Immigrant Integration in Times of Economic Crisis

Nearly six percent of the EU population are not citizens of the country in which they reside. Migration flows bring new diversity to the member states that challenges traditional national identities. Contemporary Europe seems torn between international commitments to accept immigrants and domestic public opinion unwilling to grant benefits or rights to these. The recent financial crisis only intensified this dilemma, many blaming immigrants for personally experienced economic hardship. This has led to criticism of multiculturalism and most countries oscillate between what scholars called ‘civic integration’ and multiculturalist preferences when it comes to dealing with immigrants. While free movement has become the norm in Europe, national citizenship still serves as an immigration control device for the governments. In this paper, I assess political discourse on immigrant integration in 16 countries – 14 members of the EU, plus Norway and Turkey as non-members. Based on systematic comparison of qualitative interviews with politicians from various parties in the selected countries in late 2008 and 2009, I examine how different political actors construct national discourses on immigration and citizenship preferences at the onset of the financial crisis. The comparative analysis will identify the homogeneity vs. heterogeneity of, and the consensus vs. contestation within political discourse vis-à-vis the idea of cultural diversity, immigration, and citizenship across the European continent. I introduce theoretical propositions for the Europeanization of political parties to formulate alternative hypotheses of how the parties’ ideological background, geographic location (East vs. West), or government role might affect how they articulate their preferences of immigrant integration. As such, I examine the nature of the national identity and domestic political competition to test whether civic integration of immigration will prevail as national collective identities and loyalties remain dominant or whether multiple and cross-cutting identities allow for the development of more inclusive, multicultural policy preferences.