Integration Disintegration

Hello,

The following is a good article by Jamal Okie, an Islamic political writer, looking into integration and multiculturalism in Europe and what can be learnt for the UK.


The outbreak of rioting in Paris in late October has brought into question some of the key underpinnings of the French Republic in a way that has embarrassed the French elite.The riots also underlined the hollowness of claims that France presents a model of integration that should be emulated across Europe. Interior minister and presidential hopeful Nicholas Sarkozy, himself had to admit that exclusion and discrimination had played their role in the outpouring of rage, stating in an interview that, "I challenge the idea that we all start life on the same line. Some people start further back because they have a handicap - colour, culture or the district they come from.We have to help them." Sarkozy considers that the current model needs adjustment to confront the underlying problems that led to the sustained disorder, such as positive discrimination to open opportunities for those suffering from the "handicaps" he mentions. Others insist, notably President Chirac, that the problem is that the model is not being applied rigorously enough, not that it is failing. According to many in the immigrant communities, both sides of the political spectrum are either unwilling or unable to bring about the kind of changes that are really needed. Rioting first occurred in the Clichy-sous-Bois suburb of Paris in late October after news spread that two local youths, Bouna Traore and Zyed Benna had been electrocuted as they hid from police who had been chasing them to check their papers. After the first few nights of rioting, the situation was further exacerbated when a police tear gas canister was launched into one of the mosques in the suburb, affecting hundreds of the worshippers gathered there during Ramadhan. The police gave no explanation of why this incident occurred during a time of such tension. After sustained nights of rioting in the Paris suburbs, the disorder spread to towns and cities across France, as youths in other areas took the opportunity to destroy cars, shops and attack people, especially the hated police. In total, two people were killed by rioters, and more than 10000 vehicles were burned, as were 255 schools and 233 public buildings; the police arrested 4770 people. Currently, all the leading political figures are keen to show that they are taking an active role in addressing the problems that have played a role in the outbreak of disorder. For the Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, and Interior Minister Sarkozy, both looking ahead to the Presidential elections in 2007, the next few months are crucial. They will strive to show that they are active in addressing the problems affecting the minorities. The key issue to achieve electoral success will be reassuring the worried majority that law and order will prevail and that the country is not in danger of another security breakdown. As we have discussed in these pages previously, there has been a sea change in attitudes towards social relations in parts of Europe in the past few years, due to fears about terrorism and immigration, which have led to discussion about which social model will serve Europe best. France has been an advocate of the liberal, individual model which doesn't recognise differing identities among the populace.The only status recognised by law is that of citizen of the Republic, and hence according to this approach consideration is not given to racial or religious distinctions.This is meant to guarantee the cohesiveness of the society, avoiding the emergence of civil strife or competition among different groups that will occur at the expense of the whole. This outlook was established in the revolutionary era, when the new constitutional order was founded upon the idea that the law looked upon all citizens equally, regardless of their background. At that time, France made the transition from a monarchical to a constitutional system, which derived its power from the consent of the people, instead of the force of the king's arms. Representatives of the different provinces of France, whose regions were previously the property of the king,now freely submitted to a united, legitimate order, discarding their regional and linguistic differences.This principle regarding French identity was thus enshrined in French culture and underpins its political life to this day. One of the consequences of this view of French identity is that the state is prohibited from adopting policies or laws which treat citizens differently according to ethnic or religious distinctions. On this basis, the government is prohibited from collecting data on the racial or religious groups present in the Republic.Thus all of the figures quoted in the media about the size of the ethnic or religious minority populations in France are only estimates, as such questions could never be part of an official census (both figures vary between three and eight million according to different sources). This stance has great support in the French population as a whole,and most of the elite commend it as well, since in their view it has enabled France to avoid any policy stance or governmental bias that could lead to official discrimination in favour of or against groups. If the government is officially blind regarding any differences among its people, it will be unable to mistreat them due to these differences. On the other hand, opponents of this stance argue that this information void allows rampant discrimination. Since there is no official tracking of differences in areas such as employment opportunities or education between different groups, there is no impetus for officialdom to counteract the problems that affect France's minorities. Many European countries have looked to elements of the French approach as a way to address some of the tensions evolving between their host communities and immigrant groups, in most cases from Muslim countries. In Britain, the Netherlands and elsewhere, fears about excessive immigration, and the possible development of a fifth column in the Muslim community, have driven the debate to the top of the political agenda. Many commentators in these countries claimed that the multicultural model that guided social policy for decades had to be abandoned, as it had failed to secure the adoption of core values that would guarantee harmony in society.


