Reinventing the Nation: Germany’s Post-Unification Drive Towards Becoming a ‘Country of Immigration’

Abstract

Germany’s leading role in responding to the current refugee crisis in Europe reflects a development of its approach towards migration and cultural diversity that would have been difficult to imagine 27 years ago. German unification was a decisive trigger for changing the country’s sense of nationhood and the popular narrative of what constitutes modes of legitimate belonging and inclusion. The hypothesis of this article is that over the two and a half decades Germany has shifted the coding of its national identity from an ethno-cultural framing to one that is primarily based on civic political principles. A comparison between framing strategies of the political elite in two periods (1990–95 and 2010–15) serves as an empirical indicator for the scope and nature of this transformation. The article identifies four factors to explain what has instigated this change and what is driving the long-term socio-political transformation of German society as a result of growing migration and cultural diversity: (a) the demographic change and transformation of civil society through migration; (b) the growing relevance of European communal belonging; (c) the dynamic of competitive party politics; and (d) the significance of the subnational level in addressing migration and diversity matters.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Oliver Schmidtke is a Professor in the Departments of Political Science and History at the University of Victoria where he also holds the Jean Monnet Chair in European History and Politics. He currently serves as the director of the Centre for Global Studies in Victoria. He received his PhD from the European University Institute in Florence and has been a JF Kennedy Fellow at Harvard University, a visiting scholar at Humboldt University Berlin, a F. Braudel Senior Fellow at the European University Institute and a Marie Curie Fellow at Hamburg University. His research interests are in the fields of the political sociology and politics of migration, citizenship, nationalism and the governance of migration and integration in Europe and Canada. His most recent book publication is: Nohl, A., Schittenhelm, K., Schmidtke, O. and Weiss, A. Work in Transition. Cultural Capital and Highly Skilled Migrants’ Passages into the Labour Market, University of Toronto Press, 2014.

Notes

1 27 Jan. 2016; http://www.bundestag.de/htdocs_e/documents/textarchive/speech-klueger/403862 (accessed 12 Nov. 2016).

2 J. Herf, Divided Memory: the Nazi Past in the Two Germanys (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997).

3 M. Fulbrook, German National Identity after the Holocaust (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999).

4 See: K. Eder, B. Giesen, O. Schmidtke, and D. Tambini, Collective Identities in Action. A Sociological Approach (London: Ashgate. 2002).

5 H. Bauder, Immigration Dialectic: Imagining Community, Economy, and Nation (Toronto: UFT Press 2013). H. Bauder and J. Semmelroggen, ‘Immigration and Imagination of Nationhood in the German Parliament’, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 15/1 (2009), pp. 1–26.

6 C. Hess, ‘What can co-ethnic migrants tell us about ethnic visions of the national self?’, Journal of Comparative Research on Sociology and Anthropology 2/1 (2011), pp. 103–33.

7 See: J. Halfmann, ‘Two Discourses of Citizenship in Germany. The Difference Between Public Debate and Administrative Practice’, Citizenship Studies 1/3 (1997), pp. 305–22. J. Palmowski, ‘In Search of the German Nation: Citizenship and the Challenge of Integration’, Citizenship Studies 12/6 (2008), pp. 547–63.

8 See: A. Kaya, ‘Special Issue: The Fiftieth Anniversary of Migration from Turkey to Germany: Introduction: (Re)Considering the Last Fifty Years of Migration and Current Immigration Policies in Germany’, German Politics and Society 107 31/2 (2013), pp. 1–12.

9 As Kurthen (1995) observes, over the past two centuries Germany’s sense of nationhood has seen periods of inclusion and exclusion reflecting the ongoing redrawing of its borders and territorial reach. H. Kurthen, ‘Germany at the Crossroads: National Identity and the Challenges of Immigration’, The International Migration Review 29/4 (1995), pp. 914–38.

10 P. Hogwood, ‘Citizenship Controversies in Germany: The Twin Legacy of Völkisch Nationalism and the Alleinvertretungsanspruch’, German Politics 9/3 (2000), pp. 125–44.

11 These figures are made available by Germany’s Federal Statistical Office. It is worth mentioning that fewer than 3 per cent were actually granted asylum status. On the political dynamic generated by the influx of these migrants see: H. Adam, ‘Xenophobia, Asylum Seekers, and Immigration Policies in Germany’, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 21 (2015), pp. 446–64.

12 The dictum that “Germany is not a country of immigration” was explicitly mentioned in the Coalition Agreement of 1982 (between the CDU/CSU and the liberal FDP) and it remained the position of the Chancellor Kohl until 1998.

13 See: G. Goodman, ‘The Politics and Policies of Immigration in Germany: A Rearview Look at the Makings of a “Country of Immigration’, German Politics and Society 25/4 (2007), pp. 99–110.

14 D. Miller, On Nationality (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995).

15 R. Brubaker, Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992).

16 R. Hansen and J. Koehler, ‘Issue Definition, Political Discourse and the Politics of Nationality Reform in France and Germany’, European Journal of Political Research 44 (2005), pp.623–44.

17 See: F. Dell’Olio, The Europeanization of Citizenship Between the Ideology of Nationality, Immigration and European Identity (Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 2005).

18 See: O. Schmidtke, ‘Towards a cosmopolitan and inclusive European identity? Negotiating immigrants’ inclusion and exclusion in the new Europe’, in A. Salvatore, O. Schmidtke, and H.J. Trenz (eds.), Rethinking the Public Sphere Through Transnationalizing Processes: Europe and Beyond (New York: Palgrave, 2013), pp. 132–55.

