The recent flow of immigrants into
Europe can be attributed to political instability in the homelands of the refugees
involved. This situation is referred to as a crisis, both within the European
borders and internationally. The crisis has caused complications for the
European Union as a whole, which lie in the amalgamation of viewpoints on the
subject within EU member states. The main point would be that the immigration
crisis has opened up discourse of anti-immigration attitudes and sentiments
from some EU nations, which does not harmonize well with what the European
Union’s overall stance on the subject is or should be.
The political make up of Europe can
attribute to why the immigration subject is more complex in comparison to North
America. Although, there has been rhetoric within some North American
governments that support anti-immigration ideology, there are some differences
from Europe that makes its case more increasingly politically delicate. This
paper moves to present these differences by assessing the political
distinctions between Europe and North America. Additionally, it will analyze
the effect of radical-right parties in Europe and anti-immigration sentiments. It
will also point to relevant similarities, such as how the discourse on the
immigration subject compares in some European nations and the United States. Furthermore,
it will analyze how the current state of affairs within Europe prove the
subject of immigration to be increasingly intricate and complex beside North
America.
Due to unstable conditions in the home
countries of the migrants, many people have fled from their respective several
regions to seek refuge in the European Union. This situation has caused for the
European Union to be granted with what is often recognized as their greatest challenge
since the debt crisis.”[1]
Essentially, the problem is that the European Union has to deal with a large
amount of people migrating into various EU nations, and that is something that
they have not had to deal with in the past.
Another important point in order to paint
a picture of the situation, is the coverage it has within the media. The media
has had a focus on how migrants are putting themselves in danger in the process
of migrating. Some people have even died in an attempt to make this journey
into Europe. An unfortunate example of this was reported in The Guardian as, “two
young brothers and their mother were among at least 12 Syrians heading to
Greece.”[2]
The route that these people lost their lives on is one that is extremely dangerous.
Geographically, they had no other choice in terms of how to get into Europe
from Syria.[3] All in
all, migrants are too often putting themselves in danger during their migration
travels and this proves how desperate they are in seeking asylum, considering
they put themselves and their children in such danger.
Furthermore, “the number of
illegal border-crossing detections in the European Union started to surge…at
the onset of the Arab Spring.” Events such as the Arab Spring uprisings and the
ongoing Syrian civil war have produced instability in many nations in the
Middle East and Africa. This instability has essentially coerced the people it
has affected to seek migration to the European Union in order to take refuge
from the chaos.
It has been pointed out that in a sense, the European
migration crisis could and even should be attributed to Western inaction in the
Middle East. As of March 15, the Syrian civil war has officially entered into
its 7th year, with a death toll of 470,000. There has been some
Western intervention but none on the front lines to stop the fighting.[4]
Syrian refugees initially fled to neighboring nations such as Turkey and
Jordan, but more so made their way to Europe. It is important to recognize that
people most often do not leave their homes unless they feel as though it is not
absolutely necessary and the best option.
Moreover, because of the variety of stances on the migrant situation within the EU there is confliction for the EU in finding a policy that will deal with the migration crisis in an effective and coherent manner. This is an attributing factor to why the subject of immigration is politically delicate in Europe over North America. An example that proves this delicacy could be seen with the nation of Hungary. Hungary has faced criticism for past actions it has had against incoming migrants. The New York Times reported, “The Hungarian riot police fired tear gas and water cannons at hundreds of migrants…The use of force by the Hungarian authorities, a turning point in the migration crisis, drew criticism from the United Nations”[5] This event highlights the tensions of individual nations within the EU and with the European Union as a whole. Also, the reaction to this event caused for varying attitudes and overall confusion for European leaders in terms of understanding what the unified solution to the migrant crisis is and it was seen to intensify animosity among nations.
Within this context, it is
noteworthy to point out that the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
(FRA) has recently published a report in support of immigration and
integration. This can be seen as an effort to shift how the situation is framed
from the level of individual nations and more towards the EU as a whole. FRA
director Michael O’Flaherty can be quoted saying, “the migrants living in the
EU are not part of a “crisis”, but an integral part of our society. We need a
new narrative that stresses the benefits that migrants…bring to our
societies…integration is key to our security and to our democracy.”[6]
Political orientation plays
a major role on views of migration. 9 In eight of the ten EU countries
surveyed by Pew research, it was found that those who identified with the political
right are more concerned about refugees as a threat than those on the political
left. 9 This fact was seen more
evidently in France, where 61% of those who place themselves on the political
right say that refugees are a major threat, compared with only 29% of those on
the left.[7] Furthermore, the “third wave” of “right-wing
extremism” can be seen as a response to mass immigration and the
multiculturalism that comes with this, particulary in Western Europe.[8]
Moreover, it is found that immigration plays much less of a role in North
America and in Central and Eastern Europe, according to Cas Mudde. This can be
attributed to how radical-right parties share a core ideology of nativism, authoritarianism,
and populism and these three ideological features are closely related to the political
issues of immigration, crime, and corruption. Proving that immigration a
prominent feature of radical-right parties.[9]
In the eyes of nativist, radical-right
parties, migration is seen as a direct threat to their country’s nationhood.
