The report is a working paper and cannot be quoted without permission from the authors.
Transnationalisation, Migration and Transformation:
Multi-Level Analysis of Migrant Transnationalism
(TRANS-NET)
7th Framework Programme
Socio-Economic Sciences and Humanities
COUNTRY REPORT (WP2):
GERMANY
Jürgen Gerdes, Eveline Reisenauer
University of Bielefeld
October 2010
1
Heterogeneities and Transnational Social Practices among Turkish
Migrants in Germany
1. Introduction
This country report gives an overview of the interviews conducted in Germany in the scope of
the project "Transnationalisation, Migration and Transformation: Multi-Level Analysis of
Migrant Transnationalism" (TRANS-NET). The report is still in a preliminary state because
not all interviews of our sample have been transcribed and analysed yet. Certain significant
aspects and tendencies, however, are already discernible. In the second chapter some
general information about migration movements and migration policies in Germany are
given. The third chapter describes how the interviews in Germany were conducted and
reports the personal characteristics of the interviewees. Chapter four and five address the
first results of the German study. In the fourth chapter some information about the migration
processes and the return orientations of our interviewees are given. The main part of the
country report consists of chapter five and the following sections. After developing a typology
of transnational practices, we illustrate transnationalism of Turkish migrants interviewed in
the German survey concerning the political, economic, socio-cultural and educational
domain. The country report closes with some concluding remarks in chapter five.
2. Migration Movements and Migration Policies in Germany
Germany as Country of Immigration
The official government position that Germany is not and should not be a country of
immigration was dominant until the late 1990s. Despite of significant immigration processes
and the fact that what was initially thought of as temporary labour market immigration in the
1960s developed into a settlement process already from the 1970s onward, official
immigration and immigrant integration policies on the federal level were absent (Bade &
Bommes 2000; Geddes 2003; Martin 2004). This first changed with the enactment of a new
Nationality Law in 2000 and a comprehensive Immigration Law in 2005. The 2000 Nationality
Law accepted the immigration processes of the past by easing substantively the conditions
of citizenship acquisition of immigrants and their descendants who already resided in
2
Germany for many years. Furthermore, the 2005 Immigration Law allowed regularly for
additional immigration as well as defined the integration of immigrants as a responsibility of
the state (Groß 2006).
Sources of Immigration to Germany
After World War II, there were mainly four different sources of immigration to Germany. First,
with its post-war restructuring, the West German state witnessed an influx of displaced
persons and so-called Aussiedler fleeing persecution in Soviet bloc countries, which
amounted to around 12 million people between 1945 and 1955 (Geddes 2003: 80).
Immigration of re-settlers of German origin from East European countries continued during
the Cold War, when it had also an important ideological function, but, however, was limited to
moderate numbers because of the strong exit restrictions in the Soviet bloc states. The
extensive immigration of re-settlers was possible, because the newly founded West German
state accepted a historical responsibility to admit unconditionally people of German descent,
who were deemed to be victims of persecution, forced resettlement and expulsion during and
after the Nazi rule due to their ethnic German origin in several East European states. Thus,
article 116 of the German constitution of 1949 guaranteed a privileged access to West
German
territory
and
citizenship
for
these
re-settlers
of
German
nationality
(Volkszugehörigkeit) and their descendants. After the fall of the iron curtain, however, the
number of immigrants from East European countries who claimed access by invoking their
German origin rose sharply.
The second source of immigration to post-war Germany was the recruitment of so-called
guest workers. During the very successful economic restructuring of Germany, known as the
“economic miracle”, additional labour demand, especially in agricultural and industrial
sectors, became obvious. Until 1955 German re-settlers had filled labour market gaps, but
thereafter it turned out that there numbers were insufficient in order to maintain the level of
economic growth. Therefore, between 1955 and 1966 Germany signed several guest worker
recruitment agreements with Italy, Spain, Greece, Turkey, Portugal, Yugoslavia, Tunisia and
Morocco (Martin 2004: 225). The recruitment of guest-workers was initially regarded primarily
as an economic issue to be handled predominantly within the usual German corporatist
institutions, i.e. by the Federal Labor Office in collaboration with the employer organizations
and trade unions. The assumption that these “guest workers”would finally return home was
initially shared on all sides, namely by the German state, the corresponding sending states
and the immigrants themselves as well (Joppke 1999: 65).
3
The third major source of immigration was that of family member of the “guest workers”.
Family immigration increased drastically after the recruitment stop, which was decided on in
1973 after a second economic recession in the context of the oil-price crisis and
corresponding rising rates of unemployment. Ironically, that what was intended as a tighter
immigration control measure turned out to lead to additional immigration in terms of family
immigration. Because a policy of forced repatriation was ultimately not a serious political
option and the “guest workers”feared that they would not permitted to return if they leave
Germany, many of them decided to stay and, moreover, to unify with their families as far as
that was legally possible. Hence, the foreign population of West Germany grew from a little
lower of 4 millions in 1973 to nearly 4.5 millions in 1980. At that time, the largest group of the
non-German population was of Turkish origin, by 1980 33 per cent were Turks.
Fourth, due to its initially most generous asylum law in the Western World, Germany also
faced an immigration of refugees applying for asylum. Prior to 1980, there were relatively few
asylum applications. This year, however, witnessed about 110.000 asylum applications, for
which Turks accounted for over a half due to a military coup d'état in Turkey. After Germany
responded by requiring visas and prohibiting asylum applicants from working for five years,
the asylum applications dropped again to fewer than 20.000 in 1983 (Martin 2004: 236). In
the late 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, the number of asylum applicants rose sharply
as a consequence of the opening of borders of the former socialist East European states and
the civil war in former Yugoslavia. Refugee immigration was reduced substantively again
through a far-reaching reform of asylum policy, including a constitutional amendment, in
1993.
Immigration and Integration Policy
In the following the main stages of immigration and integration policy in Germany will be
described briefly. After the recruitment agreements with different labour migrant sending
states, the first policy initiative on the federal parliamentary level was the enactment of a
Foreigner Law in 1965, which replaced the until then still valid Nazi Foreigner Edict
(Ausländerpolizeiverordnung) from 1938. Although it was presented as a liberal and even
cosmopolitan policy, the new foreigner law was aimed at upholding unconstrained national
sovereignty. Immigrants as foreigners were considered mainly as objects and means of
labour demands. The granting of a residence permit was a matter of state discretion only
and, crucially, renewals and first-time applications were handled on an equal basis, so that a
consolidation of stay could be legally avoided. This, after all, led to an unlimited latitude of
more concrete administrative interpretations, so that even behaviors such as lack of
4
integration, disturbance of labor peace and lesbian relations have been viewed as
contravening state interests (Schönwälder 2006: 11).
The one-sided focus on national interests and administrative discretion was changed in 1990
by introduction of a new Foreigner Law, which provided for some individual rights to
residence and the improvement of status over time, thus enhancing legal clarity, certainty
and predictability (Davy 2005: 132). In contrast to the 1965 Foreigner Law, which was aimed
at preserving unconditional national sovereignty towards immigration, the new Foreigner Law
of 1990 was justified with reference to the necessity of balancing the legitimate claims of
foreigners with the national interests of the German state. Although it upheld the basic
distinction between Germans and non-citizens, foreigners now had statutory residence and
family rights against the discretional power of the state, as long as certain conditions were
fulfilled.
The next noteworthy step in immigration policy was the reform of Asylum Law of 1993. In the
late 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, Germany faced an ever growing number of
asylum applicants due to the opening of borders of the former socialist East European
States, which reached a peak of 438.000 applicants in 1992. Because of the individual right
to asylum, enshrined in the German constitution, also includes the right to appeal, Germany
faced an increasing overload of legal asylum procedures. The Christian Democrats had
advocated a constitutional change of the right of asylum already since the mid 1980s, but
failed to reach a two-third majority which is necessary for a constitutional amendment. In the
summer of 1990, during the beginning of the actual election campaign the Christian
Democrats started to mobilize the public for a constitutional reform (Herbert 2001: 299). They
succeeded to make the asylum problem the most important topic of public debate between
1991 and 1993. The result was a general climate of suspicion against asylum seekers, who
were accused increasingly to be using the asylum claim as an opportunity for immigration
without really being politically persecuted. As a consequence, numerous assaults and violent
attacks against foreigners, including several assassinations, from right wing extremist groups
happened at that time. Finally, it was found an inter-party compromise concerning the
amendment of the individual right of asylum in the German Basic Law. The changed Article
16 restricted access to the constitutional right of asylum especially by two new provisions.
First, asylum-seekers arriving through so-called “safe third countries”, i.e. states who had
signed the Geneva Convention and the European Charta of Human Rights, are definitely
excluded from the asylum procedure and are denied entry or subjected to immediate
deportation without suspensiveness. Secondly, asylum-seekers from so-called “safe
countries of origin”, as determined by a list to be assessed by parliament, now faced a fast5
track application procedure where the burden of proof was shifted to them to present
evidence that their case is not “obviously unfounded”. The Social Democrats, however,
succeeded in incorporating some other immigration and integration measures as well, so that
the so-called “asylum compromise” would have been better described as an immigration
policy compromise (Angenendt 1997: 91). Besides the constitutional amendment of the right
to asylum, the agreement included the adoption of a separate asylum status for war and civil
war refugees, the establishment of maximum quotas for so-called German re-settlers from
Eastern Europe and provisions on foreign contract workers. Furthermore, naturalizations
were alleviated further. Already the Foreigner Law of 1990 had reduced the required periods
of legal residence for naturalizations, to fifteen years for the first and eight years for the
second immigrant generation. Now, former discretionary decisions were changed into as-ofright-naturalizations. However, due to continuous extreme low naturalization rates, the
debates on Germanys Nationality Law, which still stemmed in its main provisions from 1913,
persisted, and, during the 1990s, numerous reform proposals by different political parties
have been presented.
However, the main topics of proposed citizenship law reforms, an ius soli amendment and an
increased tolerance of dual citizenship, were highly controversial, so that a majority could not
be reached. When the Social Democrats and the Green Party, immediately after they
entered government in 1998, presented a draft law proposing a general tolerance of dual
citizenship, the Christian Democrats, by organizing a public campaign against it, succeeded
to press the government parties to accept finally a compromise where acceptance of dual
citizenship in general was cancelled again. However, the new Citizenship Law of 2000
introduced, most importantly, a qualified ius soli for the second immigrant generation and a
significant reduction of the period of legal residence required for naturalisation, from fifteen to
eight years (Gerdes, Faist and Rieple 2007).
In the beginning of 2000s, Germany witnessed extensive political, public and academic
debates on a comprehensive immigration policy in the context of increasing economic
globalization and a nation state based competition of knowledge-based societies. In an
climate of rising expectations concerning economic growth due to a boom in the so-called
New Economy of the information and communication technology sectors, the conception
gained importance that Germany should join the “race for talent” (Shachar 2006) and to
canvass especially highly skilled migrants. However, because an envisaged new immigration
policy was also aimed at relying on a broad political majority and at the same time
integrating, reworking and simplifying the host of disparate provisions of former different laws
and decrees, the policy process as a result of many party controversies concerning all the
6
details took several years. However, after intensive debates and negotiations, finally with
collaboration of the mediation committee of the two parliamentary assemblies, a political
compromise was reached. The 2005 Immigration Law especially provided for immigration
opportunities of high-skilled immigrants on a permanent basis and for entrepreneurs willing to
make substantial investments temporarily. Furthermore, foreign students, after finishing their
education, were offered a one-year residence permit for job search. The topic of immigrant
integration was explicitly addressed and provided for integration courses. Since the debates
on the immigration law, public discourses as well as policies in Germany changed
significantly, favouring highly-skilled immigrants but restricting access of immigrants who are
deemed costly. In recent years, a number of debates have focused on naturalisation exams
and integration courses. During the reign of Social Democrats and the Green Party so-called
activation policies such as workfare programmes have gained increasing influence in public
discourses as well as in policies. The relevant, and prominent, phrase in Germany of
“demanding and supporting”(“Fordern und Fördern”) together with demands for a general
revision of the relationship between rights and duties in the areas of labour market and social
policies is increasingly applied also to matters of integration (Bommes 2006). Political
debates between the major parties in Germany turn increasingly on questions of how heavy
the sanctions should be in terms of social assistance, residence permits and barriers to
naturalisation, if integration requirements are not fulfilled.
3. Data and Methods
Sample of Participants
So far, the German survey involves 73 persons. The interviews were conducted with Turkish
migrants as well as with children of Turkish migrants. The interviewees were recruited
through gatekeepers, such as associations (operating especially in the political, economic,
socio-cultural and educational domain), internet platforms but also the social networks of the
interviewers. After the first interviews also snowball sampling was used to recruit future
respondents. The semi-structured and life-course interviews took place from February 2009
to August 2010 in various German cities. We carried out interviews in Augsburg (1), Berlin
(17), Bielefeld (8), Bremen (20), Esslingen (1), Göppingen (1), Mühlheim an der Ruhr (3),
Munich (16) and Stuttgart (6). Not all respondents live directly in the respective city but also
in the region. Some of the interviewees have a registered residence in Turkey in addition to
the one in Germany (e.g. J-20).
7
The German survey is interested in transnational contacts and practices of Turkish migrants
whereby the emphasis is on the political, economic, socio-cultural and educational domains.
Due to the diversity of the subject a pre-defined sampling plan was not suitable. The aim was
to select rather different cases with a wide variation (Seipel, Rieker 2003: 110). It was looked
for interviewees who are diverse concerning their personal characteristics, such as gender,
age, education, marital status or place of residence in Germany. It was also considered
diversity concerning the type of migration. In Germany the cases include “guest workers”,
labour migrants, international students, refugees, marriage migration and family reunification.
The diversity of interviewees is to ensure the consideration of combinations of characteristics
but also of contrasts despite the commonalities migration and transnationality.
Our survey is not representative for Turkish migrants and children of Turkish migrants living
in Germany. The German country report makes statements about the social reality of the 73
respondents. It aims to provide a better understanding of Turkish migrants’transnational
contacts and practices.
Conducting Interviews in Germany
When the interviewees were contacted first, they were informed that we are interested in
their migration history and their personal contacts to Turkey. The interviews were arranged in
different locations depending on the choice of the interviewees. This could be the
respondents’working place or their home as well as a café.
For the interviews we have chosen a thematically focused initial question (see FischerRosenthal, Rosenthal 1997: 414). The interviewees were pleased first to tell about their
migration history and its relevance for their life. Combining the life history with a thematic
focus “allows us to state our topic and ensure that the interviewees speak about it, while still
leaving enough room for relating other biographical strands.”(Rosenthal 2005: 51) The initial
question produced different beginnings of the narration. For example, while one interviewee
started with the sentence, “On my emigration from Turkey I had no influence.” (E-22),
another interviewee told about the first generation of Turkish immigrants in Germany (E-09).
Even if Küsters (2006: 45) argues for using always the same initial question to achieve
comparability, it was not always possible. For example, we had to be flexible when another
person was present at the beginning of the interview or in the case when the interviewee
started to tell his or her story before we had the change to ask our initial question. During the
narrative phase it was often necessary to encourage the interviewees to continue the
narration. And if the interviewers felt it was relevant, they also asked questions. Especially
when the interviewees talked about transnational contacts and practices they were pleased
8
to tell more about that. Thus, the interviews sometimes had an “interactional nature”(Rapley
2004: 26).
After the narration phase questions were asked to the political, economic, socio-cultural and
educational domains especially in relation to transnationalisation. Mostly topics to the four
domains were already mentioned by the interviewees during the main narration. In this case
the interviewers asked follow-up questions to the four domains based on the notes they have
taken during the narration. For topics not mentioned by the interviewee, in a second step
external questions were asked which introduced new and additional aspects to the four
domains. After the tape recorder was switched off, a brief questionnaire with socio-statistical
data were filled out and it was talked about contact persons in Turkey for follow-up
interviews.
All interviews are recorded and transcribed. In addition research diaries were written
immediately after the interview. The duration of the interviews varies from around half an
hour to two and a half hours. On average an interview took one hour.
Personal Characteristics of the Interviewees
Concerning gender the distribution in our survey is balanced. We interviewed 34 female and
39 male respondents. With 60% the biggest part of our interviewees is between 30 and 50
years old. 18% are younger than 30 years and 22% are older than 50 years. More than the
half of the interviewees are married and the average number of children is 1,3.
The higher the level of education of persons in the target group, the higher was the response
rate. With 48 persons the biggest part of our interviewees has completed grammar school
(Gymnasium). Out of that 29 interviewees have a university degree and 1 interviewee has
obtained his PhD. Another 10 interviewees completed intermediate school (Realschule) and
8 secondary general school (Hauptschule), 5 interviewees attended only primary school.1
Concerning their current occupation 35 interviewees indicated they are employed and 19 are
self-employed. The remaining interviewees are students or pupils, unemployed or retired.
1
Moreover, there are two non-responses on the question of the highest level of education.
9
The place of birth of 51 out of 73 interviewees is Turkey. 19 were born in Germany and three
in other countries. A part of the foreign-born applied for the German citizenship. Currently 29
interviewees have the Turkish citizenship, 30 the German and 14 obtain dual citizenship.
Cross-border Contacts of the Interviewees
In the Turkish-German case information about the interviewees were shared on an early
stage of the interview phase. Nevertheless, it was only in a small number of cases possible
to exchange data of respondents’contact persons in the respective other country although
the majority of the interviewees in Germany maintain cross-border contacts. The
interviewees indicated that either they or their contact persons are not agreeable to follow-up
interviews. One reason was for example that the interviewee (E-04) is of the opinion that
would say nothing about his person. In another case (E-10) the possible contact person in
Turkey would be the mother who lives partly in Germany and partly in Turkey. When the
interviewee was asked about setting up a contact to her, he was irritated and expressed
concerns because his mother cannot read and write. He said that he does not want to
burden her too much. In a lot of other cases interviewees informed us after talking to their
family members, relatives, friends or other persons in Turkey, that the contact person does
not agree to the follow-up interview.
Even if the non-response concerning contact persons living in the respective other country
was rather high there are a few cases of follow-up interviews with cross-border contacts of
respondents. In total 12 interviewees in Germany and in Turkey mentioned contact data of
persons in the respective other country. And here again not in all cases an interview was
possible. For example, when we twice tried to contact a friend of an interviewee in Turkey,
we could only reach his wife who could not speak German. Then a Turkish speaking
colleague called her but this also has not resulted in getting contact to the target person. In
contrast, in another case the mediation of a contact trough an interviewee in Turkey resulted
in three follow-up interviews in Germany. We could make interviews with the respondent’
s
sister (E-42), her brother-in-law (E-43) and her father living in Germany (E-44). In this family
the father came to Germany in 1963 as one of the first “guest workers”. He lived in Germany
for around twenty years without his family. In this time he sent money to his family in Turkey
every month. Then his wife and the youngest daughter followed him to Germany. For
example, his daughter E-42 could not go with them because at that time she was already
older than 16 years and thus not allowed to come to Germany in the course of family
reunification. She only came in 1995 to Germany when she married the son of her father’
s
best friend who is born in Germany (E-43). All in all, most family members travelled forth and
back between Turkey and Germany several times. Nowadays, the parents live in Germany
10
as well as two adult daughters with their families. Two future adult daughters and their
families live in Turkey. The family in Germany and Turkey telephones every day. For
example, the two daughters of E-42 are calling the interviewee in Turkey sometimes ten
times a day.
4. Migration Processes
According to the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF), the number of Turkish
citizens resident in Germany in 2009 was 1.658.083. 67% of them are born in Turkey and
33% in Germany. Beside Turkish citizens, we interviewed German citizens who were once
Turkish citizens and German citizens with at least one Turkish citizen as a parent. Taken
together, the German survey includes so-called German Turks, that are all people with
Turkish migration background.
Concerning migration we have mentioned above (chapter 2) the main sources of immigration
to Germany. Also among our interviewees are different groups of immigrants. This includes
“guest workers”, international students, refugees as well as family reunification. The biggest
part of our interviewees migrated for family reasons to Germany. In addition, we conducted
interviews with people who did not immigrate themselves but where at least one parent
migrated to Germany. Moreover, during the interviews not only the topic of migration to
Germany but also return migration to Turkey was addressed.
Immigration of “Guest Workers”
[E-32, E-41, E-44]
In October 1961 the Federal Republic of Germany concluded a bilateral agreement on labour
recruitment with Turkey. The first generation of the recruited Turkish “guest workers”initially
consisted of single male migrants between 20 and 40 years but also increasingly of women
who also came mostly without their family to Germany.
Also among our interviewees are migrants who came in the period of official labour
recruitment in the 1960s and 1970s to Germany. For example, E-32 tells that he heard one
can earn good money in Germany and thus came to Germany in 1966. Since he was learnt
carpenter the employment office found a job for him in a joinery. At that time he was
unmarried. He came with the train from Turkey to Germany. He says, he felt good, also
because in Turkey he had a stepmother to whom he had not a good relationship. Thus, in
Germany he felt free. Another interviewee who came to Germany as “guest worker”is E-41
11
who made a professional education as machinist in Turkey. Thus, he only had to wait 13
days before he could come to Germany where he started in a big company for tool making.
Therefore he got a hourly wage of 4,30 DM. After a German language course he earned 0,03
DM more. He tells that he worked every day for nine hours and on Saturday until twelve
o’
clock. The interviewee worked in different companies and stresses that employers always
were very satisfied with him. As closing words he adds that he has not begged, he worked
and earned money. E-41 says that he enjoyed working. In the case of E-44 the interviewee
came to Germany in 1963 and lived for 20 years alone before he brought his family and
daughters from Turkey. First E-44 worked in a big German company for more than ten years.
After that he set up his own business and had among other things a Turkish tearoom. Now
he is retired and spends some month in the year in Turkey.
Immigration of International Students
[E-01, E-02, E-07, J-01, J-05, J-07, J-14, J-20]
The interviewees E-01 and E-02 only recently came as international students to Germany.
For E-02 it was not her first time in Germany. When she was a child her mother worked for
some years as teacher in Germany and E-02 and her father joined her for a while. Similar to
the case of E-02 is that of J-07 whose father was a “guest worker”in Germany. He was
eleven years old when he came to Germany in the course of family reunification. Because of
great problems in school in terms of insufficient language skills and widespread
discrimination, he went back to turkey after two years to a boarding school. To Germany he
came again after completing school and with the intend to study here.
Also J-01, J-14 and J-20 came to Germany as international students. In the case of J-01 his
parents already where in Germany as “guest workers”since he was ten years old. He is
grown up in Turkey first with his aunt and later he went to a bordering school. Later he
received a university degree in Turkey and three years later he went to Germany for a
second degree. J-14 was born in Brussels and as child he visited in Turkey a German high
school. After that he came to Germany for his study and with the plan to return afterwards.
Also J-20 migrated alone to Germany to study here. All three interviewees met their further
spouse in Germany and thus did not return to Turkey immediately after their study. J-01 tells
he did not finish his study in Germany. He met a second generation Turk in Germany and
due to the marriage he had to earn money. J-14 married a German wife and also because of
the military coup d'état in 1980 in Turkey he had no motivation to go back. Also J-20 met her
further husband during her study in Germany. In this case it was a Turkish “guest worker”
who was in Germany as shipbuilder. They married, got children and thus decided to defer
their return to Turkey until their children are independent, what is the case in the meantime.
12
While J-01 and J-14 decided to stay in Germany, J-20 now works in Turkey and thus is
commuting between Germany and Turkey.
Immigration of Refugees
[J-02, J-26; parents migrated as refugees: E-16, J-12]
Due to the military coup d'état in 1980 and the outbreak of military conflicts between Turkish
security forces and the Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan (PKK) in Turkey's east, thousand of Turks
and Kurds sought asylum abroad. One of the main countries granting asylum to refugees
from Turkey was Germany.
Also among our interviewees are migrants who came to Germany during these refugee
movements. J-02 already came to Germany as political refugee in 1980. Immediately
afterwards, he was involved in organising benefits for politically persecuted persons in
Turkey. In Germany J-02 started to study at the university. He explores that the universities
in Turkey at the time of his emigration were ideological and organized according to criteria of
power. In his opinion, at German universities other information were available than in the
Turkish university system. Moreover, in Germany there was the possibility for open and
democratic discussions where ideology did not feature at all. In the case of E-14 her parents
are Kurds and the whole family fled from south-eastern Anatolia in 1988. At that time E-14
was one year old. She has ten further siblings of which four are older and five are younger
than she is. With the parents E-14 speaks Arabic and with her siblings German. She tells that
her mother currently is making a German course. E-14 narrates that her family did not have
easy times in the past. Since two years the family has a residence status, before that they
were only tolerated. Thus, her father could not work in Germany during that time. The whole
family lived in a four-room-apartment where they missed private sphere. But E-14 says that
she had nevertheless a beautiful childhood. Moreover, E-14 tells that yesterday her aunt with
the family from Italy came for a visit. Her father has not seen his sister for fifteen years and
E-14 only has known her from pictures. E-14 says that the visit is nice for her father.
Immigration in the Course of Reunification as Spouse
[E-18, E-35, E-37, E-38, E-42, J-03]
In many cases former “guest workers”decided to stay in Germany and thus temporary labour
migration turned into a process of family reunification. Woman and children joined the mostly
male former “guest workers”. For example, E-44 stayed for around twenty years without his
family in Germany. Then his wife and the daughters also came to Germany to join him. Now
E-44 is in Germany since 51 years. He tells that in contrast to his wife he has a lot of
contacts in Turkey, for example due to his work. He would prefer to stay alone in Germany
13
because his wife is ill. When they married, his wife was young and they got children before
he went to Germany. One of his daughters E-42 could not come to Germany with the family
because with more than sixteen years she was too old for a visa in the course of family
reunification. Thus, she came only in 1995 when she married the son of his best friend. E-18
was brought to Germany as spouse in 1994. At that time she was fifteen years old and her
husband was sixteen years older, divorced and had already two children. E-18 says that they
did not know each other and even if they have three children together in addition to her
stepchildren, they could not come together. J-03 came to Germany to marry a German
husband. Later they got divorced and now she has a life partner of Turkish origin. Her former
husband and their daughter are now living with German citizenship in Turkey while she is
living with Turkish citizenship in Germany.