The Multicultural model had arisen in response to the persistent demand of activist groups working within and alongside nonwhite communities that their communal identity be validated by the state and protected from discrimination or attack, whether verbal or physical. It aimed to achieve intercultural, interracial harmony by recognising different identities and values as equally valid. Both state and society had to refrain from expressing preference or disdain for any of these various identities, and moreover, this entailed that an individual's membership of a particular community was an essential element of their individual identity. Importantly, for critics of this view, this led to group identity taking precedence over the individual, a form of reverse racism and stereotyping. Rather than viewing Ahmed, Joe or Sofia as an individual, interacting with them on the basis of what I perceive to be their personal merits or faults, I treat them as a member of a 'community'. So without taking the person in front of me into account, I should treat them in line with what I have been told are the particular habits and outlook of a member of their 'group'. Critics argue that this is precisely the sort of prejudice that was supposed to have been eradicated by Multiculturalism. Furthermore, the political correctness this outlook obliges hinders the openness and honesty that should characterise interaction in the public sphere. Its end product is artificial and uncomfortable contact between people of different backgrounds, where fear of causing offence means we sacrifice the kind of honest contact with others that would actually contribute to cohesion in society. The other danger of the Multicultural approach in the eyes of its critics was that it promoted a 'rights' culture that didn't recognise responsibilities. In the Muslim, immigrant context, that people constantly talked of how society had to give them more, with no sense that they had a duty to give something back to the society that had offered them so much. These fears were amplified in recent times following the rioting that took place in the towns of northern England in 2001. Across Europe, in the Netherlands, Denmark and elsewhere, parties of the right gained ground by promising to correct government policy gone mad.The bombings in London and the death of Theo Van Gogh in the Netherlands have of course magnified the tension surrounding the debate exponentially. In the face of all of the problems the Multicultural approach is blamed for, many commentators have thus looked at the French approach as a potential saviour of Europe's identity.The key marker of France's current position in Europe's social cohesion debate is its decision in 2004 to ban the Islamic hijab and other 'conspicuous/ostentatious' religious symbols. The decision of France's parliament to support a formal ban on such symbols, gained support across the continent. Such proponents argued that these measures were essential to safeguard Europe's future, particularly to combat the threat of Islamic fundamentalism, whether in a politically active or violent manifestation.They encouraged all European countries to undertake similar powerful assertions of liberal,secular values. The riots should thus serve as an indication of how ill-founded such hopes were. The high-blown rhetoric that marked the debate on the hijab has been proved utterly irrelevant to the situation on the ground. It is clear that France has not been successfully at establishing a cohesive relationship with her minorities, and the blame cannot be attributed to the multicultural agenda. Suddenly the French establishment has rediscovered how serious the problems of discrimination and neglect are that affect the banlieues surrounding it towns and cities. One of the few studies of French unemployment that included information on ethnic groups found that the average level of unemployment for immigrants of African origin was 27.38%, against an average of 8.8% for immigrants from the rest of the EU. [1] Even when youths from minority communities are successful academically, they still face discrimination and are unable to advance in the job market. The rioting was brutal and counterproductive, and the youths destroying public buildings and attacking people only harmed their own communities. In most of the areas hit by violence and destruction of property, the victims were fellow residents of the suburbs, living through the same problems as their attackers. As is usually the case in such incidents, while a minority may think they are protesting to get their voices heard, a significant number will simply take advantage of the situation to engage in meaningless acts of violence. Many commentators have found it easy to restrict themselves to condemning the youths who caused the disorder, and refuse to engage in any further analysis of the situation. For instance, right-wing politicians attacked the role of rappers in inciting anti-French sentiments, and in effect laying the groundwork for the rioting; over 200 members of parliament signed a petition calling for the prosecution of seven rap groups and musicians.The MP Francois Grosdidier who led the petition claimed that such music incited violence, "When people hear this all day long…it is no surprise that they then see red as soon as they walk past policemen or simply people who are different from them." [2]Other more paranoid observers saw the long, sinister hand of Al-Qaeda at work in the suburbs, kicking off an intifada on French soil. According to this version, the riots were the first stage, or perhaps a dry run, for serious attempts at overturning the democratic order in Europe. No matter how outlandish the claims are, the real issue the French elite have to address is why such massive numbers of youth are so disaffected from the rest of society. Why it is that such large numbers of people, in the thousands, could be mobilised on such a scale, regardless of how it was organised. It is abundantly clear that French society has not been able to offer these youth the kind of values or vision that would dissuade them from being involved in such actions.


