The Politics of Immigration. Is Germany moving towards a Multicultural Society?
©2016
Textbook
48 Pages
Summary
The topic of immigration is never simple. Questions such as ‘who belongs to society?’ and ‘how do you define national identity?’, or ‘what values are needed to maintain a coexisting society?’ are extremely difficult to answer. Global migration introduces unprecedented challenges for conceptualising the integration of immigrants.
On a European scale, Germany can be said to represent the first destination for immigrants since its unification in 1989. On a global level, Germany is the second largest immigrant receiving country after the United States. Nevertheless, only recently has Germany recognised and admitted that it is an ethnically and culturally diverse society. Before the 1998 elections, successive governments have always stuck to the maxim that Germany is ‘not a country of immigration’.
The infamous phrase came under increased pressure with the electoral victory of the Red-Green coalition in 1998. New laws regarding immigration, integration and citizenship were on the agenda with the aim of replacing the traditional ethnocultural model of German nationhood with a more liberal and modern model by moving away from the concepts of Volk and ius sanguinis. The conservative CDU, however, accused the Schroder government of trying to jeopardize German cultural identity, causing a fierce debate known as the Leitkultur (Guiding culture) debate. On the one side of this debate there were the conservative CDU politicians who viewed Germany in ethno-nationalist terms, while on the other members of the Green Party and the SPD, who attempted substituting the ‘volkish’ tradition with a multicultural model of citizenship that guaranteed universal human rights.
The aim of this study is to assess which of these two models are currently prevailing in moulding immigration and integration policy. Has the progressive left achieved its objective of moving away from the traditional ethnocultural and assimilationalist model defining citizenship towards a more inclusive multicultural model?
On a European scale, Germany can be said to represent the first destination for immigrants since its unification in 1989. On a global level, Germany is the second largest immigrant receiving country after the United States. Nevertheless, only recently has Germany recognised and admitted that it is an ethnically and culturally diverse society. Before the 1998 elections, successive governments have always stuck to the maxim that Germany is ‘not a country of immigration’.
The infamous phrase came under increased pressure with the electoral victory of the Red-Green coalition in 1998. New laws regarding immigration, integration and citizenship were on the agenda with the aim of replacing the traditional ethnocultural model of German nationhood with a more liberal and modern model by moving away from the concepts of Volk and ius sanguinis. The conservative CDU, however, accused the Schroder government of trying to jeopardize German cultural identity, causing a fierce debate known as the Leitkultur (Guiding culture) debate. On the one side of this debate there were the conservative CDU politicians who viewed Germany in ethno-nationalist terms, while on the other members of the Green Party and the SPD, who attempted substituting the ‘volkish’ tradition with a multicultural model of citizenship that guaranteed universal human rights.
The aim of this study is to assess which of these two models are currently prevailing in moulding immigration and integration policy. Has the progressive left achieved its objective of moving away from the traditional ethnocultural and assimilationalist model defining citizenship towards a more inclusive multicultural model?
Excerpt
Table Of Contents
4
may lead to "irrevocable" changes that would threaten the "historically given self-
perceptions of European nations."
6
Consequently, the debates on immigration have shifted
from an economic discourse to more central interrelated question of permanent
settlement, nationality, citizenship and integration. Questions on membership and the
rights of immigrants and ethnic minorities have assumed a central role in discussions on
national identity in the aftermath of the Cold War. The emphasis on national identity is
particularly strong in Germany where a large minority believes that Volkervermischung
(mixing of peoples) should be avoided in order to keep the German people `pure'. In
contrast to traditional settler societies such as the United States of America and Australia
characterised by a civic and more liberal understanding of nationality, Germany " more
easily conceive of a nation or people as an aggregate existing independent of state
organisation, unified by certain commonalities such as language, religion, culture, history,
and descent."
7
Yet, from the beginning of the Cold War up to today, Germany has been the
country with the largest foreign population in Europe. Over the last fifty years, the Federal
Republic of Germany has been the destination of about thirty million immigrants, many of
whom have taken the decision to settle permanently. Eurostat statistics reveal that around
11 million people have entered Germany between 1991 and 2000.
8
If in 1960 the foreign
population was constituted by fewer than 700,000 persons, today the number has risen to
almost 7.3 million foreign inhabitants, representing 9 per cent of the total population.
