German immigration policy is one of the most contentious issues in the unified German politics and society. Unified Germany’s population of ca. 82 millions includes nearly 8 million foreign residents. Politically and culturally, however, it is struggling to deal with its reality as a nation of immigration. Strong resistance exists in post-war Germany, the biggest nation of global immigration after the USA, to its multi-cultural reality, an attitude rooted in the country’s complex historical and political circumstances of inward-migration.

More

German immigration policy is one of the most contentious issues in the unified German politics and society. Unified Germany’s population of ca. 82 millions includes nearly 8 million foreign residents. Politically and culturally, however, it is struggling to deal with its reality as a nation of immigration. Strong resistance exists in post-war Germany, the biggest nation of global immigration after the USA, to its multi-cultural reality, an attitude rooted in the country’s complex historical and political circumstances of inward-migration. The “jus-sanguinis”, key principle of the country’s citizenship law has inevitably excluded permanent or long-term non-ethnic German foreign migrants from being “German”.

Over the last fifty years, the country had to first cope with the influx of a great number of historical and political migrants such as soviet-Jews, millions of German minorities from Eastern Europe (Aussiedler) and asylum seekers into the reunited Germany. Jews from the former USSR and Eastern European ethnic Germans came to postwar Germany under an exceptional law called “Bundesvertriebenen- und Fluechtlingsgesetzl” -Law for German Expatriated and Refugees. Until very recently German citizenship was granted based on descent (‘ius sanguinis‘); returning “ethnic” Germans included those expelled from Poland and the Czechoslovak Republic after World War II, those fleeing East Germany before the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961 and those „migrating back“ from the various parts of Russia before and after the collapse of the Soviet bloc. Until recently they were granted German citizenship practically upon crossing the German border. Their numbers not only swelled national immigration statistics and government expenditures, but also contributed to the emergence of intra-German tensions.

Although post-war Germany took full political responsibility for their arrival and settlement and they were German citizens in legal terms, this has not impeded fully that the everyday experience of German refugees and returning Germans has been that often of discrimination. With respect to legal treatment and immigration status, those migrants are fundamentally differentiated from the “Gastarbeiter” (guest worker) category.

Since 1955, date of the first bilateral agreement with the Italian government for the “import” of workers for its industries, foreign labour starts to flow within Germany. With the construction of the Berlin Wall this trend increases dramatically as in 1960-1961 West Germanys sees its flow of East German workers stopped. Bilateral agreements are signed with a number of countries including Greece, Morocco and Turkey. With the oil crisis of 1973, import of foreign labour is stopped and the political discourse aims more clearly towards a stop to inclusion of foreigners within West Germany. The number of foreign residents, although, continues, albeit at a slower rate, to grow  mostly, due to family reunion and to the birth of relatively large numbers of children to migrant families.

The 1989 opening of the borders with East Germany with the arrival of thousands of East German citizens seeking work and settlement contributed to fuel a renewed reaction by certain sectors within society.

In 1990 the “ius sanguinis” rule is to some extent relaxed with the New Alien Act whereby young, second generation migrants can claim German citizenship after several years of residency in Germany at least. This follows an increasing attention towards integration of second generation migrants and the realization that family reunification and long-term settlement of migrants are a non-reversible reality. In 1999, despite strong opposition especially from conservative local governments, a carefully limited “ius solis” is coupled to the rule on ius sanguinis as criteria for granting citizenship.

In the early 1990s, in particular in coincidence with the refugee flows from former Yugoslavia disrupted by civil war, the attention focuses on diminishing pressure from Asylum seekers. Legislation aiming at stopping the number of asylum applications (and granted status of refugees) as well as settlement of Aussiedler catalyze the public’s attention. Important sectors of society react with hostility, and often with exnophobic and racist phenomena, to increasing numbers of asylum seekers (despite the overall low percentages of refugee status granting, in 1991-1992 3 to 7% of applications)

Specific measures and policies have been set up for the related issue of trafficking. In 1997, for instance, the Federal Government set up a country-wide Working Group on Trafficking in Women (the Federal Ministries dealing with the trafficking in women, the Länder, the Federal Office for Criminal Investigation and non-governmental organizations) which works on the great complexity of the problems concerning trafficking in women and aims at coordinated policy solutions.

In the last five years of the 90s, in coincidence with a long-lasting period of economic expansion, Germany has encouraged immigration of skilled and socio-economically beneficial foreign labour force and has tried to regulate this type of immigration through a modernised immigration law. The 2000 Immigration Act (Draft bill aimed at controlling and restricting immigration, regulating the stay of foreigners and at integration EU citizens and foreigners (non-EU citizens -Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung: Entwurf eines Gesetz zur Streurung und Begrenzung der Zuwanderung) is oriented towards a “brain gain” approach which potentially seeks mutual interests of both the receiving and sending states. The new immigration law which was supposed to be come into the force from January 2003, was however blocked by the Supreme Court in December 2002 on the ground of irregular proceedings in the process of proposal and approval of  the law. Politically, centre-right federal states’ governments voted against the bill sponsored and proposed by the centre-left government. The stop to the law although evidently problematic, including at political level for the proposing socialdemocratic government, has not led to a rethink of immigration policy. The law is expected  to be proposed again to Parliament substantially unchanged.

Germany might expect more immigration as the EU expands, as Poland  and other Eastern Europeans migrate to Germany under freedom of movement rules. However, Germany and Austria are against immediate freedom of movement from accession countries, arguing that too many migrants might come too soon. A compromise, similar to the one which was adopted at the accession of Portugal and Spain, has been reached, whereby Poles and other nationals of countries acceding to the EU in 2004 will not enjoy the same rights to freedom of movement as other EU citizens in Germany for at least two years (2005-06). After this two-year wait, the current EU members could individually prevent freedom of movement for another three years (2007-09), and then a further two years, for a maximum seven-year wait (2010-11).

Hide