But not only women came to Germany in the course of family reunification but also men. For
example, E-38 tells that he met his wife when she was with her family in Turkey. He
describes how she has brought him to Germany in 1972 and already found him a job. And
also E-35 obtained a visa in 2000 to join his wife who already was living in Germany.
Immigration in the Course of Reunification as Child
[Migration together with their parents: E-04, E-14, E-16, E-20; migration later than their
parents: E-03, E-05, E-06, E-09, E-12, E-15, E-17, E-22, E-23, E-24, E-25, E-26, E-27, E-28,
E-29, E-30, E-33, E-36, E-39, E-40, E-45, J-04, J-08, J-09, J-11, J-15, J-16, J-17, J-21, J-25 ]
Out of the 34 interviewees who migrated as child from Turkey to Germany, only four
interviewees migrated together with the first parent who came to Germany. In all other cases
either one or both parents already lived in Germany before the child was fetched. Some
interviewees tell that as child they had no influence on their emigration. For example, E-04
says that his parents brought him to Germany without being asked, he was protracted so to
say. Also E-22 tells that he had no decision on his emigration from Turkey. His father came
to Germany in 1969 and ten years later he made the decision to bring the entire family to
Germany to join him. E-45 says with fifteen years he came to Germany and improves himself
by adding that he was brought. He tells that at the beginning of the 1980s a visa requirement
was introduced in Germany and before that all brought their children to Germany.
Some of our interviewees tell that they stayed with their mother in Turkey while the father
was as “guest worker”in Germany. In a few cases the mother first went as labour migrant to
Germany and the children were left with their father (e.g. E-27, E-39). In cases when both
parents were in Germany mostly the children stayed with their grandparents. For example, E14
23 is grown up until the age of six years at her grandmother's home while her parents worked
in Germany. When she also was brought to Germany the relationship to her grandmother
changed due to distance and she got strange to her. When E-03 was two years old first her
mother came to Germany and then her father. She and her sister were raised by their
grandmother in Turkey. Only in 1990 as the grandmother could not look any longer after the
children, the sisters were brought to their parents in Germany. As the father of E-09 went to
Germany as “guest worker”the interviewee first stayed in Turkey at his grandparents' home.
With three years his parents brought him to Germany. But since they had to work and there
was no place in a kindergarten for him, he was brought to an orphanage.
The cause for bringing the children which was mostly mentioned during the interviews was
that the father wanted the family to join him. For example, the father of E-26 was only for a
short time in Germany before he also brought his family because he had no joie de vivre
without them. But also children expressed their wish to stay with their father like in the case
of E-29. When the family was for holidays in Germany they noticed for the first time what it is
like to be together with the father. Thus, they pleased him to bring them also to Germany. But
also outside circumstances have occasioned “guest workers” to bring their children to
Germany, such as unrests in Turkey as in the case of E-28 or changing political regulations
as in the case of E-45 mentioned above.
What is striking in the narrations of the interviewees is that a lot of children of “guest workers”
moved several times between Turkey and Germany before they finally kept staying in
Germany. For example, in the case of E-17 the parents are divorced since his birth. In 1979
his mother went as tourist to Germany where already two aunts were living. She kept staying
there and worked as cleaning power in a restaurant. Thereby she got to know her further
husband, a German. In 1980 the sister of E-17 was brought to Germany but she went back
again tree years later. When the mother was in Turkey in 1985 the interviewee thought she
would be his aunt because she was in Turkey only once or in two or three years. After that,
on the stepfather's recommendation both children were brought to Germany in 1985. In
another case, the father of E-24 came to Germany as “guest worker”in 1964. Some years
later the mother followed and after additional years the four siblings. Two more children were
born in Germany. During her childhood the interviewee moved several times between
Germany and Turkey, e.g. for school. The first and second class she spent in Germany, than
she and her sister went to the grandmother to Turkey. The sister kept staying there but E-24
came back to Germany again etc. Since 1976 she is staying only in Germany.
15
The So-called Second Generation
[E-08, E-10, E-11, E-13, E-19, E-21, E-31, E-34, E-43, E-46, J-06, J-10, J-12, J-13, J-18, J19, J-22, J-23, J-24]
Out of the total number of children of Turkish parents a part of our interviewees is born and
grown up in Germany. In the following only a few examples are picked out. J-10 is born in
1974 in Germany. Her father came to Germany as “guest worker” in 1965 with the
perspective to stay in Germany. J-10 is the child of his second marriage. His first wife went
back to Turkey. During a stay in his hometown in Turkey, the father met his second wife and
brought her to Germany. About the language skills of her parents J-10 tells that her father
learned German well because he wanted to stay in Germany where he saw a better
perspective for his family. J-10 says that she is proud that also her mother learned Germany
relatively well although she is illiterate. Also E-46 is born in Germany. His grandmother was
the first one of the family who came to Germany for work in 1969. She lived in a dormitory
and worked in a factory and as a cleaner. She could not read and write. The mother of E-46
married in 1973 and shortly later she followed her mother to Germany. First her husband did
not want to come to Germany but then he did so and worked first for the rubbish collection
and later for an automobile manufacture. In 1975 the interviewee is born and grown up in
Germany. Also J-23 belongs already to the so-called third generation in Germany. But in her
case the mother is German. The grandparents on the paternal side migrated to Germany as
“guest workers”and her father followed in the age of eleven years in the course of family
reunification. The father has finished the secondary general school and has a job as
steelworker. Her mother died when J-23 was three years old. Later the father married his
cousin and J-23 has two half-sisters.
Return Migration to Turkey
The last category mentioned in this chapter is not a source of immigration to Germany but
return migration to Turkey. During the interviews the topic of return to Turkey was very often
brought up. Since guest work was initially thought as temporary migration to Germany,
returning was always a central motive for Turkish migrants in Germany. Thus, interviewees
tell how the return orientation of “guest workers”affected the whole family, about the return of
family members and friends to Turkey as well as about their own ideas concerning their
return to Turkey.
Most interviewees narrate that the “guest worker” generation assumed to be temporary
guests who will stay for a short time and then return to Turkey. As we know today, only a
limited number of migrant workers actually returned. Rather, “guest workers”used their right
16
of family reunification and sometimes brought their entire family to Germany. Returning home
then was often repeatedly delayed. For example, E-13 tells that her grandfather with her
mother first migrated to Austria and then to Germany where the grandfather worked in a steel
plant. He wanted to work in Germany to earn money and then to return. But since his
daughter started to work in a shoe factory when she was fourteen years old, the idea of
returning after he got money did not fit any longer. Thus, the grandmother and the siblings
also were brought to Germany. In other cases the idea of returning still was upheld when the
whole family was in Germany. For example, J-06 tells that her parents kept the return
orientation of her grandparents what had the consequence that returning to Turkey was
under discussion from time to time during her childhood. One consequence was that her
brother was sent back to Turkey in the age of five years and only returned to Germany in the
age of eighteen years. Also J-09 tells that the return to Turkey always was postponed from
one year to another in her family. They always lived out of their suitcase and thought that
they would go the next year. J-09 tells that the negative aspect was that she never could
have firm targets concerning school but also friends. She says she never could feel at home.
Also E-43 tells that his father came to Germany to save money, in this case for a tractor. But
then they never returned. The interviewee adds, "Two generations for one tractor ...". He
says that a part of the so-called second generation is still sticking to the dream of returning
home.
A part of the interviewees tells about family members and friends who finally went back to
Turkey. For example, in the case of E-05 his parents and brothers returned to Turkey and he
is the only one of his family who still is in Germany. Also two good friends of E-05 returned.
And E-14 tells that his sister, who is like he grown up in Germany, is living since some years
in Turkey. Recently also his parents returned to Turkey and E-14 also considers it possible to
follow them in future. In other cases interviewees tell that their parents in the end returned
after retirement. E-26 tells that her parents lived for 40 years in Germany until they returned
to Turkey where they have their own house. E-26 describes that it was not so easy for her
parents to return and their children had to attend and to help them. E-45 says out of the blue
his father wanted back to Turkey. E-45 thinks the reason was an operation his father had.
Then, in less than two years his parents went to Turkey and E-45 had no other option than to
take notice of this. At that time the father was older than 70 years. E-40 tells about his father
who came to Germany to save money for a house in Turkey, that he is back in Turkey since
ten years and that he does not miss Germany. E-40 says that his father has kept his promise
after 25 years. But not always the parents of interviewees stay in Turkey the whole year. For
example, E-06 tells that his father has built a new house in Turkey and now is more there
than in Germany. And the retired father of E-33 stays in Turkey between May and
17
September. Since the mother is still working, she is only in Turkey during the summer. The
parents of E-33 want to wait until the retirement of the mother to spend more time in Turkey.
And the parents of J-22 are just waiting for the graduation of her daughter to return
completely to Turkey. Her father already stays in Turkey for six months. And also her mother
is more often in Turkey compared to earlier times. But she is physically handicapped which is
beside her children also a reason that she cannot stay in Turkey for a longer time.
Some of our interviewees themselves return to Turkey. For example, J-20 emphasizes that
she always wanted to return to Turkey. Since some years she works in Turkey and also has
her main residence there. And her husband who is unemployed since ten years increasingly
spends longer periods in Turkey. J-20 still has a secondary residence in Germany and is
regularly all three months here, also because her children live in Germany. Also E-20 has
concrete plans to return to Turkey. When she was earlier in Turkey for holidays with her
parents, there was always the question, when they will return. But they did not have an
answer. And the interviewee could not imagine to life in Turkey at that time. This changed
since E-20 met her present husband when she was in Turkey for a business trip. They
married in 2009 and her husband came to Germany. But their common plan is to stay in
Germany for some years and then to move to Turkey together. They as well as her parents
already have bought flats in Turkey for this aim.
Other interviewees still live the dream of returning to Turkey, like E-05, E-07, E-09, E-26 and
E-29, but suspend it continuously. In most of these cases the decision about staying in
Germany or returning to Turkey is not experienced as an individual decision. Even if
interviewees say that they would like to go back to Turkey, the return is made dependent on
external circumstances, like employment, the family, or retirement. For example, E-05
explains that the economic options to return do not exist and the unemployed E-43 tells that
he would not get a job in Turkey whereas in Germany he is at least entitled to welfare
benefits. Some interviewees narrate that their children are the reason for staying in
Germany. They plan to return after their children finished their education and are
independent (e.g. E-05, E-09, E-22, E-26, E-32). Often the circle of life of the children is in
Germany and it is not foreseeable that it could be an option for the children to life in Turkey.
For example, E-29 thinks that his children would not return to Turkey. Because it would be
hard for him and his wife without them they maybe will stay some months in Turkey and
some in Germany after retirement.
Among our interviewees are also cases where Turkish migrants or their children take a
critical view on return orientations. For example, E-04 says that it is always the same. The
18
people come somehow to Germany and think, now they stay for some years. During thinking,
a child is born. He adds that he do not tell something new. Then the people continue to think.
And while they are thinking a second child is born and ten or fifteen years have passed. And
during nothing than thinking there is no change to get back. Even today they continue to
think that they will return. And a problem in any type of willingness to integrate lies in this
point. The nonsense, as E-04 puts it, is passed from generation to generation. It does not
matter what they do, the idea is there latently. It does not matter what happens, you can
return. His parents, also noting unusual as E-04 says, are commuting between Germany and
Turkey. Half a year here, half a year there. But he thinks that the next generation is fixed
here, what makes it difficult for them to return. Also E-30 is grown up with an omnipresent
backward orientation of her parents. The parents lived in Germany since two years at the
time when E-30 followed them in the age of twelve years. The family always thought about
returning but the teacher of E-30 recommended to stay until she has finished school. As she
made a cosmetic school the family wanted to return again but then E-30 met her further
husband. She tells that her husband is of Persian origin and thus would also be a foreigner in
Turkey. In the meantime E-30 has three children and two grandchildren in Germany. She
says, she is living here and will stay here. In contrast to most interviewees, E-38, who came
to Germany when he married his wife, says that it was never his intention to go back to
Turkey with savings. He wanted to stay in Germany and thus invested his savings here. In
the meantime he has bought two flats in Germany. Also J-14 does not want to return. He
decided in the middle of the 1980s to stay in Germany and thus naturalized. He says that he
would not know what to do in Turkey. Similarly, J-10 has her centre of life in Germany. Also
her parents never wanted to return to Turkey. And latest since several stays abroad, among
other five months in Turkey and two years in Costa Rica, it became clear for J-10 that she
belongs to Germany.
5. A Typology of Transnational Practices
In order to get a solid overview about the empirical configuration of the transnational
practices of the Turkish migrants in our sample, we decided to construct a typology of their
different cross-border activities and orientations. We considered this as helpful for
concentrating our efforts of analysis, in a first step, to those aspects of our data which are
especially relevant for transnational practices, in order to serve our main objective of giving
an empirically informed picture of the extent, volume and different facets of transnational
contacts, orientations and ties among Turkish migrants in Germany. In a second step, the
kind and extent of transnational practices could be related to several other aspects such as
19
the respondents’social and structural characteristics such as age, gender, education, kind of
migration, residence status, citizenship etc., on the one hand, and the respondents’individual
experiences and opinions concerning different things, on the other hand.
On the one hand, on basis of usual classifications of transnational spaces in the literature (cf.
Faist, 2000; Vertovec, 2009), we agreed in the TRANS-NET-project upon an analysis
strategy which distinguishes between different domains and spheres of life, namely the
political, the economic, the socio-cultural and the educational sphere, where different
transnational migrant practices can be related to. On the other hand, in any of these single
spheres many different aspects of cross-border orientations and activities are visible. By
going through our material we found that differences mainly occur in relation to the extent
and intensity of transnational practices. Therefore, we decided to combine the distinction of
our four domains with a distinction of different levels of stronger or weaker transnational
practices.2 Both kind of distinctions, however, are ideal-typical, which means that they are
mutually exclusive according to logical criteria only, but certainly do not occur in such purity
in everyday life. In reality, interactions and identifications in the economic, socio-cultural,
political and educational realms overlap. The other dimension of differentiation between
stronger and weaker forms of transnationalism, anyway, is not of a categorical kind, but one
of degree and relative intensity, which should be understood as continuum.
Distinctive Criteria
The differentiation of the different domains arises out of the assumption of distinct fields of
action within different kinds of social systems. We analyzed and categorized the respective
typical interactions within the different social domains according to the key concepts usually
applied in social theory and social science in each of these spheres. Thus, in the political
sphere, political interest, attention to political events, membership in political organizations
and several kinds of political participation are relevant aspects. In the economic domain the
focus is on the production and exchange of goods, capital, services and knowhow and
deployment of manpower and personnel. Within the socio-cultural sphere, social contacts,
communication, significant other persons and identity as subjective identification and
personal sense of belonging are important aspects. Finally, in the educational domain,
socialization experiences, attendance of educational institutions, acquired knowledge and
2
We would like to thank the Estonian team of the TRANS-NET consortium for inspiring us with their conceptual
article (Kalev, Jacobson and Ruutsoo, 2010), although in a different context, to distinguish between transnational
practices according to their extent.
20
competencies and educational ambitions and career plans are the main elements that should
be considered. In all of these different aspects the activities and orientations of migrants can
more or less cross the borders of their resident nation-states.
In each of the four domains, the differentiation of transnational practices according to their
respective extent can be captured with regard to three aspects: in temporal dimension, in
geographical scope and in relation to social intensity and collective and institutional
embeddedness. Concerning the time aspect, first, we take actual transnational activities and
orientations of the respondents as “stronger” than those they report in relation to past
activities or future plans. We also consider the changes and durability of certain practices in
migrants’life-courses as far we have information about that.3 Regarding the social and
institutional embeddedness of transnational practices, we assume that these practices are
the stronger the more they go beyond individual and private behaviour and the more they are
anchored in broader collectives, such as families, organizations and institutions and, thus,
the more they are part of formalised roles and functions and based on shared values and
world views. This, by and large, correspond with existing typologies of transnational social
spaces, which often denote the degree of institutionalisation as an import aspect for
distinguishing different kind of transnational contacts and ties (cf. Levitt, 2001; Faist, 2004,
Pries, 2008)
Concerning the geographical dimension, we find it especially important to distinguish in
principle between, on the one hand, intercultural and interethnic practices as well as activities
within migrant communities which take place still on German territory, and, on the other
hand, contacts, activities and orientations which transcend the nation-state border. We
decided to denote only those practices which traverse the nation-state territorial border as
transnational, while calling ethno-cultural and trans-cultural practices within the borders and
boundaries of Germany as “multicultural”.4 The term “multiculturalism”here is meant to be
primarily related to factual developments of increasing patterns of ethnic diversity and less
concerned with the mainly normative ideas of it.5 It is mainly based on the assumption that
3
The issue of durability of transnational social spaces, in relation to the question of their “newness”, has often
been a matter of controversy within related debates (cf. Kivisto, 2001).
4
We would like to thank the British team of the TRANS-NET consortium, Filippo Osella and Kaveri Harriss, for,
during discussions at project meetings, encouraging us to adhere to this basic distinction between
transnationalism and multiculturalism.
5
Multiculturalism, however, is often associated with normative claims of cultural or intercultural justice for ethnic
or even also other minorities, derived from the fact of an increasing multicultural reality in Western immigration
21
enduring patterns of migration have altered fundamentally the ethnic composition of
Germany’
s population. This is meanwhile accepted also by German politics cross-cutting
party lines. Since the debates on a new immigration law from 2001 onwards and even more
during the rule of a Grand coalition of Christian Democrats and Social Democrats from 2005
until 2009, immigrant integration became one of the top themes of political and public
debates in Germany. These changes are even expressed in significant changes in terms und
descriptions6 and resulted in increasing efforts to support immigrant integration in different
areas, especially regarding educational performances of migrants. One important aspect of
these fundamentally altered perceptions is that the importance of integration in official
discourse meanwhile often is illustrated by enumerating the real numbers of so-called
“persons with migration background”as about 15 million people, amounting to one fifth of
Germany’
s population and with an even higher share among the younger generation.
Furthermore, current wide-ranging efforts in German politics as well as in German society
aiming at facilitating the integration of immigrants is accompanied with an increasing
importance of measures such as called “management diversity”programs or the “intercultural
opening”of organizations and institutions (cf. Gerdes, 2010), according to which the talents
and specific competencies of people with different cultural backgrounds should be activated
and employed innovatively (cf. Faist, 2009). These efforts include campaigns for increasing
recruitment of migrants in different institutions such as police, hospitals and schools in order
to use them as contact persons mediating to migrant milieus and communities.
Hence, immigration and the official recognition of its consequences have remade the
German mainstream in transforming it into a multicultural reality, in a similar way as “new
assimilation theory” states that for the “American mainstream” (cf. Alba and Nee, 2003).
Taking the term “multiculturalism”in this context is of course partly a matter of terminology.
states (cf. Taylor, 1992; Kymlicka, 1995). According to the general thesis of multicultural citizenship, the
established ‘
colour-blind’institutional framework of liberal democratic states which grant individual and formal
rights irrespective of the particular characteristics and identities of persons (such as ethnicity and gender) is
insufficient to fully accommodate ethnic and national minorities because these institutions as well as the political
cultures are biased in favour of the dominant classes or majority’
s ethnicity and religion. Because of that,
multicultural theorists argue for providing group-differentiated rights as an extension of formal citizenship, such as
exemption rights for minority religious practices within official institutions and special representation rights for
cultural minorities.
6
For instance, the term “foreigners”has been renamed as “persons with migration background”and the former
“commissioner of foreigners”has been re-titled as “integration commissioner”. The Christian Democrats in their
party platform now denote Germany as a “country of integration” (CDU 2007: 88) in order to outmatch the
“Germany is a country of immigration”catchphrase with witch they have been criticised in previous decades by
nearly all the other parties for their migration-restrictive position and their insinuated ethno-cultural understanding
of Germany’
s culture.
22
The meaning of “transnational”obviously depends on what we regard as national, namely
whether we think of the nation and the cultural composition of society or whether we focus on
the dimension of territorially demarcated states. If we mean a transformation of the nation
away from previous cultural homogeneity only, we certainly also could speak of
transnational. In any case, it remains a basic difference between this “trans-cultural”and
state-internal aspect of transformation and actual state border-crossing practices and
orientations. Anyway, this difference we aim to address with distinguishing transnationalism
from multiculturalism. Certainly, there might be connections between both kinds of practices,
if, for instance, Turkish migrant organizations on German territory have regular contacts with
partner organizations in Turkey, but these kinds of relations are not necessary at all. For
example, it has been often noted that social practices and cultural understandings in Turkey
are different from that of Turkish communities in Germany.7 That the practices and
institutions of Turkish migrants in Germany are characterized by a self-perpetuating dynamic,
very different from what is going on in Turkey, also been stressed by some of our
interviewees.
The ideal-typical categories we finally developed, in order to systematize the transnational
practices of the Turkish migrants in our sample, consists of strong, moderate and weak
transnationalism and multiculturalism in each of our four domains. However, we treat a
classification in one of the transnational categories (strong, moderate or weak
transnationalism) and a categorization as “multicultural”not as mutual exclusive, because
both kinds of practices and orientations can coincide.
Different Extents of Transnational Practices in the Political Domain
In the political sphere, we take the case of migrants’membership and participation in nonGerman political organizations and institutions as an indication of strong transnationalism.
This includes membership and participation in Turkish political organizations and parties as
well as in those of other countries and, certainly, in genuine transnational organizations such
as Greenpeace, Attac and international human rights organizations. Because of a direct
relationship to non-German institutions, the “strong” category also encompasses actual
voting in Turkish elections, what presupposes that the respondents are still having Turkish
citizenship. Other forms of direct political participation in other countries, however, do not
7
Similarly, since the former German minister of the interior has organized “German Islam conferences”, where
representatives of different Muslim organizations as well as migrants critical of Islam have been invited several
times, the usual talk of a “German Islam”indicates a kind of difference to Islam elsewhere.
23
require citizenship. For example, participation in a demonstration in Turkey or other kinds of
campaigns directed toward the Turkish public would also be counted here. The category of
moderate
transnationalism
comprises
the
actual
and
regular
cooperation
or
communication with Turkish or other non-German political organizations on basis of
membership and work in German political, administrative or other organizations or
institutions. In these cases, transnational political contacts and practices are, so to say, of an
indirect kind, mediated through the functions of organizations and institutions based on
German territory. This category, of course, also covers participation in German migrant
organizations if in these contexts regular debates of political events in Turkey or other
countries take place. Also, those cases will be considered in this category, where persons
deal regularly and organisationally with politics and policies on the international or European
level. Depending on the context of the individual case, also voting in the remote past and
statements of the respondents that they can imagine for themselves to vote in future
elections in Turkey, will be counted. The category of weak transnationalism simply
comprises political interest in and corresponding strategies of gathering information of
political events in Turkey or other countries, usually by the use of some kind of media,
without further political engagement. Finally, we take the category of
political
multiculturalism as covering all forms of political participation or the exercise of political
functions in the context of events and debates pertaining to issues related to German politics
and policies of migration and integration.
Different Extents of Transnational Practices in the Economic-Occupational Domain
In the economic domain, we consider all those transnational activities of Turkish migrants
which are related to their work and occupational functions. That certainly includes
transnational entrepreneurship, which is based on some kind of transnational exchange of
resources, but we also include work and occupations which are located in others than the
private sector. Also this realm will cover cases of transnational investment. However, in
contrast to other theories of transnationalism (cf. e.g. Vertovec, 2009), we left aside
economic remittances, which we consider in the socio-cultural domain under the heading of
transnational social engagement. The reason for that is especially that there are basically
different logics of actions at work, which should not be confused by incorporating them in one
analytical sphere. While remittances are usually based on some kind of moral commitment
and carried out within contexts of reciprocity or solidarity, decisions regarding work and
occupations are, at least to a higher probability, a matter of individual self-interest.
We define strong transnationalism as transnational entrepreneurship or occupational
functions which are essentially based on cross-border exchange of goods, capital, services,
24
know-how or cross-border deployment of workforce. A classification in this category,
however, requires that the meaning of institutions or the economic viability of enterprises are
dependent on cross-border exchanges of resources. The “strong” category also includes
forms of participation in organised cross-border investments aimed at improving one’
s
economic position or stimulating economic development in Turkey or other countries.
Furthermore, the “strong” category contains cases of circular migration, i.e. if our
respondents describe their migration strategy as temporary, thus envisaging concretely
further changes of their country of residence. In the category of moderate transnationalism,
we allocate incidental occupational involvements of migrants with import or export of goods,
capital, service, know-how or workforce if these activities do not constitute a main function of
the respective organizations. Additionally those cases will be counted in this category, if the
respondents express concrete plans of founding a transnational enterprise or to take up a
related employment. The category of weak transnationalism covers all cases where
migrants, during their occupational work, can exert certain single migrant-specific resources,
opportunities or competencies (e.g. language, knowledge of Turkey or other countries,
contacts to Turkey or other countries) which have an actual connection to Turkey or other
countries. The difference to the former “moderate category” is here that these individual
resources are not systematically embedded in organizational activities. Also migrants’rather
vague plans of founding a transnational enterprise or to take up a related employment will be
included here. Finally, the category of multiculturalism means the occupational use of
migrant-specific resources, opportunities or competencies (language, knowledge of other
countries, contacts) without any actual relation to cross-border interactions. As already stated
above, with the increasing salience of integration politics and policies in Germany and
corresponding measures in different societal and occupational contexts migrants are
increasingly desired as performing bridging functions to migrant milieus and migrant
communities. Also, so-called “diversity management”programs in the private as well as in
the public sector are aimed at activating, recognizing and using their supposed specific
competencies based on their ethnic difference and migrant experience. In many of these
contexts, the respective practices are limited to the German territory and nation state.
Different Extents of Transnational Practices in the Socio-Cultural Domain
The socio-cultural domain of transnational practices is somewhat more difficult to deal with,
because it comprises a host of different aspects, which could not be grasped that easily with
basic concepts as in the political and economic sphere. In order to avoid a mixing up of very
different aspects of socio-cultural transnationalism, we decided to construct three subdimensions of analysis: degree of cross-border social contacts, transnational social
engagement and identity and residence.