Case Mudde explains that there are four frames in which West European
radical-right parties use in propaganda for their nativist movements.[10]
The first being the cultural frame, in which migration is seen as a threat to “the
cultural homogeneity of the home nation.” It can be found that nativists believe
migrants are simply unwilling to assimilate into a new culture, which will have
an effect on nationhood. Nativists believe that as an influx of migrants enter
their nation; the core of native culture is threatened. [11]
Another example to look into, in terms of
this would be the recent Netherlands general election. This election was framed
in the media as a test for anti-immigration sentiment in Europe.[12]
This is because major parties in the running have extremely xenophobic and
anti-immigration discourses involved with them, such as the Freedom Party. The
Freedom Party moved to ban immigration and asylum
seekers from Muslim countries.[13]
With all of that being
said, the European stance on migration varies among the countries within the
European Union. Additionally, the varying reactions of neighbouring countries
to the most recent Netherlands general election aids in proving the political
delicacy and complexity of immigration within the European Union.
The second frame is on religion. Considering
that the immigrants seeking refuge in the EU often come from different
religions (mainly Islam in today’s situation), it is often referenced to in
arguments by right-wing nativist groups. In this context, it is appropriate to
mainly focus on Islam, as this is the religion that is most commonly referenced
to by the right. Nativists consider Islam to be a fundamentalist religion and
some leaders even deny the possibility of a “moderate” Islam.[14]
The overall argument is that Muslims threaten key aspects of Western democracies
such as the equality and gay rights.[15]
Additionally, it was found that negative views of refugees tie with negative views of Muslims in 8 of the 10 EU countries surveyed, once again by Pew Research. Those who have a more negative view of Muslims are also much more concerned about the threat they may bring to their country. For example, in the United Kingdom, 80% of those who have an unfavorable opinion of Muslims say refugees leaving Iraq and Syria are a major threat to their country. [16] Furthermore, this research found that majority of Europeans “do not view growing diversity as making their countries better.” 17 Furthermore, in two nations in particular (Greece and Italy) there were more than half of those surveyed, which said, “Increasing diversity makes the country a worse place to live.” In contrast, it was found that 58% of Americans believed growing diversity makes the United States a better place to live.[17]
The third frame is security. Nativist parties use this argument in saying that “immigrants become criminals because they have been uprooted from their natural environment.” [1]7 It was also found that many Europeans are concerned with influx of immigrants and that it will increase the likelihood of terrorism for the host nation. Those who voice concern about the prospect of increased terrorism include Hungary (76%) and Poland, (71%) with a median of 59% across 10 EU nations. [18] In Germany, the Netherlands and Italy majority of people also think refugees will increase terrorism in their country.
The fourth frame in nativist discourse is economic. In this frame, immigrants are depicted as a financial burden to the host society, as they take jobs away from the natives.[19] This is often combined with the agenda in which welfare programs must only be for the natives of the country. Overall, a median of 50% across the 10 EU countries surveyed in the Pew research study believed that refugees are a burden to society. Nativists believe that the migrants take jobs and social benefits that would have been available to the native citizens without immigration. Alternatively, in Sweden and Germany it was found that majorities say the opposite. In this case, they believe that refugees make their country stronger and provide hard work and talent for their country.
Unlike European Union nations, Canada and the United States are recognized as countries for immigration. This is a key difference between Europe and North America and it plays a role into why immigration is much more of a heated debate and in the forefront of European politics. Countries like Canada and the U.S. accept migrants in large amounts annually, but the difference is that they are prepared to regulate the influx of immigrants. This leads to the annual number of new immigrants to more constant in comparison, which makes it less of a political issue or crisis in comparison to Europe.
As mentioned, the North American
immigration subject differs from the European one yet, there can be arguments
to prove that some North American countries relate to European nations. With
that said, the stance on immigration is not identical within the U.S. and
Canada, just because they are both North American nations. The topic of illegal
immigration is one that is commonly seen on the United States’ public agenda.
Especially, with the most recent rhetoric of, “make America great again,”
pushing for legislation for the building of a wall on the Mexican-US border,
and blatantly pushing to ban Muslims from entering the US. Now, just imagine if
there was a “North American Union,” where Canada and the U.S. were member
states. How much more politically sensitive would the immigration subject be in
today’s North America if that was the case? Essentially, the varying stances on
immigration by the European Union’s member states make it increasingly
difficult for the Union to come to a cohesive consensus.
Although, there are examples of
similarities between Europe and North America, because North America does not
operate through the same hybrid system of supranational and intergovernmental decision-making as the EU, the topic
of immigration is one of increased complexity for Europe. The EU acts as the
comprehensive body of its 28 member nations. However, European Union members
have a variety of stances on the immigration subject, which has made for immigration
to be a sensitive topic within the EU.
