Immigration in Europe - HumanitarianNet - Universidad de Deusto

INTRODUCTION 21has a fairly homogeneous population of about five million, of whichonly arournd 18,000 belong to national minorities (Sami, Roma, Jewsand Tatars). With the need for labour immigration likely to grow, Finlandis faced, more or less for the first time in its history, with the familiarproblem of how to reconcile the universalistic values of the liberaldemocratic state with the need to accommodate cultural diversity.In Italy, another country which has moved in a very short time frombeing, predominantly, a country of emigration to a country ofimmigration, and in which access to citizenship is based upon theprinciple of jus sanguinis (“law of the blood”), the problem presentsitself as how to maintain Italian identity (Pace). There is, according toPace, a growing awareness among the Italian public of the need toarrive at a new basis for “social solidarity”, which in time will presumablyinvolve moving away from the present ethnic model of the Italiannation (itself a fairly recent “invention”) to a new understanding ofwhat it means to be Italian.Two countries covered in this book, France and the United Kingdom,have long and significant histories as countries of immigration, althougheach has followed a different approach when it comes to the integrationof minorities. The French “Republican model” of immigration hasinvolved the integration of individuals rather than groups (Ma Mung).This is perhaps best described as assimilation rather than integrationsince, as Ma Mung puts it, according to this model, “The foreigner istolerated only on condition that he/she disappears”. The British approachto the management of ethnic and cultural diversity has containedelements of assimilationism, but has combined this with a strongemphasis on “cultural pluralism”, which has been the hallmark of the“classical” countries of immigration —Canada, the USA and Australia(CASTLES, 2000b, 134-140).The Republican model remained paramount in France after thecessation of labour immigration in the 1970s but began to change inthe 1990s as a result of the interplay of both progressive and repressivepolicies towards immigrants. On the one hand, there was a new focuson the problem of discrimination. The recognition that individuals arediscriminated against because of their ethnic group, clearly entails policiesdesigned to help the integration of groups rather than individuals andtherefore represents a move away from an assimilationist approach to themanagement of ethnic diversity. On the other hand, the toughening ofimmigration policy through the so-called “Pasqua Laws” 6 had the effect,6 Named after the Minister of the Interior of the right-wing Balladur governmentwhich came to power in 1993.