25
Cross-Border Social Contacts
The extent of migrants’transnational contacts focuses on the frequency of private crossborder communication and visits and the number of significant persons resp. best friends
they actually have in other countries. Hence, the category of strong transnationalism
concerns regular and intensive private contacts to persons living in Turkey or other countries,
because several of their best friends reside abroad. In the category of moderate
transnationalism, we count less intensive and regular social contacts, because few best
friends live in Turkey or other countries. By contrast, the category of weak transnationalism
means sporadic cross-border social contacts, while all of migrants’best friends live in
Germany. Finally, we speak of multiculturalism in cases of intra-ethnic or inter-ethnic social
contacts within the borders of Germany.
Social Engagement
In this dimension, we consider membership and participation in non-political transnational
associations, clubs, organizations and networks on the one hand, and activities of crossborder support and donations, on the other hand. The category of strong transnationalism
covers migrants’memberships and participation in non-German social associations and
organizations and genuine transnational networks. Furthermore, continuous participation in
organised forms of cross-border assistance beyond family relations will be attached to this
category. The category of moderate transnationalism is defined by occasional participation
in non-German social associations and organisations and transnational networks as well as,
in a similar way as in the political domain, by participation in German associations or German
migrant organisation which cooperate regularly with Turkish, other non-German or
transnational organisations. The moderate mode of transnationalism also comprises
continuous informal activities of cross-border help outside the wider family or regular crossborder support of family members. If migrants have concrete plans to participate in nonGerman or transnational organisations or networks or participate in German (migrant-)
organisations which cooperate occasionally with Turkish or transnational organisations, we
will count that as weak transnationalism. This category also includes occasional activities
of cross-border help and support of family members and donations to inter-national aid
organisations. By contrast, all initiatives and activities, individually or within associations or
organisations, aimed at supporting migrants’ integration in Germany, is classified as
multiculturalism.
26
Identity and Residence
In this dimension, we focus on the migrants’statements regarding their sense of belonging,
their views of home and perceptions regarding the centre of their life in relation to their actual
residence, considering expressions of their loci of primary identification, citizenship and
naturalization as well as of their future plans of residence. In order to avoid methodological
nationalism, to our view it is important in this context to include also statements transcending
ethnic and national affiliations if the respondents mention other reference units of
identification. We take as strong transnationalism migrants’ self-descriptions of a binational German-Turkish identity or of one in-between these two countries, cultures and
societies, or expressions of a European or cosmopolitan identity, or of those beyond ethnic
and national identifications such as class, political ideology or bi-regional or bi-local
identifications. Such descriptions may often coincide with substantial residence periods in
different countries and ambiguity about future residence(s). We use the category of
moderate transnationalism, if a certain discrepancy between ethnic-national selfdescription of identity and long-term residence of the migrants is discernible. This includes
statements of concrete plans of return to Turkey or of a further migration to other countries
as well as concrete intentions regarding longer periods of stay in Turkey or other countries.
The category of weak transnationalism is defined as a concomitance of transnational
contacts and a commitment to a life perspective in Germany. Also, if the respondents report
on vague plans of return to Turkey some day or of migration to other countries in the remote
future, that will be captured in this category. However, if the respondents’self-descriptions of
a bi-cultural identity occur without actual relations to Turkey or to other countries and with a
commitment to a life perspective in Germany, we will classify that in the category of
multiculturalism.
Different Extents of Transnational Practices in the Educational Domain
In the educational domain, we take into consideration the impact transnational activities and
orientations have on migrants’educational careers. Transnationalism can influence migrants’
educational career directly, if educational institutions, such as schools or universities, in other
countries are attended, but these influences can also be of an indirect kind, when
transnational practices and orientations of families in other than educational respects have
consequences for the educational success or failure of migrants’children. In the category of
strong transnationalism, we classify cases of attendance of educational institutions in
different countries, if these obviously correspond with or contradict the educational ambitions
as the respondents report it. In this category, we also include parental strategies of bi- and
multilingual and –cultural upbringing in order to enable transnational careers of children or
parental education styles which block educational ambitions of children as a result of
27
transnational or return orientations. In the category of moderate transnationalism, we grasp
the attendance of educational institutions in different countries which resulted in a formation
of certain transnational competencies without corresponding explicit educational ambitions of
the respondents. In addition, the targeted acquirement or successive unlearning of particular
(inter-) cultural and/or transnational competencies or knowledge of Turkey or other countries
as a consequence of migration-related or transnational socialisation experiences will be
counted here. The intentional acquisition of transnational competencies can be pursued for
different reasons, for example in order to enhance one’
s occupational or employment
opportunities, for the sake of self-ascertainment of one’
s own roots or to facilitate a bi-cultural
socialisation of the children to enable them in order understand and communicate with their
relatives abroad. The category of weak transnationalism comprises cases of maintenance
and transmission of knowledge and competencies suitable for border-crossing contacts,
communication and activities without explicit educational ambitions and without actual use of
these outside family relations. Finally, the category of multiculturalism belongs to the
advancement of bi- and multilingual and –cultural competencies or such based on different
life-forms in the context of increasing factual pluralism and cultural diversity within Germany.
It includes also parental strategies of bi- and multilingual and –cultural upbringing in order to
enhance the occupational or other opportunities of the children within a multicultural
Germany.
5.1. The Political Dimension of Transnationalism
In general, the degree of transnational political activities and orientations of our respondents
is lower than in the economic-occupational, the socio-cultural and the educational sphere
(see below). We have very few cases of people partaking in some form of cross-border
political participation and who are actually and directly involved with non-German political
institutions and organizations. One reason for that is certainly that political engagement is a
matter of personal interest and many people today are not interested in politics anyway,
especially if it concerns official political institutions and political organizations such as parties
and governments. On the other hand, practices in the other three domains, be they
transnational or not, are less easy to avoid, because every person has inevitably some sort
of social and cultural relations as well as some kind of educational and occupational career.
Another reason for the lower extent of transnationalism in the political sphere might be the
fact that a number of our respondents gave up Turkish citizenship during their naturalization
in Germany, due to Germany’
s restrictive stance in citizenship law which allow for dual
citizenship only under exceptional conditions. If the persons have renounced Turkish
28
citizenship, however, they also lost their voting rights and it might also be more difficult to
participate directly in other Turkish political organizations and parties.
Citizenship
However, there is no obvious direct correlation of the respondent’
s citizenship and their
extent of transnational political orientations and practices. Although some of the more
transnational active Turkish migrants have dual citizenship (E-20, J-20, J-14) or only Turkish
citizenship (E-01, J-01, J-05) there are also some of them who have German citizenship only
(E-14, J-17, J-19). That, to a significant extent, should be seen in connection to the fact that
our respondents attribute very different meanings to citizenship. For many, it is not primarily
a matter of political participation and representation but rather of other rights and
opportunities or of emotional affiliation and cultural belonging.8 For instance, German
citizenship is valuable for some migrants because of the full spectrum of rights it confers (E01, E-16, E-38, J-10, J-12), for others some more specific advantages are of importance,
such as full residence rights (E-05, E-18), easier travel opportunities (E-02, E-09, E-28, E-46,
J-19) or certain job chances or occupational careers (E-06, E-28, E-46, J-12, J-22). On the
other side, Turkish citizenship can also be considered as conferring certain rights, which the
Turkish migrants do not want to lose. The rights that have been often mentioned in this
context are residence rights, inheritance titles and the right to acquire certain kinds of
property (J-08, J-09, J-15). For many Turkish migrants, however, Turkish citizenship has a
kind of emotional meaning regarding their self-definition of cultural identity and in connection
with social ties they consider as important (E-34, E-40, E-43, J-01, J-04, J-08, J-09). But, of
course, there are also a considerable number of respondents who emphasize their political,
cultural or emotional distance to Turkey, saying that they would or did not feel any problems
when giving up Turkish citizenship (J-02, J-10, J-12, J-18, J-19). In some cases, the value
and meaning of citizenship also changed substantially, in different variants, during the
migrants’life courses (J-08, J-09, J-10, J-17, J-18). In some cases, the migrants’attitude
concerning German citizenship and its acquisition also articulate a sort of protest against
German citizenship policy and the corresponding political and public discourses on the
relation of integration and naturalization, in which politicians, especially of the Christian
Democratic and the Free Democratic Party, recurrently emphasise that dual citizenship
8
For this reason, we treat the issue of citizenship not as something relating exclusively to the political domain, but
rather as a theme which cuts across the different domains we are dealing with, according to the significance of
citizenship from the perspectives of our interviewees.
29
would be an expression of ambivalent political loyalty and that only renunciation of previous
citizenship could be regarded as a sign of migrants’authentic willingness to integrate in
Germany (cf. Gerdes, Rieple and Faist 2007). In this context, some Turkish migrants
explained that they will abstain from naturalization as long as Germany will not accept dual
citizenship (J-01, J-05) or said that they in the past were reluctant to apply for German
citizenship because they felt disproportionate assimilative expectations connected to
naturalization (J-09, J-18). In some cases, also experiences of discrimination and
xenophobia played a certain role to postpone the decision to naturalize. Maintaining Turkish
citizenship, in such instances, was regarded as a kind of insurance to be able to return if the
situation regarding xenophobia would get worse (J-08, J-18).
Political Interest and Participation
Our sample comprises a considerable number of Turkish migrants who regularly pursue
political events in Turkey by reading Turkish newspapers or watching Turkish TV, even if
they do not participate actively in Turkish politics. This is the case with the overwhelmingly
majority of our sample. Patterns of transnational political participation beyond the mere
observation of the political process in Turkey, as already indicated above, are rather seldom.
Interestingly, in almost all of the cases of higher transnational political orientations (E-01, E14, E-20, J-01, J-05, J-14, J-17, J-19) the respective interviewees have strong political
interests in general, including those concerning German politics and policies, and in some
cases also European and international politics. In any case, high transnational political
interests and activities are tied up with similar high interests and patterns of participation
above average in the German political context. This already indicates that political attention
and participation should not be regarded as a zero-sum game in general, that way that
political interest toward events in the country of origin would lead to a reduced political
interest and participation in Germany and to a diminished extent of political loyalty to the
German state, as it is often assumed in German public discourses as well as in some
prominent versions of German assimilation theory.9 By contrast, transnational political
activities, which go beyond the pure observance of political events in Turkey through
television or other media, are connected to occupational functions or to voluntary work in the
broad realm of measures, organizations and activities concerning the integration of
9
For example, the most influential assimilation theory in Germany (Esser 2001) assumes, from a rational choice
perspective, that in the face of always scarce resources (such as attention, time, learning capacities, social
contacts, money etc.) an investment in ethnic or transnational contexts will lead to a corresponding lack of
resources regarding the national context.
30
immigrants in Germany. Hence, the migrants who have stronger political ties to Turkey often
also exercise different kinds of bridging functions between Turkish migrant organizations and
the Turkish community in Germany, on the one hand, and German political and
administrative institutions, on the other hand. Moreover, most of these persons with higher
patterns of participation in Turkey still participate in the German political context to a farer
extent and identify more with the German polity than they are concerned with Turkish politics.
Furthermore, the more transnational political active Turkish migrants came overwhelmingly to
Germany as students and not as former “guest workers”or political refugees. Thus, they
usually belong to the group of the better educated. Although the many “guest workers”and
their family members that we have in our sample, who are in general lower educated on
average and who have been recruited explicitly for work in manual, industrial and low-skilled
jobs, exhibit more often different kinds of stronger transnationalism in the other three spheres
(see below), they do not have strong transnational orientations in the political domain. The
migrants having stronger transnational political interests also are overwhelmingly critical on
Turkish politics and policies and can be located rather on the left-wing side of the political
spectrum. Also, a significant share of transnational political active migrants came as firstgeneration migrants in a later period in their lives. Thus, their greater political interest
towards Turkey seems not very surprising given the fact that they have been socialized
politically in Turkey.
On the other end of the continuum, the persons having weak or no transnational political
orientations are sometimes not very interested in politics at all or are characterised through a
certain kind of distance to Turkish politics, which may have different causes. For instance,
political refugees, or persons who came through other migration channels but felt personally
affected by the military coup in 1980, or members of persecuted minorities in Turkey such as
Kurds and Alevis often turned away their political orientations from Turkish politics at all.
However, as indicated above, a critical stance towards Turkish politics and policies must not
lead to transnational political practices addressing in some way the political situation in
Turkey but can also entail a shift of political attention away from the Turkish to the national
political context in Germany. Another reason for a political distance to Turkey and its politics
is visible in many cases of the so-called second generation. Because these people grew up,
went to school and were socialized in Germany, also their political concerns, as far as they
are politically interested, are simply much more anchored in German national politics and
policies. One additional reason for that might be that they, due to a lack of integration policy
and educational measures facilitating immigrant integration in Germany before the turn of the
century (see above), in many instances had to make significant efforts on their own account
31
for their personal integration and adaptation to the German society. In many cases of final
successful integration trajectories and social upward mobility of second-generation Turkish
migrants, as our respective interviews reveal, their struggles for integration were
accompanied with critical reflections of Germany’
s migration and integration politics, policies
and discourses (J-09, J-15, J-18, J-21). However, there are also a number of so-called
second-generation migrants, being exceptionally successful regarding their social upward
mobility, who intensified their interest and participation in Turkish politics at a later stage in
their lives, in a way not until they felt sufficiently familiar with the German political context (J13, J-17, J-19).
As described in more detail in the previous section, we decided to create different categories
of the extent of transnationalism, in order to make it easier to draw an overall picture of
transnational political interest and affiliation among the Turkish migrants of our sample. To
recall, these are the criteria distinguishing what we call strong, moderate and weak political
transnationalism; an additional category is, as in the other three domains, the multicultural
dimension of political activity (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Different Degrees of Political Transnationalism
Strong
membership and/or
participation in
non-German or
transnational political
associations or
organisations
occasional or regular
voting in Turkey
Moderate
communication and/or
cooperation with
Turkish or other nonGerman parties and
organisations as a
member of German
political actor or
organization
Weak
interest in and
observance of political
events in Turkey or
other countries
participation in migrant
organizations where
regular discussions of
political events in
Turkey or other
countries take place
special attention toward
transnational political
actors (e.g. Attac,
Greenpeace) or
institutions (e.g. on EU
level)
Multicultural
political participation or
political function in the
context of events
pertaining to issues
related to migration and
integration politics and
policies within
Germany
In the following, we will describe some cases of our sample in more detail which we placed in
the different categories of strong, moderate and weak political transnationalism as well as in
the multicultural category. Figure 2 shows, first, the overall distribution of our cases. Here,
another field is included, which contains the cases in which no political transnationalism at all
is discernible.
32
Figure 2: Distribution of Cases according to Different Degrees of Political
Transnationalism
Strong
E-01, J-05, J-20
Moderate
E-14, E-20, J-01,
J-11, J-14, J-17,
J-19
Weak
E-02, E-06, E-33,
J-03, J-04, J-06,
J-07, J-09, J-10,
J-13, J-15, J-16,
J-21, J-22, J-24,
J-25, J-26
Multiculturalism
E-07, E-14, E-20,
E-29, E-39, E-46,
J-01, J-03, J-04,
J-05, J-07, J-13,
J-14, J-15, J-16,
J-17, J-18, J-19,
J-20, J-21, J-22
No
J-02, J-08, J-12,
J-23
Strong Transnationalism
As said, we have very few cases of strong political transnationalism. There are no
respondents which are an actual member of a Turkish political party, organization or
association. There are only three interviewees saying that they actually vote in Turkish
elections. In all cases, they migrated to Germany because they wanted to study at a German
university. Thus, they are definite first-generation migrants, who immigrated to Germany in a
later stage of their lives. E-01, having Turkish citizenship only, says that she has a clear
political opinion, although she is not a member of a political association. At the first election
on the national level, when she was eligible to vote, she lived in another town in Turkey and
went home for voting. During the second election, while living and studying in the
Netherlands, she travelled to Turkey in order to take part at the election because she
considered it as very important. She thinks that the political situation in Turkey is not really
stable. E-01 always votes left-wing parties and is sorrowful about the political course under
the current Prime Minister. Because of the political situation in Turkey it is important for her to
get another citizenship. She says that it makes her very sad that, because of the actual
political situation in Turkey, she would have to select another country for her life perspective.
She is regretting that very much because in other respects she likes her country very much,
also because she can speak her native language there and she has everything else in
Turkey. However, because of the political situation, she does not like to live there. Thus, she
is also thinking to apply for German citizenship. However, because in Germany naturalization
is only possible after eight years residence, she is thinking about other options. She says that
it would be easier to get the Canadian citizenship than the German and as a highly skilled
migrant she would be welcomed there. She says that she knows that it sounds like shopping
but she has only one live. She is also thinking about bringing her family there as well.
33
In the case of J-20, a strong political transnational orientation corresponds with a
transnational way of life also in other respects. Currently, she is working in Turkey for a
German employer. She is conducting an advisory service in different Turkish cities for
persons who are planning to join their husbands and wives living in Germany. Since 2007,
these family migrants are required to pass a German language exam in order to be eligible to
immigrate to Germany. This advisory program, carried out by a German charity organization
and supported by the German “Federal Office for Migration and Refugees”, informs family
migration candidates mainly where in Turkey they can take language courses and tests, but
also about living conditions in Germany, the German labour market, and German culture and
history. At the moment, she has principal residence in Turkey, where also her husband is
living, and secondary residence in Germany, where her two daughters are living. She came
to Germany in 1980 in order to study social work at a German university. She initially wanted
to go back to Turkey thereafter, but after her studies of social work she decided to take up a
second study, this time psychology. During this period she met a German “guest worker”of
Turkish origin who she finally married. Thus, she postponed the date of return. When having
two children and later also with their school enrolment the family delayed their return to
Turkey always further. Already during her studies she worked part-time in charity
organizations performing migrant counselling which she thereafter managed to transfer into a
full-time job. Since their two daughters now have a flat of their own, she wanted recently to
fulfil her long-term wish of going back to Turkey, why she took up her current occupation.
Now, she is commuting between Turkey and Germany very often. Because she has
important social relations and friends in both countries, she says that it might be not unlikely
that she will spend rotationally her whole live in both countries. All members of her family
have dual citizenship since they have been naturalized in Germany in 1992. She has voted in
Germany and in Turkey several times, what she considers as self-evident in her case,
because citizenship and the franchise is, according to her view, an expression of belonging
and recognition of membership and she feels definitely a strong affiliation with both countries.
She is highly interested in politics of both countries; formerly she made voluntary work in the
political environment of the German Green party; and her husband is a member of a left-wing
Turkish party.
J-05, is currently working as an independent journalist. He also came to Germany for study
purposes in 1982 and is very interested in politics in general. He is writing stories and making
interviews about many themes belonging to the broad issue of migration, integration and the
situation of migrants in Germany as well as German-Turkish relations. Due to his work, he
has occasionally contact with Turkish political organisations and associations as well.
Although he is very much concerned with German politics and policies, he has Turkish
34
citizenship only and he refuses to naturalize, although he clearly meets all necessary
conditions, because he is very critical on prevailing German discourses and politics of
integration, which he sees as unduly assimilationist. For him, acceptance of dual citizenship
is the very least, which might change his position. He has voted in Turkish elections, in some
cases also at airports, several times.
Moderate Transnationalism
Among the cases of moderate political transnationalism there are respondents, who are firstgeneration migrants coming to Germany for the purpose of taking up a study at a German
university, and thus could be summarized under the heading of highly skilled migrants, on
the one hand, and so-called second-generation migrants who are born in Germany or who
came to Germany in their early years of life and who are quite successful regarding their
social upward mobility, on the other hand.
An example of the former kind is J-01, who, while their parents were emigrated as “guest
workers”to Germany, grew up with his aunt and attended a boarding school in Turkey since
he was 10 years old. Then he studied political science and international law in Ankara and
came 1986 to Germany for the sake of taking up a follow-up study at a German university.
During visits of his parents, who lived in another German city, he met a woman of Turkish
origin who finally became his wife. This changed his plans, because he initially intended to
return to Turkey after finishing his studies. Because he then had to provide for the
subsistence of his own family he also quitted his studies and took up an employment which
had nothing to do with his academic education. Although he applied for many jobs which
correspond more to his qualifications, it was unsuccessful, because either the respective
employers did not accept his Turkish education and certificates or simply did not want to
appoint a foreigner, as he tells it. However, he is very active during his free time with
voluntary work in the city where he is living. He participates in many Turkish migrant
organizations and is a member of the respective local steering committees in many of these.
Furthermore, he has founded a private sociological institute, by which he collects and
distributes information about and to the Turkish community in the city where he is living. It is
this context, in which he has regular contacts with Turkish media and the Turkish consulate
to which he delivers, for example, individual stories of successful integration of Turkish
migrants or statistical data about the Turkish community in his city. Interestingly, however, he
emphasizes very much, that it is important for the Turkish migrants that they get engaged
primarily with the German political context and participate especially on the local level in
order to represent their interests on their own account and to partake in their process of
integration. He publishes a local electronic bilingual Turkish-German newsletter containing
35
information about political developments in Turkey as well as integration politics and policy in
Germany and especially local integration matters and Turkish cultural events. He has Turkish
citizenship only but, since he is living in Germany, he did never vote in Turkish elections.
Ironically, although his primary focus of political activity is the German context, he refuses to
apply for German citizenship, because he considers it as unfair to expect from migrants to
renounce their previous citizenship as a condition of naturalization. He says that he will
immediately naturalize as soon as Germany will accept dual citizenship. The case of J-14 is
somewhat similar. He currently works on a voluntary basis as secretary general in one of the
most important Turkish migrant organizations. Also he is primarily concerned with the
concerns of Turkish migrants in Germany and all matters relating to integration policies and
politics in Germany, he has regular contacts with Turkish institutions and political
organizations. For instance, he often travels to Turkey for the sake of attending conferences
concerning topics such as international relations, migration and the situation of Turks abroad.
He came 1967 to Germany for the sake of studying political science in Germany. Although
he as well intended to return to Turkey after finishing his studies, especially two events
changed his plan. He became married with a woman of German origin and, because of his
left-wing political orientation, the political developments around the military coup of 1980
facilitated his decision to stay in Germany. After finishing his studies, he has worked in the
umbrella organization of German trade unions and where he was in charge of affairs relating
to the interests of recruited Turkish “guest workers”at their work places. Also during this time
he had regular contacts with Turkish political organisations and administrative institutions.
The second type of migrants performing moderate transnational political interests and
participation toward Turkey belong to the category which is often denoted as the second
generation. These are persons who achieved a high career advancement. For instance, due
to his professional activities regarding integration policy in a German authority E-14 has
contacts to Turkey. He says that some problems in Germany only can be solved with the
help of the Turkish government because many of the Turks living in Germany keep their
Turkish citizenship. E-14 tells that it is necessary that there are people with Turkish
background who function as bridges. That means people who give an understanding of the
Turkish and the German-Turkish position to the government but who have also an effect on
the Turkish community. Another example is E-20, who at the beginning of her professional
activity worked in industry, where her jobs had relation to Turkey or to Turks in Germany.
Now she is working for a German authority. Her job includes that she reads Turkish press as
well as German press insofar the respective articles deal with Turkey or migration. She also
is in Turkey for employment purposes. She tells that after an accident took place in Germany
whereby Turkish migrants were affected, she travelled with a politician to the families of the
36
victims in Turkey and assisted in cultural issues. Still another example is J-17, who is
currently a Member of a regional state parliament and deputy chairwoman of her
parliamentary group. Formerly concerned with integration policies and inter-ethnic relations,
she now is in charge also for other political areas. Because of her Turkish migrant
background she manages the affairs around the town twinning between her and a Turkish
city and has regular relations with the respective politicians and authorities. Beyond that, she
is heavily involved with initiatives to stimulate the economic cooperation between German
and Turkish companies. She also organizes regular visits of a parliamentary women group in
Turkey in order to improve, as she puts it, the image of Turkey among German politicians
and citizens. A final example is J-19, who managed her extraordinary social upward mobility
by marrying a man from Turkey who belongs to the upper middle class. In the interview, she
emphasizes that she had chose him and not the other way round. By his assistance she was
and is still engaged with transnational businesses and became self-employed in several
branches. Currently, she is a self-employed owner of a beauty surgery in her city. Her
husband owns a fruit and vegetables shop. Grown up as a daughter of Turkish “guest
workers”in a city district with a high share of social disadvantaged persons she now lives in
a district known as the residence of the top layer of the city. She and her husband are
cofounder of the Alevi cultural association in her city as well as members of the “Atatürk”club. In the context of events within both associations they have contact to respective partner
organizations in Turkey and they also invite continuously persons from Turkey, such as
politicians and journalists, debating the situation in Turkey.
In all these cases, the relations to Turkish political organizations are mediated through the
work activities of Turkish migrants, voluntary or professional, within institutions and
organizations located in Germany, which are often explicitly concerned with integration
policies and measures.
Weak Transnationalism
This category covers by far the most cases of our sample: Turkish migrants with all sociocultural characteristics who more or less regularly follow political events in Turkey, in other
states or at an European or international level, without being political active beyond that.
They use different media in German or Turkish language to get informed about political
events beyond German national politics, such as newspapers (E-02, E-33, J-13), television
(J-07, J-22, J-24, J-25, J-26) or radio (J-10), online sources (E-02; J-13, J-22, J-24) or
through conversation within the family (J-06, J-22, J-24).
37
However, the intensity of political interest among the Turkish migrants varies. In general,
often those migrants who came at a later stage of their lives to Germany or who spent longer
periods in both countries seem to keep informed themselves more continuously about
Turkish politics. An example is J-07, who followed his “guest worker”parents to Germany in
the age of eleven years and, after having serious problems at a German school including
massive discrimination, he went back to Turkey, attending a boarding school in Istanbul. He
later came back to Germany for taking up a study at a German university. Afterwards, he has
worked in the area of social integration of immigrants, acting as a kind of intermediary for
German charity organization, making and keeping contacts to Turkish migrant families in city
districts with high shares of non-Germans and socially disadvantaged people. Today, he is
married and has two children. Although he emphasises that persons should be interested in
what is going on in the place where they are living, he is wondering about himself that he still
informs himself about Turkish politics that much, that he even follows Turkish parliamentary
debates on TV. Because he actually does not live in Turkey, he, as he says, should observe
Turkish politics to the same extent as Spanish, French or African politics. He has dual
citizenship, travels two or three times a year to Turkey, but has never voted in Turkish
elections and he has only contact to Turkish migrant organizations located in Germany.
