The question of European convergence has come to light in recent years following calls for far-right political and populist movements. Most importantly, the influx of immigrants in western and central European countries since the Second World War. (Favell, 2008)
This paper seeks to critically explore the different responses of migrant host societies towards incoming migrants. Examples of host societies include Denmark, Germany and Sweden. In order to examine whether or not European societies are in fact converging, it is necessary to review how different countries manage their immigrants (both within the EU and outside it), through the ‘Multiculturalism Policy Index’(MIP).
It is clear that European societies have become more diverse, however, the idea that these societies have integrated immigrants is contentious. (Meer and Modood, 2011) Although migrant workers and host employers benefit from immigration, one could be sceptical to the assumption that their families reap the same benefits that their host government offers to their native citizens. (Favell, 2008) Coinciding with the question of whether or not migrants are allowed to keep their cultural identity, in doing so converging with Europe.
The indicators of disadvantages or fairness towards migrants could be evident through education, ethnic representation, and social code, among other things. It is important to probe beneath the mutually beneficial financial gain of incoming migrants. European societies responses to migration is a strong indication for Europe’s growth as the leader of equality and unity in this globalised world.
Denmark is known to treat its native citizens generously, (Krugman P. 2015) however its integration policy of immigrants has been branded a ‘failure’ by the Danish public and the MIP. (Goli and Rezaei, 2007) The MIP since 1980 has consistently rated Denmark with a ‘0’ in terms of migrant integration. (Queen’s University, Kingston, 2011)
From as recently as 2003, there have been almost no cultural or educational ways of integrating migrants in Denmark because Danish society believes that ‘the labour market is the most suitable way of integrating immigrants’ (Goli and Rezaei, 2007 pp52). Denmark’s education policy is one of assimilation, where children of immigrants are expected to learn Danish culture and language. (Horst and Gitz-Johansen, 2010) According to the Government document ‘Vision and strategy towards better integration 2003’, children must be “acquainted with the prevailing norms and traditions of Danish society” in order to succeed. (Horst and Gitz-Johansen, 2010)
These poor integration policies alongside the absence of dual citizenship, (Queen’s University, Kingston, 2011) point to a society within a diverging continent, consisting of “immigrants spend[ing] most of their lives in the so-called ‘parallel society’” (alternative lifestyle to the native Danish). (Goli and Rezaei, 2007 pp57)
Historically, Denmark and Germany had a common mono-cultural approach towards immigrants. (Heckmann, 2003) Similar to Denmark’s citizenship law, pre-1999 naturalisation was only granted if it was “in the best interest of Germany and not of the migrant” (Pierobon, 2010), which displayed Germany’s reluctance to converge. By contrast to Denmark, Germany has progressed from a ‘0’ rating from the M.I.P in 1980 to a ‘2.5’ since 2010. (Queen’s University, Kingston, 2011)
In terms of education, Germany’s policies are similar to the Danish model. There is some bilingual education for ethnic minorities in several German states but resources are scarce and the long-term goal seems to be for the child to eventually speak German as their first language. (Allemann-Ghionda, 2008) The German education system represents the state’s policy of assimilation, where immigrants are encouraged to ‘be German’. (Allemann-Ghionda, 2008) On the other hand, it is somewhat more inclusive than Danish policies. The aim of Germany’s education curriculum is to be ‘Euro-centered’, facilitating the convergence of European societies. (Faas, 2009) Ultimately, though, these policies isolate non-EU foreigners (E.G Turks) and put them at a disadvantage to their native German classmates in the form of test scores. (Allemann-Ghionda, 2008) Evidentially, unity and equality are not in the education system.
It would be difficult to adequately assess Germany’s integration policies without reference to the recent refugee crisis. (Scally, 2015) Germany has been described as “the lonely leader of Europe” (Kocka, 2016) because of their generous approach towards refugees by committing to accept over one million refugees in the next few years. (Kocka, 2016) In May 2016, German chancellor Angela Merkel announced a progressive refugee integration law that is due to be debated in parliament. (Knight, 2016) The law is an improvement from the previous immigration law (2005), native Germans and EU-citizens do not have an advantage over refugees for job opportunities (however this part of the law is only temporary). (Knight, 2016) This law, along with the availability work-training courses and the promises of up to 100,000 basic jobs for refugees is a massive step towards integrating migrants. (Knight, 2016) In some ways, Germany could be trying to lead by example for the other EU nations in integrating the influx of refugees, eventually converging European societies.
