We spoke with Katrin Göring-Eckardt, co-chair of the parliamentary group of The Greens in the German Parliament, about the value of diversity, the willingness of the German society to welcome refugees and how to improve their situation in everyday life.
hbs: You have been in the U.S. for a few days now- a country that takes pride in being a country of immigrants. Which impressions have you gotten from your trip in this regard? Can the United States serve as a good example for Germany when it comes to integration?
Katrin Göring-Eckardt: Yes, the United States can serve as a good example because they have long considered themselves a country of immigrants. They are proud of this. They say: that's what makes us stand apart as a nation. Integration plays a significant role over here. Of course we can also examine some difficulties in this regard in the U.S. Obviously not everything is going well. One indicator of this is that Obama has placed so much emphasis on immigration at the end of his time in office and has stood up to Congress on the issue of an immigration law. In addition, many people in the U.S. have lived here for years but still do not have legal status, although they may even work. And let us not forget the many unaccompanied children and adolescents who reach the U.S. by crossing the Mexican border. But we can learn that a nation must avow to become a country of immigration. Only then can integration be successful and only then can the country be successful. What we can learn here is that diversity is something wonderful.
hbs: According to the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), Germany has recently become the second-most-popular country of immigration after the U.S. Despite this, many immigrants do not feel welcome at all in Germany. What has to change in German society in order to establish a real "welcoming culture"?
Let's start with policy. We absolutely have to have an immigration law. Currently, you have to study 28 pages and dozens of annotations in order to understand how to legally enter the country. We need an immigration law that is simple and clearly presents the various legal ways of coming to Germany. This would apply both to refugees and to skilled workers,- and I am not just talking about the infamous engineers. We need skilled workers in the nursing care industry and other industries. We also have the right of political asylum in Germany, which we must not question. But we should be aware that many of those seeking asylum will probably stay in Germany for a long time. These refugees may eventually become immigrants.
In Germany, we can currently witness a sentiment in the population that is, in effect, presenting a large welcome sign. We should take this welcome seriously and really mean it that way. PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West) is not the majority and neither are the people who set fire to the refugee home in Tröglitz (editor’s note: a German town which recently experienced anti-immigrant protest and violence). The majority of people are those who say: we want to take in refugees. We need to build on this sentiment in order to make policy out of it. We are currently having a new discussion about national identity: How do we define ourselves? It is not so much about where we come from anymore but much more about where we want to go. And by that I mean together, as a society. That will be the discussion in the next few years.
hbs: The debate over PEGIDA has cast a bad light on Germany in recent months. At the same time, the prevailing part of German society clearly took a stance against the xenophobic slogans and wants Germany to be open to the world. Did PEGIDA actually have some positive side effects in this respect?
No, I would not say that. I can't find anything positive in regard to PEGIDA. To be honest, I also don't agree with those who say that we have to talk to them. I think that we must clearly state that we have a different opinion. And when there are people who are xenophobic and spout their opinions in public, then others have to stand up and say: this is wrong, we feel differently. And anyone who is a Nazi, we will also call a Nazi. And anyone who yells "Foreigners get out," to them we say: No! We're opening the door to foreigners and refugees. Because it is good for them and for us, and because we think refugees have the right to come here. It is great that German society has delcared this, but we really did not need PEGIDA to get there. To be honest, we really could've done without them.
hbs: Since last year, the Balkan countries of Serbia, Macedonia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina have been considered “safe countries of origin” in Germany. This decision caused heated arguments in Germany, also within the Green Party. How did you perceive this discussion and what can the party learn from this experience?
First of all, we need to recognize that this decision with regard to the safe countries of origin does not mean that people from these states will stay in Germany for a shorter period of time. The law you are referring to was a compromise that has improved a lot of things for refugees, particularly their legal permission to work. And it will improve things even more in the future; for example, it was agreed that the refugees will receive a health insurance card. I consider easier access to medical care an absolute necessity. In this trade-off, our states, the Bundesländer, have decided that this compromise is worthwhile. Despite the new law we have to keep the case-by-case review and the right to asylum, of course. These things have actually not changed on the ground. But the expectation that the declaration of these countries as safe countries of origin would free up more capacities has so far not been fulfilled. All this has to be understood in this discussion. Now, what we can learn in the Green Party is that it is not helpful to imply about each other that "they probably do not want what is best for the refugees." I would not imply that about any one of us. We all want to find a solution that is both pragmatic and improves the situation for the refugees in Germany.
hbs: Another topic that is being watched carefully in Europe and the U.S. are the humanitarian consequences of the wars in the Middle East. According to the UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees), there are currently more refugees than there have been since World War II. What do Germany, and Europe as a whole, have to do in order to combat the consequences of this catastrophe?
We have to look at both short-term and long-term aspects. Of course, and I am saying this at the outset, we have to fight the root causes which drive people to flee in the first place. It is obvious that we have to work through means of development cooperation, try to bring peace to certain regions, and use civil engagement in order to ensure, to the extent possible, that no one has to flee. That said, there will still be many, many people driven to flee. In the short term, we must therefore focus on two things: First, we have to ensure that the refugees can live reasonably well at their current location and that they are being cared for properly. The fact that the UNHCR sometimes does not know from one day to the next whether they will actually have enough money to hand out food at a certain refugee camp is a real catastrophe. This is irresponsible and has to change.
Secondly, we have to plan for taking in more refugees. And we can do that. Especially in Germany, we can do that, and we can do that in wider Europe, too. We can no longer simply allow people to drown in the Mediterranean Sea. This has to change, and it has to change very quickly. Hundreds of people drowned just this week alone. Even Volker Kauder said recently that we have to take in more refugees (editor’s note: Kauder is the parliamentary group leader of the ruling CDU/ CSU in the German Bundestag). I'm curious to see whether he will actually stand by his word and whether that will mean the German federal government will cover certain related costs instead of leaving it all for the municipalities. Many of these municipalities are still dealing with a serious budget crisis. We cannot allow a situation in which refugee accommodation facilities and other related services are financed while public spending in other areas is cut. This would risk a shift away from the welcoming mood in Germany very quickly.
hbs: It appears that anti-Semitism and a latent form of Islamophobia has spread in many places in Europe in recent years. Islamophobia is a topic on the political agenda in the U.S. as well. How can we fight this development in your opinion and who has a particular responsibility in this regard?
Clarity – just as with PEGIDA – we must take a clear stance. Do not shy away from discussions and arguments: at demonstrations and counter-demonstrations, in the Bundestag, the parliament, local government meetings, club meetings, your kitchen table, etc. This subject will not leave us alone. And it must not leave us alone. We have to talk about the structures that go to the heart of society. The fact that a party like the AFD (Alternative for Germany) can become so established should have us worried. The AFD is still far from being the Front National or UKIP (UK Independence Party) – thank goodness. But the policies advocated by the AFD, for example the "three-child policy," do not just warn about Islam, but also about so-called "Islamization." There is so much absurdity in this that sometimes we are helpless in arguing against it. To confront this, we have to invest a lot of energy and cannot allow ourselves to get tired of discussing it. We also have to use positive concepts and speak with enthusiasm for this wonderfully diverse Europe and this diverse Germany. We have to convince the people that this is worth fighting for.