In some cases, however, certain experiences the migrants made during periods they had
lived in Turkey, led to a more distanced stance toward Turkish politics. For instance, J-04,
who decided to go back to Turkey in 1990, where he lived until 1999 and where he went into
business with himself, opening some restaurants and bars in Turkish holiday areas, reports
on serious problems he had during that time with Turkish authorities and with practices of
corruption which he did not know and never completely understand. Although having Turkish
citizenship only, he says that he today is much less interested in Turkish politics. While
before 1990, when he was living in Germany since 1966, he has voted several times in
Turkish elections, he will not do that again, as he says.
The so-called second generation Turkish migrants, although some of them even say that
their interest in Turkish political affairs has increased (J-10, J-13, J-17, J-22), are
overwhelmingly more interested in German politics and policies, very often especially related
to questions of migrants’situation and integration. Even some Turkish migrants exercising
political functions in Germany often state that they understand themselves as primarily
representing German people. J-15, who is currently a Member of a regional state parliament,
that, as a German representative, she would see it extremely unfitting when considering
Turkish concerns. E-06 says that he would not stand as a candidate in his town in Turkey. It
is not his aim to make local or state politics in Turkey. But the Turks abroad is a topic of
38
interest for him, to which he wants to make a contribution. Very often, the interests toward
the political state of things in Turkey are accompanied with critical perspectives, relating to
human rights, democracy, the situation of minorities and extent of what is sometimes named
as dangers of islamization in Turkey (J-06, J-10, J-15, J-22, J-24).
Multiculturalism
As already indicated above, many cases of strong, moderate and weak forms of
transnational political interest and participation correspond with activities in the realm of
integration policies and politics and inter-ethnic relations within Germany. That is very
obvious in the case of the strong and moderate modes of political transnationalism, insofar
transnational political relations and activities at an organizational level occur in the context of
respective professional or voluntary work of Turkish migrants. That means, by and large, that
transnational political engagement is overwhelmingly not perceived and do not function as an
alternative to political participation at the national level, but rather as an expansion of it.
However, also in the case of weak transnationalism, political interest regarding Turkish
political affairs are often accompanied with interests toward German discourses and policies
concerning migration and integration, such as the social situation of migrants, their living
conditions, levels of institutional discrimination, their educational and occupational careers
and the like. Therefore, according to our typology, we have categorized by far the most of the
transnational cases simultaneously in what we have called the multicultural dimension of
political involvement (see Figure 2). On the other hand, there are few cases which can be
located in the multicultural category only. For example, J-18 is very interested in German
integration policy, especially regarding educational issues, while performing voluntary and
part-time work in supporting the school careers of children with migration background.
Although at present having Turkish citizenship only, she says that she is rarely interested in
Turkish politics.
Most importantly in this context is the fact that Turkish migrants in most of the cases favour
an understanding of integration which can be named as much more multicultural (cf.
Kymlicka 1995) than the dominating understanding of it as it is currently represented in
German politics, policies and the media (cf. Gerdes 2010). For example, J-01, although
extraordinarily oriented toward the German political contexts and explicitly objecting too
much political engagement with the country of origin (see above), is very active in striving for
recognition of the Turkish language as an official element of German school curricula and is
also a member of a committee organizing the celebration of Turkish public and religious
holidays among the Turkish community in his city. He also favours the recognition of dual
citizenship as a rule. During the interview, he emphasises several times that he thinks that
39
the recognition of cultural identity is a precondition of successful integration, which, by
contrast could not function if migrants are forced to repudiate their roots. Likewise, for J-17, a
member of a regional state parliament, it is especially important that Germany changes its
self-understanding from an ethnically defined collective identity towards one that accepts
ethnic as well as other kinds of diversity as a matter of course. Similarly, in many of our
interviews the respondents reflect intensively about the relation and difference of integration
and assimilation (E-28, E-46, J-05, J-07, J-10, J-13, J-14).
No Transnationalism
The respondents who have no transnational political orientations at all belong
overwhelmingly to the so-called second generation of Turkish migrants who are born in
Germany or came during their very early years of childhood. The reasons for that, however,
seem different. In some cases, they are simply not interested that much in politics in general.
For example, J-08, although within their professional work concerned with labour-market
integration and qualification measures of different groups of long-term unemployed persons,
including migrants, tells that she did not acquire German citizenship up to now, although she
does not have any problems with giving up Turkish citizenship and meets all conditions
required for naturalization and even though she is planning that since several years. The
explanation for this delay, which she gives for herself, as she tells it, is that her political
interest and also her wish to vote in Germany is not that immediate. She also tells that she
was several times in Turkey when there were elections but yet did not vote, because she did
not feel sufficiently informed about the different positions of the Turkish political parties. In
other cases, migrants are simply oriented toward German politics. For instance, J-12,
although he is very critical of official party politics and of, as he sees it, altogether incomplete
political education in Germany, is clearly interested in German politics. By contrast, he is not
at all interested in Turkish politics, because he has problems to understand the official
language in Turkey. But much more important for him is the fact that he, in contrast to
Germany, does not feel affected by Turkish laws. Similarly, J-23, says that her already low
political interests are confined to Germany and to European affairs. Among the cases of first
generation migrants, a main cause for political disinterest vis-à-vis the Turkish political
context are, not very surprisingly, experiences of political persecution. For example, J-02
migrated 1980 after the military coup to Germany and found himself later on a published list
of persons wanted by warrant of arrest so that he could not re-enter Turkish territory for 16
years. Although his asylum procedure in Germany took altogether seven years until he was
finally recognized as political refugee, what had disadvantageous consequences for his
educational career, he says that he is thankful to Germany which gave him a new home. He
has given up Turkish citizenship voluntarily although he had the opportunity to get dual
40
citizenship. Although in his early years in Germany he was a cofounder of some migrant
organizations, today he views it as problematic if one is too intensively involved in ethnic
organizations because there is, according to his stance, always a danger of being concerned
with homeland affairs rather than with actual problems on the ground and on location.
5.2.
The
Economic
and
Occupational
Dimension
of
Transnationalism
In the economic and occupational sphere, we observe in general a much stronger extent of
transnational activities of our respondents than in the political sphere. This may be traced
back to different causes. One reason is probably that every person is somewhat
automatically concerned with economic and job-related activities in order to earn a living,
while political engagement, by contrast, is a matter of personal interest, which might be
absent in a number of cases. Thus, because a higher portion of persons is involved with the
working sphere or, if not yet employed, at least have some experiences or plans regarding
their jobs, what also might raise the share of migrants who make use of transnational
opportunities. In addition, in the economic and occupational sphere the respective activities
are conducted more individually and usually have more immediate results than in the political
sphere where some kind of collective coordination is necessary and where the influence of
individual action is dependent on a host of other factors. That probably enhances also the
incentives of transnational activities in the economic sphere. However, the most relevant
point seems to be a restructuring of the economy in favour of an expanding service sector
and, due to Germany’
s acceptance of being an immigration country, the simultaneous
development of numerous jobs relating in some way to initiatives, projects and measures
facilitating the integration of migrants in Germany. These integration-related jobs that we
attribute to what we call the multicultural category are often accompanied with transnational
relations and activities as well (see our overall classification of cases in Figure 4). In this
sense, there is a similarity in the political and the economic sphere. As in the political
domain, we also observe in the economic domain a strong connection between transnational
and simultaneous multicultural activities.
Many of those migrants exhibiting higher transnational economic and occupational practices
are, however, better-educated and have academic degrees. Because our sample in general
comprises a disproportionally high share of migrants having high school graduation or even
university degree, this probably also contributed to our results concerning a high share of
transnational active migrants in this domain. In many cases, the migrants with high
41
transnational economic activities are self-employed or are working free-lanced (e.g. E-03, E08, E-25, J-03, J-05, J-11, J-13, J-19, J-20). A significant share of transnational active
respondents have already transnational educational experiences and have studied in
different countries or went abroad for the study purposes (e.g. E-07, J-01, J-03, J-05, J-11, J13, J-14, J-20). In the categories of a higher economic transnationalism, we find no
connection with the fact whether the migrants are of the first or of the so-called second
migrant generation, although in the categories of weak or no transnational economic
practices we have disproportionally often migrants of the so-called generation. Somewhat
interestingly, however, our first generation cases in these weak categories are often migrated
from Turkey to Germany at least partly also on political grounds (J-02, J-26).
In Figure 3, the criteria distinguishing the different extents of transnationalism in the
economic and occupational realm are summarized.
Figure 3: Different Degrees of Economic and Occupational Transnationalism
Strong
transnational
entrepreneurship or
occupational function
based on cross-border
exchange of goods,
capital, services, knowhow or cross-border
deployment of
workforce
participation in
organised cross-border
investments to
stimulate economic
development
Moderate
incidental occupational
involvement with
import/export of goods,
capital, services, knowhow or cross-border
deployment of
workforce
concrete plans to
establish a
transnational
enterprise, to take a
related employment or
to migrate for
occupational reasons
Weak
use of certain
transnational
competencies or
resources within
occupational activities
vague plans to
establish a
transnational
enterprise, to take a
related employment or
to migrate for
occupational reasons
Multicultural
ethnic
entrepreneurship
occupational use of
competencies,
resources or
opportunities
connected to migration
background and
cultural diversity
without actual relations
to other countries
circular migration
Figure 4 shows the distribution of cases according to different degrees of economic and
occupational transnationalism, including also the multicultural category, as far as our
interviews have been appraised already in this dimension.
42
Figure 4: Distribution of Cases according to Different Degrees of Economic and
Occupational Transnationalism
Strong
E-07, E-08, E-14,
E-31, E-34, J-03,
J-04, J-11, J-13,
J-19, J-20
Moderate
E-01, E-03, E-25,
E-44, J-01, J-05,
J-14, J-15, J-17,
Weak
E-06, J-07, J-10,
J-16, J-21
Multiculturalism
E-13, E-28, J-01,
J-02, J-03, J-04,
J-05, J-06, J-07,
J-08, J-11, J-13,
J-14, J-15, J-16,
J-17, J-18, J-19,
J-20, J-21, J-22,
J-23
No
J-09, J-12, J-25,
J-26
Strong Transnationalism
Our category of strong transnationalism contain migrants who are primarily concerned with
the cross-border exchange of know-how and import and export of goods and services while
residing in Germany as well as also a few migrants whose occupational functions make it
necessary that they themselves are highly mobile by travelling frequently back and forth
between Turkey and Germany. One example of the latter category is J-11, who is actually
commuting between Berlin and Ankara bi-weekly. He is a self-employed political advisor and
a member of a consulting consortium which assist companies, public institutions and
administrative bodies by, for example, introducing strategies of modern organization and
project management and conducting staff seminars. He has studied political science and
European law in Germany, Canada and Switzerland and is in charge for political consulting,
including political communication, public relations and especially the creation of and contacts
and networks for his customers. To some degree, the consulting consortium also advices
German companies who are interested in investments in Turkey, arranges contacts with
Turkish business partners and informs about co-operation possibilities with institutions
promoting transnational projects like the EU and GTZ. His connection to Turkey stems from a
previous working period in Turkey of about six years, in which he was employed as the head
in the Turkish outpost of German party foundation. Besides his studies in the countries
mentioned above, he has lived and worked in still other countries such as the US, Romania
and Thailand. He is married with a Thai woman. Another case is J-20, which has already
been introduced in the previous section on transnational politics. Currently, she is working in
Turkey for a German employer. She is employed in an advisory program in Turkey, called
“Prepared Arrival at the New Home”, carried out by a German charity organization and
supported by the German “Federal Office for Migration and Refugees”, which informs
husband and wives of migrants who are planning to migrate to Germany where in Turkey
they can take the meanwhile required language courses and tests, but also about living
43
conditions in Germany, the German labour market and German culture and history. At the
moment, she has principal residence in Turkey, where also her husband is living, and
secondary residence in Germany, where her two daughters are living. She is commuting
between Turkey and Germany very often not only for private reasons, because she has
important social relations and friends in both countries, but also for occupational reasons.
Another case in point is E-07, who is the publisher of a German-Turkish magazine in
Germany. Since the production of the magazine is too expensive in Germany, it takes place
in Turkey. In recent years, she travelled to Turkey six times a year for this matter. She
usually first, went by plane to Istanbul, where the graphic designer resides, and then she flew
onward to Ankara to the printing house. Afterwards she brought the printed magazines with
the airplane to Germany. Because of this complicated and costly procedure, she decided for
the last two issues of the magazine not to go to Turkey. Now, she communicates with the
graphic designer by telephone, e-mail and MSN. Then the graphic designer sends the
magazine to the printing house and during three days they bring the printed magazines to the
airplane. E-07 and her helpers only have to pick up the magazines at the airport in Germany.
A part of the overall circulation of the magazine is also distributed in Ankara. A further
example is E-08, who as a travel agent also is visiting very often Turkey in order to find and
communicate with co-operation partners there like hotel owners and travel guides.
In other cases, the economically strong active transnational migrants have a clear residential
focal point in Germany, but are engaged to far-reaching extent in the cross-border transfer of
goods, services or know-how and cooperate with Turkish enterprises. An example is the
textile business of J-03 and J-04, who are currently also life partners. They sell evening and
wedding dresses, to a significant extent to Turkish migrant customers, which they partly
produce in outposts in Turkey, led by family members or other partners, and which they
partly import from other Turkish firms. Both of the partners have numerous business contacts
to Turkey which stem from previous longer residence periods there, where they were selfemployed in different branches as well. Another case here is E-31, who actually works for an
insurance company in Germany and his clients are especially Turkish migrants. In the
meantime the company also has opened a branch in Turkey for the support of returners on
location. For him this branch is a pillar at home and offers the opportunity to return, as E-31
who is born in Germany tells. Still another example is E-34, who is a manager of a Turkish
association and has professional connections to Turkey. A major issue of the association is
Turkish culture. They organize numerous cultural events, such as musical events, cabaret
and a literary circle. Almost daily he has contact to ministries and artists in Turkey. J-13 tells
her occupational story as an increasing rapprochement to her Turkish origin, which she tried
to escape from before. She says that only her work has made her a Turk. She has studied
44
political science and is currently working as an independent journalist at a German
newspaper, although she initially wanted to become an artist. Because of her Turkish
background, during her career, she was always in charge for issues relating to Turkish
migrants, integration and reporting of events in Turkey. Previously, she has worked at a
regional German state ministry of family, women and integration, where she, as she puts it,
had to explain the specifics of Turkey and Turkish migrants. Although she has visit Turkey in
earlier times rather seldom and only on private grounds, nowadays she is in Turkey three to
five times a year for professional reasons. Still another example for strong transnational
relations is J-19, who currently is a self-employed owner of a beauty surgery in her city. She
has many Turkish migrant customers and also has employed some women with migration
background. She managed her extraordinary social upward mobility by marrying a man from
Turkey who belongs to the upper middle class. In the interview, she emphasizes that she had
chose him and not the other way round. By his assistance she was and is still engaged with
transnational businesses and became self-employed in several branches. Also her husband
is self-employed; he owns a fruit and vegetables shop. Grown up as a daughter of Turkish
“guest workers”in a city district with a high share of social disadvantaged persons she now
lives in a district known as the residence of the top layer of the city. In the context of her
current business she cooperates closely with a female friend of her, who also owns a beauty
salon in Istanbul. She says that they exchange many ideas and that she has learned from
her Turkish friend important skills which she adopted in her work. At the moment she,
together with her friend in Turkey, considers the import and export of cosmetic products.
Moderate Transnationalism
In this category, we have a certain number of migrants whose transnational political activities
coincide with their occupational functions. In two cases (J-15, J-17), which we placed in this
category, the respective migrants are members of regional German State parliaments. In
both cases it is very obvious that their migration background and their engagement with, at
least initially, migration and integration policy played a certain role for their occupational and,
in this case, also their political career. In two other cases (J-01, J-14), the respective
respondents are currently working within or exercising mediating functions to migrant
organizations. In all of these cases, the contexts of being primarily concerned with
integration-related and multicultural matters also led to some sort of continuous working
relations to Turkish cooperation partners.
An example is J-17, who is currently deputy chairwoman of her parliamentary group in a
German State parliament. Formerly concerned with integration policies and inter-ethnic
45
relations, she now is, however, also in charge for other political areas such as especially
economic and budgetary policies. Because of her Turkish migrant background she manages
the affairs around a town twinning between her and a Turkish city and has regular relations
with the respective politicians and authorities. Beyond that, she is heavily involved with
initiatives to stimulate the economic cooperation between German and Turkish companies.
She also organizes regular visits of a parliamentary women group in Turkey in order to
improve, as she puts it, the image of Turkey among German politicians and citizens. Another
regional state MP, J-15, although she understands her political and occupational function as
primarily representing German people, she nevertheless attends occasionally conferences of
political organizations in Turkey. However, we primarily placed her case in the moderate
category because she previously worked in the German outpost of a Turkish TV channel
where she was able to exert her knowledge of Turkey and Turkish language competencies
as well as her knowledge of Germany and about the situation of Turkish migrants in
Germany. An example relating to migrant organizations is J-14, whose case also has already
been described in the political part. He currently works on a voluntary basis as secretary
general in one of the most important Turkish migrant organizations. Although he is primarily
concerned with the affairs of Turkish migrants in Germany and all matters relating to
integration policies and politics in Germany, he has regular contacts with Turkish institutions
and political organizations. For instance, he often travels to Turkey for the sake of attending
conferences concerning topics such as international relations, migration and the situation of
Turks abroad. Previously, he has worked in the umbrella organization of German trade
unions, where he was in charge of affairs relating to the interests of recruited Turkish “guest
workers”at their work places. Also during this time he had regular contacts with Turkish
political organisations and administrative institutions. J-01, as another example of the
congruence of political and occupational transnationalism and, thus, also introduced in the
previous section, is very active concerning integration initiatives in the city where he is living.
Although his actual full-time job has nothing to do either with transnational contacts or with
matters of migrant integration, he participates on a part-time basis in many Turkish migrant
organizations and is a member of the respective local steering committees in many of these.
Furthermore, he has founded a private sociological institute, by which he collects and
distributes information about and to the Turkish community in the city where he is living. It is
this context, in which he has regular contacts with Turkish media and the Turkish consulate
to which he delivers, for example, individual stories of successful integration of Turkish
migrants or statistical data about the Turkish community in his city. He also publishes a local
electronic bilingual Turkish-German newsletter containing information about political
developments in Turkey as well as integration politics and policy in Germany and especially
local integration matters and Turkish cultural events. Still another example is E-25, who,
46
besides of publishing a newspaper, sells invitation cards for various occasions. He and his
wife talked to a provider in Turkey from which they imported invitation cards, which are
individually printed in Germany. Expensive and elaborate prints they let produce directly in
Turkey.
Weak Transnationalism
Our category of weak transnationalism contains mainly cases of migrants who work in
occupational functions relating to inter-ethnic or inter-cultural relations in Germany and who
in these contexts sometimes also have transnational contacts or have to use some kind of
transnational knowledge or consider, because of having previous transnational experiences
or actually transnational interests of some kind in other respects, also to bring in some ideas
of transnational activities in their pre-dominant multi-cultural work places. An example is E06, who tells that he noticed a market niche concerning legal questions and corresponding
conflicts concerning migrants in Germany in relation to both Turkish and German law. He
thus decided to become a German-Turkish lawyer. His clients are mainly Turkish clients and
for a certain part of the cases Turkish law is necessary, e.g. in family law. He already knew
before his study that he wants to do that. He says that he already acted as a child in many
ways as a translator between German and Turkish language and culture. Thus, he thought to
make it in a professional way and to earn money for it (237-246). Another example is E-08,
who is currently thinking about establishing a hair salon in Turkey in addition to the one she
already owns in Germany. Only for this reason, she maintains Turkish citizenship. Another
case in point is J-07, who is working in the area of social integration of immigrants, acting as
a kind of intermediary for German charity organization, making and keeping contacts to
Turkish migrant families in city districts with high shares of non-Germans and socially
disadvantaged people. Because he is very interested in issues pertaining to the educational
performances and opportunities of Turkish migrants, he currently considers to establish a
project concerning a better co-ordination of vocational education between Turkey and
Germany in order to make it easier for migrants to continue their occupational career in both
countries if they wish to change their residence. In a similar way, J-10, currently working as a
teacher and having pupils also with migration background, is thinking about her participation
in a more substantial program of transnational student exchange, including Turkey and also
countries where Spanish is the official language, because she previously has resided for
certain periods in Spain and Costa Rica.
47
Multiculturalism
Our multicultural category consists of cases, where the respondents to varying degrees may
have or may have not transnational relations in other spheres, but where they have no such
border-crossing relations and contacts in their jobs, neither actually nor previously. On the
other hand, these migrants make use of opportunities relating to their migrant background
and/or of bi-cultural competencies because they are working in contexts where they are
concerned with inter-cultural relations and programs promoting the integration of migrants in
Germany.
One example is E-13, who recently has set up her own business as interpreter and
translator. She explores that it was always difficult for her parents in Germany (55-56) and
stresses during the interview that it was important for her to improve her social status. What
is crucial for her self-employment is that she wants to make a step forward (86). She wants
to get something done in her live and is working hard for that. She says for her job she really
needs patience, nerves and disciplines (226). Until five o'clock she works in her translation
agency and thereafter she has an additional part-time job in a call centre in order to be able
to save some money. Thus, she often arrives at home not until nine in the evening. She says
that she has no time for personal pleasure and leisure time activities (415-420). Another
example is E-28, who is a pharmacist and tells that she already recognized during her study
that there is a market niche for her as a Turkish-speaking pharmacist. There were Turkish
customers who preferred to come to the pharmacy when she was working there and asked
for her when she was absent. She also mentions misunderstandings between Turkishspeaking customers and German-speaking pharmacists. For example, there was a customer
who had obstipation but got a medication against diarrhoea in the pharmacy. Another
customer took for years an expectorant against headache because she could not read the
package leaflet of the medicinal product. In the meantime, also doctors call her when they
have a Turkish patient in their consulting hours and ask her to give a translation. She tells
that Turkish migrants also come to the pharmacy to ask her also for help in other areas of
life, such as their telephone connection, cancellations or pension applications. Even if this
takes a lot of time, she regards this kind of support as something, as she puts it, that we owe
to the first migrant generation. She explains that it is the lower social class that emigrated
from Turkey to Germany and that they only can help themselves to a certain degree. (66-91)
Drawing on the experience of her parents she explains that the first generation can get along
in their daily routine but they cannot cope with official matters in Germany (100-102). Other
examples are J-02, J-06 and J-08. J-02 is a political refugee, who has a strong orientation
toward Germany with rare contacts to Turkey, which decreased further since his mother in
Turkey died. Having a teaching degree, he currently works as a teacher of integration
48
courses for migrants at an inter-cultural meeting place. It can be assumed that he was
employed because of his migrant background. The same is true in the case of J-06, who has
recently been employed as research assistant in a project on functional illiteracy, in which
context also migration-related issues also play a role. J-08 has a leading function in an
agency concerned with labour-market integration and qualification measures of different
groups of long-term unemployed persons, including migrants. Before, she has worked in
many other jobs relating to migrant integration. She says that her work always was
connected to her migrant background. Although she has strong private factual and emotional
relations to Turkey, her professional role is limited to Germany. Our sample also contains
some migrants who are still going to school or university, but who mention ideas about their
later occupations in the pedagogic realm in order to support especially children with
migration background (J-18, J-23).
No Transnationalism
Interestingly, we have comparatively few cases of migrants whose occupational functions
show no transnational and multicultural features at all. J-25 and J-26, who are son and father
respectively, are self-employed, working part-time in a kiosk owned by their family. In their
fulltime jobs, E-25 is working on the assembly line in a big car producing company and E-26
is a manual worker in a German parcel transportation company. J-12, after having serious
problems with drugs and criminal activities, currently makes a vocational education as a male
nurse. J-09 as a self-employed woman hairdresser has customers mainly of German origin.
Although she has strong emotional ties to Turkey, in her job there is no transnational relation
or orientation.
5.3. The Socio-Cultural Dimension of Transnationalism
Since the socio-cultural dimension of transnationalism includes a variety of aspects of crossborder activities and orientations, we differentiated this dimension in three sub-areas. The
first sub-area addresses transnational private contacts and networks, the second social
engagement and social security, and the third self-descriptions of the own identity and further
life perspectives of the respondents in the German survey.
5.3.1. Private Contacts and Networks
Nearly all of our interviewees maintain regular and intensive, continuous or at least sporadic
private contacts to Turkey. This includes family members, relatives and friends living in
49
Turkey. The attitude concerning contacts to Turkey differs from interviewee to interviewee,
whereby four types can be distinguished. First, for some of the interviewees it is a matter of
course to have contacts to Turkey. For example, E-06 says concerning his contacts that
actually private one has a lot of friends and especially relatives in Turkey, E-22 explains it is
needless to say that he still is in contact with people in Turkey, and E-39 says that private
contacts to Turkey he has automatically. Second, for another type of interviewees the
establishment and maintenance of contacts has to be cultivated continually. For example, E10 who is born in Germany narrates that only in the age of seventeen years he tried to find
some links to Turkey and thus stayed there for a longer time. Even if J-12 is born in Turkey,
he tells he neglected his family contacts to Turkey but since one year he tries to intensify
these contacts again. He says that after a certain age the importance of relationships is
increasing. For J-10 a certain basis is necessary to keep a relationship with people she does
not see for eleven months a year. For her trust is an important component to maintain
contacts. Also E-38 tells that contacts to Turkey got difficult but he would not like to forget
and he would not like to be forgotten. Third, two interviewees explain that family relations do
not change with increasing physical distance. E-14 has regularly e-mail exchange with his
parents and sister but does not see them very often in his view. He adds that he has to be
honest, when his parents still where in Germany not far from his town he also did not visit
them every week. Similarly, E-45 tells that due to the illness of his mother he has thought
about his contacts to Turkey. He asked himself how often he has seen his parents when they
still lived in Germany. And he gives the answer that they also at that time only telephoned
from time to time. E-45 says that that is the reality today. He has two children which also
needs his help. Fourth, whereas most of the interviewees consider their contacts to Turkey
as positive, two interviewees describe them as critical or even forced. J-02 who came as
political refugee to Germany says that he is always a stranger in Turkey. When he talks to
friends in Turkey he recognises that they distinguish between them in Turkey and the others
in Germany. As consequence J-02 feels that he does not belong to them in Turkey any
longer. They do not observe him as part of them. This experience also shows him that he
belongs to Germany. In consequence, he engages less in the country where he is born by
pure change. From today's point of view he also sees the reason for earlier visits in family
expectations. His mother was happy because of his visits but since she died he did not travel
to Turkey for three years. He says that for him it does not matter if he goes to Turkey or not.
