The 21st century has been peppered by socio-political, economic and environmental instability resulting in an influx of immigration across the globe. The European continent has especially experienced a noticeable increase in numbers of both economic migrants and refugees with an estimated nine million of its population belonging to this demographic at the end of 2022. Now more than ever, European states are faced with a shift in what it means to be British, French, German, or Italian. Different integration methods across the continent have proven ineffective in truly absorbing the diverse populations now living within their borders, an issue that has led to a rise in ultra-nationalism, xenophobia, racism and hate crimes in some countries.
Assimilation, the true French way of life
In France, talks of a new immigration bill that would grant a work permit to immigrants with experience in sectors suffering from a shortage of labour have reignited debates on immigration. Many have framed this as a way of responding to the country’s needs while ensuring smooth integration while others have argued that it could lead to more undocumented migrants and oppose encouraging more newcomers in the country.
For the French, who hold a strong attachment to their national identity and values, immigration has recurrently been at the forefront of political debates with integration as the most salient topic. Indeed, a staple of the country’s immigration policies involves complete assimilation, a process which encourages the erasure of newcomers’ established identities in favour of ones that better correspond with their host country.
Throughout its history, France has experienced waves of immigration from countries including Russia, Belgium and Spain. With every wave, a cycle of marginalisation, reluctant acceptance and finally assimilation occurs. Currently, the majority of immigrants in France come from Africa with a notable number of individuals from old French colonies such as Morocco and Algeria. An increase in refugees from Afghanistan, Syria and other war-torn nations has also been noted.
Given France’s reliance on assimilation, it is no surprise that a significant barrier for acceptance of this wave of immigrants is their noticeable differences in appearance, culture, and religion. Headstrong in its concept of secularism and ‘colour-blindness’, France seems to be having more trouble moving on to the last stages of this cycle when confronted with populations more distinct than their EU neighbours.
This is no new dilemma. Despite their long history in the country xenophobia and the consequent segregation of several immigrant communities has occurred. Paris and its greater metropolitan area has been heavily criticised for its ethno-racial segregation that pushes immigrants and non-white French nationals to the outskirts of the city.
Multiculturalism, the pros and cons
Just across the channel, the United Kingdom (UK) faces a drastic rise in the number of migrants attempting to enter the country from mainland Europe. Discussions of stricter restrictions on illegal migrations are rife within the political world. Last April, previous Home Secretary Priti Patel’s controversial plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda was intercepted by the European Court of Human Rights just as the first flight was to leave the country. This month, a new bill proposed by the current Home Secretary Suella Braverman aims to deter the use of illegal migration channels by denying individuals entering the country illegally the right to seek asylum, stay in the country, and benefit from the modern slavery protection programme.
With integration attitudes that differ from its mainland neighbour, the UK has seen a growing number of people travelling to its shores from France by small boats since the start of the pandemic. Several factors can be cited to explain the preference for seeking asylum in the UK as opposed to its mainland neighbour. Familiarity with the country’s spoken language is often highlighted along with reunification with family members and crucially, better living conditions. As seen in London where one can find an array of communities participating in their distinct cultural activities, the UK’s position on integration largely revolves around multiculturalism.
The UK approaches the integration of its immigrant population through a two-way process. While most individuals are still required to undergo testing before gaining citizenship which includes cultural awareness, newcomers are not necessarily required to adopt British norms as their own to be integrated into the country. Additionally, cultural norms and traditions from immigrant communities are sometimes incorporated into British society as is seen with cuisine for example.
Partially driven by a lack of control of its borders, the UK has recently left the European Union allowing it to be more assertive in its stance on immigration. Despite its multiculturalist approach to integration, the UK still faces issues of rejection and segregation of its immigrant populations. An undefined British culture has led the country into a dilemma in which no one feels at home, and everyone feels threatened.
Even with the stark differences between France’s assimilation and the UK’s multiculturalism, the countries both face growing tensions from the different communities within their borders. While one struggles with a lack of a defined cultural identity, the other suffers from one that is too rigid. The divide this has resulted in is best seen in political trends and attitudes. In France, the far-right and far-left have gained momentum leaving their central counterparts that had previously dominated the ground behind. In Britain, political trust is steadily waning, and polarisation similar to that being observed in France is being reported.
Cosmopolitanism
In the face of these bleak outlooks, cosmopolitanism might very well be the answer to creating more coherent societies. As explained above by Professor Appiah, cosmopolitanism promotes the notion of global citizenship. By allowing for multiple levels of identity — individual, national, and most important global, it breaks down state boundaries and encourages a global moral responsibility. Within this ideology, one is allowed to define oneself as one wishes but multiculturalism acknowledges the ties held by humanity that supersede origin, race, religion and more. In consequence, it also highlights the important differences seen within societies as enrichment and promotes toleration and openness to others. These attitudes are in line with standards such as the United Nations’ universal declaration of human rights.
Adopting a cosmopolitan attitude would allow for smoother integration as shared understanding between populations would be established while conserving the existing identities of both nationals and newcomers. Additionally, a mindset of global responsibility would eliminate the ‘us versus them’ approach that is commonly seen where integration is needed. Increased empathy of nationals, much like that which has been seen during the Ukraine crisis, would not only make for a better environment but also would decrease sentiments of worthlessness, fear, and being lost seen in refugees and migrants.
Mainstream cosmopolitanism differs from multiculturalism in so much as it does tend to advocate a measure of shared identity in fields such as integrated education. The Northern Irish approach of almost complete segregation of education does not gel in a cosmopolitan universe.
Cosmopolitanism, regardless of all its potential, will not be able to magically address all of Europe’s immigration issues, but it may very well be the step needed to move towards improvement of integration. When considering the case of France and the UK, it is clear to see that cosmopolitanism would restore the considerable damage that has been done through inadequate policies and lack of consideration.