9
In
2006, over fifteen million people in Germany roughly one every five residents turned out
to possess a migrant background.
10
On a European scale, Germany can be said to represent
the first destination for immigrants since unification in 1989. On a global level, Germany is
the second largest immigrant receiving country after the United States. Nevertheless, only
recently has Germany recognised and admitted that it is an ethnically and culturally diverse
6
Hammar T. `Comparing European and North American International Migration', International Migration View,
Vo. 23 No. 3 (1989) p 637
7
Neuman G. `Nationality Law in the United States and Germany' in Schuck P. & Munz R. `In paths to Inclusion:
The integration of Migrants in the United States and Germany' (1998, Providence: Berghan Books) p 249-250
8
Eurostat `Eurostat
`
379.4 million inhabitants in the EU and 305.1 million in the euro zone on 1 January 2002'
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/3-11012002-AP/EN/3-11012002-AP-EN.HTML Accessed
on 14/08/09
9
Ibid
10
`Deutschland: 15 Mio. Einwohner mit `Migrationshintergrund' Migration und Bevolkerung 5 2006
http://www.migration-info.de/migration_und_bevoelkerung/artikel/060502.htm Accessed on 14/08/09
5
society. Before the 1998 elections, successive governments have always stuck to the maxim
that Germany is `not a country of immigration.'
The infamous phrase came under increased pressure with the electoral victory of the Red-
Green coalition in 1998. New laws regarding immigration, integration and citizenship were
on the agenda with the aim of replacing the traditional ethnocultural model of German
nationhood with a more liberal and modern model by moving away from the concepts of
Volk and ius sanguinis. The conservative CDU, however, accused the Schroder government
of trying to jeopardize German cultural identity, causing a fierce debate known as the
Leitkultur (Guiding culture) debate. On the one side of this debate there were the
conservative CDU politicians who viewed Germany in ethno-nationalist terms, while on the
other members of the Green Party and the SPD, who attempted substituting the `volkish'
tradition with a multicultural model of citizenship that guaranteed universal human rights.
The aim of this study is to assess which of these two models are currently prevailing in
moulding immigration and integration policy. Has the progressive left achieved its objective
of moving away from the traditional ethnocultural and assimilationalist model defining
citizenship towards a more inclusive multicultural model
11
? This study will argue that the
ethno-cultural and assimilationalist model is still succeeding because even though
Germany's policies on immigration have undergone significant and unprecedented changes,
Rogers Brubaker's claim that the "automatic transformation of immigrants into citizens
remains unthinkable in Germany"
12
still appears depicting the current political and social
reality. The first hypothesis is that immigrants are still expected to assimilate rather than
integrate. To test this argument or hypothesis, evidence will be taken from both the 2000
Nationality Act and contemporary debates over citizenship to suggest that immigrants are
still expected to assimilate German culture rather than integrate. At the same time,
however, the policies on immigration and citizenship undertaken by the red-green coalition
have eliminated the `not a country of immigration' maxim from political discourse and
represent a first step towards replacing the ethnocultural model. In fact, the study will also
11
Note- This study is not going to focus on the term multiculturalism itself. I will treat multiculturalism as a
term used by the German left parties as a means to describe the alternative model to the ethnocultural
model based on the recognition of different cultures in society.
12
Brubaker W.R. `Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany' ( 1992, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard
University Press) p 185
6
argue that the traditional ethnocultural-assimilationalist model will most likely not endure in
the foreseeable future because important domestic pressures, such as demographic and
skill shortages, and external factors like the European Union will eventually force Germany
to adopt a more civic and pluralistic model characterising countries such as Britain, France,
Sweden, and the Netherlands. The second hypothesis is that endogenous factors and the
Europeanization of both national identity and immigration policy-making will have an
increasing impact on Germany society and the ethnocultural notion of citizenship. To test
this second hypothesis, evidence will be taken from statistical data and figures on
demographic and skill shortages, while the effect of Europeanization will be assessed by
discussing the Treaty on European Union in Maastricht and the Treaty of Amsterdam.