Also the seventeen year old J-22 is ambivalent concerning her contacts to Turkey. She says
to be honest she is not interested in her Turkish contacts much. When her parents are in
Germany she has to telephone with her grandfather or her aunts. This concerns mainly
religious feasts like Ramadan even if she does not believe on that. J-22 says that is
somehow forced.
50
Travelling to Turkey
The frequency of travelling to Turkey for visits and holidays is really different. While some of
the interviewees go to Turkey several times a year (e.g. E-01, E-02, E-06, E-14, E-26, E-37,
J-01, J-08, J-15, J-20) or once a year, especially during the summer holidays, (e.g. E-08, E05, E-12, E-21, E-22, E-29, E-46, J-14) others only go there every few years (e.g. E-38, J-02,
J-06, J-12). In exceptional cases interviewees never travel to Turkey. For example, since the
Kurdish parents of E-13 escaped from Turkey when she was one year old she has not been
in Turkey again. The interviewees not only tell about their visits and holidays in Turkey but
also that relatives and friends from Turkey visit them in Germany (e.g. E-01, E-02, E-05, E06, E-08, E-14, E-27, E-42, J-08).
Across a lifetime the frequency of travelling to Turkey may change. Especially retired
interviewees tell that now they can go to Turkey more often and for longer periods. For
example, since the husband of E-37 is retired they visit their families in Turkey three times a
year. Before retirement they were in Turkey only once or twice a year. Also E-44 is retired
and thus stays in Turkey for two or three months a time. In other cases the frequency of
travelling to Turkey diminishes for various reasons, such as time, money or the dead of a
significant person in Turkey. For example, E-05 usually went to Turkey once a year, mostly in
the summer holidays and if possible for one month. When he set up his own business, E-05
did not go to Turkey for years and only his wife with the daughter went there. In the
meantime he can make holidays again. E-03 went first with her parents and later with her
husband once a year to Turkey. Only since the last three years this is not possible any
longer. Now they go one year and the next they stay in Germany. They have bought a
condominium in Germany and she also needs to pay her master school. Thus, everything is
not possible. When she was a child J-23 was in Turkey regularly what has changed. In the
last four years she was only once or twice in Turkey. This has also financial reasons. Her
parent bought a new house what caused immense costs. Thus, the eighteen year old J-23
works beside the school to contribute to the family income. But not only time or money is a
reason why interviewees change their habits concerning Turkey. Since the grandparents of
J-06 do not live anymore her Turkey contacts have decreased sharply and the last time she
was in Turkey was in 2003.
All in all, interviewees tell that nowadays it is easier to go to Turkey then in earlier times
because of new and cheaper technologies of travel. For example, only in the first time when
J-20 was in Germany she did not travel to Turkey two times a year because then there were
no cheap flights. And also J-22 tells that contacts to Turkey are more frequent compared to
51
former times because of cheap flights. While interviewees in earlier times went to Turkey
especially by car (e.g. E-19) now nearly all interviewees fly to Turkey. An exception is the
family of E-43 which lives from social benefits. Because the flights are really expensive for
them, they mostly go to Turkey by car. Then they travel for three days and see also other
countries such as Greek or Bulgaria. On the last summer holidays they went to Turkey
together with three other families, that is the two brothers of E-43 and a friend of an uncle
and their families. In total they were ten children what was fun for the daughters of E-43.
They made stops at petrol stations, cooked tea and eat something. In Turkey everyone went
to his own family.
Most of our interviewees combine visits of relatives and friends with holidays when they
travel to Turkey. Either they take the visits as holidays or they make holidays after they
visited their contacts. For example, E-26 tells when they go for holiday in Turkey, they first
visit her parents, then her parents-in-law and after that they travel together with friends to the
sea where they relax for ten or fourteen days. E-03 explains that in the past it was enough for
them to stay in their village and spend time with their relatives. But now their children are
grown up and they want something else. Thus, the family travels around in Turkey. But not in
each case visits and holidays are compatible. Thus, E-05 and his family stay maximum one
week or ten days with their relatives or friends in Turkey and then they make holidays. E-05
says that he associates holidays with relaxation and not with regimentations and invitations.
And E-45 tells that this year he wanted to make holidays with his wife and his children in
Turkey. But since his whole family and the whole family of his wife are in Turkey, they
travelled all over Turkey to see them. Thereby the holidays have fallen by the wayside. E-45
says that they always have to make compromises. Other interviewees do not make this
compromise but make holidays in Turkey without visiting relatives or friends. For example,
when E-33 was a child she visited her relatives in Turkey together with her parents but since
she is adult she does not see them any longer and only goes for holidays to Turkey. Also E41 goes from time to time to Turkey but not to the town where his sister is living but makes
holidays for example in Antalya.
When interviewees go to Turkey to visit their relatives, they often bring gifts with them. E-46
tells when one goes to Turkey, one has to take a lot of presents with him or her. Thus,
Lufthansa allows 30 kg only for Turkish “guest workers”. In earlier times the people brought
Milka-chocolate, shampoo, toys and canned food to Turkey. And his grandmother always
took spaghetti with her. Also wheelchairs are often brought to Turkey. In contrast jewellery
and textiles are brought from Turkey to Germany. When E-01 travels to Turkey she brings
gifts for her close family. That includes especially chocolate and cheese because those
52
products are not cheap in Turkey. Earlier she also brought things from "Tchibo" but since that
shops are also in Turkey she does buy presents from there any longer.
Some of the interviewees describe how their visits in Turkey look like. To mention only some
of the examples, E-13 describes that she does not call her relatives in Turkey but when they
are there the relationship is not reserved or foreign. They stay in the house where the
grandmother and an uncle are living. They see each other regularly and have breakfast or
coffee and cake together. E-29 tells that his grandfather has 35 grandchildren and for
holidays all return to Turkey and meet there. When E-29 is in Turkey the relatives often come
to his house. Sometimes they come in the night. Then they make Turkish tea and eat
watermelon. And J-22 tells that at holidays in Turkey she can make what she wants to. She
visits relatives and there are enormous festivals where fifty people sit around a desk. During
their stay in Turkey some of the interviewees also got to know their future spouse. For
example, E-03 tells that she fetched her husband from Turkey. They already have known
each other because they come from the same village in Turkey where E-03 made holidays
with her parents each year. E-19 who is born in Germany tells that he met his future wife at a
wedding in Turkey and liked her charisma. He explains that it was not that his parents
proposed her, rather they met like two normal people. Also E-45 who came to Germany as a
child saw his wife in Turkey and felt in love with her. He narrates that he was in the flat of his
parents and has seen his wife on a balcony and contacted her.
Communicating to Turkey
When the interviewees are back in Germany they use communication technology to stay in
contact with their relatives and friends in Turkey. E-06 says that nowadays one does not
have to travel to Turkey because of internet and telephone. Everything is flat and at a
reasonable price. And also other interviewees tell about changes in technology of
communication for keeping contact to Turkey. J-22 tells that the contact to Turkey is more
frequent in contrast to former times. Earlier one could call once or twice a month but now
there are hundreds of thousands tariffs to Turkey. One pays once a month and can
telephone as long as one wants. E-19 who is born in Germany tells about his childhood that
his family called his aunt, wrote letters and went to Turkey by car each year for five or six
weeks. At that time the technological communication was not very common. Although there
were telephones the connection was bad and not everyone in the village of his parents had
an own phone. Thus, they had predominantly postal correspondence. They wrote a letter and
then they had to wait for four or five weeks for the answer. Compared to that nowadays he
communicates with his contacts in Turkey by telephone, SMS and internet. When he met his
53
wife in Turkey they first had a far-ranging relationship. They telephoned and wrote text
massages.
Just like concerning travelling to Turkey, also in the frequency of communication are great
differences among our interviewees. The communication through telephone and internet
varies from once a day (e.g. E-02, E-06, E-14, E-42, E-44, J-20), several times a week (e.g.
E-01, E-17), once a week (e.g. E-08) to once a month (e.g. E-12). Some interviewees call
their relatives only for festivities (e.g. E-46) or never call them but only have contact when
they meet in Turkey (e.g. E-13).
In our survey most interviewees use phone calls to stay in contact with their relatives and
friends abroad. During the calls the interviewees talk about a wide range of topics with their
relatives or friends in Turkey. For example, E-17 tells that this allows him to see how his one
year old nephew is growing up and he tells his relatives about his son. In the case of E-42
she and her two daughters call her sisters every day. At the time of the interview the most
important topic was an upcoming wedding in Turkey. Also E-44, the father of E-42, calls his
daughters almost every day, even if only two minutes is some cases. They talk about how
they are doing, the weather and what other people are doing. But not all interviewees
maintain very regular and intensive telephone contact with their relative and friends in
Turkey. E-45 tells that they are a very communicative family and adds that this is meant
ironically. When he telephones with his brother, the sister-in-law and the nephew, he asks
how his grandparents are. With his parents he often talks about their healthy. And since they
are still registered in Germany, bureaucratic matters and correspondences are often a topic.
He says he is the person in charge of his parents for the authorities. Also E-46 states that he
belongs to the few-telephone users. Only for festivities he telephones with his relatives in
Turkey. Thereby always the younger have to call the older.
A smaller fraction of the interviewees use new communication technologies, such as internet,
e-mail, chat, Messenger, Skype-calls or Facebook. For example, for E-02 Facebook offers
the opportunity to know daily what happens in Turkey. All in all, it is to be analysed
systematically what technologies are used to maintain cross-border contacts and on which
factors, e.g. social class or gender, the use of new technologies is depending.
While the comments above addressed the frequency and the intensity of travelling and
communicating to Turkey, in the following we will describe different degrees of socio-cultural
transnationalism concerning private contacts and networks.
54
Figure 5: Different Degrees of Socio-Cultural Transnationalism regarding Private
Contacts and Networks
Strong
regular and intensive
private cross-border
contacts
(communication and
visits), because several
relatives and/or best
friends live in Turkey or
other countries
Moderate
less intensive but
continuous private
cross-border contacts
(communication and
visits), because few
relatives and/or best
friends live in Turkey or
other countries
Weak
sporadic private crossborder contacts
(communication and
visits), while nearly all
relatives and/or best
friends live in Germany
Multicultural
continuous inter-ethnic
private contacts
(including to ethnic
Germans); one or more
best friends from
another ethnic origin
Figure 6: Distribution of Cases according to Different Degrees of Socio-Cultural
Transnationalism regarding Private Contacts and Networks
Strong
E-01, E-02, E-06, E-08,
E-14, E-26, E-42, J-03,
J-08, J-09, J-20
Moderate
E-05, E-10, E-12, E-17,
E-19, E-21, E-22, E-27,
E-29, E-34, E-37, E-39,
E-40, E-44, E-45, E-46,
J-10, J-14
Weak
E-03, E-04, E-05, E-07,
E-13, E-38, E-41, J-01,
J-02, J-06, J-12, J-15,
J-17, J-22, J-23
Multiculturalism
E-04, E-28, E-33, E-37,
J-01, J-08, J-17
Strong Transnationalism
Especially Turkish migrants who changed their residence between Turkey and Germany
several times have regular and intensive private cross-border contacts. J-20 migrated alone
to Germany and thus her entire family and relatives are in Turkey. Moreover, she has five
good female friends there. During her life in Germany she continuously kept strong contact to
Turkey. She went there around twice each year and telephoned with relatives and friends
nearly daily or had e-mail exchange with them. In the meantime the main residence of J-20 is
again in Turkey where she also works while her second home is still in Germany. Her
husband is unemployed since ten years and stays always longer periods in Turkey. J-20
travels regularly all three month to Germany, among other things because her children are
here. Since she is working in Turkey she also notes that her German contacts are missing.
Concerning her further residence she says that it is likely that she commutes between Turkey
and Germany permanently because her husband will stay in Turkey and her children in
Germany. Also J-03 lived always for longer periods in Turkey and in Germany. She is born in
1955 in Turkey and stayed there until 1971, then she went to Germany (1971-1986) and
again back to Turkey (1986-1999). Since 1999 the centre of her live is again in Germany and
he plans to stay here in the further. Now she has a life partner with Turkish origin. She is
55
divorced from her German husband who lives together with their daughter with German
citizenship in Turkey. Moreover she has relatives and friends in Turkey.
Also the international students we interviewed are clearly embedded in both countries. Most
of the relevant contacts of E-01 are still in Turkey, such as her parents and brother, relatives,
her parents’circle of friends and her best friend as well as other friends. She is in Turkey at
least four times a year and she still has her room in her parents’house. Her parents and the
brother also visit E-01 regularly in Germany. Moreover, with her parents she phones once in
two days and once a week with her brother. With her best friend she telephones rarely,
maybe once a month, but they write e-mails several times a week sometimes. E-01 tells that
she and her fiancé are going to marry in Turkey because all contacts, friends and
grandparents are there. E-02 lived as child for five years in Germany. After she returned to
Turkey she maintained contact to teachers and class mates in Germany. A close friend also
visited her in Turkey and they are still in contact even if not really regularly. Since E-02 lives
again in Germany for her PhD she is in continuous contact with her parents and with friends
of her student days. They use internet communication channels like Facebook. She says that
they know daily what happens.
Among our interviewees are further interviewees who have regular and intensive private
contacts to family members as well as to friends (E-06, E-14, E-26 and J-08). In the case of
E-06 are a lot of friends and especially relatives in Turkey. His wife is from the same place in
Turkey and belongs to the distant relatives. He regularly goes to Turkey and his parents also
come often to Germany. He tells that in total they see each other around ten times a year
and they telephone almost every day. E-14 explores that he comes from a large family and
his contact to Turkey has never been broken. Moreover, his sister, who also is grown up in
Germany, is living in Turkey since some years. They have almost daily e-mail exchange but
months can pass until they meet again. The parents of E-14 also have bought an apartment
in Turkey and will follow their daughter after the retirement of the father. In addition to family
contacts E-14 made some friends during his study in America which now are back in Turkey.
E-26 owns a furnished house in Turkey and she is every year there two times. When she and
her husband go to Turkey they first visit her parents, then her parents-in-law and after that
they travel together with friends to the sea where they relax for ten or fourteen days. J-08 is
usually in Turkey five times a year for visits or holidays. And once a year she has visitors
from Turkey. She tells that during the last ten years she has build up a large circle of friends
in Turkey. Beside that important significant persons are her cousin and her aunt on her
mother’
s side.
56
In some cases the contacts of interviewees to Turkey are limited to the family. E-08 tells that
there is a strong family bond. The grandparents on the mother’
s and on the father’
s side live
in Turkey. She has contact to her family in Turkey at least once a week, she is always there
for two weeks for summer holidays, and sometimes also for a longer weekend. This year E08 will first fly to Turkey together with her best friend and later with her mother and brother
for the 80th birthday of her grandmother. For New Year’
s Eve her family will come for three
months to Germany and will stay at her aunt’
s home. The other aunt of E-08 works in Turkey
for a German company and thus comes all three months to Germany. Also E-42 tells that
they have a really strong family bond. The daughter of E-42 tells when they arrive in Turkey
everyone is happy and the family is embraced. When E-42 meets her two sisters in Turkey
they are inseparable. They also telephone every day. At the moment they talk especially
about the nephew living in Germany whose engagement and marriage will take place in
Turkey. The family of E-42, which lives from social benefits, could not take part at the
engagement but they hope to save enough money to go to Turkey for the marriage. This
would also be very important for the two daughters of E-42.
The case of E-42 shows that there is also a strong emotional bond to Turkey. The same
applies to J-09. J-09 is grown up with her grandmother until she was eight years old and she
says that she absolutely wants to be buried next to her grandmother’
s grave in Turkey. Even
if she was not often as wanted in Turkey the last years, she now would like to have more
time there to care for her grandmother’
s grave but also to visit those relatives who have a
special place in her hard. There are cousins she loves a lot. J-09 explores that even if she
meets some of the important people in her live not for three of four years, she feels the
closeness. Furthermore, her contacts to Turkey have actually intensified since her parents
returned to Turkey in the meantime. Beside her contacts to Turkey J-09 has a friend who
migrated to Turkish Cyprus and friends in Barcelona.
Moderate Transnationalism
The interviewees in this category have less intensive but continuous private contacts to
Turkey. Even if the current centre of life and also important contacts are in Germany, they
maintain contact to a few relatives or friends in Turkey they describe as important references.
For example, during childhood and adolescence J-10 and her parents went to Turkey every
year. During her study she went there only every two years but then she stayed for a period
of fife months in Turkey. For her it is really clear that her centre of life is in Germany because
there she is socialised and has the most intensive contacts. Nevertheless the relationship to
Turkey is important for J-10 and she sets out some significant persons. Her grandfather, her
grandmother, her aunt and her uncle were always very important for her because they
57
always took care of her when she was in Turkey. They have integrated her and spent time
with her. The relationship was always positive. Moreover, she mentions a friend who now is
back in Turkey but with whom she lived together while she studied in Germany. With her she
has more contact than to the friends in the home town of her parents. But even if those
contacts are not really continuous she meets them when she is in Turkey and she does not
feel foreign with them.
Also of other interviewees in this category some of the most important contact persons live in
Turkey. For example, E-05 tells that his parents and the parents of his wife are dead and to
his two brothers in Turkey he does not have a good relationship. Thus, when they go to
Turkey they have more contact with the family of his wife. Moreover, he has two good friends
who returned to Turkey and about which he says that they are better than brothers. They visit
each other and can stay overnight at the friends' home. E-12 has private contacts to his
village in Turkey. Especially he points out his uncle who returned to Turkey with whom he
calls at least once a month. Also an uncle who acts as father figure is important for E-17. In
addition he has a big family on the paternal side as well as on the maternal side and tries to
call to Turkey three times a week. E-40 tells that he has very good relations to Turkey. To his
parents and relatives but also to his circle of friends which includes famous actors, singers
and authors. He is divorced two times. His second wife and their child live in the same
locality as he whereas his first wife lives with her new husband in Turkey. Since the new
husband did not want the son from the first marriage, the son is in a boarding school in
Germany and visits E-40 from time to time.
In some cases the interviewees or their close family own an apartment or a house in Turkey.
E-19 says first when he and his parents went to Turkey they stayed at their relatives' home
but in the middle of the 1980s his father has build up a house there. On holidays E-29 always
goes to the place where he is born and where he comes together with all of his relatives. The
houses of the relatives in Turkey are situated in one street and because the house of E-29 is
located in the middle they often meet there. The grandmother and the aunt of E-34 live in
Turkey. And due to the summer house of his parents he also has a circle of friends in Turkey.
He says, for him it is important to keep contacts in Turkey. And also the retired E-44 says
that in Turkey his has a villa and a big garden with tomatoes and grapes. He says in Turkey
one can have a better life. When he is in Germany he calls his two of four daughters in
Turkey every day.
The intensity of contacts to Turkey also depends on the concrete life situation of the
interviewees. For example, whereas E-10 went to Turkey only once or twice a year for
58
holidays with his parents earlier, with seventeen years he stayed there for a longer time and
got to known the strong family bond. Due to retirement E-37 as well as E-44 can stay more
often and longer in Turkey. And the phase of life when E-19 as well as E-45 had a more
intensive contact to Turkey was when they met their future wives there. E-19 who always had
contact to relatives in Turkey got to know his future wife at a wedding in Turkey. Since she
had not finished her university degree, they had a far-ranging relationship the first time.
During this time they telephoned and wrote text massages. Then they married in Turkey and
she came to Germany. Nowadays when they go to Turkey they meet the relatives whom they
missed for months. That are especially the mother of his wife, her relatives and his relatives.
Also E-45 met his wife in Turkey when he was with his parents in the apartment they own.
When he was back in Germany he tried to keep the contact. Thus, they stayed in contact for
five or six years before they married and his wife came to Germany. At that time his wife had
to finish her studies in Turkey and went there from time to time for tests. His whole family and
the whole family of his wife live in Turkey.
Weak Transnationalism
When E-14 talks about “holiday-Turks”he seems to have especially this type of migrants in
mind. He says that most Turks living in Germany are “holiday-Turks”. He describes them as
people who go abroad for four or five weeks but otherwise they have no knowledge about
their home country. In his opinion they often have an idealised picture of Turkey and that
they would not be able to live there. Also J-10 who lived in Turkey five month during her
study, reflects the difference between holidays and everyday life. She tells as child they had
sometimes the wish to return to Turkey because at that time she had another picture of
Turkey. It was idealised, everything was more pleasant and the people were nicer she
thought. She says that during the holidays the situation is different to living there. Due to the
experiences she made abroad, inter alia while she stayed in Costa Rica for two years, the
wish to go back to Turkey has been relativised and the relationship to Germany got even
stronger. Also J-15 says that her one month stay in the United States has made her
identification with Germany very clear. There she recognized that she is really German.
This category of interviewees includes sporadic private cross-border contacts while nearly all
relatives and friends mentioned as significant contacts are living in Germany. The centre of
life of these interviewees is clearly in Germany even if they sometimes pursue the dream of
returning to Turkey.
The most common reason why interviewees maintain cross-border contacts are relatives in
Turkey. Thus, the dead of family members is a reason why in some cases the contact to
59
Turkey decreases. For example, J-02 tells that he went each year in September because of
family expectations. The reason was his mother and as long as she lived he went to Turkey.
Now he has no motive to go to Turkey. He does not want to see his birthplace, he does not
need Turkey as holiday country, and he does not have constant contacts any longer. The few
sporadic contacts he maintains are to his sister who is living alone and to two friends from his
childhood. Also the contacts to Turkey of J-06 decreased since her grandparents died. The
persons to whom she has contact now and then are two cousins. She thinks this is because
they lived in Canada for ten years because their father worked there and thus they have a
similar mentality somehow. For J-06 Turkey is only connected with holidays and she cannot
imagine to life there ever.
Not only dead of significant contacts, but also financial reasons lead to declining contacts to
Turkey, like the cases of E-03 and J-23 show. About her childhood E-03 tells that although
the flights to Turkey were expensive for her parents due to fife children, it was important for
them to go to Turkey at least once a year. Also after E-03 married a man from Turkey she
continued to go to Turkey each year. But since the last three years this is not possible any
longer. Now they go one year and the next year they stay in Germany. They have bought an
own apartment in Germany and in addition she needs to pay her master school. Thus, they
do not have the financial resources to Turkey each year even they would like to. Also the
Turkey holidays of J-23 got less because of financial reasons. When she was a child she and
her parents went to Turkey regularly. Since the last four years this is not possible any longer
because she and her parents moved to another house what incurred considerable costs.
Thus, beside school J-23 is working to contribute to the family income. For her, Turkey is
connected with holidays and she would like to go there regularly in the further. She says that
Turkey is totally beautiful, there is beach and the weather is bombastic. Her parents also
have a summer house in Turkey and she has some contact with the children in the
neighbourhood.
Also for other interviewees Turkey is the country where they spend their holidays and where
they have sporadic private contacts even if the main significant persons are in Germany.
When J-01 was asked about his contacts first of all he talked about contacts with Turkish
migration background in Germany. Due to the explicit demand about his contacts to Turkey
he says that there are also some contacts. He says that when his family for holidays in
Turkey they maintain these contacts or they call each other. Also E-13 maintains her
contacts to Turkey primarily when she is there. She describes that she does not call them but
when she is in Turkey the relationship is not reserved or foreign. Her paternal grandmother
and the siblings of her father are in Turkey. But her mother only has one brother in Turkey.
60
The rest of the family is in Germany. About the migration history of her family E-13 narrates
that her grandfather first migrated to Austria where he felt isolated. Thus, he went to
Germany where he still had some contacts and where he could find work in a steel plant. The
mother of E-13 migrated together with the grandfather and when she was 14 years old she
started to work in a shoe factory. Only by and by the grandmother and the siblings of her
mother also migrated to Germany. E-13 great up with her grandparents until she started
school and she also thought her grandparents are her parents. Her parents who lived in the
neighbouring town she called aunt and uncle. She tells that her life with the grandparents
was beautiful. They were an extended family and uncles and aunts lived with them. Since the
grandparents died, the frame that holds the family together is missing. So they try to keep the
family together. They meet at least once a month on birthdays and holidays. Especially, her
sister and her brother are important reference persons for E-13. She says that they are her
life.
Even if J-22 maintains contacts to Turkey this is promoted by her parents. The relation of J22 to her Turkish contacts seems to be ambivalent. On the one hand, she is more interested
in the contacts she maintains in Germany and describes the contacts to Turkey as somehow
forced. She says if she is honest she is not interested at the contacts to Turkey. But when
her parents call the relatives in Turkey she also has to talk with them. And also on special
days such as Ramadan or other religious days she has to call to Turkey. She says that she
cannot think about anything for what she would like to call her grandfather. J-22 says that
she has her live in Germany, goes to school here and has her private life. Thus, she is
actually interested in the people who are in Germany. On the other hand, she says that when
she goes to Turkey at least once a year she wants to visit her hometown. She tells that she
is attached to her family and wants to spend time with them. For her it is the time of holidays
when she misses her relatives and the culture in Turkey.
While E-13 and J-22 are grown up in Germany and have contact to Turkey only through their
parents, existing Turkey contacts have decreased in the case of E-38 and E-41 who came to
Germany as adults. The parents of E-38 have already died but he has a sister in Istanbul and
a brother in the United States. The last time he was in Istanbul is two years ago but he
planned to go there one month after the interview. E-38 says that the contacts to Turkey got
difficult but he would not like to forget and he would not like to be forgotten. Also E-41 tells
that he has only few contacts to Turkey. The flat of his father in Turkey is sold in the
meantime. His sister is living in Turkey and on Ramadan he calls her. From time to time he
goes to Turkey but not to the town where his sister is living but for holidays.