It would be seen as arbitrary to the
ideals of the European Union if it bans migrants from entering its nations. Having
said that, the difficulty with integration and migration is in the nativist and
anti-immigration ideologies that are within some European nations. As
mentioned, the Freedom Party, in the Netherlands’ recent election pushed for
anti-immigration and leaving the EU. This is just one example but it works to
show the nativist discourse that is occurring within some EU nations.
Conclusively, if the radical-right ideology gains enough support, the response to the migration crisis could to ban immigration. This type of political conversation has already begun to stigmatize immigrants in some way and that may only persist if it takes over in precedence. On the other hand, if the European Union supports immigration, European nations who are against this will want to separate themselves from the EU. This is where the difficulty and sensitivity lies for the European Union. It would be a lot better for the EU to find a solution, in which all of their constituent nations agree upon, however, the rise of the radical-right in some EU member nations has created a discourse of otherness and an overall negative view of migrants. This could lead to have an unfavourable effect on the coherence of the European Union. With all of this considered, it can be concluded that the topic of immigration within the European Union is easily irritable in comparison to North America due to the political makeup of the European Union and the discourse created by the radical right.
[1] “Europe’s
Migration Crisis”, Council On Foreign Relations, last modified
2017, accessed March 16, 2017, http://www.cfr.org/refugees-and-the-displaced/europes-migration-crisis/p32874.
2 Elgot, Jessica. “Family Of Syrian Boy Washed Up On Beach Were
Trying To Reach Canada”. The
Guardian. Last modified 2017. Accessed March 14, 2017.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/03/refugee-crisis-syrian-boy-washed-up-on-beach-turkey-trying-to-reach-canada.
[3] “This
Map Shows The Routes Of Europe’s Refugee Nightmare — And How It’s Getting
Worse”. Business Insider.
Last modified 2015. Accessed March 15, 2017.
http://www.businessinsider.com/map-of-europe-refugee-crisis-2015-9.
[4] Mega Specia,
“6 Years Of Civil War In Syria”, Nytimes.Com – Video, last
modified 2017, accessed March 16, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/middleeast/100000004986266/syria-conflict-seventh-year-civil-war.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FSyria&action=click&contentCollection=world®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection.
[5] Rick Lyman,
“Europe Lacks Strategy To Tackle Crisis, But Migrants March On”, Nytimes.Com,
last modified 2015, accessed March 15, 2017,
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/18/world/europe/europe-migrants-refugees.html.
[6] “Taking
The ‘Crisis’ Out Of Migration: Integration In The EU | European Union Agency
For Fundamental Rights”, Fra.Europa.Eu, last modified 2017,
accessed March 16, 2017, http://fra.europa.eu/en/press-release/2017/taking-crisis-out-migration-integration-eu.
[7] Poushter,
Jacob. “European Opinions Of The Refugee Crisis In 5 Charts”. Pew
Research Center. Last modified 2017. Accessed March 21, 2017.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/16/european-opinions-of-the-refugee-crisis-in-5-charts/.
[8] Klaus von
Beyme, “Right‐Wing
Extremism In Post‐War
Europe”, West European Politics 11, no. 2 (1988): 1-18.
[9] Cas Mudde,
“Extreme Right Parties In Western Europe”, Acta Politica 39,
no. 3 (2004).
[10] Cas Mudde,
“The Relationship Between Immigration And Nativism In Europe And North
America”, Acta Politica, no. 4 (2010).
[11] Dutch PVV leader Geert Wilders often refers to a
“tsunami of islamization”
[12] Lauren
Said-Moorhouse, “Dutch Election: Europe’s Far-Right Populists Fail First
Test”, CNN, last modified 2017, accessed March 15, 2017,
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/16/europe/netherlands-dutch-results/index.html.
[13] “Netherlands
Election”, Reuters, last modified 2017, accessed March 16, 2017,
http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/rngs/NETHERLANDS-ELECTION/0100320E4KT/index.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social#section/parties.
[14] Martin
Dolezal, Marc Helbling and Swen Hutter, “Debating Islam In Austria,
Germany And Switzerland: Ethnic Citizenship, Church–State Relations And
Right-Wing Populism”, West European Politics 33, no. 2 (2010).
[15] Cas Mudde,
“The Relationship Between Immigration And Nativism In Europe And North
America”, Acta Politica, no. 4 (2010).
[16] Poushter,
Jacob. “European Opinions Of The Refugee Crisis In 5 Charts”. Pew
Research Center. Last modified 2017. Accessed March 21, 2017. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/16/european-opinions-of-the-refugee-crisis-in-5-charts/.
[17] Poushter,
Jacob. “European Opinions Of The Refugee Crisis In 5 Charts”. Pew
Research Center. Last modified 2017. Accessed March 21, 2017. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/16/european-opinions-of-the-refugee-crisis-in-5-charts/.
[18] Poushter,
Jacob. “European Opinions Of The Refugee Crisis In 5 Charts”. Pew
Research Center. Last modified 2017. Accessed March 21, 2017. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/16/european-opinions-of-the-refugee-crisis-in-5-charts/.
[19] Cas Mudde, “The Relationship Between Immigration And
Nativism In Europe And North America”, Acta Politica, no. 4 (2010).
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more