Master thesis for European Studies: Integration and Identity
Experiencing a new City
Experiences of Iranian and former Yugoslavian
refugees integrating into Amsterdam and
Rotterdam.
Marije de Groot 11372274 February-July 2017
Preface
In this thesis interviews conducted by the Oral History project named Ongekend Bijzonder are used to value the experiences of Iranian and former Yugoslavian in relation to their integration into the Netherlands and in particular into Rotterdam and Amsterdam. Therefore I would like to give a special
thank you to BMP (Stichting Bevordering Maatschappelijke Participatie) for allowing me to use their interviews conducted for the Ongekend Bijzonder project. The interviews are analysed in the context of the changing mentality towards integration in the past decades. The focus will be on the impact of
Content
Introduction………..6
Integration: A complex concept………12
Integration in the Netherlands: a passed model of multicultural integration policy………...12
The denominators of integration………..16
The impact of the City: Feeling at home in Amsterdam and Rotterdam………19
Amsterdam and Rotterdam: diversity in the city………22
Violence and Fear: Background stories of Iran and former Yugoslavia………..28
Regime changes in Iran……….28
The Civil War in Yugoslavia……….30
Iranians and former Yugoslavians in the Netherlands……….32
Interview analysis: personal experiences of integrating into Amsterdam and Rotterdam………36
Iranians and former Yugoslavians becoming ‘Amsterdammers’……….36
Iranians and former Yugoslavians becoming ‘Rotterdammers’………41
General experiences in both Amsterdam and Rotterdam………45
Conclusion……….50
Introduction
‘The Netherlands are open to others, as they are open to the sea, and open to new influences’.1 ‘’How can you tell that you love someone? That’s a feeling! And that is how I feel about Rotterdam’’.2 ‘I have become an Amsterdammer with all my heart’3
These are quotes from interviews with refugees from Iran and former Yugoslavia who were asked about their connection to the Dutch cities Amsterdam and Rotterdam. Integrating into Dutch society means integrating into the city, because it is the place in which people rebuild their lives. Refugees from Iran and former Yugoslavia have lived in these cities since the nineties and through the project Ongekend Bijzonder a selection of refugees were asked to reflect on their connection to Rotterdam and Amsterdam. These interviews show that where you live influences the way you experience your integration process. Simultaneously, ones background story can shape this connection to a new city. Therefore the main question posed in this thesis is: what are the differences in experience and appreciation of the integration of two refugee groups, namely Iranian and ex-Yugoslavian into Amsterdam and Rotterdam and how can these differences be explained?
Integration is a word people have grown tired off.4 It is mentioned countless times in the media and in politics but what integration truly means, remains vague. Renee Frissen and Sadik Harchaoui argue in Integratie en de metropool (integration in the metropole) that concepts like this, that are mentioned many times in the public sphere, rarely get thoroughly criticised or analyzed.5 The Dutch central bureau of statistics defines integration as ‘the growing together of immigrant groups and the native population and the complete participation of the immigrants within the native society’.6 Describing integration this way implies a two sided effort and it is arguable if this is the case. In this thesis some critical reflections on integration will be made, mainly focussing on one often overlooked aspect of integration: personal experience. Personal experiences on integration make the topic more concrete: refugee experiences can give a deeper insight into integration and what this means on a personal level. For example, do people feel integrated themselves? How did this integration take place and what influence have local authorities on this?
These topics are becoming more relevant because larger numbers of people come to the 1 Stichting Bevordering Maatschappelijke Participatie - BMP (2015): Project Ongekend Bijzonder, Amsterdam, interview 39. DANS. https://doi.org/10.17026/dans-zba-7cb5 (Accessed: April 2017).
2 BMP, Ongekend Bijzonder, OB_R_36. 3 Ibidem, OB_A_40.
4 Renee Frissen and Sadik Harchaoui (ed.), Integratie en de metropool: Perspectieven voor 2040 (Amsterdam 2011).
5 Frissen and Harchaoui (ed.), Integratie en de metropool, 39.
6 Gregor Walz, ‘CBS heeft achterhaald idee van integratie’, Sociale Vraagstukken (December 4 2014)
Netherlands as refugees, eventually integrating when granted a status. In the Netherlands, 43000 asylum requests were submitted in 2016 alone, which is closely related to the ongoing conflict in Syria.7 The influx of refugees can put pressure on cities and local authorities but equally enrich the city diversity. More than ever, governments all over the world re-examine the use of the urban space and the role of newcomers in this.8 Especially since the public opinion towards refugees and migrants has become more negative the past decades (increasingly since 9/11 and the murder on Theo van Gogh in 2004) the effect of refugee integration into the city has become a topic in public debate and
in politics. Refugees
integrating into cities is a constant reappearing topic on the agendas of local governments, but the role of the city within this process is not as often taken into account. According to Deborah Platts-Fowler and David Robinson the notion of location is often overlooked in politics and research. The authors state that there is an existing void in research on integration due to lack of clear data on migrant communities, missing clarity on what integration exactly means as a conceptual notion and mostly the failure to understand the importance of refugee experience and the location they live in. The integration process takes place on different levels and there is a substantial range of outcomes.9
Differences between refugees and refugee communities are increasingly taken into account in academic research but according to Platts-Fowler and Robinson the extend of refugee diversity has not been considered enough. Through conducting a qualitative analysis on experiences, feelings and appreciation of location, this thesis seeks to give insight on individual appreciation and experience of location (herein: the city) and equally think about the two ethnic groups and the effects of their heritage on the creation of a new home. This qualitative analysis contains opinions, feelings and underlying reasons and motivations in order to discover possible trends and give a deeper idea of the
integration of refugees. This analysis on
experience is achieved by considering interviews of refugees who integrated into Rotterdam and Amsterdam utilizing the source material of the oral history project called Ongekend Bijzonder (roughly translated: Unknowingly Special). The entire project of Ongekend Bijzonder focuses on a variety of refugees groups including Eritreans, Iraqis, Chileans and many more in four cities namely; Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Utrecht, The Hague. Through filmed interviews the aim of the project is to make their stories part of the heritage and history of both the city and the country. Therefore the material has been made easily accessible and from 2015 till March 2017 the interviews have equally 7 Elias van der Plicht, Achterlaten en opnieuw beginnen; Vluchtelingen in Nederland, toen en nu (Amsterdam 2016) 86.
8 Scott A. Bollens, ‘Urbanism, Political Uncertainty and Democratisation’, Urban Studies, vol. 45 no. 5-6 (2008): 1255-1289.
