The unemployment rate among migrants (24.4) is excessively high compared to the same indicator for the native population (10%). The reasons are “low level of education” and insufficient language proficiency, “including among highly qualified personnel.” Researchers are particularly concerned about the integration problems of second- and third-generation immigrants: young representatives of diasporas are three times more likely to drop out of school before completing their education than their German peers; only one in ten manages to obtain a secondary school certificate.
Every eighth resident of Germany, according to the document's authors, is a foreigner. That is, born outside the country. This statistics differs somewhat from the commonly accepted one, since it is based not on citizenship but on origin; moreover, it attempts to encompass with its all-seeing eye a group of persons not previously considered “pure” foreigners – late resettlers. It is they, according to OSCE experts, who considerably spoiled the analysis results: if in 1991, 75% of male resettlers were permanently employed, then in 2004 – only 56%.
“The prolonged economic crisis hits foreigners harder than native-born residents,” says one of the researchers, Thomas Liebig. “In an era of cyclical fluctuations, demand for low-skilled labor decreases significantly.” The situation is equally unfavorable for German Turks, who also saw their employment rate deteriorate by 20% during the 1990s.
The sad figures characterizing the current situation in the country should be perceived as “a signal screaming about the need to radically change the paradigm of immigration management,” believes Maria Böhmer, recently appointed as the Federal Government Commissioner for Foreigners' Affairs. Apparently, having familiarized herself with the mentioned document, she launched a series of interviews in which she spoke unflatteringly about the “multi-culti” policy practiced by the “red-green” government: “The idea of parallel societies is unproductive. People who come to us must speak our language, know our history, recognize our justice system, play by our rules... German history is rich in positive examples of integration – let us recall the Huguenots or Polish miners in the Ruhr region. I expect from newcomers a willingness to find a home here and accept our culture.”
In the name of increasing the efficiency of the German economy, Maria Böhmer calls for focusing on the admission of highly qualified migrants. Her thought is understandable against the background of data recently presented by the Brussels sociological center Carim, according to which 54% of migrants with higher education choose the USA and Canada as their pilgrimage destination, while 87% of those arriving in Europe are people with minimal education or no education at all. The government commissioner reminds foreigners of the need to “consciously follow state directives on attending educational courses” and almost repeats the words of French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, spoken after the recent riots whose main actors were foreign teenagers, about “selective immigration.”
According to the authors of the OSCE report, saving the drowning is the work of the drowning themselves. Instead of general long-term language courses for all foreigners, they advise focusing more on “intensive courses in specific specialties.” Studying professional terminology instead of global linguistic training is the key to rapid integration into working life, as the example of Sweden shows, and, accordingly, a mutual plus for both sides – the newly arrived and the labor market eternally in need of personnel. That is, the economy in both cases turns out to be the cornerstone. Only in Maria Böhmer's vision it is the victim, while from the point of view of Brussels scientists it is the culprit of poor integration of foreigners.
The sacred cow of economic management also became a stumbling block at the meeting of European interior ministers. “Management of migration processes must remain in the purview of national states, since the influx of foreigners directly affects the economic situation in each country,” declared Wolfgang Schäuble, thereby expressing his decisive “no” to the European Commission's plans to create a unified European immigration system.
Incidentally, Schäuble, who returned to his old job after 14 years, managed to impress his colleagues with his knowledge of the immigration issue (the result of his participation in many years of discussions on the relevant federal law). Reproaching the ministers for paying excessive attention to the penetration of refugees from Africa into the countries of the Mediterranean basin, he reminded them of the danger of illegal entry into EU countries by “shady characters” from Eastern and Southeastern Europe. The law on restricting and managing migration, in force in Germany since January 1, 2005, failed to solve this problem, and therefore, as Nicolas Sarkozy put it, “our task is to protect ourselves from those who are needed by no one in the world.”
Meanwhile, Schäuble's regional subordinates took a step towards each other, having almost agreed on granting residence permits to refugees. As Hesse's Interior Minister Volker Bouffier promised, a document will soon be submitted for consideration to the conference of ministers, according to which a permanent visa will become available to persons “with Duldung status, who speak German, support themselves and their families through their own work, and comply with the laws.” Such people, quite possibly, will number 10-15% of refugees who have lived in Germany for decades. It remains unclear, however, how a refugee without an official work permit is supposed to support himself.
Whoever does not fulfill these conditions is subject to “systematic deportation.” Since, as Buffier said, “we are not entitled to further overfill the cup of our people’s patience.” A people still not ready to agree that Germany is a country of immigrants, even in the face of the fact that every eighth resident is a foreigner. By the way, this is the second indicator in the world, second only to the United States.