61
There are also cases where interviewees try to refresh contacts to Turkey a bit. For example,
J-12 tells that he has neglected his contacts to Turkey and the last time he was there is four
years ago. He had some problems with drugs and criminality and in this time he did not
contact his relatives. But now also the communication options are better and additionally in a
certain age the relevance of relationships gain importance. In the case of J-17 nearly the
complete extended family lives in Germany. But she has in the occupational and voluntary
sector some contacts to Turkey and some friendships have developed.
Multiculturalism
Nearly all of the interviewees in our survey maintain continuous interethnic private contacts in
Germany. But since we asked in the interviews in particular about their contacts to Turkey
and other countries, here are only those respondents listed who talk explicitly about their
contacts in Germany.
When E-28 was asked about her contacts to Turkey she told that she was torn out too early
from the Turkish society. She even does not have intensive contact to her relatives in Turkey.
She thinks that her Turkish neighbours in Germany are closer than her own relatives and that
there is a cultural difference. She says, meanwhile we are a mixed culture. The Turks are
neither German nor Turkish like the Turks in Turkey. She says, for her it is difficult with the
Turks in Turkey. For example, in Germany the people are very directly, Turks in Germany
say things allusively and Turks in Turkey are so abstract that E-28 hardly can understand it.
E-28 says that it is a whole different way of life. It is neither better nor worse, it is different. E28 prefers the term integration instead of assimilation. For her assimilation would mean that
she would become German. But she is neither Turkish nor German, she is something
between. And she says she can take the best of both societies. When E-28 tells about her
husband she explains that it was clear that she wanted to marry someone whose parents are
also “guest workers”. She says that the same situation makes it possible that her husband
can understand her and that she can take him to her parents. She thinks a German husband
could not show understanding for her father who is a retired “guest worker”and her mother
who cannot speak German. Also E-33 tells that she does not have contact to her relatives in
Turkey since the time she does not make holidays with her parents in Turkey. But in contrast
to E-28, she married a Turk who came to Germany after their wedding.
Other interviewees tell about their relationship to so called ethnic Germans. J-14 conducts a
bi-national marriage with a German. And E-37 tells about her German neighbourhood to
which she has a good relationship. She narrates that she taught her neighbours how to cook
Turkish dishes, like börek, and that they sometimes do much better than Turkish
62
housewives. In return, E-37 learned from her neighbours how to bake German cake. And on
her birthday they gave to her a machine to make ‘
Spätzle’
, a sort of pasta which is typical for
Southern Germany. If someone is on holiday a neighbour is watering the plants. In contrast
to J-14 and E-37, J-08 does not have private contacts to so called ethnic Germans. She tells
that at the work she has predominantly contact to colleagues of German origin but in her
private life she has no or little German friends. She says that is a phenomenon she always
questions.
Other interviewees have a really mixed circle of friends in Germany. The contacts of J-01
consist of persons with as well as without migration background. And E-04 tells that he
cannot say that he only had contacts to Germans, or to Turks, or to Yugoslavs. He had
contact to all of them. When E-04 was asked about his contacts to Turkey he answers that
he has non. On the demand, non et al?, he says, family. Uncles, aunts, niches, cousins. In
another interview E-08 mentioned that her best friend is Italian and that she will make
holidays together with him in Turkey.
J-17 does not have familial contacts to Turkey since her complete extended family lives in
Germany. J-17 fells to be German. And that not only because it is political correct but also
because she thinks that Germany has to develop a new understanding of who is German.
She does not want to go on with saying Germans are native Germans but that the German
society is a culturally diverse society. That means that people with a different origin also have
to be normal Germans. She would like that this thinking will be established. Thus, at a point
of her life she decided to say that she will be more German than the Germans even if some
people will be irritated. And she is also so much rooted in the German society that she feels
like that. She says that Germany is her home (Heimat).
5.3.2. Social Engagement and Social Security
This chapter addresses different degrees of socio-cultural transnationalism concerning both,
social engagement and social security practices.
63
Figure 7: Different Degrees of Socio-Cultural Transnationalism regarding Social
Engagement and Social Security
Strong
membership and
participation in nonGerman or
transnational
associations,
organisations or
networks
Moderate
occasional participation
in non-German or
transnational
organisations or
networks
Weak
concrete plans to
participate in nonGerman or
transnational
organisations or
networks
participation in German
(migrant-)
organisations which
cooperate regularly
with Turkish or
transnational
organisations
participation in German
(migrant-)
organisations which
cooperate occasionally
with Turkish or
transnational
organisations
continuous informal
initiatives of crossborder help and
support (including
transnational family
care)
sporadic informal
initiatives of crossborder help and
support (including
transnational family
care)
Multicultural
Initiatives (individually
or within associations
or organisations) to
support of migrant
integration in Germany
(including family care)
Figure 8: Distribution of Cases according to Different Degrees of Socio-Cultural
Transnationalism regarding Social Engagement and Social Security
Strong
Moderate
E-02, E-08, E-30, E-34,
E-39, J-01, J-07, J-08,
J-19, J-20
Weak
E-05, E-46, J-01, J-04,
J-09, J-10, J-17, J-18,
J-20, J-22
Multiculturalism
E-03, E-06, E-11, E-12,
E-13, E-15, E-27, E-29,
E-31, E-33, E-34 E-35,
E-36, E-37, E-38, E-39,
E-40, E-46, J-01, J-03,
J-04, J-07, J-08, J-14,
J-18, J-19, J-20, J-22
Strong Transnationalism
Even if a lot of the interviewees in the German survey are social engaged with regard to
both, participation in organisations and informal initiatives, none of the interviewees
participates in non-German or transnational associations, organisations or networks.
Moderate Transnationalism
Due to their professional activity in a Turkish association and in a project related to migration,
E-34 and J-20 have constant relationships to Turkey. As managing director of a Turkish
association E-34 is nearly daily in contact with ministries and artists in Turkey. At the time of
the interview also a friend of him had a job in a cultural organisation in Turkey to which he
has professional contacts. J-20 is working in a three years project in Turkey for a German
64
welfare organisation. She advises spouses who potentially follow to Germany concerning
German language courses and other aspects of life in Germany.
Some of the interviewees maintain due to their voluntary work in Turkish associations regular
contacts to Turkey. J-01 is engaged in various organisations, among others he is member in
a council for integration and co-founder of an initiative for the protection of the mother
tongue. Due to his functions in different organisations he serves as point of contact for the
Turkish Consulate and for Turkish media. Sometimes he also arranges contacts to Turkey.
Moreover, he works together with migrant organisations which maintain contacts to partner
organisations in Turkey. About the association where E-39 is director, he tells that it is
engaged in all areas concerning Turks and Germans. The association is in contact with
cultural associations, radio stations and ministers in Turkey but they do not have business
contacts to enterprises. The association organizes journeys to Eastern Turkey or to the Black
Sea coast, where also Germans take part. Or they go together to the EU in Brussels. Also E30 who is engaged in a Turkish women's club is regularly concerned with Turkey due to her
function. The club already was engaged in organizing different activities in Turkey. For
example, she tells that in Turkey are a lot of children with cerebral palsy but since they only
stay at home they are unnoticed. The club organised donations for those children in Turkey,
even if they could not make something large as E-30 says. They also supported social
institutions in Turkey in the past. Also J-07 plans a project to support people in Turkey. In this
case it is about help for street children in a Turkish city. In this context, she already has
established first contacts to Turkey.
Beside support provided by organisations, also family responsibilities make cross-border
support necessary. For example, J-20 tells that she continuously sends money to her parents
and sisters in Turkey. And J-19 supports her parents-in-law in Turkey, who also usually come
for three months each year for a visit to Germany and live at the respondent's home. In the
extended family of J-08 it happens frequently that someone of the relatives is in need or that
the education of children has to be financed. Cases like this happen two or three times a
year. Then a member of the extended family collects money. But not only financial but also
other forms of material support are necessary. J-08 tells that in earlier times her mother
sewed cloths which have been distributed among relatives but also among needy people in
their village in Turkey. J-08 mentions that this matter of course concerning assistance also
influenced her and her sister. Beside financial and material support, interviewees also tell
about social support practices of family members. For example, E-08 tells about her father
who died after a two year illness. In this time they brought his sister from Turkey for two
month. The father now is buried in Turkey and the interviewee is often there to visit his grave.
65
She says that one have to be flexible. E-02 narrates that one month after she arrived as PhD
student in Germany she had a health problem but no health insurance in Germany. Also
independently of a health insurance she would have gone to Turkey because there were the
doctors she knew. Due to her illness she had to stay in Turkey for one month. E-02 tells,
since that time things have changed. The next time when she had health problems she
reached for a doctor in Germany because she thought she will stay in Germany for the next
years and thus she needs a doctor in situ. Nevertheless, there are cases like an operation
wherefore she would go to Turkey but only because of the aftercare. In case of smaller
things also a friend in Germany can help her. For example, she tells a friend has changed
her bandage daily. But after an operation she would prefer the aftercare undertaken by her
mother in Turkey. It may also be possible that her mother could come to Germany in special
cases. She says that she does not know yet.
Weak Transnationalism
Due to their engagement in Turkish associations, some interviewees cooperate occasionally
with Turkey. For example, E-05 established together with some friends a family initiative.
They meet every six weeks for a social evening. E-05 tells that over time some culture and
some politics came along. They also want to keep contact with Turkey and to hear something
about the development in Turkey. But they do not want to follow it up only in the media and
thus also invite people from Turkey from time to time. For example, they organized a speech
about the image of Turks in history and culture. The aim of the initiative is to exchange
information and to meet different people. Other interviewees use informal initiatives to
support people in Turkey. Several interviewees tell about donations to Turkey. For example,
J-04 tells that in earlier times he gave comprehensive support to Turkey but nowadays he
only gives donations from time to time. The money goes to his sister who is living in Turkey
to give it to poor children for clothes and school articles. J-17 gives donations to Turkey
which are collected from her mother who stays often longer periods in Turkey in the
meantime. And also J-01 and J-09 tell that they send donations to Turkey from time to time.
Social support is also often given to occasionally to family members. For example, E-46 tells
that his father died last year. When the father was ill his brothers from Turkey often called
him and another brother from Germany came for a visit. E-46 says that in the case of
mourning the people are together. And Turkish families also collect money in the event of
death. Concerning financial support, J-01 tells that in the near past he has sent regularly
money to family members in Turkey but nowadays it got irregular. In the case of J-10 and J18 the parents continuous support the families in Turkey, but the interviewees themselves
only give irregularly support. J-10 tells that her mother continuous sends money to Turkey
66
but J-10 only gives money to her grandparents from time to time. It also happened
sometimes when she was for holidays in Turkey that J-10 supported a neighbour who has a
lot of children. The interviewee tells that she recently talked with some friends about a project
to transfer donations in kind to economically weak regions in Turkey whereby she
emphasizes the education sector.
While some interviewees are still involved in familial social support practices to Turkey, other
respondents only know that from their parents. For example, J-15 tells that her parents send
money for example when her aunt is ill. Sometimes J-15 even does not take notice of things
like that. In contrast to J-15, E-20 has a close emotional connection to her relative in Turkey.
She tells that she can never be there for her relatives in Turkey because of the physical
distance. But her mother who is housewife goes to Turkey in cases of illness or death and for
weddings. Some months ago the aunt of the interviewee was ill and her mother was there to
take care of her sister. In other cases familial social support is not or no longer necessary.
For example, J-03 tells that she got support from relatives in Turkey when she came to
Germany. But nowadays, as she says, thankfully no cross-border support is necessary. In
the case of J-14 he tells that family responsibilities to Turkey to not exist since his parents
died.
Multiculturalism
According to a study of the "Center for Studies on Turkey" on the voluntary activities of Turks
in Germany (Halm and Sauer 2005), two thirds of the respondents with Turkish origin are
actively involved in institutions, associations and initiatives in Germany. The most important
areas of participation are religion, sport, leisure, culture and school. There is a great
difference in the transition between participation and engagement. In total ten percent of the
respondents are engaged in an institution, association or initiative. The engagement can be
differentiated in Turkish, German and multicultural contexts.
Also the interviewees in our study report about their involvement in institutions, associations
and initiatives in Germany. Some of the interviewees are actually involved in different
associations at the same time or one association after another. Especially J-01 is
distinguished by a strong social engagement in the area of integration in Germany. In the
framework of his voluntary activities he describes himself as advisor of migrant associations
and as mediator between the Turkish community in the town where he is living and German
institutions, organisations and actors. He is in constant contact to both sides. J-01 is cofounder of a Turkish parents' association, the Turkish community of German city and an
initiative for the protection of the mother tongue. Moreover, he is among others member in a
67
council for integration and integration commissioner of a German state for a football
association. J-01 represents the classical position of multiculturalism in stating that tolerance
and recognition of cultural difference are not to see in contrast but as the prerequisite for
successful integration. Even if no other of our interviewees is incorporated in integration work
in such way, also other interviewees took part in different initiatives. The blind E-40 lists five
associations where he had functions such as director, co-founded and member during his
life. Beside diverse cultural clubs, he was co-founder of an association for the promotion of
blind and visual impaired people. This association also wanted to support blind people in
Turkey but, as E-40 puts it, German laws do not make it easy to support people outside of
Germany. J-08 has experience in migration work on a fee basis in different social facilities.
She worked in the areas of early childhood education, women's education and Turkish for
beginners. And also J-20 carried out migration work on fee basis for different welfare
organisations. Moreover, she was always voluntary engaged, among others as director of a
Turkish parents' association. She also tells about her voluntary engagement at the Red
Cross and in the Green Party.
Among our interviewees are some members of Turkish migrant communities and TurkishGerman communities with a wide range of offers in the integration sector (E-06, E-34, E-35,
E-36, E-39, J-14 and J-22). An example for a Turkish migrant community is the club where
E-35 and E-36 are engaged. It was founded in 1974 as meeting point for Turkish migrants of
the helpless first generation. An important point for the club is solidarity. The club offers
different facilities, such as an integration course for Turkish boys and girls, homework
assistance, a women’
s section, a prayer room and a dormitory for people who are alone in
Germany for work while their spouse lives in Turkey. E-36 emphasizes that it is a neutral and
open club. Moreover the club has no contacts to Turkey and they do not get support from the
Turkish state. The club is funded by membership contributions and donations. J-14 is director
of a prominent Turkish migrant organisation in Germany. In this context he is engaged with
questions of the German integration policy and the promotion of the interests of Turkish
migrants. Beside communities that describe themselves as predominantly Turkish, there are
communities which emphasize that they are Turkish-German or German-Turkish. For
example, E-39 tells that the association where he is director is engaged in all areas
concerning Turks and Germans. In the meantime, they also influence local politics with
respect to integration. He says that the politicians are glad to have an association with which
they can talk about such topics. In earlier times politicians made laws and afterwards there
were protests of Turkish organisations. The association organizes a number of social events,
such as discussions, concerts or theatre projects. But not all communities perform such a
68
wide range of activities, some focus more on specific areas, such as religion (E-03, E-38, E46), culture (J-19, E-27, E-37), women (J-03) or sport (E-14, E-29, J-04).
We also talked to respondents who are employed in the area of social and care services
which are specialised in Turkish migrants. For example, E-31 works for an insurance
company in Germany and his clients are especially Turkish migrants. He says that the
language provides the basis for trust and he uses the knowledge about this for his job. About
his clients E-31 tells that people who live in a foreign country have a high need for security
and take out a high number of insurance policies, even if they cannot understand them. From
his own experience E-31 tells that his parents had insurance policies double. E-11 works in
an ambulatory nursing service. She narrates when she was twenty years old, her mother got
a nursing case and she could not handle the situation. She says that Turkish migrants often
even do not know that there is a nursing service. In Turkey are also old people's and nursing
homes but there are only patients who do not have a family. She tells, that it is important to
hire Turkish staff in a nursing service because they can speak the patient's language and for
example, they take of the shoes when the entry into the flat or can bind a headscarf.
But not only services provide support and care for migrants in need but also other initiatives.
For example, E-03 works on honorary basis in a mosque. When she made a guided tour for
nurses in the mosque, a nurse told her about an old Turkish woman in a retirement home
who never gets visits. Thus, E-03 decided to go there for a visit. She tells that she did not
know before that one can go just like that to a retirement house but since she knows that she
and other volunteers regularly visit old women in retirement houses. And they also make
visits in the children’
s union of hospitals. E-03 says, when she works on honorary basis she
has the feeling to do also something for herself. It is time that she takes for her. And she
learns something. In other cases informal support and care is given by family members. For
example, the grandmother of E-13 suffered a stroke. E-13 tells that her grandmother needed
a nursing home but they could not find a Turkish one. During the three weeks in a German
nursing home always someone was with her. E-13 changed diapers and washed her
grandmother. Later the grandmother felt into a coma and died after three days in intensive
care. Another interviewee is already yet concerned about what will happen when his parents
are in need of help. The parents of E-15 have a house in Turkey where they spend the
summer. In the winter they stay in Germany. E-15 says that is because he forces his parents
also to stay in Germany for some months. And if they will need care, he wants them to stay
also in summer in Germany.
69
5.3.3. Identities
The analysis of this dimension is more difficult than the others, due to several reasons.10
First, identity and belonging can be described in relation to many different aspects such as
cultural identifications, social relations, and understandings of political membership. Second,
in most of our interviews our respondents made many and often different and ambivalent
statements concerning their sense of belonging and whether or not they will stay in Germany
or will migrate to Turkey or to another country in the future. Third, the self-descriptions of our
respondents’identities have changed to a farer extent and often several times at several
stages in their courses of life. Fourth, in many cases it is obvious that both the extensiveness
of related statements and their apparent inconsistencies reflect to a significant extent the
institutional setting of Germany’
s long lasting “guest worker”migration policy regime and the
migrants’ exposure to similar different and ambivalent expectations of the German
population, varying between the opposite ends of supposed return migration and far-reaching
assimilation, and corresponding experiences of discrimination. Also, the respective selfdescriptions are often related to individual reflections upon and reactions on German public
and political discourses on integration and conditions of naturalization. Concerning
citizenship, especially the fact that Germany still do not accept dual citizenship officially and
legally, but also the factual chance the Turkish migrants had to get dual citizenship before
Germany’
s citizenship law reform in 2000 as well as the possibility to get the so-called “pink
card”as a reduced kind of Turkish citizenship, seem to have led to a broad spectrum of very
different individual responses as well as the problems many of our respondents report in this
respect. Finally, also the feelings of belonging to Turkey of our respondents vary to a far
extent and in many cases have changed due to experiences of alienation they have made on
the occasion of visits or resident periods in Turkey.
Because of these difficulties, in this dimension we so far classified less cases our typology.
However, we will mention some cases in each of our categories selectively.
In Figure 9, the criteria distinguishing the different extents of transnationalism in the identity
dimension are summarized again.
10
Therefore, it is the analysis and interpretation of this part which is least developed to date.
70
Figure 9: Different Degrees of Socio-Cultural Transnationalism: Identity: Belonging
and Residence
Strong
self-description of a binational GermanTurkish identity, or of
an European or
cosmopolitan identity,
or of one beyond ethnic
and national
identifications
(e.g. class, political
ideology, bi-regional,
bi-local)
substantial residence
periods in different
countries; ambiguity
about future
residence(s)
Moderate
discrepancy between
ethnic-national selfdescription of identity
and long-term
residence
concrete plans of
return to Turkey or of
migration to other
countries;
concrete intentions
regarding longer
periods of stay in
Turkey or other
countries
Weak
concomitance of
transnational contacts
and a commitment to a
life perspective in
Germany
Multicultural
self-description of a bicultural identity without
actual relations to
Turkey or to other
countries
vague plans of return
to Turkey or of
migration to other
countries in the remote
future
commitment to a life
perspective in
Germany
Figure 10 shows the distribution of cases according to different degrees in relation to the
identity dimension of socio-cultural transnationalism, as far as they could already be
classified somewhat reliable.11
Figure 10: Distribution of Cases according to Different Degrees of Socio-Cultural
Transnationalism: Identity, Belonging and Residence
Strong
E-02, E-28 J-03, J04, J-08, J-09, J14, J-19
Moderate
E-03, E-14, E05, J-07
Weak
E-22, J-06, J-13, J15, J-17
Multicultural
E-04, E-33, E-39,
E-40, E-46, J-12, J15, J-17, J-19, J-23
No
J-02
Strong Transnationalism
In this category, we classify cases of basically two different kinds. First, we have a number of
respondents who positively assess their bi-national identity and who find it advantageous to
be able to revert to experiences, knowledge and competencies of both countries and cultures
and in some cases even developed a sort of pride regarding their dual identity. If these dual
11
However, in this dimension we have to rethink the classification of cases as well as the distinctiveness of our
criteria once again.
71
competencies are viewed as enabling transnational contacts and activities, we classify that
as in this strong category. By contrast, if such a positive stance vis-à-vis one’
s dual
belonging and relating skills is described as favourable regarding the position and
opportunities in a multi-cultural Germany only, the corresponding case is sorted in our
multicultural category. Interestingly, however, many of our respondents with such a selfconfident dual self-understanding report at the same time that it took some time to arrive at
such a positive attitude and that several propitious circumstances in their individual life
course contributed to this outcome. Second, we also have a number of respondents, who
either simply do not primarily identify themselves with an ethnic or national dimension or who
even distance themselves explicitly from this kind of identification. In some of these cases,
they prefer instead self-descriptions other than or beyond ethnic and national identities, such
as class or Europe. In several cases, however, both of these types of transnational identity
also overlap.
An example of a self-confident bi-national identification is J-08, who came to Germany
shortly after she was born in Turkey in the course of family migration. She says that there
was a certain period in her life, when different events, such as the death of her mother, the
birth of her first child as well as strong xenophobic experiences in the East part of Germany,
encouraged her to re-discover her Turkish roots. Since then, she made efforts to improve her
Turkish language and to engage more consciously with some traditional elements of the
Turkish culture. Meanwhile, she considers it as important that her children become
acquainted with both cultures simultaneously in order to be able to chose on their own
accounts with which country and culture they will identify and where they will live. She says
that she today has reached a stage, at which she loves different aspects of both cultures.
While she sees her future life located in Germany, she nevertheless feels a strong
connection to Turkey and is sure that she will keep close contacts there, where she at the
moment also travels about five times a year. Another example is J-19, who is born in
Germany and who in a later phase also was exposed to Turkish influences more intensively
because of marrying a man who was born and raised in Turkey. In order to be able to
communicate better with him and with her parents-in-law she also advanced her Turkish
language skills and also considers a bi-lingual education of her children important. She says
that she finds it favourable to take from both cultures the respective best.
However, J-19 is also an example of the second type of transnational identification. Because
her husband belonged to the upper middle class in Turkey, what she emphasizes several
times, with his assistance she managed her extraordinary social upward mobility. She was
and is still engaged with transnational businesses and became self-employed in several
72
branches. Currently, she is a self-employed owner of a beauty surgery in her city. Her
husband owns a fruit and vegetables shop. Grown up as a daughter of Turkish “guest
workers”in a city district with a high share of social disadvantaged persons she now lives in
a district known as the residence of the top layer of the city. Symptomatically, she says that
she sees herself not really as a migrant of the second generation, but in a sense rather as
the third or fourth generation. Another example of this type is J-03, who during the interview
stresses several times that she does not have something in common with Turkish migrants,
because she descends from a well-off family and also because she married a German man
who similarly stems from a good family in which many members were traditionally selfemployed and whose ancestors were land owners. Also some of her other statements reflect
her primary identification with a kind of transnational business elite. There are also some
respondents who primarily identify themselves with Europe, as, for example, J-14. However,
we have very few respondents who say explicitly that they understand themselves as
cosmopolitan or global citizen. A case which comes closest to such a kind of identification is
J-11, who states that, for him, it is mainly irrelevant in which country and at which place he
lives. Because he already has lived in many different countries, he says that he can imagine
to migrate further to another country like China or Hong Kong. He says that it is from his
perspective of primary importance where he can lead a good life, have an interesting job as
well as sufficient social contacts. Similarly, J-09 says that one can feel at home anywhere,
where significant other persons are residing. To mention another case: when E-28 was
asked how she imagines her future, she answered that she does not make concrete plans.
She is somewhat afraid of settling down anywhere. Her ideal is to commute between two or
three states. She wants to have a choice instead of limitations, especially regarding whether
either to stay in Germany or in Turkey. To create options she tries to gain a foothold in
Turkey (218-224). Still another mode of identification represents E-02, who says that she
would not identify herself as Turkish. Only if someone asks, she says that she is a Turk. But
that is not the definition of herself. She identifies herself with her student status. She says,
she is she self (580-585).
Moderate Transnationalism
The category of moderate transnationalism in the identity dimension represents cases when
migrants strongly fluctuate between different and conflicting identifications or when migrants’
identifications contradict their long-term residence. Also cases, when migrants postpone their
intention to return over years but still maintain that idea, can be counted here. A case in point
is J-07, who, living for more than thirty years continuously in Germany, says that he is still
convinced that he will return one day, what he also tells his family from time to time. However
73
neither his wife nor his children really believe that anymore. A main reason for his return
ambition is that he never felt at home in Germany. However, when he visits Turkey, he also
feel alienated and says that he often, after some days, don’know whereof to speak with his
Turkish relatives and friends. He says that even in Turkey the things are no longer as before.