9 Deborah Platts-Fowler and David Robinson, ‘A Place for Integration: Refugee Experiences in Two English Cities’, Population Space Place, vol. 45 (2015): 467.
formed the inspiration for the Ongekend Bijzonder festival and a series of exhibitions, poems, theatre
plays and other displays. A first analyses of
the source material of Ongekend Bijzonder has been carried out by Stasja van Droffelaar, Gerben Kroese and Saskia Moerbeek.10 They researched the economic and societal contributions the interviewed refugees have within the cities they live. Their article, ‘’Bijdragen van Vluchtelingen aan de Stad’’ was based on a selection of all the interviews that was conducted by Ongekend Bijzonder and the conclusion entailed an overall positive self-image of the contributions of the refugees to the cities. According to the authors the material shows how the refugees attempt to merge their old identities and experiences with their new life whilst integrating into city society. This article by Van Droffelaar, Kroese and Moerbeek posed ideas for further research: are there differences in
experiences between the interviewed refugee groups and does their experiences of the city differ? Within this thesis these follow-up questions are used to find out if indeed differences exist between Iranians and former Yugoslavians and if different experiences can equally be related to the two cities
which they inhabited. These questions are
reflected upon in this thesis using the same source material as the article by Van Droffelaar, Kroese and Moerbeek but solely focussing on two groups within two cities. The project has facilitated this opportunity by interviewing both Iranians and former Yugoslavians in both Rotterdam and
Amsterdam.. A total of 248 interviews has been conducted in the course of 2013 up until 2015: 200 of refugees who have resided in the Netherlands for a long time and 48 of recently arrived refugees. Iranians and former Yugoslavians are the only two groups who have been interviewed in both Rotterdam and Amsterdam and through the availability of these sources the choice of examined interviews for this thesis was decided. As a result the interviews which are used are: ten interviews of former Yugoslavians in Amsterdam and nine of this group in Rotterdam, thirteen with Iranian descent in Amsterdam and six Iranians in Rotterdam. The interviews of Ongekend Bijzonder were conducted by prepared and educated interviewers. Half a year long, the interviewers had a lesson each week about how to prepare, take and process the interviews. The interviewers are all bilingual and come from within the same community as the interviewee, although the interviewee had the option to request someone from outside the community. The interviewers arranged who they wanted to interview themselves but they were asked to find a balance in gender and a spread in age and education level. A wide variety of education levels was not accomplished and especially amongst the Iranian interviewees most people enjoyed a higher level of education. This can be explained by the determination amongst refugees to have an education in 10 Stasja van Droffelaar, Gerben Kroese and Saskia Moerbeek, ‘Bijdragen van vluchtelingen aan de stad: Een eerste analyse van het Ongekend Bijzonder interviewmateriaal’, Ongekend Bijzonder (2016)
https://ongekendbijzonder.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/artikel-Ongekend-Bijzonder-.pdf (Accessed: June 2017).
order to have a fresh start and this group might also be likely to be more willing to contribute to the interviews. The interviewers searched for interviewees mostly through their own connections.11
The willingness to participate in this project is important to keep in mind, as it is possible that individuals who regard their live in the Netherlands as less successful are equally less inclined to speak about it. The idea that the interviews would be recorded and that this would be easily accessible online scared away several potential interviewees. The internet allows people to upload their personal stories but it can open the way to people editing or reusing the source. 12 The interviews are therefore not representations of refugees in these cities or in the Netherlands. Additionally because the interviewees were selected by the same person and a limited amount of interviews per country of birth was conducted. Positively, a relatively equal percentage of men and women was accomplished and varying per ethnicity a wide range of ages was interviewed. The outline of the different interviews is as followed: the interviewees were asked to bring an object with a special meaning to them, to start a conversation. Mostly these objects were related to their country of birth or to their family. The choices of these objects could be influenced by the fact they were interviewed because of their refugee status. The first part of the interview would mostly focus on their backgrounds and reasons for fleeing or for their parents to flee. Hereafter the questions are directed towards the upbringing of the person and the first experiences in the Netherlands. Where did they live, how did they experience school/finding a job, do they miss their country of birth? The exact questions vary per interview and through this the interviewer shapes the stories that are told.
Each interview is a reconstruction of what the interviewee believed or remember happened, which makes them valuable as sources that can be used to describe the effect of policy and location on individuals. However an interview is a source that can only be used with care and consideration for the subjectivity attached to an oral testimony. Oral history, a category to which the Ongekend Bijzonder project belongs, is a relatively new discipline in history. Oral history can be described as, ‘’Oral history is a discipline that refers both to a method of recording and preserving oral testimony and the product of that process’’.13 This means oral history is both about the end product as it is about the way this product is made. Oral history has as its main source interviews and in an interview the interaction between interviewer and interviewee creates the story. As argued, Oral history is a very subjective approach in which the choice of interviewer, the choice of interviewee, the context in which the interview is made and the person watching the interview all effect the way the story is shaped. The reason an interviewee is chosen is 11 Droffelaar, van, Kroese and Moerbeek, ‘Bijdragen van vluchtelingen aan de stad’, 5.
12 Martin Bazley, Helen Graham, 'Experiment, Share, Revise: Learning through Oral History and Digital Storytelling', Oral History Review, vol. 40 no. 2 (2012): 109-113.
dependent on the kind of context the interview was made in. Their stories might have been divergent if they were asked about their city contribution without the context of ‘being a refugee’.
The interviewee is particular a subjective factor in the story that is created in the interview. The memory of people is selective and not every aspect is possible to recollect. The memories are equally arranged a certain way, in order for the individual to comprehend. Additionally the interviewee can choose the words that are said, deliberately exaggerating one thing or leaving out another. One’s own role in the story can be (deliberately or unintentionally) told to be stoic or heroic, a passive victim or an proactive participant. 14
Through these deliberate choices of what is told, it is possible to reveal what topics are experienced to be most memorable. Therefore the method of oral history might pose difficulties in uncovering what exactly happened but more importantly, it reveals how the events that took place were experienced. Oral history is simultaneously a sufficient way to capture experience as an interview allows for emotions to be seen. The possible struggles to find the right words, or the tone in which the words are said expose the story in a more personal manner. Body language can have this effect as well, as it is for example possible to read how comfortable the interviewee is while explaining a story. Philosopher Marta Nussbaum describes that ‘emotions shape the landscapes or our social and mental lives’ and are therefore crucial to take into consideration as they play an active role in the memory of our experiences.15 The emotions shown in interviewees are in its turn subject to interpretation by the person viewing the interview.
Besides the interviewee, the interviewer creates another subjective aspect to the creation of the interview. The questions that are chosen to ask but equally the way in which questions are asked. In a more anthropological approach, the interviewer tries to say as little is possible to allow the interviewee to create the story. In an historical approach, the aim of the interview is clearer and thereby the interviewee is guided into a certain direction. The tone in which questions are asked and the body language and expression of the interviewer all influence the answers given. For example the raise of an eyebrow can make people feel the need to defend themselves. Even with the best intention of leaving the story completely up to the interviewee, a framework is created by the interviewer. 16 However interviews are an important tool in giving people a platform in which there is room for a story to be told.
Oral history is particularly seen as positive for community building, it is an opportunity to understand others and understand history in a unique way. It is 14 Cauvin, Oral History, 95.
15 Mary Chamberlain, Selma Leydesdorff, ‘Transnational families: memories and narratives’, Global Networks, vol. 4 no. 3 (2004): 227–241, 237.