Case Study and Structure
Germany has been chosen as a case study for various reasons. Firstly, since reunification
immigration and asylum have been a matter of concern for the German public and have
always been at the centre of attention during successive political elections at the national
and local level. The Politbarometer (Forschungsgruppe Wahlen) surveys show that today
Auslanderpolitik is still viewed as the most pressing political problem. Opinion Polls show
that the vast majority of the German public continues to preserve its negative attitudes and
sentiments towards immigrants and opposes the idea of granting citizenship to foreigners.
13
As Anetta Kahane, one of Germany's best-known anti-racism campaigners asserted in an
interview, unlike much of the Western world "there's absolutely no understanding in
Germany of the concept of integration and coexistence of different cultures."
14
At the same
time, however, the integration of immigrants in society is an extremely sensitive topic given
the Nazi legacy and the infamous behaviour towards non-Germans. Secondly, the German
concepts of nationality and identity are different from other `classic' immigration countries
in Western Europe based on a civic model of citizenship. Finally, the final part of this study is
going to discuss the role of domestic pressures as well as the various aspects of
Europeanization and their potential impact in Germany. Thus, Germany has been chosen as
13
Note- Precise statistics will be provided in Ch 3
14
Deutsche Welle `Germany's Long Road to Multiculturalism' 21.07.2005
7
a single case study since a cross-national analysis would divert the focus and would risk
becoming overly stretched.
The first part of the study is going to clarify some of the concepts which are going to be used
while analysing the German case. These include interrelated concepts including citizenship,
integration, assimilation, and Europeanization. This should help provide a conceptual
framework. The second section will briefly analyse the historical traditions and dynamics of
immigration and integration in Germany. In order to fully understand current policy
decisions and political debates, it is essential to be familiar with the historical legacy of a
country, which pushes governments into a `path dependency.' In fact, as Peters points out,
"when a government programme or organisation embarks on a path there is an inertial
tendency for those initial policy choices to persist. The path may be altered, but it requires a
good deal of political pressure to produce the change."
15
The third part will then analyse
one of the most important policies on immigration crafted by the Schroder government, the
2000 Nationality Act. As Green put it, "as well as immigration, residence and citizenship
policy standing out for their importance in German politics as a whole, the policy sector per
se is quite unlike any other in the domestic politics of industrialised countries" since it
concentrates exclusively on non-citizens.
16
As the analysis of the Leitkultur debate will show,
the contents and the effects of this reform had important implications on the concept of
citizenship, but have not completely transformed its ethnocultural characteristic. The final
section is going to assess the role of the European Union and the demographic/skill
shortages in acting as a dynamic force affecting domestic policy on immigration and
inducing the re-conceptualisation of the concept of Staatsvolk. For instance, would a
European `policy framework' allow the harmonisation of issues related to immigration such
as citizenship laws and dual nationality? Would this encourage Germany move towards a
civic model like most of its European counterparts?
15
Peters G. `Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism' (London, 1999: Pinter) p 63
16
Green S. `The politics of exclusion: Institutions and immigration policy in contemporary Germany' (2004,
Manchester University Press) 4
8
Chapter 1 Conceptual Framework: Citizenship, Integration, Assimilation and Europeanization
1.1 Citizenship
Immigration, integration, and the acquisition of citizenship are an interrelated process. The
act of acquisition of citizenship is viewed as a fundamental step of the migratory process
and as an indicator that helps to assess the level of integration of the immigrant population
in the receiving country. The benefits of German citizenship include: "access to the German
as well as all the EU labour markets, unrestricted access to the health and welfare system,
any wage premium paid by discriminating employers to citizens, increased worldwide
mobility, the right to vote and be elected in Germany and the EU, and the right to own
property in Germany and the EU."
17
As Gerarld Neuman point out, "citizenship carries the
potential for empowerment, through voting, through government service, through military
service and the accompanying social respect."