Similarly, E-03 says, it is a strange feeling but to a certain extent she feels at home there and
here. She looks forward to go home to Turkey. However, when she is there she becomes
homesick for Germany (421-423). When she talks about her childhood, she says that it was
a problem that she came to Germany in her early years of childhood. She neither mastered
the Turkish language nor the German language sufficiently. She says, she always was
somewhere in the middle. A little bit German and a little bit Turkish. But in both respects it
was not perfect (53-56). E-05 says, his home (Heimat) is rather in Turkey than here. Home
(Heimat) is there where the heart beats (331). For him integration can only go so far as one
has the feeling to live in this country and to adapt to the circumstances of everyday life
without abandon the self (268-272). E-14 tells that his sister always was much more oriented
towards Turkey than he (103-104). She is for professional reasons in Turkey and now has no
ambition to return to Germany, even less after their parents also returned to Turkey (108110). Since his sister and his parents returned to Turkey, E-14 considers the idea of following
them and also settling down in Turkey. For his planning for the future the decision of his
sister and parents plays an important role. (30-34)
Weak Transnationalism
The weak category in this dimension contains mostly cases of migrants who feel a dominant
sense of belonging to Germany and usually see their future perspective also in Germany, but
who at the same time uphold continuous relations and ties to Turkey or other countries. A
case in point is J-13, who says that only her work has made her increasingly a Turk. She is
working as an independent journalist at a German newspaper, and, during her occupational
career, was always in charge for issues relating to Turkish migrants, integration and the
reporting of events in Turkey. However, these developments did not lead to a relativization of
Germany as her main place of residence and to a decreasing identification with it but rather
has made Turkey, as she puts it, to her favourite foreign country. In a similar vein, J-06
reports on occasional events which remind her of experiences she had in Turkey, leading
some time to a kind of regretful thoughts about her successive alienation from Turkey.
In general, as E-22 explains, it is usually the case that a lot of people who live in Germany
are oriented to some extent to Turkey, even if they do not have a whole foot in Turkey, a part
of them is there, they have relatives there and some have ambitions to return one day (24674
248). For his children, as he tells, is Germany the home and they do not have the same
relation to Turkey as he has. But people as he, who are partly grown up in Turkey, are
usually between two worlds. E-22 tells that he is working in Germany and has bought a
house here. He says he belongs to those who are naturalised in Germany. But he thinks
when he is in the age around 60 he will not make it different as the first generation often do
and stay some months in Turkey and some in Germany. (304-344)
Multiculturalism
In many of our cases the corresponding migrants, besides their transnational identifications
to varying degrees, describe different aspects of a multicultural identity in relation to their
lives in Germany. However, we have hardly cases which could be characterized as solely
multicultural. One case of this latter kind is E-38, who tells that he never felt foreign in
Germany. He feels well understood and had never problems with the people here. In the
village where he is living he has an excellent relationship to his neighbours. He says he has
a lot of advantages in Germany. He is over sixty years old but feels very young. Another
example might be E-46 who tells with regard to his own children that they are the fourth
generation in Germany and the second who is born here. He thinks it is unfair to talk about
foreigners in this case. His children are residing in Germany their whole life but do not feel
fully at home. With reference to Mohammed he describes, differences are a blessing. The
difference between Germans and Turks he relates especially to reasons and emotions. The
German qualities are discipline, punctuality, hard work and coolness while in the Turkish
case feelings go deeper, what E-46 attaches to strong family ties. Another example is J-12
who is born in Germany and who reports that he at several times in his life had tried to see
himself as a German, but the people around him then often told him that he really is a Turk.
No Transnationalism
So far we have little cases which can be characterized as having neither transnational nor
multicultural aspects. An example is J-02, which has been reported to some extent already in
the section on the political domain. J-02 migrated 1980 after the military coup to Germany
and found himself later on a published list of persons wanted by warrant of arrest so that he
could not re-enter Turkish territory for 16 years. Although his asylum procedure in Germany
took altogether seven years until he was finally recognized as political refugee, what had
disadvantageous consequences for his educational career, he says that he is thankful to
Germany which gave him a new home. He has given up Turkish citizenship voluntarily
although he had the opportunity to get dual citizenship. Although in his early years in
75
Germany he was a cofounder of some migrant organizations, today he views it as
problematic if one is too intensively involved in ethnic organizations because there is,
according to his stance, always a danger of being concerned with homeland affairs rather
than with actual problems on the ground and on location. He is absolutely sure that he will
stay in Germany for his whole life and his social contacts to Turkey decreased successively.
5.4. The Educational Dimension of Transnationalism
Research on migration and education comes to the conclusion that educational outcomes in
Germany vary considerably among different ethnic groups. Especially since the report of the
OECD’
s Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA) in 2001, the debate on
the failures of the German public education and school system is raising, particularly with
regard to the situation of young migrants. The data have shown that children and young
people with migration background do not succeed in the German school system. The
children of foreigners, whether they migrated with their parents or were born in Germany, lag
behind in education, both in comparison to their native counterparts and in comparison to
similar pupil and student populations in other countries. Almost all studies on the education
of migrants arrive at the general conclusion that migrants in Germany have a low level of
education. This is not only true for the first generations of migrants which often came as
labour migrants, so called guest workers, during the 1960s and early 1970s to Germany, but
also for the second and third generation of migrants. The study by Frank Kalter and Nadine
Granato finds that “the second generation does better than the first; however, when
compared to the German reference group there remains a remarkable gap in human capital
assets. Second-generation Turks are especially disadvantaged with more than 40% holding
no or only primary education and more than 90% holding qualifications no higher than lower
secondary.” (2007: 285) Also compared to second-generation Turks in other European
countries, those in Germany are disadvantaged. For example “only 3 per cent enter higher
education in Germany, as compared to almost 40 per cent in Sweden and France.”(Crul,
Schneider 2010: 1258) Particularly female Turkish migrants are affected by low education.
While there is a broad consensus that migrants are disadvantaged in the German education
system, the attempted explanations for mechanisms of inequalities in education relating to
ethnic backgrounds are very different. While the dominant political discourse sees the failure
in the migrants themselves, scientific explanations range from institutional discrimination in
schools (Gomolla & Radtke, 2005; Kristen, 2006) to individual qualification deficits of young
migrants like the absence of German language skills (Esser, 2006).
76
Even if discriminatory effects of the German school system are reflected in our survey, it also
includes respondents who succeeded. On this, E-39 says that in the meantime there are also
Turks in important occupational positions in Germany. The highly skilled migrant children and
children of Turkish migrants in our survey can be divided in three groups. The first group
includes children of highly skilled migrants who do not report about educational
disadvantages in the interviews. For example, E-14 tells that his parents both are academics
why education was always important in his family. It was always clear that he and his sister
will study at the university and the parents would not have accepted less.
In contrast to the first group the second and the third group are made up of social climbers.
E-14 pictures that different to his parents the lower class from Turkey immigrated to
Germany what has far-reaching implications on the subsequent generation because the
parents cannot give profession or academic advices. In addition the educational system in
Germany is discriminating migrants. All the more impressing is for E-14 that from this class
an even increasing number of politicians, media people and entrepreneurs of Turkish origin
emerged. He emphasizes that a lot of those success stories are based only on own initiative.
The second group includes children of “guest workers”who successfully passes the German
education system. J-23 who attends high school says that she would not have came so fare
without the pressure of her parents. For J-17 the factors for finally studying after initial
difficulties in the school are manifold. Decisive factors are attainment of a comprehensive
school, family support and promotion by teachers. She says that she discovered education
as key for social advancement. E-22 tells that due to his ambition and the circumstance that
his parents not demanded of him to work he could make school carrier and finally study. He
notes that a lot of his colleagues of the preparation class have been lost on that way and
most of them not even have completed a professional training. E-22 is the first and only one
of his family and relatives who went to the university. He says that of cause it was something
special for his parents that he has succeeded. The third group is made up of children of
“guest workers”who were not successful in the regular German education system but made
up for what they missed as adults. For example, E-10 left the secondary school without
passing the final examinations. He started a professional education as cook but did not finish
it. Then he worked for a long time as car mechanic. After that he finished a professional
education as social worker in a nursing home. This enabled him to make up his “Abitur”(Alevels) at the second education cannel and finally to study economics.
77
Figure 11: Different Degrees of Educational Transnationalism
Strong
strong transnational
impacts on educational
careers
correspondence or
contradiction of
migration-related or
transnational
socialisation
processes, attendance
of educational
institutions in different
countries, and
educational ambitions
strong parental impact
blocking educational
ambitions of children
as a result of return
orientations
Moderate
attendance of
educational institutions
in different countries
leading to formation of
transnational
competencies without
corresponding explicit
educational ambitions
Weak
maintenance and
transmission of
knowledge and
competencies suitable
for border-crossing
contacts,
communication and
activities without
explicit educational
ambitions and primarily
without actual use
outside family relations
targeted acquirement
or successive
unlearning of particular
cultural and/or
transnational
competencies or
knowledge of Turkey or
other countries as a
consequence of
migration-related or
transnational
socialisation
experiences
parental strategies of
bi- and multilingual and
-cultural upbringing in
order to enable
transnational
orientations of children
Multicultural
advancement of biand multilingual and cultural competencies
or such based on
different life-forms in
the context of
increasing factual
pluralism and diversity
within Germany
parental strategies of
bi- and multilingual and
-cultural upbringing in
order to enhance
occupational or other
opportunities of
children within
multicultural Germany
Turkish classes at
German schools
Figure 12: Distribution of Cases according to Different Degrees of Educational
Transnationalism
Strong
E-01, E-02, E-14, E-24,
E-29, J-01, J-09, J-10,
J-20
Moderate
E-03, E-06, E-22, E-28,
E-33, J-02, J-07, J-08,
J-14, J-15, J-17
Weak
E-05, E-06, E-19, E-22,
J-01, J-04, J-06, J-08,
J-09, J-14, J-23
Multiculturalism
E-03, E-10, E-14, E-22,
E-28, E-39, J-17, J-23
Strong Transnationalism
To provide the empirical evidence of emerging transnational social spaces, transnational
studies often refer to highly skilled migrants, like educational migrants (Martin 2005),
international students or professionals (Scheibelhofer 2006; Weiß 2006; Bauschke-Urban
2008). Moreover, they deal with transnational careers (Kreutzer and Roth 2006) as well as
epistemic networks (Faist 2008: 31). Also among our interviewees are highly skilled migrants
where, what we would call, a strong transnational orientation is obvious.
One case of highly skilled migrants in our study is international students. For example, E-01
came to Germany as a PhD student after she studied in Turkey, Italy and the Netherlands.
She decided to come to Germany for two reasons. First, her fiancé was already living in
Germany. And second, she found a doctor father for her PhD. Also E-02 is a PhD student in
Germany. This is not the first time that she lives in Germany. When she was eight years old
78
she followed her mother who came to Germany one year earlier as teacher for Turkish
migrant children and they returned five years later to Turkey.
There are also two interviewees who came to Germany for their study and never returned to
Turkey (J-01, J-20). While his parents were in Germany, J-01 is grown up with his aunt in
Turkey and later he went to an internat. In 1938 he received a university degree in Turkey
and three years later he went to Germany for a second degree. When he visited his parents,
he met his future wife, a second generation Turk, and changed to the university in the town
where his wife as well as his parents were living. But he did not finish this second study. Now
he has a job for which he is, as he says, overqualified because of his Turkish university
degree which is not recognized in Germany. He tells that he applied for higher quality jobs
but that he was not required because of his Turkish background. Similarly, J-20 came to
Germany in the age of twenty-one years for her study and with the aim to return afterwards.
But then she made a second degree. And also like J-01, during the years of study J-20 met
her future husband, in this case a Turkish “guest worker”, and they got children. Since the
children are independent now, she is working in a project in Turkey for a German employer.
She advises potential spouses who follow to Germany concerning German language courses
and other aspects of life in Germany.
But also interviewees who are grown up in Germany studied abroad, such as E-14 and J-10.
In the case of E-14 the father as well as the mother are highly skilled migrants. Education
was always very important for the family and it was clear that E-14 and his sister will be
trained as academics. Thus, after he completed his "Abitur" (A-levels) in Germany, he
studied at an American university. Later he also worked in the United States and in Turkey
before he returned to Germany. In contrast to E-14, the parents of J-10 came as “guest
workers”to Germany. She says that her parents never wanted to return to Turkey and both
of them learned good German, although her mother is illiterate. Even if her parents belong to
an Arabic minority in Turkey, the language in the family was Turkish and J-10 only improved
her Arabic during her study. She says that German is the language in which she can best
express herself but Turkish and Arabic is important for her to express emotional things. In the
age of seventeen the interviewee went for one year to Canada for high school. Back in
Germany she started to study and during that she went for five years to Istanbul where she
also wrote her examination paper. Then she went back to Germany to complete her studies.
Later she went for four months to Spain to learn Spanish as well as dancing. Back in
Germany she made her legal clerkship. Then she again had the desire to go abroad. In
Costa Rica she worked for two years as primary school teacher at a German school abroad.
Again back in Germany she teaches at a high school, also Turkish and Spanish language. J79
10 is engaged in a project to student exchange with several countries and she talked with a
friend about a project on donations in kind to Turkey in the area of education.
People do not only move abroad with the intention of receiving a university degree but also
for degrees on a lower level. One example gave E-24 who travelled as child several times
between Germany and Turkey until she came definitely to Germany in 1976. She tells about
her son who finished the intermediate school in Germany and then tried to make his “Abitur”
(A-levels). Since this did not work out he went to Turkey to make his high school degree
abroad. E-24 accompanied him and stayed with him for one month in Turkey. At the
weekends her son travels to her sister who lives in Turkey. Last year the class of her son
came to a German partner school. Two of his teachers are grown up in Germany and
returned lather with their parents to Turkey.
But not in all cases transnational practices result in a successful course of education. Our
interviews also show that especially the return orientation of parents often influences the
education of children in a negative way. As shown above, a big part of the “guest worker“
generation never gave up the idea of returning “home”. And also the Turkish as well as the
German government shared this perspective of temporary migration. Thus, at local public
schools in Germany so-called Turkish classes were established. For example, E-02 tells
about her mother who came to Germany as teacher for Turkish migrant children in the
1990s. She explains that the programme originates from the 1960s and 1970s as it was
thought that the children of Turkish “guest workers”will return to their country of origin. The
idea was that the children should command of their language until they are back in Turkey.
We interviewed persons of the so-called second generation who talked extensively of the
consequences this permanent postponed return perspective of their families had for the
development of their own life plans and education careers. For example, E-29 finished the
second class of the high school when his family followed the father who was as “guest
worker”in Germany. At first, they only wanted to stay for three moths during the holidays but
then they never returned to Turkey. Thus, E-29 and his two siblings gave up their schools in
Turkey. While his younger siblings continued school in Germany, the fifteen year old
interviewee made a German language course. After one year he went to a vocational
preparation school for migrants which took another year. The family wanted to go back to
Turkey in some years and thus the father of the interviewee said it would be unprofitable to
start a professional training in Germany. Thus, the interviewee started as unskilled worker
and only later he made a professional training.
80
Also in another case the father came to Germany as “guest worker”to earn money with the
plan to get self-employed in Turkey after returning. But then the mother got ill and since the
doctors in Turkey could not find the reason she was brought to Germany for treatment. The
children also came with her. Since the illness took longer than expected, the father sent the
children to school in Germany. The return to Turkey was postponed year after year, often
because they waited for the finishing of a class level or the education of one of the
daughters. The interviewee J-09 describes how the family always waited for the next year to
return to Turkey. She says insofar they lived actually always out of their suitcase and
prepared everything for the next summer to leave Germany. They always thought next year
they would return forever. J-09 says that this had negative aspects for her because she
never could have firm targets. This was also the case with regard to school. She always
wanted to study but her parents pushed her to leave school and to become a hairdresser.
They argued that a study would take too long and the university degree anyway would not be
recognized in Turkey. Now that her own daughter left home J-09 thinks about fulfilling her
dream about studying.
Also because of their own experience as migrant children some of the interviewees narrate
that their children are the reason for still staying in Germany. They do not want to pull them
out of the school. But they plan to return to Turkey after their children finished their education
and are independent (E-09, E-22, E-26, E-32).
Moderate Transnationalism
The movement between educational institutions in different countries is not always motivated
by educational ambitions. In most of the cases in our survey migration to other countries
goes along with other factors than the acquisition of education, such as family reunification.
The motivation to change the country in these cases is not for educational reasons.
Among our interviewees are Turkish migrants who studied in Germany but the decision to
migrate to Germany is caused by other reasons. For example, J-02 is a political refugee. He
tells that during the time of his migration the universities in Turkey were ideological and
organized according to criteria of power. Thus, he started his study in Germany. In another
case J-14 attended a German high school in Turkey. He tells that had to do with the fact that
his father studied in Germany. Spontaneously he decided also to study in Germany and
afterwards to return to Turkey. This decision was not explicit related to educational matters
but his friends told him that Berlin is a nice city. Thus, he came to Germany in 1967. In the
end he kept staying in Germany for two reasons. First, he married a German wife. Second,
because of the military coup d'état in Turkey he had no motivation to go back. J-14 tells that
81
he finally decided in the middle of the 1980s to stay in Germany and thus, he soon got
naturalized and does not plan to return ever. Again under other conditions it happened that J07 studied in Germany. The son of a “guest worker”came in the age of eleven years to
Germany by family reunification. Due to big problems in school, such as discrimination and a
lack of knowledge of the German language, after two years he went to a boarding school in
Turkey. Later he returned to Germany and also studied there.
The second kind of cases in this category is similar to the case of J-07 who first came to
Germany but then went back to a Turkish boarding school. In many cases the children of
Turkish “guest workers”were left for a certain time in Turkey or even were sent back to
Turkey for a certain period. Some of the interviewees were pulled out from school in Turkey
to follow their parents to Germany. When E-28 came to Germany she had finished the
second class in Turkey. In Germany she had to repeat the second class and went to a
Turkish class. Similarly to the biography of E-28, E-03 finished the third class in Turkey and
started with the fourth class at a Turkish school in Germany. E-22 was already thirteen years
old when he and his family followed the father to Germany where he visited a preparation
class. By been pulled out from school in Turkey and continued their education in Germany
this cases have a clear transnational aspect. If we continue to pursue their way through live
in Germany, we can see that despite their commonality in the kind of migration and that the
parents of all three interviewees were “guest workers”, their lives differ from one another.
While E-28 gives a positive evaluation of the preparation classes, for E-22 they were an error
in the German policy. Nevertheless, both interviewees ended up with a university degree. In
contrast, E-03 has a certificate of secondary education (Hauptschulabschluss).
The interviewees who came to Germany as children or adolescent persons often describe
that because of their migration experience they had deficits in cultural knowledge or
competences. These problems can be related to Germany but also to Turkey or even to both
countries. In some cases the interviewees acquire such knowledge and competences only as
adults. Particularly with regard to language children of “guest workers”tell about their deficits.
For example E-03 describes that she did not have the opportunity to learn German as she
was a child. She says one fells like half a person if one does not speak the language.
Sometimes she wants to tell something but it does not come across what she wants to say
because the language is missing. Language is really important for E-03 and she tries to
improve it as adult.
But as our interviews show in migrant families are not only problems with the German but
also with the Turkish language. For example, the parents of E-06 went to Germany while he
82
was staying with his grandmother in Turkey. When he was four years old he was also
brought to Germany. He did not go to the kindergarten and when school started he got into a
preparation class until the seventh class. He tells that later at the grammar school
(Gymnasium) he could choose English and Turkish as foreign languages. Thus, E-06 says,
he has a good knowledge of Turkish. In his opinion the parental home is not sufficient to
speak Turkish well. Also J-08 is a child of a working class family. Her mother is illiterate and
her father attended school only for three years. Thus, the parents did not read books to their
children or impart academic knowledge to them. But, as J-08 tells, her parents gave a lot of
love and attention to their children. She had to leave grammar school (Gymnasium) without a
qualification because her ill mother wanted the youngest daughter to marry to be secured.
Only when J-08 wanted to educate her own children bilingual, she recognized that her
Turkish is so bad that it actually could not be her mother tongue. Since her origin and roots
are important to her, she decided to improve her Turkish by the means of language books. In
the interview she emphasizes that the Turkish culture in Germany is really different to the
Turkish culture in Turkey. Similarly, J-15 tells that because of her socialisation in Germany
she learned the German language better. Only later she improved her Turkish language
skills because for the parents of her former fiancée placed great value on talking only
Turkish. J-15 emphasizes multilingualism as a particularly important competence. Beside
German, Turkish, English and some French she would like to speak future languages.
Not only language skills are obtained subsequently by our interviewees but also other
knowledge concerning Turkey. For example J-17 describes how she recognized her deficits
concerning her mother tongue but also that she does not know Turkey. She says when she
was in her early twenties an intensive Turkish phases started. She combined with her
political engagement to improve her Turkish and to focus on the Turkish system. Also E-33
developed her interest in Turkey only when she became adult. Her parents are from Eastern
Turkey but since there was war when she was a child and her relatives were displaced, the
family always travelled to other regions in Turkey. The parents of E-33 never want to go back
to Eastern Turkey. But two years ago E-33 made a guided tour through Eastern Turkey. She
says she is glad that she went there because she discovered her roots in Eastern Turkey.
Moreover she tells about the cultural treasures and the wonderful landscapes there.
Weak Transnationalism
Not all of our interviewees learned German language after their migration to Germany. For
example, J-04 completed primary education in Turkey. The visits of his German uncle
motivated him to learn some German during school. Later as a teenager he migrated to
83
Germany and worked at his uncle's enterprises at the fair. Also J-14 learned German before
migration by visiting a German high school in Turkey. Later he studied in Germany.
In our interviews interviewees also mention intercultural competences that are important
throughout their lifecycle. Thereby bilingualism is highlighted as the most important
competence. When the interviewees were asked about their mother tongue, a large number
answered that they consider themselves as native speakers in both languages. Also most of
the interviewees with children explain that it is important for them that the children learn
German as well as Turkish. Thereby they have different strategies of bilingualism. Whereas a
part of the children speak only Turkish until they go to the kindergarten or to school, the other
part practices Turkish as well as German at home. In the first case for example E-06 tells
that his youngest son learned German during one month in the kindergarten although E-06
mostly speaks Turkish with his children. Similarly, E-22 explores that he has his own strategy
concerning the language of his children. In his opinion it is easier for children who master
their mother tongue to learn a foreign language. In order that his children learn first Turkish
he has not sent them to the kindergarten. During the one-year pre-school his children spoke
as well German as their class mates. In contrast, the son of his brother who went to the
kindergarten now can speak German but not Turkish.
Also the daughter of E-05 learned only Turkish until the kindergarten and then she learned
German relatively fast. Then E-05 who is grown up in Germany started to speak German
with his daughter and his wife who came to Germany after the marriage continues talking
Turkish with her. Now the daughter prefers to talk only German because it is easier for her.
Thus, they have to pay attention that her Turkish does not atrophy. They meet regularly with
a circle of friends, so that the children keep the Turkish. E-05 says each language is a
human and if someone speaks tow languages, she or he is two humans. Also in the case of
E-19, J-01, J-06, J-08 and J-09 it is practiced that the one partner speaks German and the
other partner Turkish with the children. E-19 who is born in Germany explains that he talks
German to his children while his wife who cannot speak German talks Turkish to them. A
bilingual education is also important for J-01. He deplores that altogether migrants with
Turkish background also after a long-time residence have learned German insufficiently. And
because of communication difficulties they are involved in German institutions insufficiently,
especially as regards political processes on country and municipal level. J-01 is engaged in
an initiative for the protection of the mother tongue. He sees good competences in the
mother tongue as condition for learning other languages. Also J-08 tells that her former
husband spoke Turkish with the children and she speaks German and Turkish with them.
She is proud that her children speak Turkish well. For her it is really important that her
84
children know their origin and thus have the opportunity to find their own belonging. She says
that she wants to give both to them, the German and the Turkish, because she also lives in
both.
Also when migrant children and children of migrants talk about their childhood they
sometimes highlight that they are grown up bilingual. For example, J-09 tells that she learned
both languages quickly and easily. Her father has attended a German language course and
thus decided to speak German with his children while the mother continued talking Turkish to
them. Also J-22 tells about a bilingual socialisation. In this case she always talks Turkish with
her parents and with her three older sisters German. In contrast to her sisters she visits
grammar school (Gymnasium). In contrast to J-09 and J-22, J-06 tells that although she
speaks Turkish with her parents she has problems with that language. Vocabulary is missing
and she has difficulties to tell complex stories. While some interviewees talk about
bilingualism only with reference their family, in other cases language skills also can be used
in other areas of live. For example J-23 tells that she is chatting with the neighbourhood
children of their summer house in Turkey where the family goes for holidays. She says this
offers the opportunity to improve her Turkish, especially the written language and the
pronunciation. In return, they sometimes communicate in German because her friends in
Turkey want to learn German. J-23 tells that she was thinking about a social year in the UK
but her family asked why she will not do that in Turkey. J-23 thinks she maybe will do that
also for her Turkish language. Furthermore, for other interviewees Turkish language is a skill
they can use for their professional career as shown in chapter 4.3.
Multiculturalism
Bilingualism is not only seen as an everyday language for the home and as potential skill for
transnational communication but also as skill for a career in Germany. For example E-39 tells
that he has three children and that he supports them. For example, in the kindergarten his
children started to learn English. However, he has the problem that his youngest son does
not speak Turkish well. In a conversation a politician told him that Germany depends on
exports and thus language is important to foster contacts. Thus, it is planed that in some
years schools will offer Turkish as a foreign language in the state (Bundesland) where E-39
is living. E-39 says his children would choose it as an elective course. In this case bilingual
and multilingual education of the children is seen as a resource to improve career
opportunities in Germany.
Nowadays elective courses for Turkish, as already established in the state North RhineWestphalia, are connected with the idea of Turkish language as an important qualification in
85
Germany. In this respect, the current policy differs from times when Germany in the political
self-conception was claimed “not as country of immigration”. During the time of the influx of
“guest workers”and related family reunification, Turkish classes were arranged with the goal
of reintegration of “guest worker’
s”children into their home culture. Thus, Turkish pupils were
separated from their German peers and taught by teachers from Turkey in their mother
tongue. Also a part of our interviewees tells about attending school in classes made up
primarily of children of other Turkish immigrants in Germany. Going back to interviewees
mentioned above, E-03, E-22 and E-28 went to German schools after attending schools in
Turkey. In Germany E-03 visited a Turkish school with only Turkish pupils. Only from the
sixth class on she got in a class with also German pupils. E-22 attended a preparation class,
where he and the other Turkish pupils, as he says, wasted two and a half years. He says the
idea of the preparation classes was to introduce the Turkish school children into the German
society, but in fact they were more or less under themselves and most of the time they spoke
Turkish with the expectation of the German lessons. Only in the ninth class they were
distributed into regular classes. And E-28 tells that she visited a Turkish class where the
lessons were in Turkish language and each day they had two hours remedial teaching in
German. In contrast to E-22, E-28 is the opinion the preparation class was here salvation.