16 Selma Leydesdorff, ‘Gender and the Categories of Experienced History’, Gender & History, vol.11 no.3 (1999): 597–611.
valuable because it can be used as a means to giving a voice to those who would usually be overlooked in history, like members of the working class, women, LGBT, ethnic minorities and immigrants. Oral history can add another layer to our understanding of the past, outside of public records and statistics. Through oral testimonies more attention is paid to small scale and localised examples .17 Especially for refugees, oral history might be one of the only ways in which their full personal accounts of experiences and identities can be acknowledged. Migrants and refugees have within their memories a constant dialogue between the old and the new, because more than never-resettled people their history is connected to their present.18 Strong emotions and sometimes traumas have a strong influence on how refugees regard their own lives and often these stories are
filled with determination. The interviews used in this thesis
will show this determination. Rebuilding a new life in an unknown city can be challenging: finding employment or education, making connections and searching to feel at home, whilst giving history a place in a new life. The Iranian and former Yugoslavian interviewees face these challenges in
countless unique ways and have varying experiences of integration in Rotterdam and Amsterdam. Their interviews will be analysed and compared in the context of integration, location and their personal histories. When do we regard someone integrated and does this match their experience? What impact can your living surroundings have on this integration? And to what extend does this difference in history shape the experiences in the present?
Chapter 1. The complex concept called Integration
As mentioned in the introduction, integration is a complicated notion which is in need of more critical assessment, especially because of its common use in public and political debate. The analysis of the interviews in chapter three will be based on personal experiences on integration into cities and it is therefore important to examine the various levels integration entails. This chapter provides 17 Leydesdorff, ‘Gender and the Categories of Experienced History’, 608.
a short history of how integration is regarded in the Netherlands and how this can be compared with other countries. Some aspects of integration are continuously regarded as important, like
employment or language, whilst other aspects, like traditions and habits, may shift in importance. The final part of the chapter consists of certain denominators that are relevant in the integration process. The analysis of the interviews in chapter four will show which of these aspects have proven to be important in personal experiences. 19
1.1 Integration in the Netherlands: a passed model of multicultural integration policy
The Dutch model of integration policy was regarded in research and to an extent still is in public debate, as a policy based on multiculturalism. In this multicultural model the emancipation of the immigrant culture was the main aspect of integration.20 This originates from the way Dutch society was organised at the start of the early twentieth century up until the sixties, which was named the pillar society. The pillar society meant that (religious) groups in society were in every way separate from each other (e.g. separate schools for Protestants and Catholics) but all lived next to one another. People ‘tolerated’ one another and in the aimed multicultural society this way of living together of separate groups was the aspiration. Tolerating meant leaving other people to act out their religion or their culture. Which meant no melting of cultures took place but peaceful co-existence was the norm. By making multiculturalism the core of integration policy, this kind of cultural pluralism was institutionalised.21 An example of this is government subsidy for schools: Catholic and Protestant schools were subsidised and thus this rule applied to Islamic schools as well.
This multicultural model differs from the models which are believed to have been in place in other European countries. Citizenship in Germany was based on national ethnicity whereas in France the citizenship model was based on the ‘Republic’.22 The ‘Republican’ French model derives from the historically important republic for the people with a universal public philosophy at its core. The Republic safeguards the separation between the public and the private domain and French secularism. It is meant to be a ‘politically open’ system of values in which citizenship is based on 19 In the integration of newcomers in this chapter immigrants and refugees are often taken together because ones granted a status, refugees follow the same rules as other immigrants. However it is important to keep in mind their experience is not the same, and refugees often did not want to leave their native countries and did not choose the Netherlands. They may carry traumas and may long back to their old lives with the hope of moving back there someday. These aspects influence their integration, which will be described more thoroughly in chapter three.
20 The models of integration in the Netherlands, Germany and France are referred to in the past tense because shifts in all policy models are apparent, which will be discussed in this chapter. The models have not completely disappeared from the integration policies in these countries as they are based on deeper ideas on citizenship. 21 Jan Willem Duyvendak, Peter Scholten, ‘Deconstructing the Dutch multicultural model: A frame perspective on Dutch immigrant integration policymaking’, Comparative European Politics, vol. 10 no. 3 (2012):
266–282.
22 Christophe Bertossia, Jan Willem Duyvendak, ‘National models of immigrant integration: The costs for comparative research’, Comparative European Politics, vol. 10 (2012):237–247.
nationality –meaning immigrant integration occurs through citizenship. The German more ethnicity related approach has been strict on granting refugees residential rights, which are based on
contribution to the labour market and criminal records. This strict approach is equally apparent in Austria and Switzerland. For example, the Dutch government actively subsidized initiatives by ethnic minorities, the French would not make a distinction between initiatives by ethnic minorities or French natives and the German government would not be inclined to subsidies such initiative at all.
This means the Dutch multiculturalists model was unique in Europe and has been regarded as a successful model of integration. This reputation was based on the presumed tolerance in the Netherlands, which might have been an attracting factor for immigrants or refugees. There are a few examples to be named which might explain the regarded success of the Dutch multicultural ideology; up until 2004, the Netherlands was one of the only countries that offered a fully-subsidised language
course for immigrants. Another example is
the broadcasting agreement in which it was stated that at least twenty percent of the public broadcasting time on television and radio should be catering ethnic minorities. Especially through regional and local programs, sometimes even in the minority language, the goal was to reach out to these groups and this way promote socio-economic participation. After 2005 this regulation changed into theme-related broadcasting, no longer based on classifications of ethnic groups.23 This
broadcasting regulation ties in with a new trend in policy in which the idea of the mentioned emancipation of the immigrant’s culture is less relevant as cultural distinctiveness is increasingly viewed as an obstacle to socio-economic participation.24 It should be noted as well that even though the Dutch model has always received much praise, sociologist Ruud Koopmans concluded from a comparative research on the different models that the Dutch model shows no better results than the French or German models in terms of socio-economic participation and equality.25
The two examples mark the changes taking place in integration policy. Jan Willem Duyvendak has criticised the usage of the Dutch multicultural model, as it is explained in research and public debate, of implying a
continuity in Dutch integration policy. He argues this continuity does not exist. The past thirty years policies surrounding integration have changed significantly in the Netherlands. It can be said that multiculturalism still plays a role in the integration policy discourse nowadays. Politicians have often referred to this concept but in practice much about integration policy has changed. The integration policy is shifting into the very opposite of the multicultural idea. Since the 1990s within politics there is less willingness to make space for cultural differences, inspired by increasingly negative public 23 Ruud Koopmans,’ Tradeoffs between equality and difference: Immigrant integration, multiculturalism, and the welfare state in cross-national perspective’, WZB Discussion Paper, no. SP IV (2008).