18
The notion of citizenship, which can be defined as "the set of rights, duties, and identities
linking citizens to the nation-state,"
19
is of fundamental importance in the construction of
national identity. At the same time, national identity still plays a primary role in the
acquisition of those legal prerequisite necessary for the attainment of political rights. Thus,
even though conceptually nationality and citizenship can be separated, practically they are
inextricably linked to each other. Before the reforms carried out by the Red-Green coalition
via the 2000 Nationality Act, German citizenship was firmly rooted in the 1913 Nationality
Law. The 1913 Reich Staatsangehorigekeitsgesetz defined nationality based on the principle
of ius sanguinis- or descent by blood- according to which a potential member must embrace
the ethno-cultural characteristic of the German community, with little regard for birthplace
and residence. Madel rightly affirms that "the confluence of German laws of citizenship and
ideologies of ethnicity, nation and state, have effectively prevented this population [Turkish
17
Kahanec M. & Tosun M.S. `Political Economy of Immigration in Germany: Attitudes and Citizenship
Aspirations' Institute for the Study of Labour (IZA) No 3140 November 2007 p 3
18
Neuman G.L. `National Law as a Method of Integration A Comparison Between the USA and Germany'
draft chapter p 4
19
Koopmans R. & Statham P. `Migration and ethnic relations as a field of political contention: An opportunity
structure approach' in Koopman R. & Statham P. `Challenging Immigration and Ethnic Relations Politics:
Comparative European Perspective' (2000,Oxford: Oxford University Press) p 28
9
Community] from achieving legal and social equality, and civil rights, by denying them
crucial access to full citizenship."
20
The Nationality Law based on ethnographic notions of
citizenship was modernised and partly liberalised with the introduction of Ius soli
(citizenship based on territory), but the transition towards a more civic model is still by large
incomplete. The failure of introducing dual citizenship signifies that citizenship is still
conceived not only as a type of membership, but also as "a specific cultural imprint on
nationhood, which functions as a form of symbolic closure restricting, albeit to different
extents and under nationally specific conditions, the ability of migrants to join the national
community."
21
Nationhood, is still viewed by the conservatives not as the holder of
universal political values, but as an "organic cultural linguistic community; the nationhood is
constituted by ethnocultural unity."
22
Consequently, as Brett Klopp provocatively argued,
"nearly fifty years after the Holocaust it appeared that Germany was still a country only for
the Germans."
23
These notions of nationhood and citizenship somewhat still imply that the
assimilation of immigrants is an essential prerequisite of integration policy.
1.2 Assimilationalist Mode of Political Integration
Numerous various and distinct modes or patterns of national integration exist. Exploring
these different national patterns would go beyond the primary intent of this study that is
establishing whether the citizenship reform in 2000 was successful in eradicating the
ethnographic notion of nationhood. Broadly speaking integration implies adaptation and, in
the words of Simon Green, it "consists of both immigrant and host society modifying their
behaviour around universally accepted norms and standards."
24
Assimilation, on the other
hand, can be described as the `process of making similar' and involves complete absorption.
The assimilationalist mode of political integration, mostly advocated by conservatives and
nationalists, views the nation state as the cornerstone of its thinking and is based on the
20
Madel R. ` Fortress Europe and the Foreigners Within: Germany's Turks' in Goddard V.A. & Llobera J.R. and
Shore C. The Anthropology of Europe (Oxford: Berg, 1994) p 117
21
Koopmans R. & Statham P. ` 2000 p 29
22
Brubaker W.R. `Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany' ( 1992, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard
University Press) p 17
23
Klopp B.'German Multiculturalism: Immigrant Integration and the Transformation of Citizenship' (Westport:
Praeger Publishers, 2002)
24
Green S. In Padgett S. Paterson W.E. Smith G. 2003 p 244
10
belief that no polity can be durable and consistent without a community sharing a common
national culture.
25
Cultural and ethnic minorities are expected to assimilate into the
dominant national culture by embracing the host society's way of life, common values,
moral beliefs and social practices and at the same time abandoning their separate culture.
In sum, "if they wish to become part of society and be treated like the rest of their fellow-
citizens, they should assimilate. If they insist on retaining their separate cultures, they
should not complain if they are viewed as outsiders and subjected to discriminatory
treatment."
26
It can be argued that policies based on assimilation seldom work because they
are likely to reinforce and increase differences between members of society instead of
alleviating them by causing a reaction to the assimilatory pressures. As Parekh notes,
"when a society refuses to accommodate the legitimate demands of its cultural minorities,
the latter seek to exploit such spaces as society itself provides to legitimize their
demands."