On the other hand, many charities have criticised Germany’s new integration policy. (Knight, 2016) They argue that these ill-thought policies hinder refugees’ freedom of movement and the offering of low-skilled, low-wage jobs could make it difficult for refugees to enter the job market in the long-term. This would be thoroughly detrimental to them. (Knight, 2015) The law still does not provide any bilingual education and promotes the German language for incoming refugees instead of trying to integrate migrants to make a diverse society. (Knight, 2015) Germany has improved its integration policies and this will no doubt reflect in the future MIP. However, in terms of migrant integration, in many ways, the country falls behind its other EU neighbours such as the U.K and Sweden.
In direct contrast to Demark and Germany, Sweden has the highest ratings of migrant integration from the MIP. (Queen’s University, Kingston, 2011) Sweden’s migration policies are reflected in the way they take in immigrants. Unlike most of mainland Europe, there is a fairly free entry for immigrants in Sweden. (University of Oxford, 2016)
Sweden not only aims to integrate migrants into Swedish society but values their input into an increasingly diverse community. (Sainsbury, 2006) By permitting dual citizenship, the state recognises the desire of migrants to keep their native citizenship even if Swedish-born. (Ministry of Justice, 2013) Throughout the 1970s, “immigrants were encouraged to preserve their cultural heritage” (Sainsbury, 299-244 pp.237) The majority of immigrant and ethnic minority groups and their activities are state funded. (Yurdakul, 2007) These groups are funded to improve the integration of immigrants, as they provide the State with data and issues about immigrants. (Yurdakul, 2007) Furthermore, Migrants have been allowed to contest in local and regional elections. (Sainsbury, 2006) Swedish society and the state seem to pursue diversity as a response to migration.
Diversity in Sweden is not limited to culture practices. The law is flexible towards exemption from dress codes for religious minorities in Sweden. According to the 2008 Discrimination Act, it is the duty of employers to make their working conditions “suitable for all employees regardless of sex, ethnicity, religion, or other belief”. (Government Offices of Sweden, 2015) (Wahlbeck, 2013) For example, in 2005, a Sikh man was allowed to wear a turban and have a long beard in the Swedish army. (Queen’s University, Kingston, 2011) Ultimately, there seem to be no restrictions for immigrants to enter into various areas of life, which enhances the variance of communities in Sweden as a whole.
Although Swedish society has progressed well in terms of making immigrants equal to the natives, there is little evidence for affirmative action for disadvantaged immigrant groups. (Queen’s University, Kingston, 2011) Fundamentally (as in written in the constitution), quotas as a way of ensuring diversity in university and job positions are outlawed. (Queen’s University, Kingston, 2011) In theory, all citizens in Sweden are treated equally, however, in recent years, there has been a 40% rise in xenophobic hate crimes. (Crouch, 2015) The media has presented cases of casual racism from high-profile Swedish politicians. (Crouch, 2015). This does not reflect a converging society, because, in some ways, the society seeks to marginalise some ethnic minorities.
As of late, Sweden has isolated itself from the rest of Europe in response to the recent migrant influx (Crouch,2016). Sweden has temporarily closed its borders and enforced border patrols. (Crouch, 2016) This step is evidential in other countries such as Germany and Denmark. (Crouch, 2016) Overall, in theory, Sweden’s State institutions and civil society seem to welcome immigrants with open arms. These policies have been labelled as a ‘model for the European Union’. (Wiesbrock, 2011) Nonetheless, Sweden’s recent policies towards refugees reveal the growth of the far-right and a divergence away from European quotas for migration.
Conclusion
This paper presented examples of societies and their attitudes towards migration and how they see themselves (culturally) within a diverse Europe. Migration in Europe is still an ongoing discussion that has been the centre of many political debates and elections in recent times.
Changing approaches towards migrants have benefited migrants freedom of movement, in ways nobody could have predicted at the end of WW2. (Favell, 2008) European societies and their co-operation with each other have severely developed since the end of WW2. (Favell, 2008) Many politicians and communities across Europe recognise the urgency as well as the benefits of integrating migrants and have acted upon these incentives.
Evidence suggests, though, that European convergence goes little beyond economic and labour integration. There seems to be a reluctance to accept immigrants and different European cultures. Primarily, the education system is the root of assimilation. As the first or second generation of migrants grow, their cultures and values disappear. Even in countries like Germany, Denmark, and Sweden where all citizens (in theory) are treated equally, there is little information about action for disadvantaged ethnic minority groups. (Wahlbeck, 2013) European societies need to converge in order to overcome these problems and to promote equality, unity, and diversity.