24 Duyvendak, Scholten, ‘Deconstructing the Dutch multicultural model’, 279. 25 Koopmans,’ Tradeoffs between equality and difference’, 30.
opinions on immigrants and refugees. The former Yugoslavians and Iranians who’s interviews are analysed in this thesis fled to the Netherlands between the late eighties and the late nineties. They have thus integrated into the Netherlands during the shift in integration policy. The underlying ideas that inspired the 1998 integration laws already existed in politics since the end of the eighties. Before 1998 integration policy used to be foremost aimed at preventing ethnic
minorities to fall into unemployment; integration was seen as a contract between the receiving state and the newcomer, in exchange for good integration into the Netherlands, the government would provide a job to the integrating party. Having a form of employment was regarded by the refugees and Dutch population alike as a crucial part of integration.26 Integration was thus based on economic contribution and culturally there were fewer expectations for immigrants to take on Dutch culture. During the nineties, a transition has taken place towards more culture based integration.27
Culture based integration has appeared since the trend of the ‘culturalization of citizenship’ according to scholars like Jan Willem Duyvendak.28 The
culturalization of citizenship makes its arrival in integration policies all over Western Europe since the mid 1990s. In shaping citizenship and integration policy an increasing role of morality and culture has been added. It is a reaction to non-western influence which is said by proponents of the
culturalization of citizenship to effect European culture: European cultural heritage should be promoted and even defended. This non-western influence is usually depicted as the Islamic other
and this Islamic other is imagined to be more backward, less (sexually) free and less secular. Against this image an idea of Europe is created which is inspired by freedom, secularism and
democracy.29 The shift from this multicultural idea
towards a culturally inspired integration policy can be explained partly by the change in image existing towards refugees, based on the European other. Refugees have only started to become a topic within public debates since the 1980s. Before this time migration has been used as a tool to strengthen local economies through the means of labour migration. This has pulled migrant groups to European cities and many have stayed there ever since.30 The permanent stay of labour migrants has created increasing attention to the impact of immigration on different levels in society: topics including welfare, cultural identity, unemployment and housing.31 The Dutch Social/Cultural Planning Bureau (Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau, SCP) has studied public opinions towards immigrants since 26 Plicht, van der, Achterlaten en opnieuw beginnen, 84.
27 Ruben Gowricharn, Raoul Nolen, Inburgering: mensen, instellingen en lokaal beleid (Rotterdam 2003) 13. 28 Paul Mepschen, JanWillem Duyvendak,Evelien H.Tonkens, ‘Sexual Politics, Orientalism and Multicultural Citizenship in the Netherlands’, Sociologie ,vol. 44 no. 5 (2010): 962–979.
29 John Mcleod, Beginning Postcolonialism (Manchester 2010) 47. 30 Gowricharn, Nolen, Inburgering, 11.
31 Christina Boswell, European Migration Policies in Flux: Changing Patterns of Inclusion and Exclusion (Oxford 2003) 9.
1991 and it is evident these opinions have increased in negativity, with a peek since the terror attacks of 9/11. These negative images are predominantly about refugees from Muslim countries, and the same research shows that people with Muslim heritage feel less welcome in the Netherlands.32
When integrating into the Netherlands, especially as a non-European or non-Western citizen it is seen as essential that these European values of freedom, secularism and democracy are understood and respected. Ones a residence permit is obtained, since 1998
newcomers are by law required to learn about the Dutch culture. 33 This learning (and eventually) adopting process is often referred to as assimilation, or in Dutch inburgering, meaning ‘becoming a citizen’. Inburgering first and foremost means learning the Dutch language but equally consists of knowledge on Dutch society. The aim is that people do not only participate on an economic level but equally on a societal level. Learning about the Dutch culture is supposed to help make connections with neighbours and other Dutch citizens in order to prevent immigrants or immigrant groups becoming isolated within society.
Language has become increasingly important in this approach of integration and for anyone from outside the EU/EER member states it is an obligation to learn Dutch. It is a crucial part of the assimilation test which has to be taken within three years after arriving in the Netherlands. Up until 2007 the assimilation and language coursed was offered for free by local governments but a policy change in 2013 meant that it must be paid for by the immigrant himself or a loan can be granted by the Dutch government in order to participate in Dutch lessons. When the exam has been passed the money is reimbursed and if someone fails to pass the test within the time limit a financial sanction follows.
This sanction, but also the content of the assimilation test is the continuous ground for debate. The new law in which immigrants pay for their own assimilation exam has created numerous organisations offering assimilation and language courses but the quality differs heavily and the number of newcomers passing the test has dropped. The test includes
questions on Dutch history, but also on personal encounters with for example an employee or a neighbour. Vluchtelingenwerk Nederland, the largest refugee organisation in the Netherlands has shared the test to be filled in by the Dutch population and the results showed that 64 percent of people making the test would fail.34 Most Iranians and Yugoslavian refugees arrived in the Netherlands before the required assimilation test and assimilated into the Netherlands on their own 32 Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau, ‘Publieke opinie en de multiculturele samenleving in Nederland – Fact-sheet’ (September 2003) http://www.art1.nl/nprd/factsheets/opinie.pdf (Accessed: June 2017).
33 Edith Dourleijn, Jaco Dagevos (red.), Vluchtelingengroepen in Nederland, Over de integratie van Afghaanse,
Iraakse, Iraanse en Somalische migranten (Den Haag 2011) 58.
34 Els Anker, 'Inburgeringscursus' stuit op veel kritiek’, De Metro (Februari 3 2016)
https://www.metronieuws.nl/nieuws/binnenland/2016/02/inburgeringscursus-stuit-op-veel-kritiek-0
account. But before 1998, as well as now, there were/are non-profit organisations in place to assist newcomers and refugees in particular. These organisations offered opportunities to learn Dutch and often already had some kind of assimilation course, but this was not mandatory. The courses mostly consisted of explanations into practical matters like visiting the doctors. Since the described
culturalization of citizenship more organisations have put a focus on the cultural aspect of integration. Nowadays there are over 400 organisations in the Netherlands that attempt to assist refugees integrating.35 Many of these organisations are linked to societal participation, by stimulating language through language buddies or story time moments for children, connecting refugees to social networks and aiding in finding employment. It can also include assistance with more individual subjects like for example a trauma.
However unfortunately this process of intensive integration can only start ones a residence-permit has been obtained. During the period of waiting there are hardly any possibilities of education or integration in the new society, even though this period can sometimes take years.36 When arriving in the Netherlands most refugees first live in an asylum centre for a while, before they are placed into a regular home. Since 2009 the COA offers an integration course for people who are not placed yet to make the transition easier or to lift their language skills, these courses are on a voluntary basis. A course like this can certainly help giving refugees a chance to immediately get familiar with Dutch society.
It has become clear that integration is not a set notion and it entails many aspects. A course on integration or a test do not make an individual an integrated member of Dutch society, but it might be a tool to help people along in the process. The next part of this chapter will discuss what other aspects are related to integration, to think about what integration actually means.
1.2 The denominators of integration
The word integration, as derived from Latin, means undivided whole/unity. Integrating as a verb then means, belonging to this whole/unity. This is already a difficult notion, because it is arguable if most nation-states are actually a unity. This unity can also be seen as citizenship, related to nationalism: belonging to a nation, on paper as well as in behaviour. Citizenship is paired with privileges granted to an individual by the state and obligations to the country, ranging from paying tax to contributing to the public sphere. Refugees integrating into the Netherlands have to become part of this unity, which
has not always proven to be easy. The
35 Vluchtelingen Organisaties Nederland, http://www.vluchtelingenorganisaties.nl ( Accessed: June 17 2017). 36 Dourleijn, Dagevos, Vluchtelingengroepen in Nederland.
