany – 4.9%, Spain – 24%, Greece – 26%. At the same time, despite the rise in unemployment, immigration flow is continues to grow. Europeans tend to have a high qualification and simple, unskilled work for many of them is not suitable. Therefore, theindigenous people in anticipation of better times take unemployment insurance, meanwhile immigrants perform unskilled work.
Solvation of this situation it is not yet visible, although politicians have started talking about a problem. British Prime Minister David Cameron at the end of last year announced plans of the government to cut social benefits for migrant workers, and the Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orban sharply criticized the situation with immigration in the European Union, calling it dangerous. But the problem is getting worse because of continuous illegal immigration. The severity of the problem of illegal migration to the EU has greatly increased with the beginning of the events in the Arabian world. The overthrow of the political regime has not led to stabilization of the situation inside the country, but on the contrary, tens of thousands of people fleeing from instability. The military operation in Libya has given an extra push to "migration tsunami" in Europe. Independent analytical services believe that every year half a million people illegally penetrate to Europe. Detained illegal immigrants send off, but many manage to stay. Illegals perform menial work for a penny that suits a particular category of employers. But they are, in fact, deny the work of those who could do it legally.
Despite the efforts of the EU in the field of migration management and strategy of the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility (GAMM), which is reviewed and promoted at official levels as a comprehensive framework of external migration policy of the EU, which is based on a real partnership with the countries outside the EU and aimed at solving problems of migration and mobility in an integrated and balanced manner. Still the pan-European migration policies have not embodied, unfortunately, the result of satisfying all stakeholders of European migration control. As conceived by the EU leaders, GPMM had to respond to the opportunities and challenges faced by the EU's migration policy, providing at the same time help the partners in resolving their own priority problems in the field of migration and mobility in their own regional context and in the appropriate manner.
In fact, each of the EU Member States, including the “young member states” builds its own immigration policy. And this is largely due to the difference in "national" approach to migration issues.
Different approaches to the problem of integration of immigrants clearly visible on the example of France (assimilationist model), Germany (segregation) and the UK (pluralist model). The first model involves the rejection of immigrants from its former identity and complete assimilation of values and behaviors taken on a new home. It assimilated immigrants who are virtually indistinguishable from the host population can be considered as full members of society. In theory, the successful assimilation seems reasonable for a nation state seeking to preserve the cultural homogeneity, and for the immigrant, as it allows him to fully fit into the new community. In France, a member of the national community is any person who has French citizenship. French citizen could be anyone, regardless of country of origin, which is politically loyal only France and shares her cultural values. French law on citizenship is based on the principle of the "right of the soil", which is that a person born in the country automatically becomes a citizen of France.
Most Western European countries abandoned the policy of assimilation, considering it ineffective. However, France is trying to aggressively pursue it. Support for people from this part of the environment action by the French authorities indicates that this policy reflects not only the interests of the titular nation, but also of the citizens who have Muslim roots. At the same time, another part of Muslims clearly sees these steps as an anti-Islamic and extremists are using them to discharge tension between "indigenous" French and Muslim immigrants.
Unlike France, the basis for German citizenship is on the principle of the "right of blood". The German model is based on the nation's ethnic and not the civil basis: According to German law, a person born in its territory does not become a citizen. German nationality law was changed in 1999 with the adoption of the law, which states that a person born in Germany automatically receives citizenship if at least one of his parents has legally resided in the country for at least 8 years. Thus, until recently the migrant to become a German citizen was virtually impossible in the absence of German roots. Therefore, as a first-generation immigrants and their descendants, lived all his life in Germany, still were not citizens. This policy led to the separation of the population of immigrant origin from German citizens, i.e. segregation. German leadership did not make, as the French do, immigrants take their norms, customs, traditions, because they see them as temporary workers. This policy, especially after the emergence of new generations of immigrants, was extremely short-sighted. Germany's stubborn refusal to recognize itself as a country for immigrants has led to the fact due to the deliberate action of State Authorities formed a separate immigrant communities.
