Search

This paper explores Western European hegemony and power. The focus, however, is not European hegemony over other parts of the world but over non-European immigrants INSIDE of contemporary Europe itself. The paper is a case study of recent Danish legal, educational, and political attempts to better the integration of particularly Muslim immigrants in Denmark. My focus is on how Europe is constructed through these discourses on Muslim immigrants - and how the immigrants in turn are often constructed as alien to European values and norms. By denaturalizing the concepts which these discursive representations rely on (the citizen, the European, the immigrant, etc.), I tease out the silencing or forgetfulness of these representations (for example that Europe is complicit in creating a world of inequality). And based on a close textual reading of the law, the political initiatives, the mandatory civic courses for immigrants, etc., I argue that non-European immigrants in Denmark are kept in a state of eternal Diaspora inside of Europe - despite an official rhetoric of integration. The ambition is to unpack and politicize the Euro-centrism which informs discourses on Europe and which naturalizes the idea of Europe as a moral, acting subject under extreme pressure from Muslim immigrants. Finally, I discuss the theoretical implications of my study which transgresses the national (Danish) and speaks to the construction of regional or international identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American model of immigrant integration has often been cited in Europe, generally in negative terms. Nevertheless, many aspects of this model have influenced recent policy evolution in Europe. In this paper, I first explore criteria of success in th ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores competing conceptualisations of the ‘foreigner’, their status, rights, duties and obligations in Europe and examines how, why and with what effects the European Union (EU) now plays a role in providing an institutional setting for making sense of ideas and data about migration and for decisions about appropriate norms and institutions governing 'integration'. The paper will analyse EU mobilisations around ‘integration’ and demonstrate how social and political spaces have now opened at EU level for migrants. It will also explore (i) impacts of cross-national and temporal variation in the EU27 in terms of the form and timing of their policy responses affects this EU domain and (ii) the intense contestation about the constitution and meaning of these spaces in terms of the balance between rights and responsibilities attendant to notions of 'integration'. Moreover, the constitution of social and political spaces for migrants at EU level tells us quite a lot about the European projects, the boundaries it removes and the new boundaries it creates. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will address the roles of the Islamic religion in the integration process of Muslim immigrants in Western Europe and the United States. It will discuss the validity of the congregational model for the integration of Muslim immigrants in both A ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper deals with the attitudes towards immigrants and refugees in Sweden since the early 90s. Sweden is one of the largest reception countries of immigrants in Europe, regarding its population. Being a non-imperial country with no former colonies and having a record of more than 50 years of a large working migration Sweden differs from both its Nordic and European neighbours. In this study I try to investigate how attitudes has changed, how the attitudes differs between groups and how attitudes towards immigrants relate to other political attitudes. I also make some comparisons with Belgium, France, Denmark and Norway, countries which have large right-wing populist or extremist parties, something that Sweden does not have. Finally I argue that the attitude pattern in Sweden is not a very fertile soil for right wing extremist parties. Although there are xenophobic sentiments, strong other political and ideological cleavages, decreasing resistance towards refugees and the linking of xenophobia to small sub-cultures does not give much room for an extremist party in parliament. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Economic disparities between North and South have fueled the movement of generations of migrants from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East into Europe. Today, European countries are grappling with the complex process of integrating these migrants, and their descendants, into a changing continent. At the same time, they are also struggling to meet the demands of historical minorities, most notably the Roma. The European Union adopted the Racial Equality Directive (RED) in June 2000. Symbolically, this directive represents a new mode of integration, one that employs an American-style model of legal protection that prohibits racial discrimination in both public and private housing, education, employment, and beyond. Perhaps more imporantly, the RED also requires the creation at the national level of what Charles Epp (1998) has called support structures for legal mobilization. These sorts of reforms have been shown in other polities to promote new modes of interest group mobilization and greater use of the courts. The directive represents a significant change in EU policy, and for most Member States, it represents a significant change in their national laws and institutions. Employing historical institutionalist methods, this paper examines the policy-making process that produced the RED in order to understand the connection between ideas, interests, and institutions. In pursuit of those theoretical goals, we address a series of empirical questions: Who was pushing for the RED? In particular, what role did lawyers play in shaping the final form of the directive? Did legal entrepreneurs have a litigation strategy in mind? Why does the RED focus on race but ignore religion? Our analysis shows that the substantive content of the RED was, in fact, driven by a small group of legally-oriented NGOs with firmly held preferences. By contrast, most of the government representatives either lacked firm preferences or were generally in favor of the directive. