Coming Home: Media and Returning Diaspora in Israel and Germany

CHAPTER ONE: COMING HOME? FSU IMMIGRANTS IN ISRAEL AND GERMANY

CHAPTER ONE COMING HOME? FSU IMMIGRANTS IN ISRAEL AND GERMANY According to Kim’s (2001) comprehensive theory of communication and crosscultural adaptation, as well as to Alba and Nee’s (2003) new assimilation theory, immigrants’ social and cultural integration is affected by the political, economic, and cultural features of the host country, as well as by the characteristics of the immigrants themselves, especially the strength of their ethnic group, yielding results ranging from rapid assimilation to cultural and social segregation. As such, this chapter opens with a review of host environment conditions pertinent to the integration of immigrants from the FSU in Israel and Germany, followed by a description of the immigrants’ sociodemographic and cultural characteristics, and concluding with an examination of adaptation strategies employed by these immigrant communities. HOST ENVIRONMENT CONDITIONS Immigrants’ adaptation to a new cultural environment cannot be fully understood without taking into account the various factors of their reception context. We review the principal factors affecting both the pace and scope of FSU immigrants’ adaptation and cross-cultural transformation, including Israel and Germany’s immigration and absorption policies, their respective integration ideologies, and the public climate toward the Russian-speaking newcomers prevailing in both countries. IMMIGRATION POLICIES Israel and Germany are among the few countries whose immigration and citizenship policies are based on the ethnoreligious Jus Sanguinis [right of blood] criterion. Consequently, ethnicity plays a central role in these countries’ 13 14 COMING HOME public policy and political discourse (Levy, 1999a, 1999b; Munz & Ohliger, 1998, 2003; Shuval & Leshem, 1998). By contrast, in countries adhering to the multicultural model, such as Australia, Canada, and the United States, every immigrant is equally entitled to citizenship according to the Jus Soli [right of territory, i.e., place of birth] principle (Castles & Miller, 1993; Hjerm, 1998; Joppke, 1999). Since its establishment, Israel has thus maintained a highly liberal immigration policy toward immigrants of Jewish descent, in accordance with its Declaration of Independence (1948) and by virtue of the Law of Return (1950), declaring that the Jews have the “natural right” to return to their historic homeland. As a result, all Jews and their families are entitled to immigrate to Israel and to receive Israeli citizenship immediately on arrival (Berthomiere, 2003; Shuval & Leshem, 1998). Similarly, in the second half of the twentieth century, several large groups of ethnic Germans arrived in Germany after having lived in Eastern European countries and the Soviet Union for dozens and sometimes hundreds of years. In this case as well, the immigrants are granted German citizenship forthwith according to Paragraph 116(1) of the German Constitution (1949) and its recent (1990 and 1992) amendments (Bauer & Zimmermann, 1997; Koopmans, 1999; Munz & Ulrich, 1997; Ronge, 1997). Moreover, because of these countries’ ideological obligation toward their co-ethnics in the Diaspora, in both cases, the neutral word “immigrant” was replaced by the normative term Oleh (one who ascends) in Israel and Aussiedler (one who resettles) in Germany. These terms designate people perceived as returning to their “fatherland” and consequently characterized by cognitive and emotional affinities to the cultural traditions of the host country (Faist, 1994; Martin, 1994; Shuval & Leshem, 1998; Steinbach, 2001).1 Official declarations notwithstanding, there are essential differences between Israel and Germany in implementation of mechanisms to encourage or limit the returning Diaspora’s influx. During the 1990s, Germany began to revise its open-door policy, adding several restrictions to its immigration laws. In 1993, for example, Germany set a quota of 225,000 Aussiedlers per year, as contrasted with the unlimited influx allowed in previous years. That same year saw the passage of a new law that would eventually halt immigration of Aussiedlers altogether. According to this law, from the year 2010, persons of German descent born outside Germany after 1993 will no longer be entitled to the status of returning immigrants (Munz & Ulrich, 1997; Richter, 1999; Ronge, 1997). By contrast, the Israeli government has always declared that Aliyah (Jewish immigration to Israel) contributes to the country’s security and economic stability and even to international recognition of its legitimacy. As such, Israel never limited the number of returning immigrants and continues to encourage Aliyah, especially from the FSU (Shuval, 1998). As a result of this liberal immigration policy, to obtain immigration visas to Israel, potential immigrants need only to provide documentation 15 COMING HOME? attesting to their ethnic affiliation, without having to prove any cultural or emotional affinity for the Jewish people or...