Welcome to fetch songs the podcast series of the foundation for European Progressive studies find out more about us on Bess - fear of dot you. Music. Hello this is FEPS talks the podcast series of the foundation for European progress is studies my name is Lance to under and the secretary-general FEPS and I have the pleasure today to meet in Berlin dr. Stephen Mangan and with a member of the FEPS Progressive migration group.
But more importantly as senior fellow in Berlin of the German Institute for international and security affairs as many of you probably know as WP dr. Anand you have a longer-term overview because you started to work on migration. For over three decades ago how do you see the evolution of this debate. But also the policies in the German context and international one because you have also been working with many International organizations.
Yeah let me start with a change I think in the 1980s still Germany was a really reluctant country of immigration. And the wording was at that time Deutschland is kind unbundling slant Germany is no country of immigration despite all empirical counter-evidence and despite and in a complete let's say a historical way to interpret German history Germany Hayden long and uninterrupted migration history from the 19th century. When the first workers for the coal mines were recruited.
Then during the Weimar Republic in the 1920s when also labor demand was large through the Nazi time of course and. Also then through the post-war area and the Reconstruction area of the 1950s but public awareness in the 1980s was still. That migration started with a guest worker recruitment in the mid. 50s despite migrants had been recruited for nearly 100 years at that time so I think.
Migration has in all these these periods profoundly changed German Society but nevertheless there was in the 1980s this perception of being no immigration Country and then when I started to study political science from Saul m home came to power in France this is socialist government and he had a reform agenda that time and he proposed to develop
he said France has already become life on strike hello Vance was seen as a Multicultural Society and so on and that should be was to be promoted by government this is perception and at that time that was such a stark contrast to the perception in Germany of being no country of immigration that I became
interest in studying migration migration of Ferris I should was a start point that that's a very interesting companies in between France and Germany because I remember the late 1990s when France actually won the football World Cup. And some people like Daniel cohn-bendit attributed this to the Multicultural approach of France too puts a football as opposed to Germany and that time.
Yeah it's important differences and quite thrilling as real challenge also a research challenge because migration research at that time was not developed as it is today which is also a consequence of of our migration history now to make the circle I think Germany has really opened up since the 1980s, his become that it has a migration history and over time also migration topics have profoundly changed we had
initially this debate on integration of guest workers that was in the 1970s and we had as you member 1973 recruitment stop for guest workers due to the economic crisis at these years and then the whole debate was on how to integrate. Dos was it because they did not return as supposed by the buzzer and Abstract as in couldn't stop but decided to stay.
Knowing that they would never have a chance to return to Germany if they would leave Germany so that was a counter content intended effect at the time and the policy debate and the research also was on the integration of guest workers.
And then in the 1990s we had this massive inflow of refugees after the awards in former Yugoslavia and debate heated debate on Asylum policy and the German Constitution which had then was done in 1993 restricted the right to Asylum so heated debates on Asylum policy we had a wave of racism and anti-foreigner attacks at that time with learning Asylum homes and so on will you. Doc chapter in post-war history and we have now again a change because we have now a kind of parallel debate between.
Of two topics the first is is our labor shortages and the need of massively investing in labor recruitment on the one hand. And on the other hand the increasing number of refugees especially after the Ukrainian War. So this is how the political debates shifted in his ended Ikea periods of this one would you say that as the migration profile of the country started to change the policy debate broaden up from a narrowly economic one to also more social and political.
Yes of course because the first debates I remember we're surely on the economic sense of Labor migration and, as I mentioned we had in 1969 1970 we had an economic crisis and then there was a huge debate and dominated by economists on does it make sense to import labor or not and this has completely changed and with the integration debate in the 1980s all these these issues of what has changed in society due to immigration and what is necessary to support because
schooling and I housing and all these issues Health Care came up in the 9th so. Yeah you were right Germany opened up indicates and and has become has really become and under.
Chancellor Merkel it was really forward Germany has become a country of immigration now as you mentioned Chancellor Medica 2015 is clearly a turning point as you explained there was obviously a long history of immigration it was still before but I think European societies experience the 2015 Refugee in flew as a crisis Rejoice O change the broader European discourse and the opinions are probably still polarized
between you know some people saying this has been a success because we got will commence cool tool. And that's what open this integration on the other hand many other people being critical about the many failures than starting from lampedusa and other similar situations and dozens sometimes, died unnecessarily on the seat and without being able to reach the European Shores how do you draw the balance.