Dutch Central Bureau of Statistics gave the following definition to integration in 2014: ‘the growing together of immigrant groups and the native population (autochtonen) and the complete
participation of the immigrants within the native society’ has been criticised by many and even revised by the same bureau in 2016. This revision was established in reaction to recent debates on the Dutch terms of ‘allochtoon’ meaning something along the lines of ‘foreign citizen’ and the term ‘autochtoon’, meaning ‘Dutch-born person’. The CBS definition on integration initially included the usage of these terms but the terms have been abandoned in the yearly report on integration in
2016.37 As
mentioned in the introduction a point of critique is the implication of the two-sidedness of the process. Even though in these reports the main topic is to what extend refugees differ from the native population without reflecting on this native population itself. The same report of 2016 describes that the focus of the report lies on the similarities and differences between citizens with a migration background and people with a Dutch background. The report includes a range of topics that are classified by the CBS as denominators of integration: criminality, education, employment, a stable income (economical independence), societal participation (e.g. being part of community society or participating in informal help) and unemployment benefit. Sociologist Gregor Walz argues integration reports colour the image of refugees by for example choosing to show criminal acts without depicted victims of criminal activity. The denominators chosen are framing the image of immigrants. Therefore Walz argues the denominators are not complete. Aspects like cultural participation (e.g. theatre or cultural events)or political activism (member of political parties, taking active part in democracy) are missing. These aspects are essential when the definition includes ‘the full participation of immigrants in society’.38
The denominators mentioned by the CBS as well as added notion to this will be used in the analysis of the interviews in this thesis. Together these denominators can be ways of measuring how successful integration is, although even with these denominators integration remains subjective and complex. It is related to feelings by both immigrants and the native population. Feeling welcome and feeling at home for example, are nearly impossible to analyse through statistics, which is the primary source of the CBS yearly reports. Important for these feelings are first contacts people make in the Netherlands: friendly encounters and first friends which help them find their way. Friends and relations in society are important to how positive people experience integration. The next chapter will reflect upon this in relation to the neighbourhood people feel ‘at home’ in.
The interviews of the stories of Iranian and former Yugoslavian refugees give a better image of this but even then not much can be said about the feeling of immigrants in general, as feelings are 37 Centraal Bureau Statistiek, Jaarrapport Integratie 2016 (Den Haag 2016).
very personal. The mentioned denominators are all linked to a crucial part of integration: location. The location can be an impediment or an advantage in terms of employment opportunities or education but the influence of location stretches further than this. As explained in the following chapter it can, amongst other things, inspire social or cultural participation. Besides feeling integrated, it can make people feel at home in their new city.
2. The Impact of the City, ‘feeling at home’ in Rotterdam and Amsterdam.
As argued in the introduction of this thesis, location and the experience of the location are
underappreciated topics in research and politics. The various denominators that determine whether or not somebody is integrated into Dutch society, as described in the previous chapter –societal participation, criminality, education, employment, income, employment benefit, cultural
participation, political involvement- are elements that take place within geographical boundaries. Thus they are connected to location and especially in large cities, the opportunities in terms of education or employment are high. Additionally, there are many opportunities for societal or cultural
participation. Living in a city, or a particular neighbourhood within a city, can contribute or add difficulty to integration. What this comprehends is discussed in this chapter. The second part of this chapter focuses on Rotterdam and Amsterdam cities and will provide example of neighbourhoods within these cities. The final part of this chapter will reflect on the manufacturability of the city and specifically the public space. Can the mere architecture or planning of the city influence the way it is experienced? What are ways in which cities deal with an increasing diversity of its inhabitants? Amsterdam and Rotterdam feels like home for people of many different cultures, how do these cities
deal with this variety? ‘Feeling at home’ is a feeling the
‘newcomers’ are trying to find and the citizens of the receiving country are trying to keep. Even though everyone recognises the described feeling, it is difficult to exactly put into words what it means. When asked to describe it, people tend to use words like ‘safe’, ‘secure’ and ‘at ease’. In relation to home, scholars especially mention the importance of familiarity. It might be because of this familiarity people feel safe and at ease.39 Jan Willem Duyvendak argues in his book that living in a place you feel at home in, affects the willingness to thrive and tackle personal problems like
unemployment or debts.40 He describes that social mobility, moving within society (one’s socioeconomic status) is strongly related to ones physical mobility, by which he means the way people interact with their surroundings. An example of this relation is acceptance in the community of a certain neighbourhood. For refugees, it is especially of importance that they are accepted into society and that their status as Dutch citizen is recognised by their neighbours. Discrimination can diminish the feeling of belonging significantly and therefore diminish the urge to contribute to the
community.41 Maurice Specht has done research on citizen
participation focussing on three big European cities.42 There is more inclination to participate as an active citizen when a person feel good about where he or she lives. The neighbourhood has a role in this, either negative or positive. Specht divides the effects of neighbourhoods into ‘internal social interrelationships’ and ‘external sources’. ‘Internal social interrelationships’ mean that within the neighbourhood a culture of negative or positive behaviour can exist in which for example many people can be unemployed, children stimulate each other not to go to school or there is a high possibility of criminal involvement through social circles. More positively people can stimulate each other, by working closely together as neighbours to solve issues in the neighbourhood. Connections with your neighbours can also mean building up a network through which opportunities might occur. Especially refugees new to a city often have a lack of such a network.
39 Jan Willem Duyvendak, ‘Why feeling at home matters’, in: The Politics of Home (Hampshire 2011) 27. 40 Duyvendak, ‘Why feeling at home matters’, 28.
41 Gowricharn, Nolen, Inburgering, 63.
42 Maurice Specht, De Pragmatiek van Burgerparticipatie: Hoe burgers omgaan met complexe vraagstukken
A negative culture within a neighbourhood can thus reduce the social mobility of people, because the lack of stimulation. It could additionally mean that when going for a job interview, your address is related to certain negative culture. This negative culture might equally be a reason that companies do not want to locate themselves in the area. This can lead to isolation of the neighbourhood in relation to the rest of the city and this phenomenon can be found in relation to so called ‘problematic neighbourhoods’.43 When discussing Amsterdam and Rotterdam examples are given from ‘problematic neighbourhoods’ and how they develop.
By ‘external sources’ Specht means the opportunities available within the proximity of a certain neighbourhood. For example, the absence or presence of a good secondary school nearby, or jobs coherent to the composition of the neighbourhood, or the quality of public services. A neighbourhood near a city centre means people have easy access to schools or hospitals whereas more isolated neighbourhoods do not. The lack of proximity can be a reason to attend education below one’s level. If somebody has a job far away from where he or she lives this can cause problems with for example dropping off children at school. Lacking nearness of
opportunities can create a feeling of isolation from the city or from society and as explained, this can mean people are less inclined to contribute to society.
The Dutch national government attempts to work together with local
governments and city councils to prevent neighbourhoods of falling into such isolation.44 Herein cities can be a powerful tool in activating political change. As Scott Bollens describes this: ‘urbanism can create physical and psychological spaces that complement and encourage intergroup reconciliation’.45
Within cities there are many ways the challenge of diversity is tackled, for example through non-profit organisations trying to connect various ethnic groups. Or through community centres within neighbourhoods that organise events to stimulate social interaction and to prevent isolation. Equally because isolation can cause problems in terms of criminality or even radicalization. For instance, as a response to the murder of Theo van Gogh in 2004 in both Amsterdam and Rotterdam organisations were put into place to actively stimulate inclusion. ‘Wij Amsterdammers’ (We from Amsterdam) organised events aimed for different social classes and groups in the city in an attempt to boost the feeling of belonging in Amsterdam. A similar initiative was set up in Rotterdam called ‘Meedoen of Achterblijven’ (join in or stay behind) which attempted to offer a platform for people living close to each other to connect. 46
Refugees and immigrants are often mentioned in relation to 43 Specht, De Pragmatiek van Burgerparticipatie, 63.