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ethnic and ethno-cultural minorities in Europe, mainly within the EU, rarely contemplate overtly secessionist agendas today. Yet, they display significantly different opinions on some salient features of statehood than their respective majorities. The paper brings evidence for the claims that: (i) People belonging to indigenous ethno-cultural minorities, as well as to immigrant groups, are much more prone to complain about feeling discriminated against, than people belonging to majorities. (ii) Minorities are more convinced than majorities that religious, custom, and language diversity is to the advantage, rather than to the detriment of a country. (iii) Minorities suffer more from an experience of little political efficacy than do their majorities. (iv) Despite a feeling of less political efficacy, minorities in the EU tend to welcome and support the above-national political fora. For long, geographically concentrated minorities have typically fought for decentralization, which provides them with a kind of autonomy. But lately minorities in the EU have grown disposed to delegate decision to the Community level and support further integration. These choices occur in spite of minoritiesÂ’ lower scores on political efficacy measures, when low efficacy is significantly associated with the choice of lower decision levels. The findings presented are based on the European Social SurveyÂ’s 2002 round and the first version of the 2004 ESS round. The amendments to classical statehood patterns supported by minorities in Europe, the continent originating the nation-state model, are deemed relevant for countries of the Third World struggling with more chronic ethnic cleavages. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigrant integration has grown into a major concern in both Europe and the U.S. Long-held national models have been crumbling, as traditional processes and tools of integration grow less and less effective. The seemingly inexorable meshing of national ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 1945 immigration in the core industrial democracies has been increasing. The rise in immigration is a function of market forces (demand-pull and supply-push) and kinship networks, which reduce the transactions costs of moving from one society to another. These economic and sociological forces are the necessary conditions for migration to occur, but the sufficient conditions are legal and political. States must be willing to accept immigration and to grant rights to outsiders. How then do states regulate migration, in the face of economic forces that push them toward greater openness, while security concerns and powerful political forces push them toward closure? States are trapped in a "liberal" paradox -- in order to maintain a competitive advantage, governments must keep their economies and societies open to trade, investment, and migration. But unlike goods, capital, and services, the movement of people involves greater political risks. In both Europe and North America rights are the key to regulating migration, as states strive to fulfill three key functions: maintaining security, building trade and investment regimes, and regulating migration. The garrison state was linked with the trading state in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The twentieth and twenty-first centuries have seen the emergence of the migration state, where regulation of international migration is as important as providing for the security of the state and the economic well being of the citizenry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The modern national state is not able to deal with the issue of undocumented migrants on its own. Within Europe, national states partly ‘delegate’ implementation issues to other actors, like to the supranational level of the EU (networks of officials and ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How can we analyze the nexus between migration, borders and security in Europe? And what does it imply on a conceptual level for the way security is conceived and the way it can be analyzed? This research argues for a turn from the prevalent form of linguistic and event-based security analysis towards practices constitutive of security - the daily production of security through technical and administrative procedures. It looks at the constitutive nature of everyday routines and technological procedures in producing security and allows interpreting governmental technologies as forms of consituting borders. In a time in which Europe is harmonizing its approach to asylum, visa and immigration, the question of how security is produced in the government of migration gains on new salience. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Illegal migration continues to grow in political salience, yet the delineation between legal and illegal migration remains in constant flux. Despite widespread agreement that some kinds of migration are always illegal - migrant trafficking for exploitation, for example - other kinds of migration often switch from legal to illegal status or the reverse as governments continually adjust their migration laws and policies, changing the administrative application of those laws and policies even more frequently. Compounding the uncertainty, different states have significantly different migration policies. Despite the elimination of border checks for travel among their countries, and despite years of efforts to build a common approach, European states continue to pursue strikingly different policies concerning both legal and illegal migration. Agreement on a common definition of "illegal" migrants appears almost as far away as a common European definition of legal migrants. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]