Managing Ethnic Diversity after 9/11: Integration, Security, and Civil Liberties in Transatlantic Perspective

Index

language, health services, and temporary housing). In Portugal, initiatives have been taken by the newly created High Commission for Immigration and Ethnic Minorities, and Spain is also currently implementing a national plan, entitled the “Global Program for Immigration,” designed to enhance integration. Along with this effort by the national government, a number of regional governments have also implemented integration programs, and all of Spain’s major cities have instituted integration programs. Yet success will take time; integration is a long-term process while the logic of policy making—and the funding of such initiatives—is often framed by shortterm political considerations. As Rinux Penninx points out, The conundrum here is that decisions on the content and orientation policies are taken in a political system decided by the majority vote. . . . The way immigrants are perceived by the receiving society turns out to be important in such a process, often more so than facts. This tendency increases if immigration and the status of immigrants become politicized. This mechanism can lead either to the absence of integration policies and an avoidance of issues related to immigrants or to lopsided and patronizing policies reflecting majority interest and disregarding immigrant needs and voices.6 If correct, this statement implies that more attention should be given to the question of how integration policies are framed. The politicization of immigration and integration issues has prevented some policy initiatives from being accepted and thus implemented effectively. This problematic situation has generated, in turn, a climate of anti-immigrant sentiments that fuels a further politicization of the debate about migrant integration. Formulating a more effective integration policy therefore requires a greater de-politicization of policy making. In the short term, policy initiatives should therefore be less ideologically driven and more focused on fostering social cohesion. In the long term, the sustainability of integration policies should rely on the ability to suggest realistic objectives—instead of ineffective electoral promises. We conclude with an observation: whereas the securitization of integration issues since 9/11 has been detrimental to (particularly Arab and Muslim) immigrants and their native-born children, both the U.S. and European governments have been increasingly aware of the need to address the unintended effects of this trend in order to prevent social fragmentation, political discontent, and more specifically the radicalization of young Muslims. The war on terror—and its accompanying rhetoric—has limited such opportunities for integration. Yet today integration policies must be viewed as powerful instruments in both fighting terrorism and in reasserting the fundamental values of democracy. A traditional approach to security concerns has previously prevented integration initiatives from being adopted or effectively implemented; a new one may encourage both U.S. and European governments to be more proactive in this field. CONCLUSION 283 NOTES 1. OJ L 164.06.2002, Art. 1 (1) (d). 2. Council of the European Union, The European Union Counter-Terrorism Strategy: Prevent, Protect, Pursue, Respond, Council Doc. 14469/4/05 (Brussels, November 30, 2005). 3. Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Concerning Terrorist Recruitment: Addressing the Factors Contributing to Violent Radicalization, COM (2005) 313 final, Brussels, September 21, 2005. 4. Sergio Carrea and Florian Geyer, “Terrorism, Borders and Migration,” European Policy Studies 131 (June 2007): 3–4. 5. Commission of the European Communities, Communication on Immigration, Integration and Employment, COM (2003) 336 final, Brussels, June 3, 2003, 25. 6. Rinus Penninx, “Integration Processes of Migrants: Research Findings and Policy Lessons,” in Europe and Its Immigrants in the 21st Century, ed. Demetrios G. Papademetriou (Washington, D.C.: Migration Policy Institute, 2006), 38. A. CHEBEL D’APPOLLONIA AND S. REICH 284 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS JAMES BACKMEIER is a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Research on Immigration , Population, and Public Policy at the Univeristy of California, Irvine. His research focues on the sociology of international migration and immigrant group incorporation, racial/ethnic stratification in the U.S. labor market, and labor force participation among immigrant youth. FRANK D. BEAN is Chancellor’s Professor of Sociology and Economics and director of the Center for Research on Immigration, Population, and Public Policy at the University of California, Irvine. CAROL BOHMER is a visiting associate professor in the Government Department at Dartmouth College. She has worked extensively in the area of law and society, examining the way legal and social institutions interact, both in the United States and abroad, as well...