44 Frans Timmermans, ‘Thuis is in de stad, thuis in de wereld’ in: Renee Frissen and Sadik Harchaoei (red.)
Integratie en de metropool: Perspectieven voor 2040 (Amsterdam 2011).
45 Bollens, ‘Urbanism, Political Uncertainty and Democratisation’, 1271.
46 Vera Marinelli, Op lokale maat: handreiking voor het opstellen van lokaal integratiebeleid (Amsterdam 2006) 32.
backwards neighbourhoods but it is in the first place not surprising that refugees live within these areas as the housing prices are often low. Thereafter they do not always get the opportunity to contradict the image of where they live. Bollens describes that the biggest challenge many big cities face is how to facilitate cultural and ethnic diversity whilst dealing with physical and psychological obstacles, like discrimination and hostility. Cities attempt to ensure that the diversity enriches city life instead of solely hoping the newcomers will completely adapt to the city.47
A relatively new way of dealing with this diversity is in the field of city planning. Over the past decades questions are raised if it is possible to manufacture a city or specifically a neighbourhood that encourages social interactions and prevents the isolation of social groups. Nonetheless, there many discussion on capabilities of manufacturing a place in which these interactions take place. Can the public space where people meet be shaped to a more inclusive neighbourhood and what are necessary elements to enable this? As mentioned an important aspect of a positive experience of the living space is inclusion, feeling welcome will make people feel at home. According to architect Liesbeth van der Pol, not accepting a certain culture often derives from ignorance of the other’s culture, creating presumptions and generalisations. Meeting each other physically promotes less ignorance amongst cultural groups. Meeting places within the city and specifically the neighbourhood are therefore attempted to be facilitated. Designing centrally located open squares contribute to the possibility of social interactions in the neighbourhood. Several social or cultural groups make use of the public space in different ways and this usage can make people feel at home in the neighbourhood.48
There are equally meeting places between cultures that often occur in cities that cannot be manufactured, for example a middle-eastern supermarket or a ‘hip’ Moroccan tea house. Especially in a city like Amsterdam a lot of cultural exchange is visible through these enterprises. The existence of these enterprises cannot completely be forced by planning but it can be possible to facilitate opportunities for them to occur, by for example creating a shop area near a public square and stimulate smaller initiatives to take their stay. In Amsterdam and Rotterdam the local governments are constantly thinking of ways in which to facilitate a living area suitable for the wide range of cultures in the cities.
2.2 Amsterdam and Rotterdam: stories of diversity in the city.
Both Amsterdam and Rotterdam have many neighbourhoods in which cultural exchange takes place. Simultaneously there are more challenging neighbourhoods and as argued in this chapter, this can be 47 Blair A. Ruble, Lisa M. Hanley and Allison M. Garland, ‘Introduction: renegotiating the city’ in: Immigration
and Integration in Urban communities (Washington 2008) 1.
48 Liesbeth van der Pol, ‘Engagement gevraagd, de rol van de ontwerper’ in Renee Frissen and Sadik Harchaoei (red.) Integratie en de metropool: Perspectieven voor 2040 (Amsterdam 2011).
of great influence to refugees integrating into the city and their experience thereof. Amsterdam and Rotterdam have changed and adjusted to refugees arriving since the Second World War up until today. 49 The amounts of companies in these cities draw people, generating job opportunities for both highly skilled and low-skilled citizens. Both inside the companies (manager, cleaners and security staff) and outside the companies. The presence of companies with many employees creates the need for the existence of more restaurants , bars or babysitting services. These opportunities attract refugees because it offers them higher chances of having a good and successful live.
Amsterdam and Rotterdam are set to become majority-minority cities, meaning that less than half of the inhabitants will be from Dutch descent. 50 A trend that occurs in many large cities in the past decades. Historically the cities have attracted people from all over the world, especially since international trade blossomed in the fifteenth century.51
In 1876, Amsterdam was connected to the North Sea by a large canal which meant a growing connection to international trade. This marked the beginning of an extensive growth of international exchange. The city started to grow and thrive and already in these times there are many refugees and immigrants settling into the city. In the centuries after the Netherlands has welcomed refugees who came to the country for the considerable religious tolerance. It was not until the twentieth century that significant numbers of immigrants and refugees came to the Netherlands. Up until the sixties these were mostly European refugees, especially after the Second World War. After the sixties immigrants from other destinations in the world came to the Netherlands. They were welcomed because the Netherlands were in need for more people on the labour market and thus Surinam, Turkish and Moroccan labour migrants took their stay in Amsterdam. Ever since as immigrants, refugees, workforce, tradesmen or expats new people have come to Amsterdam making the city grow in population and this affected city planning.52 During the 1970s discussion arose about whether or not Amsterdam was a foremost economical city or a living city. Should the city base its planning on economic growth or population growth? Old neighbourhoods were planned to be cleared out to make space for economic enterprises which caused many to protest and eventually in 1978 the city council decided Amsterdam should be primarily a city to live in. This did not mean economic stagnation, especially since Schiphol airport was built near the city and Amsterdam became an even more important hub in Europe. Amsterdam South (or in Dutch the Zuidas) was located between the airport and the city and thanks to its location a powerful financial district was established. Nowadays this is an area with numerous high rise buildings that house large
49 Vera Marinelli, Op lokale maat, 24.
50 Maurice Crul, Jens Schneider en Frans Lelie, Superdiversiteit: Een nieuwe visie op integratie (Amsterdam 2013).
51 Plicht, van der, Achterlaten en opnieuw beginnen, 15. 52 Plicht, van der, Achterlaten en opnieuw beginnen, 82.
international companies. The decision to make Amsterdam primarily a city to live in resulted in new
ideas towards liveability. In the 1980s the government stressed
citizen participation as a necessary factor of city life. By promoting this the Dutch government hoped to get people involved in their neighbourhoods and in city planning. From then and continuing in the nineties increasing attention was drawn to the liveability of the city, whereby the city council
attempted to renew neighbourhoods that had fallen into decay. Keeping the city clean and safe was considered a shared responsibility of both government and citizen.53 Liveability was defined by housing corporations and the government. This definition stated neighbourhoods should have plenty conveniences within and nearby (‘internal social interrelationships’ and ‘external sources’) and a balanced diversity of ethnic groups within. A side effect of this classification was that certain social groups were associated with un-liveability, like ethnic minorities and the unemployment. 54
This notion of liveability and the
neighbourhood renewals are reflected in the Bijlmer and the Indische buurt. The Bijlmer was built in the sixties outside the city centre, to establish a green and spacious living area for families. The design consisted of various ten-story buildings with large patches of green between them. However the families that were expected to move to the Bijlmer chose cities outside Amsterdam, family houses with gardens instead of the apartments in the Bijlmer flats. As a result, many of the flats remained empty and therefore offered the ideal living area for Surinam immigrants who came to the Netherlands in the seventies. Many of these immigrants were poor and unemployed and the word ‘ghetto’ was soon related to the neighbourhood.
