How welcome are immigrants really?

Statistics Sweden today places the Swedish multicultural demographic at 17.9% – that’s foreign-born and first generation Swedes.  In a population of nine million, such a number is significant.  In Denmark, more than 250 000 people – over half the growth in Danish population of the past 35 years – is accounted for by immigrants and their descendants. Statistics Denmark identifies its immigrant population as 541 215 (approximately 11%). Statistics Norway reports that 10.6% of Norwegians are immigrants or first generation Norwegians. Statistics Finland states its current immigrant population as 3100 stronger than 2008.

Given the population sizes of the Scandinavian nations above (9.2 million, 5.5 million, 4.8 million and 5.3 million respectively) such figures appear relatively sizeable.

There’s an expression in Swedish, called lagom.  The Danes and Norwegians say moderat.  It’s keskivaikeaa to the Finns.  Lagom means ‘just right’; and seems to be a word many use to describe Scandinavian immigration.  Break the surface, however, and opinions are not always unified when it comes to the after effects.

Modern Swedish immigration policy, widely regarded as liberal, has begun an about face.  In 2008, Swedish online newspaper The Local reported that Sweden was now “putting on the brakes” regarding asylum seekers.  Such action was not overlooked by media such as the UK’s Observer. As the current policy stands, Migrationsverket (the Swedish Migration Board) grants visas to prospective immigrants on the basis of asylum, family ties (a spouse, relative or person one intends to cohabitate with or marry), work or study.  Being an EU citizen makes life a lot easier too.  Freedom of movement does away with necessities such as work or residence permits for up to three months, without having to register right of residence.

Currently the Migration Board proudly trumpets its refugee intake as “between 1200 and 1900” per year.  According to journalist James Savage, Swedes are the Europeans most accepting of such changes to their once homogenous society.  A Eurobarometer survey of 2007 indicated that 86% of respondents felt that Swedish culture was “enriched [by] ethnic minorities”.

It’s only a few hours south, but Denmark is often criticised in Scandinavian media for a burgeoning climate of racism.  What’s the fuss?

The Copenhagen-based Centre for Economic and Business Research attributes tolerance to Danish attitudes to immigration, saying that Danes are no more hostile towards immigration than other citizens of the EU.  Residence permits are offered in the same vein as Sweden. However, requirements for residency based on family ties appear more stringent.  According to New To Denmark, a web resource for immigrants, an applicant must be over 24 years of age, be residing with his or her partner in Denmark at the time of application, and as a couple, have a “combined attachment” to Denmark greater than to any other country.  According to Eurostat’s latest data, the Danes granted asylum to approximately 890 people in 2008 – 51.6% of the 1725 decisions made.

Racial superiority?

In 2008, 3710 asylum seekers were granted residence in Norway. Statistics Norway notes that between 1990 and 2008, “377 000 non-Nordic citizens” were permitted residence.  Since the 1990s, immigrants have made the move primarily due to family ties, with a surge “during and after” the Balkan conflicts.  In its latest 2008 attitudinal study, Statistics Norway found that “one out of ten want a liberalisation of the current asylum policy, whereas 4 out of 10 think that refugees’ access to obtaining a residence permit should be made more difficult”.  Statistics Norway claims that Norwegians are comparatively more accepting than other European nations, being “in the middle or at the liberal or tolerant end of the scale on most immigrant issues”.  Why, then, is it so that “nine out of 10 [Norwegians] do not mind having contact with immigrants as neighbours or home helps, but one out of 3 would feel uncomfortable having an immigrant married into the family”?

Externally, it seems to be the Finns who are viewed as less tolerant.  US-based sociologist Manuel Castells reprimanded a 2005 Helsinki conference, saying that Finland is “allergic to immigration”. Mikko Cortes-Tellez, of Finland’s Ministry of Education, writes that only 100 000 immigrants call Finland home today.  According to Cortes-Tellez, “the amount of foreigners living in Finland is relatively small by international standards – only about 2% of the population”.  Throughout recent Finnish history, however, there has been a steady flow of immigrants including re-patriating Ingrian people from Russia and Estonia, and Somalian, Iraqi and Yugoslavian refugees.

Attempts to dissolve negative attitudes are underway.  Cortes-Tellez observes that a new initiative of the Finnish government aims to embody “a more active form of immigration” – focusing less on integration issues, and more on filling the gaps in the future labour market.  If Finns wish to retain their above average living standards and services, they need more people who are willing to put in the hard yards.

The most intriguing – and inflammatory – slant on Scandinavian immigration is the issue of the ‘other’.  Other people, other cultures, other religions.  In July 2009 the Finnish national public broadcaster, YLE, reported that numerous teenagers of immigrant backgrounds were being sent home to be “de-Westernised”.  Leena-Kaisa Åberg, chief of refugees and immigration at the Finnish Red Cross, commented that teachers seldom challenged the whereabouts of these students.  Legally, the consent of both parents ensures that a stint in the fatherland is within their rights.  Fjordman put a rocket up the blogosphere when he famously wrote about the costs of Muslim immigration in Europe.  Provocatively opening with the words, “Do gang rapes boost GDP?”, Norway’s most notorious (and anonymous) blogger went on to examine issues such as immigrant dependency on welfare, the existence of honour killings and societal attitudes to integration.

A truly multicultural society?

Surprisingly, despite Finland’s miniscule multicultural population, it’s the only major European country without a far right party.  Anti-(non western) immigration sentiment carries a similar air of resentment amongst other Scandi nations.  While Swedes are apparently Europe’s most open citizens, many harbour Fjordman’s discontent. Sverigedemokraterna (the Sweden Democrats) believe that “the current situation with a large number of immigrants living in cultural enclaves is not beneficial for the country”.  SD not only urge a stop on immigration, but encourage repatriation due to the social and economic strains placed on society.  Norway’s Fremskrittspartiet (the Progress Party) feels the current immigration and integration policy fails as it “lets criminals stay in Norway, while throwing out people who work hard and follow the law”.  Their disclaimer is that the party does not have “principled opposition” to immigration, but bases their ‘in practice’ objections pragmatically.

But none have garnered attention like Dansk Folkeparti (the Danish People’s Party) – it remains the third largest party in Denmark since the 2007 parliamentary election.

Blogger Hairy Swede, who identifies himself as ‘a Swedish-American in Sweden’ returning to his roots, lays out the catch-22.  He observes that Sweden’s immigrants are looked upon as victims, with only 20% being self-sufficient after two and a half years. While the expectation exists, they “never become Swedish. Not necessarily because they don’t want to but because they don’t know how.”

So, what to do?  We gain a melting pot of cultures and perspectives.  We ‘lose’ money if the people depending on it fail to – or don’t wish to – integrate into their new societies.  Perhaps American political scientist Samuel P Huntington was on the right track when he said, “But then I came to the conclusion that no, while there may be an immigration problem, it isn’t really a serious problem.  The really serious problem is assimilation.”

It’s a fine balance, but in a perfect Scandinavian world, generous immigration policies would be mirrored by realistic integration.