27
The Leitkultur debate will show that nevertheless the mentality according to
which `if immigrants want a place in our society they should become just like us' is still
widespread in German society. As Green pointed out, "Germany's approach meant that
immigrants were expected not to integrate, but to assimilate: that is, to give up the majority
of their cultural identity in favour of becoming (not just legally) German."
28
However, it is extremely important to specify that even if this exclusive approach to identity
and citizenship was the cause for the incomplete membership status of the immigrant
population in Germany, yet the lack of political and cultural integration did not exclude
social integration. German migrants have been famously defined `denizens' since they
possessed legal and social, but not political rights. The main element of distinction between
citizens and `semi-citizens' or `quasi citizens' is in fact the access to political rights, which
are essential because "it is those with the right to vote and to be voted for may make,
amend, and repeal the laws, including those concerning citizenship and naturalisation
criteria."
29
Thus, even though this study will mostly focus on the cultural and political
dimension of integration since these are viewed as key in the process of becoming full
25
Parekh B. `Rethinking Multiculturalism' (New York:Palgrave Macmillan 2006) 196-197
26
Ibid
27
Ibid p 198
28
Green S. Cited in Padgett S.; Paterson W.E.; Smith G. 'Developments in German politics'( London: Palgrave
Macmillan 2003) p 245
29
Klopp Brett 2002 p14
11
members of society, we must not forget that in Germany a lot of the focus is centred on
social integration within the welfare state. In the words of Frank Eckardt, "German
integration is specifically organized within the framework of the universalist welfare state"
and "political integration was always understood as the `pinnacle' of social integration and
not as an end in itself."
30
1.3 Europeanization
At the start of the new century, the European dimension is an important source of domestic
policy framework, including Auslanderpolitik. As Bendel affirmed, "in some important areas
national asylum and immigration policy has long become unthinkable without the EU."
31
Europeanization has been successful in asylum and refugee policies, an area that has
traditionally been linked to national sovereignty. But how do you conceptualise the term?
There are many `faces' of Europeanization. A useful definition to provide a framework has
been offered by Bulmer and Radaelli:
"processes of construction, diffusion and institutionalisation of formal and informal rules,
procedures, policy paradigms, styles, `ways of doing things' and shared beliefs and norms
which are first defined and consolidated in the EU policy process and then incorporated in
the logic of domestic discourse, political structures and public policies."
32
Europeanization is the "development of EU policies in particular, issue-areas embodying
new rules, norms, regulations, and procedures."
33
Hence, the process of Europeanization of
immigration can be assessed by the amount of EU directives and regulations regarding
immigration policies like for instance a common asylum system. This thesis views
Europeanization as the impact of the European Union on the member states. The extent of
the European impact on national immigration policy reforms is difficult to agree on.
30
Eckardt F. `Multiculturalsim in Germany: From Ideology to Pragmatism- and Back?' National Identities Vol. 9
No. 3 September 2007 p237
31
Bendel P. `Immigration Policy in the European Union: Still bringing up the walls for fortress Europe?'
Migration Letters Vo 2 N.1 April 2005 p 22
32
Bulmer S.J. & Radaelli C.M. `The Europeanisation of National Policy?' Queen's Papers on Europeanisation
Vo. 1 2004 p 4
33
Risse `A European Identity' in Cowles G.M.; Caporaso J.; Risse T.' Transforming Europe' (Cornell: Cornell
University Press, 2001) p 218
12
Different scholars provide different and sometimes contradictory evidence on how policy on
a European level can affect domestic politics of immigration. According to Eiko Thielemann
"European integration must be regarded as a crucial catalyst for the changes in domestic
asylum legislation that were introduced throughout the 1990s."
34
Others like Maarten Vink
instead dispute the view that the EU can exercise significant control on domestic immigration
Policies. As he puts it, "that many proactive efforts to bring about a common European
policy, do not necessarily imply the subsequent Europeanization of domestic politics."
35
How has Europeanization affected Germany? Germany is one of the founding members of
the European Coal and Steel Community and has been defined by many scholars as the
most Europeanised EU member state. Since the end of the Second World War, Germany has
always been of the most active participants in European integration and has often displayed
its interest in the development of a common European immigration policy. In fact, Germany
has been described as the `front-runner' or `motor' or `locomotive' of European integration
due to its strong pro-integrationalist attitude and thanks to its role in promoting
supranationalism. As Alscher and Prumm put it, Germany has "been a primary actor in the
process of supranational development, forcing institutional and policy transformations,
always eager to erect a functioning single European market, promoting the harmonization
of asylum laws."