You're absolutely right 19 2015 2016 was a decisive moment in German post-war history and view member as you remember we initially in 2015 had let's say abroad. Acceptance of those who came as refugees and there was a lot of help.
Organised by civil society and so on you know you remember all these things and it was really backed by strongly by the Mercury government and de pushed also public opinion in this in this direction when lesson we can learn, pretty see makes a difference how pretty see approaches these challenges and her famous speech drawers or saying was Bischoff and US yeah we can do it.
And I think that's really it really changed public or at least influenced public perception but on the other hand so then with the rising numbers it became clear that there are several challenges public support decreased due to housing problems cooling problems and so on and look ahead really difficult to find support and this is still transferred toward Durham politics today there is a cleavage also in the City Christian Democratic Union between those who are
Chrome worker and those who are against mercker and they're still deep cleavage in the in the party so at the beginning I would say many many supported this what you called becomes culture. But it was also. At that time right at the beginning strong resistance from at least a part of German society and over time this reluctancy was exploited or perhaps also reinforced by a populists.
Pointing towards a challenges in the points that are not okay and not working and so on and that led to the rise of the right-wing populist party IFD alternative referred to as lat. And I said before they had existed before but since then they mainly focused on migration right yeah that's right for you so that was the main reason why they became so strong and the recent polls indicate that they are 20% Which is incredible for Germany we had never, hey dude.
Right-wing extremists are to these figures and that make politicians of the other parties will be nervous which also a little bit explains the recent support of German government for. For the Diaz CS reform and so on I think assessment in German politics and policy was a split but I think there was some at least some confidence in German policy and ability to act. In contrast and it is important for our contest in contrast to EU policies right so there was really really weak.
Trust in public in German public in the EU Commission in the ability of the European. Asylum system and units on this is obvious from the start that the real solution to this crisis can only be European. Because the bird is shedding has to be European and basically two types of countries came under pressure one was the so-called destination countries like Germany and Sweden.
And then the entry countries which is basically Greece Italy Hungary depending on people arriving on sea or on land yeah I mean it's Story the history goes goes through to be back into the into the 1990s because at that time Germany was the country that. Really pressed for the Dublin system yes.
Because at that time when history member because it's so interesting from our perspective today at that time Germany had many many Asylum Seekers from former Yugoslavia it's a country of Entry because Clifford the membership of the Austria and Poland Germany was the country of Entry Asylum Seekers came to Germany and not as a external border you countries and that was the reason why the the external border countries supported this idea of Dublin because at that time the head,
how do we any Asylum Seekers Etc little bit about that's aligned so Germany was the one with many refugees the external border countries not and it was that made it easy for them to accept the Dublin regulation which would be from a today perspectives against their own interests yes so. But did his completely changed now the flows go directly to the external border countries and everybody in Germany knows that Dublin system is has not worked where it's not still it's not working anymore.
And especially that there is no solidarity between EU member State why is it so hot is it because of migration itself or is it because this is part of the broader economic cultural social question what makes it so difficult because in principle the formula would not be so complicated, the difficulty is that the interest of the member states are so different and. Depends on the it's a on the structure of immigration I mean we had countries with.
Let's say before the Ukrainian War we had countries with hardly any immigrants about Poland or some some other Eastern European countries which immigration rates are immigration share in the population between 1 and 2%.
And we ate and the other is the other hand countries like like Luxembourg with 35 or I don't know how much percent so this is different the structure of the immigration is different in some countries you have Mary Sam was seldom Seekers and as we ignore economic migrants some European countries are countries of immigration in the like Poland was for many years for the union stew and some countries are pure countries of immigration.
And some eyebrows I mean there's so huge different differences in national interests that it is hardly unbelievable that a common policy would be. Would be possible I think that's the main reason and immigration history plays a role whether you have Colonial ties or not.