Urban planner Jos Gadet reasons it is unfair to blame these
immigrants for the downfall of the neighbourhood, as the only reason they inhabited the Bijlmer was because nobody else would.55 As explained, at the end of the eighties and start nineties the idea of liveability changed and the failure of the planned Bijlmer was related to the ‘internal social
interrelationships’ and ‘external sources’. That the Bijlmer was regarded a ‘ghetto’ had a negative effect on the people living there and as it was designed to be solely a living area, there were few shops, companies or restaurants and thus opportunities for jobs nearby. Although since the nineties there are many projects to renew the Bijlmer the neighbourhood is still behind on the rest of the city, many people living there are still poor and there is a high rate of unemployment. The housing prices are relatively low for a city like Amsterdam and because of this many refugees come to live here when they arrive in the Netherlands.
53 Harm Kaal, ‘A conceptual history of livability’, City, vol. 15 no. 5 (2011): 532-547. 54 Kaal, ‘A conceptual history of liveability’, 546.
55 Hanne Obbink, ‘Ondergang en opkomst van de Bijlmer’, De Trouw (December 13 2016)
https://www.trouw.nl/samenleving/ondergang-en-opkomst-van-de-bijlmer~a278a4b7/ (Accessed: May 10 2017).
The Bijlmer is an example of how a neighbourhood can have bad influences on the social and physical mobility of the inhabitants. The bad reputation of the neighbourhood isolated the community living there from the rest of the city. Nowadays, through the effort of inhabitants, the area is starting to become more popular. Small shops and enterprises like hairdressers are taking their stay and through community initiatives (like a Facebook page between inhabitants of the flats) the Bijlmer is shaking of its negative image predominantly by a positive culture amongst the inhabitants.
Another part of Amsterdam where many immigrants and refugees have taken their stay is Amsterdam-Oost. Amsterdam Oost includes many neighbourhoods like: Indische buurt, Transvaalbuurt, Oostpoort, Weesperzijde, Oosterparkbuurt, Dapperbuurt, Watergraafsmeer and the newly built Oostelijk Havengebied, the Amstelkwartier and IJburg. Since the nineties, the city has invested intensively in this area due to its location and important role of living space within the city. The Indische buurt especially is a very culturally diverse neighbourhood and for this reason many refugees have chosen to live here. Like the Bijlmer the area used to have a poor reputation and was regarded a ‘ghetto’, a reputation which was linked to the high percentage of newcomers in the neighbourhood. The average income in the neighbourhood was low and a large criminal circuit was active. However, thanks to regeneration that started in the nineties this neighbourhood is nowadays considered a favoured living space. There is a huge variety of shops and restaurants and many cultural and sports-related enterprises. It is known as a successful coming together of cultures and people and the neighbourhood has an active community (Buurthuis Archipel and Indische
Buurtbalie) that equally offer lessons and a friendly welcome to refugees getting acquainted with the
Netherlands.56 The
examples of Amsterdam Oost and the Bijlmer show the ways in which diversity can have an impact on the city. This requires an active role of both people living in the neighbourhoods as of the city government. The city has historically thrived on its international character and probably will continue to do so in the future.
Rotterdam has a similar history of international trade although up until the twentieth century the city was much smaller than Amsterdam. Rotterdam and many neighbourhoods are shaped by its diversity and the challenges this offers. The city is an important global harbour and like Amsterdam, Rotterdam has benefited from growing international trade. Especially after the Second World War, when half of the city was destroyed and it was rebuild in the fifties and sixties. Since then, Rotterdam has developed into a global city, known for its modern architecture and position in international trade. The harbour has attracted many labour immigrants in the sixties and seventies 56 Buurthuis Archipel, http://www.buurthuisarchipel.nl/ (June 20 2017). Indische BuurtBalie,
shaping the city with the highest consistency of people from foreign descent in the Netherlands. As mentioned, it is set to become a majority-minority city, probably within the year 2017 (whereas in Amsterdam this is predicted for 2030).57
Rotterdam therefore has many neighbourhoods rich in cultural diversity and the new ideas of liveability developed in the nineties were in Rotterdam the inspiration for the creation of
neighbourhoods shaped around this multicultural identity: the neighbourhood Le Medi and the housing complex Biz Botuluyuz. One of the aims of these areas was to create a living environment for ‘foreign Dutch citizens’ and this is visible in the Turkish, Moroccan and Mediterranean inspired architecture (see image Le Medi). The idea was people would ‘feel more at home’ thanks to the familiarity with the architecture. Biz Botuluyuz initially attracted almost solely Turkish families and nowadays a strong Turkish community exists in the neighbourhood. 58
Le Medi: photo made by: Afritecture59
The neighbourhoods are build within an area which was known in the eighties and nineties for its criminal rates and drugs trade. The area enjoys a more positive image nowadays but many expressed critique on this kind of city architecture. One of the reasons is the strong community that has taken shape in Biz Botuluyuz, in which people address each other in Turkish and some
inhabitants do not speak Dutch, which has argued to be in the way of integration of these groups into Dutch society. Biz Botuluyuz seems to fit better in the old ideas of a multicultural society in which all cultures were segragated from each other and less in the new ideas of integration as adjusting to Dutch society.
Within urban planning criticism is focused on forced manufacturability. Researchers Cihan Buğdaci and Ergűn Erkoçu argue exotic architectonics are trying to brand the city, and city design should not be based on categorisation of culture. Buğdaci and Erkoçu find this branding of
57 Godfried Engbersen, Erik Snel and Afke Weltevrede, Sociale Herovering in Amsterdam en Rotterdam: een
verhaal over twee wijken (Amsterdam 2005) 11.
58 Ruud van Haastrecht, ‘Turken voelen zich verbonden in eigen woningcomplex’, De Trouw (September 18 2008) https://www.trouw.nl/home/turken-voelen-zich-verbonden-in-eigen-woningcomplex~aeeadc45/ (June 10 2017).
59 Photo from: ‘Le Medi’, Afritecture (October 7 2009) http://www.afritecture.org/architecture/le-medi ( May 20 2017).
neighbourhoods a negative and forced trend whereas earlier mentioned architect Van der Pol thinks it has positive effects since also young native Rotterdam’ citizens take their stay in these areas because of its aesthetics. Buğdaci and Erkoçu argue that the Dutch city plans are often too much about the ‘formal planned city’ instead of the ‘informal lived city’. When a neighbourhood is being built it is forced who will inhabit the neighbourhood instead of leaving space for several kinds of people to take their stay. By classification of certain neighbourhoods certain people are attracted but
may also be repelled.60 The
size of this thesis did not allow a thorough analysis of every neighbourhood in Rotterdam and Amsterdam in which the interviewees live or have lived. The examples show challenges and
opportunities in relation to diversity in neighbourhoods. Aspects of this examples can be traced back in the interviews; in which some interviewees explain their views and experiences of the
neighbourhoods they have integrated into. In the interviews the value attached to the public sphere and the community within the neighbourhoods will be described. The aim of this thesis is to consider the possible differences of these city experiences amongst Iranian and former Yugoslavian refugees. Therefore a more thorough description of who these refugees are and what their background is, is discussed in the following chapter.