36
An example of supranational policy-making and of Germany's preference
for a communitisation of immigration policy was the amendment made to the Basic Law in
1993, which `brought Europe in' and provided a comprehensive regulation at a European
level. Some argue that since the Treaty of Amsterdam Germany has not only become less
involved, but also more resistant to further integration with regards to migration policy.
Others like Prumm and Alscher declare that "a strong limitation to German autonomy is still
accepted by the German government and this position was more or less the same during
the negotiations on the Amsterdam Treaty."
37
Chapter 3 will discuss the extent of
Europeanization in more detail.
34
Thielemann E. `The Soft Europeanisation of Migration Policy European Integration and Domestic Policy
Challenge'
ECSA Seventh Biennial International Conference, May 31- June 2, 2001 p 3
35
Vink M. `Negative and Positive Integration in European Immigration Policies'European Integration online
Papers (EIoP) Vo. 6 N. 13 August 2002 p 10
36
Prumm K. & Alscher S. `The Europeanization of National Policies and Politics of Immigration' in Faist T. and
Ette A. `The Europeanization of National Policies and Politics of Immigration' (New York: Palgrave Macmillan
2007) p 90
37
Ibid p 89
13
Chapter 2 Immigration in Germany: A Contradictory Policy Area
This section is going to briefly analyse the historical traditions and dynamics of immigration
and integration in Germany. Germany's historical legacy in immigration since the end of the
Second World War has been characterised by the dictum Deutschland ist kein
Einwanderungsland. The aim of this historical overview is to explore the reasons for the
reluctance until recently of the political class to acknowledge the presence of migrants and
ethnic diversity in society and to explain the contradiction between the official discourse
willingly neglecting the fact that Germany is one of the main European destinations for
migrants and the de facto immigration policies undertaken by successive governments. For
this purpose, immigration policy during the Cold War era will be briefly discussed. This
should help understand the various dilemmas and difficulties encountered by the Schroder
government while trying to reform citizenship and transform its ethno nationalist nature.
The first wave of immigration in Germany occurred straight after the end of the Second
World War when millions of ethnic Germans (Aussiedler) were expelled from Eastern
Europe and the Soviet Union. In 1950 almost twelve million German Vertiebene (expellees)
had entered the Federal Republic of Germany and 15.7 of West Germans were
immigrants.
38
They were granted automatic German citizenship since they were considered
as being part of the German `community of descent' as a result of Article 116 of the 1949
Basic Law. The `right to return' was thus taken advantage of by hundreds of thousands of
ethnic Germans and was defined by Thranhardt "the largest single state organised migration
flow in the world."
39
Albeit the considerably high inflow of migrants, the FRG endorsed
further immigration to feed the hungry economy, which was recovering swiftly and
therefore urgently needed to deal with the lack of manpower caused by the war.
Consequently, from 1955 to 1968 the FRG singed labour recruitment agreements with the
Mediterranean countries including Italy, Spain, Greece, Turkey, Portugal, Tunisia, Morocco,
38
Chapin D. W. `Germany for the Germans? The Political Effects of International Migration' (1997, Greenwood
Press: Westport) p 12
39
Thranhardt D. `Germany's Immigration Policies and Politics' in Brochman G. And Hammar t. `Mechanisms of
Immigration control: A Comparative Analysis of European Regulation Policies' (Ocford:1999) p 36
Details
- Pages
- Type of Edition
- Erstausgabe
- Year
- 2016
- ISBN (PDF)
- 9783960676027
- ISBN (Softcover)
- 9783960671022
- File size
- 394 KB
- Language
- English
- Institution / College
- University of Sheffield
- Publication date
- 2016 (November)
- Grade
- Merit
- Keywords
- Leitkultur Multikulti Migration Deutschland Flüchtlingspolitik Integration Einwanderer Ausländer Refugee Multicultural Germany Migration 2000 Nationality Act Immigrant