Like France or Spain and certain structure of immigration and stemming from these Colonial ties you countries as so diverse with regard to her to migration and it has been overlooked for many years I think ironically of course all European countries are faced with the same. It's a macro or micro challenges long-term long-term challenges, all you countries are in demographic terms shrinking and and aging.
And especially the Eastern European countries so they should have interest in opening up for migration. Paradoxically some of these shrinking societies and the most opposed to immigration like. Hungry for example yeah of course and then there are questions of national identity and what constitutes that national identity is that like Hungary something.
Special or is it and also historical experiences how long have you been exposed to immigration and pressures and to immigration that all plays a role but.
In the end interests are really different highly different between the member states and it makes it so difficult to end of course we should not forget geographical exposure is amended that makes it obviously now a big difference for the countries are those who suffer the most can I ask you about the pandemic because depending obviously had a great effect on migration it basically brought it into holes at least for a while 2020 and short period of time.
Is it going to be seen as an episode which will be you know forgotten and washed out or does it have some kind of lasting. Legacy or lessors regarding migration yeah I think also depend Deming was a kind of turning point in some regards I think at that time in 90 2019 2020 independently came up there was no no good alternative to closing borders because that was something new the first really Mega pandemic.
And we had no experience before how to cope with this type of Mega challenge and at that time it was also unclear how dangerous the virus could be you remember the scenes from from Northern Italy which is all this conference yes and so and it was feared but it did so at that time I think there was no no good alternative or at least nobody had a good good idea how to could be good could replace product closings and Mobility restrictions.
I guess I would say that was the right decision at the time. But meanwhile I think we have more events picture of the of the pandemic risks and we have refined our options as our options then simply blocking internal International Mobility is for example it is to use in the China so we are different options and there are some lessons learned I think in the first lesson is that as a immense costs, of a kind of lockdown or the pandemic generally economically and socially.
Especially with regard to International Mobility now we have some some figures on the repercussions of the pandemic on remittances sent back the countries of origin and a lot of information statement makes clear how how immense all these costs have been and especially for migrants and refugees and migrants fear
cut opportunities for income generation refugees from protection and so on I think the second lesson learned is of the pandemic is that these cost of immobilization must be somehow perceived. More strongly and did it that there must be more. Solidarity also with countries with other countries affected and the European ones we had this debate concerning wreck signs and distribution of medical equipment and so on.
So And I think that is a lesson that it is not possible just to fight a pandemic within National borders but you need International support and perhaps did certain lesson learned. Is that we did you need something like a new international verification system you International. System for Global Mobility because Global Mobility can easily that is what we learned can easily be interrupted.
Was immense costs we have now still a kind of splitted Mobility system we have high Mobility International Mobility for, for people from industrialized countries and we have low Mobility opportunities for for the rest of the world, that must be changed because at least I'm convinced that migration and international ability is a strong economic power. If it is so very regulated and documented of course.
But we have no let's say International trust system for verification of visa and of some other types and that is something we did it's a construction site and we have to approach it and perhaps that's also a lesson from the pandemic it's a little bit far away but I think it will become more and more important in future as you mentioned the diverse experience of different countries at the time,
depending could also otherwise the migration group organized by FEPS is bringing together Europeans with Africans I think everybody is convinced at least those participating in this that you have better policy can only emerge if there is a dialogue. But how would you specify the potential benefits of an exchange.
Between people experts in different continents which can contribute to the Improvement of European policies I think the the importance of a DOT of dialogue especially with with Africa cannot be overestimated I think I'm deeply convinced that any progress party C cannot be based only on a European perspective that is impossibly reason is. That I would say that it's one of the this European perspective is one of the reasons. Why European politics have not been more successful in the past.
Just to mention all the commission ideas of Mobility Partnerships or.
Migration Partnerships only not new ideas we discuss it for at 20 years or so but there was never a really good working, your partnership and for me the reason the main reason is that these Partnerships were designed solely from from a European perspective that the interests of the partner countries we're not really taking into account, and I think that's the main reason why they just simply do not work properly and we should learn from from these experiences and was the new Partnerships and.