60 Cihan Buğdaci, Ergűn Erkoçu, ‘De pluriculturaliteit van de toekomstige stad: een nieuwe attitude van de interdisciplinair’ in: Renee Frissen and Sadik Harchaoei (red.) Integratie en de metropool: Perspectieven voor
3. Violence and Fear Iran and former Yugoslavia: background stories as to why the interviewees chose to flee
The interviewees studied in this thesis have fled their countries for various reasons and come from different cultures. In this chapter a short summary will be given of the situation in both Iran and Yugoslavia in the 1990s and the circumstances that urged people to leave their homes. Following there will be a paragraph with demographics of the groups that fled to the Netherlands, to give an idea of the refugees of these countries that fled to the Netherlands. The differences in culture, background and reasons for fleeing may influence the way people integrate. These background stories are important to keep in mind when reading about the experiences expressed in the
interviews. How much does their culture and background influence their perception of the new city they integrate into? What have people left behind, and with what emotional luggage do they come into the Netherlands? Who are these refugees and how much does their new living space differ from their past?
3.1 Regime changes in Iran
Cultural tensions in Iran arose in the 1970s, especially in the capital city Teheran.61 The Iranian conservative lifestyle was confronted with American soft power influences through advertisement and television. The development of the West had been looked upon as an ideal, but was
simultaneously put into question regarding its compatibility with Iranian culture. At the same time the gap between the government and the people grew, the last Shah of Iran named Mohammed 61 Michael Axworthy, Revolutionairy Iran (Penguin books 2014).
Reza Pahlavi was not a popular man and during the seventies he started to extend his autocratic power. In 1971 he organized an extravagant festivity to celebrate the 2500 year old monarchy in Iran in an attempt to impress the international community, leaving Iranians with a bitter feeling of spend money in a time of food shortages due to draught.62 The Shah kept close ties with the United States and surrounded himself mostly with security personal and internationals, enlarging the gap with Iranian citizens more extensively, especially distancing himself from religious leaders. From 1977 onwards the protests against the Shah commenced, first in religious capital Qom but spreading towards the rest of the country. Mohammed Reza was pressed to leave the country and in 1979 he leaves for Cairo, ending decades of Iranian monarchy.
Many different groups joined the Iranian Revolution against the Shah from various political backgrounds, however the revolution was seized by one religious movement. The revolution that had taken place was aimed against the Shah but simultaneously against the American lifestyle he had propagated. With the Shah gone, there was an opening for a new regime. Ayatollah Rurollah
Khomeini had been in exile under the Shah but was very influential, especially religiously. He equally condemned the new government sparking new protest in which people demanded an Islamic Republic. Not without effort Khomeini reentered the country and declared a new Islamic government that would last until 1988. People who had joined the revolution but were not in line with Khomeini’s religious movement fled the country out of fear for prosecution. An example of such a group were
communist movements or other religious doctrines. The years of
Khomeini’s rule have been marked by armed conflict with neighboring country Iraq, who invaded Iran under the leadership of Saddam Hussein in 1980 backed by United States’ weapons and finances which only confirmed the revolutionaries’ view of the West. The Islamic dictatorship and war against Iraq caused more people to flee from Iran, because of military service for young men and (amongst other things) gender restrictions against women, like not being able to leave the house without wearing a veil.63 This wave of refugees included many professionals, academics and entrepreneur and
is regarded as a ‘brain drain’ for Iran. With the newly announced
Islamic Republic, Iran isolated itself from the Western world. The United States supplied the Iraqi army in fear of the spreading of the Islamic revolution in the Middle East. Iran had many American funded weapons left of the decades of Shah’ rule and were equally supplied with armory during the war and therefore the battle lasted long, cost both countries much money and there were many casualties amongst citizens (the exact numbers are unknown). Various countries were involved, like France ,the Soviets, the United States and United Kingdom helping either both or one side(s). 62 Maurice Blessing. ‘Sjah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi (1919-1980)’, Historisch Nieuwsblad, vol. 9 (2006). 63 Shirin Hakimzadeh,‘ Iran: A Vast Diaspora Abroad and Millions of Refugees at Home’, Migration Policy
Institute (September 1 2016) http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/iran-vast-diaspora-abroad-and-millions-refugees-home/ (Accessed: May 2017).
In 1988 under International pressure, Khomeini gave in to ending the war. In 1989 in reaction to a book written by Salman Rushdie which insulted Islam sparked a gulf or regime radicalization. A higher commitment to Islam was required in Iran and measures were taken against self-proclaimed enemies of the regime.64 This reaction got a lot of international attention, isolating Iran even more from the rest of the world and reinforcing a negative image of Islam as backwards, aggressive and irrational. Khomeini died one year after the ending of the war and his legacy has been clearly visible in Iran the past two decades. His Islamic organization of the state had been his most important goal and this is visible in the structure of the country nowadays. By many he is regarded as a national hero which is one of the reasons many people who fled the country fearing him (or experienced worse trauma by his regime) do not wish to return to Iran. The post-Khomeini state went through four different political periods: the second republic (1989–1997), the third republic (1997–2005), the fourth republic (2005–2013), and the fifth republic (2013).65 The war fought under Khomeini’s republic had put Iran on the world map as an international independent actor and many Iranians felt pride in this. On the other hand, the Islamic Republics meant oppression: the country was officially de-secularized. The second and more so the third Republic was led by relatively moderate religious leaders but many still longed for more individual freedom.
Religious leaders held a strong position in the government and could even veto government decisions. The supreme leader has to endorse democratically elected
presidents before they can enter into the office. For many these restrictions due to religious power in Iran have been reasons to leave the country. This other ‘wave’ of refugees are, like the one just after the revolution, highly skilled individuals with academic backgrounds but this group also includes economic refugees from middle/working classes. Iran’s economy has suffered from war and its isolated position of the rest of the world. This refugee ‘wave’ started around 1993 and still exists up until today. Opposition against the government is not allowed and there have been several reports of human rights violation over the last decades. Many flee Iran in fear of persecution and there have been stories of torture and ill treatment by Iranian Intelligence and in prisons.66 In recent years, the situation has seemed to take a more positive turn of more political and individual freedom. The economy has equally moved up, partly related to the lifting of international
embargoes. Two years later, on the 19th of May 2017 Iran reelected president Hassan Rohani, which shows support in the country for the more open and renewed Western oriented approach Iran has 64 Michael Axworthy, Revolutionairy Iran (Penguin books 2014) 299.
65 Mojtaba Mahdavi, ‘Khomeinism after Khomeini: Multiple Faces of Khomeinism’ in: Ayatollah Khomeini (Oxford 2013).
66 ‘’Why They Left : Stories of Iranian Activists in Exile’’, Human Rights Watch (December 13 2012) https://www.hrw.org/report/2012/12/13/why-they-left/stories-iranian-activists-exile.