19 M. Kohli, ‘The Battlegrounds of European Identity’, European Societies 2/2 (2000), pp. 113–37.

20 A total of 218 documents were coded for the period of 1990–99 and 322 documents for the period 2010–15. Among the 540 documents used, 362 were part of parliamentary proceedings, 178 consisted of other forms of party-specific elite discourse. In the two figures reporting on the distribution of frames, the number stated in the graphs (y-axis) refers to the number of documents – as the basic unit of analysis – reflecting a particular frame.

21 As of the 1990 elections, the West German Green party lost its seats in the Bundestag and was represented only by eight MPs from the East German Alliance 90s / Greens, hence the relatively small number of documents available for the Green party for the first period. Similarly, the liberal FDP failed to secure 5per cent of the votes required to be seated in the Bundestag after the 2013 elections.

22 The fairly low numbers for this third type also reflect my decision to code a document under this rubric only if there was an explicit reference to a European or cosmopolitan identity.

23 See: O. Schmidtke, ‘Between Populist Rhetoric and Pragmatic Policy Making: The Normalization of Migration as an Electoral Issue in German Politics’, Acta Politica 50 (2015), pp. 379–98.

24 U. Davy. and A. Weber (eds.), Paradigmenwechsel in Einwanderungsfragen? (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2006).

25 See: S. Green, ‘Much Ado About Not-Very-Much? Assessing Ten Years of German Citizenship Reform’, Citizenship Studies 16/2 (2012), pp. 173–88. J. Mushaben, The Changing Faces of Citizenship: Integration and mobilization among Ethnic Minorities in Germany (Providence/Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2008).

26 See: http://www.cdu.de/ (accessed 5 April 2016).

27 On the controversies fuelling this debate see: S. Manz, ‘Constructing a Normative National Identity: The Leitkultur Debate in German, 2000/2001’, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 25/5-6 (2004), pp. 481–96. To understand why this term provoked such a heated public debate, one has to be aware of the fact that it is somewhat reminiscent of Nazi theories of racial supremacy. For a critical analysis, see: H. Pautz,’ The Politics of Identity in Germany: the Leitkultur Debate’, Race and Class 46/4 (2005), pp. 39–52.

28 See http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/17/angela-merkel-german-multiculturalism-failed (accessed 15 Jan. 2016).

29 See: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-world-from-berlin-merkel-s-rhetoric-in-integration-debate-is-inexcusable-a-723702.html (accessed 23 Feb. 2016).

30 Data from the 2014 micro census, German Federal Statistical Office. Germany’s Federal Statistical Office defines this group as follows: ‘the population group with a migration background consists of all persons who have immigrated into the territory of today’s Federal Republic of Germany after 1949, and of all foreigners born in Germany and all persons born in Germany who have at least one parent who immigrated into the country or was born as a foreigner in Germany’. (see: https://www.destatis.de/EN/FactsFigures/SocietyState/Population/MigrationIntegration/PersonsMigrationBackground/Current.html (accessed 14 Aug. 2016).

31 S. Vertovec, ‘Super-diversity and its Implications’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 30/6 (2007), pp. 1024–54.

32 See: S. Green, ‘Germany: A Changing Country of Immigration’, German Politics 22/3, (2013), pp. 333–51.

33 P. Connolly, ‘What now for the contact hypothesis? Towards a new research agenda’, Race, Ethnicity and Education 3/2 (2000), pp. 69–193.

34 The report and additional details of the 2016 study can be found at: https://www.sinus-institut.de/en/sinus-solutions/sinus-jugendmilieus/

35 See: O. Abali, ‘German Public Opinion on Immigration and Integration. Report by the Migration Policy Institute’, (2009), available from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/german-public-opinion-immigration-and-integration (accessed 14 Feb. 2016).

36 Joining neo-Nazi and right wing groups can also be interpreted as a form of youth culture in Eastern Germany and revolt against the GDR legacy of the parent generation.

37 For the complex relationships between national identity, migration, and demographic change see: M. Behr, ‘An American in Berlin: Reflections on the German Demographic Challenge, Immigration, and National Identity’, Population Research and Policy Review 25/5-6 (2003), pp. 465–77.

38 See: A. Favell, Eurostars and Eurocities. Free Movement and Mobility in an Integrating Europe (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2008).

39 L. Rensmann, ‘The Reluctant Cosmopolitanization of European Party Politics: The Case of Germany’, German Politics and Society 32/2 (2014), pp. 59–85.

40 See: K.H. Jarausch (ed.), After Unity: Reconfiguring German Identities (Providence: Berghahn Books, 1997).

41 T. Triadafilopoulos, Becoming Multicultural: Immigration and the Politics of Membership in Canada and Germany (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2012).

42 See: B. Lieberman, ‘From Economic Miracle to Standort Deutschland: Exchanging Economic Metaphors in the Federal Republic of Germany’, German Politics and Society 18/2 (2010), pp. 30–65.

43 See: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/youth/Source/Resources/Forum21/Issue_No10/N10_National_integration_plan_en.pdf (accessed 10 March, 2016).

44 See: O. Schmidtke and A. Zaslove, ‘Why Regions Matter in Immigrant Integration Policies: North Rhine-Westphalia and Emilia-Romagna in Comparative Perspective’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 39/10 (2014), pp. 36–57.

45 See: K.R. Korte, Wahlen in NRW: Kommunalwahl – Landtagswahl – Bundestagswahl – Europawahl (Schwalbach: Wochenschau-Verlag, 2009).

46 See: B. Donovan, Intersectionality and the Substantive Representation of Migrant Interests in Germany’, German Politics & Society 30/4 (2012), pp. 23–44.