I think this is core to any successful migration policy be it migration policy or Asylum policy to have Partnerships with. Countries of origin or at least with Transit countries on so on to establish such Partnerships you should listen to those who are also. Part of this of disagreements and that means in this case to the to our African colleagues so I think that's absolutely necessary there's.
No way to go back to this sort of European, one-sided approach to migration policy its on Partnerships that's that's the main message with our Partnerships no effective policies right this is an absolutely essential point I assume when experts come together to improve policy they bring together different ideas to the table do you have a favorite idea which you bring to the table in order to. Improve maybe also to humanize or make more effective European migration policies.
Yeah there I mean a lot of good proposals also discussed now I would say Partnerships are as I as I said I from my perspective the most important thing. Migration field for example and we have year also in Germany as in other countries to debate debate on brain drain. So we have a sharply increasing need of workers not just.
High school but also low-skilled that is new in the journal debate you inside and you don't rebate if you also need middle middle level and lower qualified workers but we need them desperately. And especially for is for skilled labor you have immediately the debate on brain drain yes. And to have really a sustainable policy you.
Must think about training opportunities in these countries I think that's that's the way we should we should we should walk into a setup training facilities in these countries not just import. Skilled workers who have been trained in these countries and then we have a debate. Is there a shortage in this partner country on nurses on doctors and how to cake no I think it's a wrong way we should set up. Training facilities and.
And trained for example nurses but also many many other people for working in our countries and, I'd say the best solution would be if. That would be combined with additional training for skilled labor for the partner country so kind of debit trick system, there's some ideas on the table, developed by the center for Global development in Washington extremely difficult to to implement such proposals but.
I think that's the best way because then we were if you don't have to discuss about brain grain anymore for migrants for refugees we have this debate now on the European level on the on the reform of the. Crum European Asylum system personally I think that not that was not really. But it's not a perfect approach to let's put it this way to commission presented because there's so many dangerous difficulties in uncertainties involved that it were.
Especially the relocation scheming we're not work it will simply it work not enough places sounds like but generally. Also here for refugees Partnerships are important with.
All right so is was Transit countries and whose countries of origin there's fighting of root causes is important of course it's our difficult I know I was a member of the German government's Commission on fighting root causes of displacement we perfectly know how difficult it is to implement what is this that could reduce number of refugees but nevertheless you you you have to do it and we have to find a combination of
these policies with policies fighting root causes for refugees so there are many many proposals but. What proposes are incorporation on International Exchange and there is no really good proposal. Referring to an National policies. My final question would be a little bit more political because we are approaching the European Parliament elections which will take place next year and the expectation is that some of the political forces especially on the right.
How do you inclined to take advantage of prejudice and xenophobia which always penetrates. The discussion on migration would you have any advice for the progressive forces prepare this period and the difficult debates ahead you're just 22 points the first is very clearly advocate. Human rights orientation in migration politics that relates to migration as a to migrants but also to refugees of.
And combine that with Partnerships in international corporation it's the first point and the point second point is really simple look for pragmatic Solutions.
But to do this these are the best arguments against populists you know we are finding presenting that policy can make a difference and do not ignore difficulties that is perhaps also important and also lesson of 2015 16 in Germany do not ignore differences people are not stupid see what it's not really ready for this not working you know but try to approach them and find
Ensign pragmatic Solutions no ideological ideological solutions that makes it all complicated and then we have cultural Wars in order whatever. Time prophetic Solutions. Thank you very much doctor and get in I think it is clear that migration is a very complicated sometimes they say yes Tony. Issue Germany has indeed the center at all.
SM in country of destination a country that changed its migration profile in the recent decades but probably can also lead the European countries into some kind of new compromise and mechanism a new policy that could be better camp in a new more human way. But also to the benefit of European economies and societies but also for the economic and social development of the countries of the origin.
Because that's also can be an essential benefit, these Partnerships work out yeah let me just add one sentence the issue of them leadership is always difficult in Germany but no but they're sundaram experiences we can share with with other countries and so just not to repeat the same the same mistakes. Indeed not repeating past mistakes absolutely essential thank you so much for your Insight and obviously we remain in close touch and cooperation.
In order to promote the progressive migration group of X thank you very much for your time. Music. And our conversation interesting do not hesitate to share it on social media with the hashtag. Music.