She believes if she had come directly in a German class she would have been intimidated
and she would not have had succeeded.
6. Conclusions
This country report presents some insights into the interviews conducted so far in the
German survey. We want to conclude with some findings concerning transnational social
spaces between Turkey and Germany. Figure 13 summarizes the distribution of cases
according to different degrees of transnationalism in the German survey.
86
Figure 13: Distribution of Cases according to Different Degrees of Transnationalism in
the Political, Economic, Socio-cultural and Educational Domain
Strong
Transnationalism
E-01, J-05, J-20
Moderate
Transnationalism
E-14, E-20, J-01,
J-11, J-14, J-17,
J-19
Weak
Transnationalism
E-02, E-06, E-33,
J-03, J-04, J-06,
J-07, J-09, J-10,
J-13, J-15, J-16,
J-21, J-22, J-24,
J-25, J-26
Economic
domain
E-07, E-08, E-14,
E-31, E-34, J-03,
J-04, J-11, J-13,
J-19, J-20
E-01, E-03, E-25,
E-44, J-01, J-05,
J-14, J-15, J-17,
E-06, J-07, J-10,
J-16, J-21
Socio-cultural
domain:
Private
contacts
E-01, E-02, E-06,
E-08, E-14, E-26,
E-42, J-03, J-08,
J-09, J-20
E-05, E-10, E-12,
E-17, E-19, E-21,
E-22, E-27, E-29,
E-34, E-37, E-39,
E-40, E-44, E-45,
E-46, J-10, J-14
E-02, E-08, E-30,
E-34, E-39, J-01,
J-07, J-08, J-19,
J-20
E-03, E-04, E-05,
E-07, E-13, E-38,
E-41, J-01, J-02,
J-06, J-12, J-15,
J-17, J-22, J-23
Political domain
Socio-cultural
domain:
Engagement/
Social security
E-05, E-46, J-01,
J-04, J-09, J-10,
J-17, J-18, J-20,
J-22
Socio-cultural
domain:
Identity
E-02, E-28 J-03,
J-04, J-08, J-09,
J-14, J-19
E-03, E-14, E-05,
J-07
E-22, J-06, J-13,
J-15, J-17
Educational
domain
E-01, E-02, E-14,
E-24, E-29, J-01,
J-09, J-10, J-20
E-03, E-06, E-22,
E-28, E-33, J-02,
J-07, J-08, J-14,
J-15, J-17
E-05, E-06, E-19,
E-22, J-01, J-04,
J-06, J-08, J-09, J14, J-23
Multiculturalism
E-07, E-14, E-20,
E-29, E-39, E-46,
J-01, J-03, J-04,
J-05, J-07, J-13,
J-14, J-15, J-16,
J-17, J-18, J-19,
J-20, J-21, J-22
E-13, E-28, J-01,
J-02, J-03, J-04,
J-05, J-06, J-07,
J-08, J-11, J-13,
J-14, J-15, J-16,
J-17, J-18, J-19,
J-20, J-21, J-22,
J-23
E-04, E-28, E-33,
E-37, J-01, J-08,
J-17
E-03, E-06, E-11,
E-12, E-13, E-15,
E-27, E-29, E-31,
E-33, E-34 E-35,
E-36, E-37, E-38,
E-39, E-40, E-46,
J-01, J-03, J-04,
J-07, J-08, J-14,
J-18, J-19, J-20,
J-22
E-04, E-33, E-39,
E-40, E-46, J-12,
J-15, J-17, J-19,
J-23
E-03, E-10, E-14,
E-22, E-28, E-39,
J-17, J-23
Transnationalism in various social areas
As table 13 illustrates, there are variations in transnationalism with regard to different social
areas. The interviewees in the German survey show distinctions concerning forms of mobility
and social networks in various life domains, such as policy, economic, family, education, etc.
There are a few cases which show strong cross-border relations and practices in nearly all
areas. For example, the case of J-20 could be described as transnational way of life. In the
political domain she is highly interested in politics of both countries and due to her dual
87
citizenship she also voted in Germany and in Turkey several times. In the economic domain
she works in Turkey for a German employer. Thus, now her main residence is in Turkey but
she has a second home in Germany. In the socio-cultural domain especially her husband
and her children can be emphasized. The husband of J-20 is unemployed since ten years
and stays always longer periods in Turkey. But her children are in Germany and not least
because of them J-20 travels regularly all three months to Germany. While J-20 was living in
Germany she travelled two times a year to Turkey and telephoned once a day with her
Turkish contacts. Also in the educational domain J-20 can be classified as highly
transnational because she migrated in 1980 as international student to Germany.
Different to J-20 most of the interviewees in the German survey do not have such a
transnational way of life. Transnationalism often does only affect some or even one life
domain, like in the case of E-42. The father of E-42 came in 1963 as “guest worker” to
Germany and lived there alone for around twenty years. Then a part of the family followed
but E-42 could not go with them because she was too old for family reunification. She only
came to Germany when she married her husband, the son of her father’
s best friend.
Nowadays, two of her sisters are back in Turkey and she and her two daughters call them
several times each day. Thus, in the socio-cultural domain E-42 has strong transnational
relations while in all other domains there are no transnational contacts or practices. Some of
the interviewees are not engaged in highly transnational practices, like E-41. He tells that he
has only few contacts to Turkey. The flat of his father in Turkey is sold in the meantime. His
sister is living in Turkey and on Ramadan he calls her. From time to time he goes to Turkey
but not to the town where his sister is living but for holidays. In other areas than the sociocultural he has no relationships to Turkey.
Heterogeneity of transnationalism among Turkish migrants
If we consider not only the variety in different social areas but also differences among
Turkish migrants we also can see variations in transnationalism. In general, there is a small
number of cases among our respondents with explicitly strong transnational activities in the
sense that interviewees are characterised by high rates of permanent geographical mobility.
For example, compared to Mexican migration to the United States which is dominated by
circular migration, the case of Turkish migrants in Germany is rather characterised by
settlement and whole-family migration. Most of our interviewees do not establish “mobile
livelihoods”and dual home bases in Turkey and in Germany. There are only a few cases of
long distance commuting, such as J-20. She migrated alone to Germany in 1980 as
international student. Her plan was always to return to Turkey some day and thus she
88
continuously kept strong contact to Turkey. In the meantime she found a job in Turkey for a
fixed term of three years. Thus, her main residence is now in Turkey but her second home is
still in Germany where she is regularly all three months. Also concerning her further
residence she says that it is likely to commute between Turkey and Germany permanently
because her husband will stay in Turkey and her children in Germany. In sum, some cases in
the German survey can be described as a transnational way of life. These cases are often
connected to occupational careers, economic entrepreneurship and business activities, in
some instances also to political activities and networks. But even if the majority of the
interviewees in the German survey is not constantly on the move, there is a great number of
transnational relations and practices obvious in the German-Turkish case. However, the
frequency and intensity of such relations and practices is highly variable among Turkish
migrants and children of Turkish migrants. For example, while some of the respondents
telephone with their significant others in Turkey each day several times, other respondents
only have contact to them when they travel to Turkey for holidays.
Transnationalism in biographical courses
The frequency and intensity of transnational relations and practices does not only vary
among migrants but also in life courses. There are some cases where contacts to Turkey
decrease over time. For example E-03, who came as child to Germany, tells that it was
always important for her parents to go to Turkey at least once a year even if the flights were
expensive. Later E-03 married a man from her village in Turkey and they kept on going to
Turkey regularly. But now they have bought an apartment in Germany and thus they cannot
go to Turkey as often as they would like to. Similarly, J-23 tells that when she was a child she
regularly travelled to Turkey with her parents. But the visits have decreased in the last four
years because the family moved to a new house what was really expensive. Beside financial
matters the dead of a significant other is a reason for decreasing contacts to Turkey. For
example, J-02 tells that his mother was the reason for flying to Turkey nearly each
September. After his mother died he only went irregularly to Turkey and now he was not
there since three years. He says for him it does not matter if he goes to Turkey or not. Also J06 explains that her contacts to Turkey have considerably decreased what also is related to
the dead of her grandparents. With other relatives in Turkey she only has contact from time
to time.
But there are also cases in which the contacts and the stays in Turkey are increasing. This
especially applies to Turkish migrants after their retirement. For example, E-37 tells that they
can spend longer periods in Turkey since her husband is retired. And also the former “guest
89
worker”E-44 who has a house with a garden in Turkey tells that he normally stays in Turkey
for two or three months since he is retired. He says that retired people have to go home.
Beside the own retirement also retired parents who returned to Turkey are a reason to
telephone more often to Turkey than in earlier times. For example, E-45 tells that out of the
blue his father wanted back to Turkey. At that time he was still older than seventy years. E45 now is the person in charge of his parents, who are still registered in Germany, for the
authorities in Germany. Thus, they often have to telephone because of bureaucratic matters
and correspondences. An incensement of relationships to Turkey is not only obvious in the
case of the first but sometimes also in the second generation. For example, E-10 is born in
Germany and as child he only went to Turkey with his parents once or twice for holidays. In
the age of seventeen years he had the wish to build up relationships to Turkey and thus
stayed there for a time. Now also his mother is living partly in Turkey. In contrast to E-10, E28 is born in Turkey and came to Germany in the second class. When she was asked about
her contacts to Turkey she told that she was torn out too early from the Turkish society. She
even does not have intensive contact to her relatives in Turkey. She thinks that her Turkish
neighbours in Germany are closer than her own relatives and that there is a cultural
difference. Nevertheless, she tried to build up some occupational contacts to Turkey as adult.
One of these contacts also got a good friend of her in the meantime. All of these examples
illustrate that contacts to Turkey are not static but variable and change over time. Moreover,
especially cases of so-called second generation interviewees who set up contacts to Turkey
only when they are adult illustrate that relationships to Turkey do not necessarily decrease
with the duration of stay in Germany. Even if this is true for some cases, in other cases
transnational relationships and practices stay constant during the stay in Germany or even
increase.
Institutionally produced biographical transnational orientations
Transnational social spaces between Turkey and Germany can not sufficiently be explained
with the emergence of new communication and transportation technologies. To understand
why Turkish migrants do not cut but instead maintain relationships to Turkey, we especially
have to consider the peculiarity of the German-Turkish case. In October 1961 the Federal
Republic of Germany concluded a bilateral agreement on labour recruitment with Turkey.
The recruited “guest workers”were regarded as temporary workers and not as long-term
members of the receiving society. This perspective of temporary migration was anchored in
the whole spectrum of migration policy which is familiar under the title of Germany’
s longstanding official rejection of being an immigration country. It is visible for example in the rules
90
of Germany’
s foreigner law, the absence of official integration policies and the very restrictive
citizenship law with very demanding preconditions for naturalization.
The assumption that Turkish migrants would work in Germany for a limited period of time and
then return to Turkey was initially also shared by the “guest workers”themselves. Also many
of the respondents in the German survey migrated to Germany within this “guest worker“
scheme, either as workers or as family members of labour migrants. As shown above, they
regarded their stay in Germany as temporary. They assumed that they would work in
Germany for some years only, saving as much money as possible and that they then would
have a much more comfortable situation regarding their social upward mobility when being
back in Turkey thereafter. What is crucial in these cases is that the Turkish migrants
postponed their return several times without having really doubts that they definitely would
return one day.
As a consequence of the long-term dominant German “guest worker”system, we would talk
about a kind of an institutionally-produced biographical transnational orientation. Much of the
life plans and personal projects of Turkish migrants were oriented towards return to Turkey,
while they at the same time became increasingly involved with the social and cultural
conditions in Germany the longer they stayed. Thus, a kind of stable bi-national or
transnational orientation was the logical result.
Transnational social spaces beyond the first generation of Turkish migrants
The return orientation of the “guest worker”generation had consequences not only for the
persons directly concerned, that are the individual migrant workers of the first generation, but
also for their families and especially for their children, the so-called second generation. As
the interviewee E-43 whose parents came to Germany to save money to buy a tractor in
Turkey puts it: “Two generations for one tractor ...”.
We interviewed respondents of the so-called second generation who talked extensively of
the consequences this permanent postponed return orientation of their families had for their
own life plans, education careers and emotional relations. In many cases the children were
left for a certain time in Turkey or even were sent back to Turkey again. Sometimes children
of “guest workers”travelled forth and back several times during their childhood. In particular
with regard to education the return orientation of the first generation shaped the career of
their children. For example, J-09 narrates impressively about her life story related to the
return orientation of her parents. She tells about her childhood that the return to Turkey was
91
postponed year after year and thus the family lived out of the suitcase for years. As J-09
expressed the wish to study the parents argued that a study would take to long and the
university degree anyway would not be recognized in Turkey. Thus, she left school and
became a hairdresser. Similarly, E-29 who came to Germany when he was 15 years old, tells
that he did not have a profession because his family always planned to go back to Turkey.
Thus, he started as unskilled worker and only later made a professional training.
Also due to the return orientation of the first generation that affected the second generation,
cross-border contacts between Germany and Turkey cannot only be found among the first
but also among the so-called second generation. As Thomas Faist points out, transnational
social spaces develop in two stages. "In a first phase they are a by-product of international
migration" (Faist 2000: 201). In the second phase they "go beyond migratory chains of the
first generation of migrants and develop a life of their own." (Ibid.) However, even if
transnational relations can be found independently of generations, there are some
differences in the kind of relations. In the case of the first generation contacts were especially
maintained because of transnational families. For example, the now retired former “guest
worker”E-44 tells that he lived for 20 years alone in Germany while his wife and his four
daughters stayed in Turkey. His wife did not work and he sent each months 300.- DM,
sometimes even 500.- or 1.000.- DM to his family in Turkey. While in the “guest worker”
generation often the closest family stayed in Turkey and they thus had domestic and social
responsibilities to Turkey, these strong obligations often do not longer exist for the second
generation.
Transnationalism and integration
Although Germany is one of the most important European destinations for migrants since the
Second Word War, Germany did "not understand itself as a country of immigration for nonGermans" (Brubaker 1992: 174). A process of policy review began in 2001 with the report
"Structuring Immigration – Fostering Integration" of the Independent Commission on
Migration to Germany and lead to a new Immigration Law in 2005 regulating measures to
immigrant integration. This law strives at the integration of legal immigrants in Germany by
way of integration courses consisting of a language course together with an orientation
course, mandatory for immigrants from non-EU countries. Foremost the courses aim to
support the integration of immigrants into German society.
The same understanding of integration into an existing German society can be found at the
academic level. The German debate on immigrant integration has been shaped strongly by
92
assimilationists. One of the most influential is Hartmut Esser who understands integration of
immigrants as being or becoming part of the existing system of the receiving society,
implicitly conceptualized as national society (Esser 1980). Esser distinguishes cognitive,
structural, social and identificational assimilation as different dimensions, but a serious
alternative to assimilation does not exist for immigrants (Esser 2004). Thereby the German
language is considered the most important condition for successful integration, whereas
bilingualism is not a beneficial and useful competence for linguistic and vocational integration
of children of migrants (Esser 2006). According to Wilhelm Heitmeyer’
s cultural deficit
approach (Heitmeyer et al. 1997) many immigrant cultures and identities are antagonistic to
Western values. A bicultural life style is rejected as it would not develop a coherent identity.
Despite their diverging outlooks, Esser and Heitmeyer thus agree that cultural adaptation is a
prerequisite for structural assimilation, that retaining cultural traditions will prove problematic
and that biculturalism and bilingualism do not work. Because society is understood as
relatively socio-economically and culturally homogeneous, integration has to be seen as a
one-sided process by which immigrants adapt to mainstream requirements.
Even if transnational approaches concede that assimilation in the receiving country is one
possible model of integration, they argue for a multi-perspective analysis of immigrant
incorporation (Faist 2003, Glick Schiller et al. 2005, Pries 2006). According to transnational
approaches different pathways of immigrant incorporation have to be distinguished. Which
model is appropriate depends on the respective historical period, the causes of migration, the
relation to the homeland and the extent of discrimination in the country of immigration (Faist
2003). The main argument of transnational approaches is that incorporation in one society is
neither empirically nor theoretically exclusive (Glick Schiller et al. 2005).
Also the German TRANS-NET survey shows a more differentiated and multifaceted picture
of immigrant integration. A first view of the empirical material suggests that transnationalism
and integration are not reciprocally excluded. As figure 13 illustrates, there are cases where
interviewees are mentioned in the categories "strong transnationalism" and "multiculturalism"
at the same time. An example in the political domain is J-20. She is currently working in
Turkey for a German employer and has a residence in both countries. J-20 has dual
citizenship and is interested in politics of both countries. This is confirmed by the fact that she
voted in Germany and in Turkey several times. In Germany she made voluntary work in the
political environment of the German Green party. Moreover, she feels a strong affiliation with
both countries. This example illustrates that we must assume cases of integration in
Germany as well as in Turkey. To get a more comprehensive picture of the relationship
93
between transnationalism and integration, a more intensive analysis of the data in the
German study is necessary.
7. References
Alba, R. and Nee, V. (2003) Remaking the American Mainstream: Assimilation and
Contemporary Immigration, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Angenendt, S. (1997) Deutsche Migrationspolitik im neuen Europa. Opladen: Leske +
Budrich.
Bade, K.J.; Bommes, M. (2000) Migration und politische Kultur im „NichtEinwanderungsland“. In Bade, K.J. & Bommes, M. (Eds.) Migrationsreport 2000. Frankfurt
a. M./New York: Campus, 163-204.
Bauschke-Urban, C. (2008) Zwischen den Welten? Eine neue Generation von
Wissenschaftlerinnen in transnationalen Räumen? In Zimmermann, K., Kamphans, M. &
Metz-Göckel, S. (Eds.) Perspektiven der Hochschulforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für
Sozialwissenschaften, 273–292.
Bommes, M. (2006) Einleitung: Migrations- und Integrationspolitik in Deutschland zwischen
institutioneller Anpassung und Abwehr. In Bommes, M. & Schiffauer, W. (Eds.)
Migrationsreport 2006. Fakten – Analysen – Perspektiven. Frankfurt a. M./New York:
Campus, 9-25.
Brubaker, R. (1992) Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press.
CDU (2007) Freiheit und Sicherheit: Grundsätze für Deutschland. Beschluss des 21.
Parteitags der CDU Deutschlands vom 03.12.2007 in Hannover.
Crul, M.; Schneider, J. (2010) Comparative Integration Context Theory: Participation and
Belonging in New Diverse European Cities. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 33(7), 1249-1268.
Davy, U. (2005) Integration of Immigrants in Germany: A Slowly Evolving Concept. European
Journal of Migration and Law, 7, 123-144.
Esser, H. (1980) Aspekte der Wanderungssoziologie. Assimilation und Integration von
Wanderern, ethnischen Gruppen und Minderheiten. Eine handlungstheoretische Analyse.
Darmstadt/Neuwied: Luchterhand.
Esser, H. (2001) Integration und ethnische Schichtung. Working Paper No. 40, Mannheim:
Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung.
Esser, H. (2004) Welche Alternative zu „Assimilation“ gibt es eigentlich? In Bade, K. &
Bommes, M. (Eds.) Migration – Integration – Bildung. Grundfragen und Problembereiche,
IMIS-Beiträge 23/2004. Osnabrück: IMIS, 41-59.
Esser, H. (2006) Sprache und Integration. Die sozialen Bedingungen und Folgen des
Spracherwerbs von Migranten. Frankfurt am Main, New York: Campus.
Faist, T. (2000) The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational
Social Spaces. Oxford: University Press.
Faist, T. (2003) Amalgamating Newcomers, National Minority and Diaspora – Integration(s)
of Immigrants from Poland in Germany. In Sackmann, R., Peters, B. & Faist, T. (Eds.)
Identity and Integration. Migrants in Western Europe. Aldershot: Ashgate, 205-234.
Faist, T. (2004) The Border-Crossing Expansion of Social Space: Concepts, Questions and
Topics. In Faist, T. and Kivisto, P. (eds): Transnational Social Spaces: Agents, Networks
and Institutions. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1-34.
Faist, T. (2008) Migrants as Transnational Development Agents. An Inquiry into the Newest
Round of the Migration-Development Nexus. Population, Space and Place, 14, 21–42.
Faist, T. (2009) Diversity – A New Mode of Incorporation? Ethnic and Racial Studies 32(1):
171-190.
94
Fischer-Rosenthal, W.; Rosenthal, G. (1997) Warum Biographieanalyse und wie man sie
macht. In: Zeitschrift für Sozialisationsforschung und Erziehungssoziologie, 17(4), 505427.
Geddes, A. (2003) The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe, London: Sage.
Gerdes, J. (2010) Germany’
s Activated Integration Regime: Migrants Rights and Immigrant
Integration in German Political Party Discourse, In Journal of Migration and Integration.
Forthcoming.
Gerdes, J., Faist, T. & Rieple, B. (2007) We are all “Republican”Now – The Politics of Dual
Citizenship in Germany. In Faist, T. (Ed.) Dual Citizenship in Europe: From Nationhood to
Societal Integration. Aldershot: Ashgate, 45-76.
Glick Schiller, N. (2005) Transborder Citizenship: an Outcome of legal Pluralism within
Transnational Social Fields. In Benda-Beckmann, F. v., Benda-Beckmann, K. v. & Griffith,
A. (Eds.) Mobile People, Mobile Law: Expanding Legal Relations in a Contracting World.
Aldershot: Ashgate, 48-90.
Gomolla, M.; Radtke, F.O. (2002) Institutionelle Diskriminierung. Die Herstellung ethnischer
Differenz in der Schule. Opladen: Leske und Budrich.
Groß, T. (2006) Integration durch Sprache – der deutsche Kompromiss. Kritische Justiz, 39,
2-11.
Halm, D.; Sauer, M. (2005) Freiwilliges Engagement von Türkinnen und Türken in
Deutschland. Projekt der Stiftung Zentrum für Türkeistudien im Auftrag des
Bundesministeriums für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend. Essen.
Heitmeyer, W., Müller, J. & Schröder, H. (1997) Verlockender Fundamentalismus. Türkische
Jugendliche in Deutschland. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Herbert, U. (2001) Geschichte der Ausländerpolitik in Deutschland. München: Beck.
Joppke, C. (1999) Immigration and the Nation Sate: The United States, Germany and Great
Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kalter, F.; Granato, N. (2007) Educational Hurdles on the Way to Structural Assimilation in
Germany. In Heath, A.F. & Cheung, S.Y. (Eds.) Unequal chances. Ethnic minorities in
Western labour markets. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 271–319.
Kivisto, P. (2001) Theorizing Transnational Immigration: A Critical Review of Current Efforts.
In: Ethnic and Racial Studies 24(4), 549-577.
Kreutzer, F.; Roth, S. (Eds.) (2006) Transnationale Karrieren. Biographien, Lebensführung
und Mobilität. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Kristen, C. (2006) Ethnische Diskriminierung im deutschen Schulsystem? Theoretische
Überlegungen und empirische Ergebnisse. Discussion Paper Nr. SP IV 20006-601. Berlin:
Arbeitsstelle Interkulturelle Konflikte und gesellschaftliche Integration (AKI),
Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).
Küsters, I. (2006) Narrative Interviews. Grundlagen und Anwendungen. Wiesbaden: VS
Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Kymlicka, W. (1995) Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Levitt, P. (2001) Transnational Migration: Taking Stock and Future Dimensions. In: Global
Networks 1(3), 195-216.
Martin, J. (2005) Been-To, Burger, Transmigranten? Zur Bildungsmigration von Ghanaern
und ihrer Rückkehr aus der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Münster: Lit Verlag.
Martin, P.L. (2004) Germany: Managing Migration in the Twenty-First Century. In Cornelius,
W.A., Takeyuki, T, Martin, P.L. & Hollifield, J.F. (Eds.) Controlling Immigration. A Global
Perspective. Stanford/California: Stanford University Press, 221-253.
Pries, L. (2006) Verschiedene Formen der Migration - verschiedene Wege der Integration. In
Otto, H.-U. & Schrödter, M. (Eds.) Soziale Arbeit in der Migrationsgesellschaft.
Multikulturalismus - Neo-Assimilation - Transnationalität. Lahnstein: Verlag Neue Praxis
(Neue Praxis Sonderheft), 19–28.
Pries, L. (2008) Die Transnationalisierung der sozialen Welt. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Rapley, T. (2004) Interviews. In: Seale, C.; Gobo, G.; Gumbrium, J.F.; Silverman, D. (Eds.)
Qualitative Research Practice. London: Sage, 15-33.
95
Rosenthal, Gabriele (2005) Bioghrapical Research. In: Seale, C.; Gobo, G.; Gumbrium, J.F.;
Silverman, D. (Eds.) Qualitative Research Practice. London: Sage, 48-64.
Scheibelhofer, E. (2006) Wenn WissenschaftlerInnen im Ausland forschen. Transnationale
Lebensstiele zwischen selbstbestimmter Lebensführung und ungewollter Arbeitsmigration.
In Kreutzer, F. & Roth, S. (Eds.) Transnationale Karrieren. Biografien, Lebensführung und
Mobilität. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 122-140.
Schönwälder, Karen (2006) Politikwandel in der (bundes-)deutschen Migrationspolitik. In
Davy, U. & Weber, A. (Eds.) Paradigmenwechsel in Einwanderungsfragen? Überlegungen
zum neuen Zuwanderungsgesetz. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 8-22.
Seipel, Ch.; Rieker, P. (2003) Integrative Sozialforschung. Konzepte und Methoden der
qualitativen und quantitativen empirischen Forschung. Weinheim: Juventa.
Shachar, A. (2006) The Race for Talent: Highly Skilled Migrants and Competitive Immigration
Regimes. New York University Law Review, 81(1), 148-206.
Silverman, D. (2005) Doing Qualitative Research. A Practical Handbook. London: Sage.
Taylor, C. (1992) Multiculturalism and ‘
The Politics of Recognition’
. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Weiß, A. (2006) Hoch qualifizierte MigrantInnen. Der Kern einer transnationalen
Mittelklasse? In Kreutzer, F. & Roth, S. (Eds.) Transnationale Karrieren. Biografien,
Lebensführung und Mobilität. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 283-300.
Vertovec, S. (2009) Transnationalism. New York: Routledge.
96