Producing a cohesive society takes more than stirring speeches about values. It is rather the experience of people sharing life together that gives the rhetoric a reality. It is in this sense that France is suffering.The fact is that the high levels of unemployment and discrimination affecting immigrant youth are the result of widespread prejudice.The persistent and growing popularity of the Front National, led by the infamous Jean-Marie Le Pen, is a testament to this hostility. This prejudice is present in the indigenous community, which it is often claimed feels it values and identity are under threat. It seems however that the talk of upholding, republican secular values is a convenient proxy for protecting a national identity framed in ethnic and religious terms, which will never accept the Muslim minority. Back to Multiculturalism? In the UK, many supporters of a multiculturalism have seen the events in France as a grim vindication of their approach. Frankly, they have been on the ropes in the last few years as multiculturalism was derided for its perceived failures. Many even spoke of the death of multiculturalism. Much of the analysis in the wake of the riots, in the British media at least, has thus claimed that, while it has its faults, multiculturalism could offer France a way out of the crisis, an opportunity to strengthen its civil society with more inclusive policies reflecting the needs of its diverse communities. Apparently, the UK has been more successful in its attempts at integration, because the riots that have occurred on British streets have been much smaller than those in France. Though some in the UK would like to portray Britain as a model for others, the fact is that problems of racism and discrimination affect community relations here as well.We can see similar differences in rates of employment for example.The national unemployment rate for white people in 2003 stood at 5.8%, compared with 13% for ethnic minorities as a whole, and 20% and 23% for people of Pakistani and Bangladeshi descent, respectively. [3] In the Netherlands as well, there has been a big movement away from the multicultural approach that the country was famous for, towards a much more stringent emphasis on liberal values and restrictions on immigration. One of the main complaints of Dutch critics of multiculturalism was that so much has been given, in terms of funds and cultural recognition, to Muslims at the expense of the majority. In return, it is claimed, Muslims have been ungrateful for the privileges they have received, and have been hostile and dismissive of the host culture in return. Again however, as in the UK and France, unemployment among immigrants is significantly higher than in the indigenous population; in 2002 the unemployment rate for North Africans at 10% was twice that of the indigenous Dutch. Even if we adjust for differences in education, the disparity in employment levels does not disappear. Unemployment among North Africans without secondary level qualifications is 22%, but among native Dutch with a similar educational level the rate is only 10%. [4] An International Labour Organisation (ILO) study conducted in 2000 that focused on France, Germany, The Netherlands and the UK found that discrimination was a serious obstacle for ethnic minorities in all of them. Job applicants from minority groups were discriminated against in approximately one in three cases. [5] The figures seem to indicate that there is a common reality of discrimination and a comparative lack of opportunities in the different countries of Europe. Unemployment is only one facet of relations between Europe and its minorities; however it does serve as an indicator of the state of relations between groups from different backgrounds.The issue of integration is commonly presented nowadays as problem of adapting minorities to a dominant national culture. In the case of Muslims in particular, this is related to adopting secular values and a modern conception of national allegiance. However, the hostility that manifests in the form of discrimination on racial or religious grounds points to the existence of a problem in the indigenous community. Notions of nationhood grounded in tradition, and race, still hold ground for many. Whether in countries that embrace multiculturalism, or dismiss it as a liberal indulgence, issues of minorities and immigration are viewed through the prism of a natural, 'true' nation based on ancestry and blood. In this context, abstract notions of citizenship, while earnestly embraced by the intelligentsia, only seem to serve as a way to create hoops for minorities to jump through. If national identity in European countries is still linked to religion or race, rather than a set of civic values, this presents a serious problem to the integration agenda. This would imply that even if the Muslim community were to integrate, in the manner desired, to 'national values' and institutions, the problems of discrimination would still exist. If the general public uses a yardstick of colour of skin or religion when hiring an employee, or choosing a neighbourhood to live in, values don't come into the equation.This does not bode well for the prospects of building the cohesive society so sincerely desired, and presents a troubling image of Europe's future. If this endeavour is not successful, it will lead many to question the official values of which Europe is so proud.The Muslim minority will be disillusioned, but also the majority community will feel that their elite have betrayed them. It will also cast serious doubts on the claims of secularists that their values can actually produce social harmony between differing communities in the manner that they desire.

Reference
Ethnic Minorities in the Labour Market: Comparative Policy Approaches (Western Europe): Andrew Geddes, Liverpool University/European University Institute. P.18
BBC News website;Thursday, 24 November 2005, 15:42 GMT
Measures of Integration; Randall Hansen, Connections Magazine 2003
European Outlook 2: Destination Europe, Immigration and Integration in the European Union, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
European Outlook 2: Destination Europe, Immigration and Integration in the European Union, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis. P.70