Britain faced a major influx of migrants after 1948. Then it was adopted British nationality Act, apply for a single citizenship for the metropolis and its colonies with the right of resettlement and work in the UK. Initially, the British government restricted the inflow of migrants and sought to assimilate them. However, over time, the communities of Muslims in the UK began to acquire power and influence, as a result, the ability to put pressure on the authorities. The result: in 1985, introduced the concept of "multicultural lifestyle" in the domestic politics of the Kingdom. The point of this policy was the recognition by the state as part of the national community, many communities that have the right to live in their own circle, keeping the cultural heritage, national traits, customs, family relations, as well as to defend their rights at the national level. Through this public policy community in the UK enjoy extensive rights. However, this leads to the fact that the descendants of immigrants in different generations are not included in British society, and are not perceived as "indigenous" British subjects, but as members of these groups, in relation to which used ethnic approach. Despite the fact that France, Germany and the United Kingdom have chosen different strategies of behavior towards immigrants, the result was approximately the same: all of these countries have formed a parallel society in the sustainable communities of immigrants, as a rule, on a national basis.
The fact that the European model of integration of migrants is in crisis – an obvious one, which depends on the economic downturn and contradictory policies of Brussels and European capitals. The crisis of this model also happened due to internal European migration. There are countries where young people are actively goes in search of work and a new life, such as Spain and Italy. Only in 2013, 94 000 Italians immigrated to other countries. In the past three years on a monthly basis 1200 of Italians moved to the UK. In a country where multiculturalism and immigration is also the target of criticism, for example, Prime Minister David Cameron said that in British cities are too many Italians and Spaniards. The question is how politicians play on the fears of citizens. All answers to the causes of the economic crisis in their rhetoric are reduced to one: to blame immigrants. In this political game of today's enemy is often called immigrants from Arabic countries. French nationalist leader Marine Le Pen spoke directly in one of their fundamentals performances: it is time to suspend the Schengen regime in the European Union. But these initiatives are contrary to European interests: freedom of movement of citizens is not only about a new labor force, and the influx of tourists but protection of fundamental human rights.
In earlier times the "appointed" enemy was Chinese or Romanian, and in the case of Italy – the citizens of the southern regions. Politicians have built their careers on promoting hatred on the ideas that Western Europe is higher than the East, the northern regions are more developed than the south, and that Christianity is better than Islam. But this formula is unacceptable to modern Europe, because it threatens the foundations of stability and peace in society. To solve a problem in the EU, in our opinion, you can refer to international experience, and in particular Russia, whose centuries-old history is closely linked to the coexistence of different religions and citizens of many nationalities within one state. This – is the national wealth of Russia and its people. History of Russia – a scope of different languages, ethnic groups, peoples and cultures.
The publication of books in national languages, in contrast to many European countries – are well-known throughout the country Gypsy, Jewish theaters, newspapers are published by Russian Germans or Poles, radio broadcast in local languages. There are no obstacles for increasing national educated intelligentsia. Currently 83 of the subjects in the Russian Federation are 26 national-territorial entities (21 republics, one autonomous region, four autonomous regions). The share of the national-territorial entities account for 52% of Russian territory, are home to 46% of the population, which is more consistent with the notion of interculturalism, rather than the modern concept of multiculturalism. They are based on the fact that the world and individual countries are multicultural. But interculturalism comes from the fact that different cultures have to interact, that is necessary to create conditions for cooperation in the civil basis, based on the understanding that all – residents of one country, one city, one of the village houses, one case have a shared responsibility.
Europe today – space of very different cultures, which could create its unique look. From the Atlantic to the Mediterranean, from the Volga to the Rhine different nations and languages built, a "large communal house with different rooms". And we need to keep this house for future generations in peace and harmony.
Director for Science Aleksandr Krasovskii,
Leading Specialist Evgenii Ocheretko