Civic and political integration of migrants with minority backgrounds: Turkey-origin migrants in the United Kingdom

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis study argues that minorities have higher in-group consciousness and adaptability developed through uneven interaction with the majority. Once migrated, their collective experiences are transferred to the country-of-residence with them, leading to higher civic and political integration in the country-of-residence than majority-migrants. Introducing a new civic and political integration model, it compares the majority and minority migrants from Turkey in the UK, by using ordinal logistic regression analyses. Findings show that Kurds are more involved in politics than Turks, however, they do not differ in terms of civic participation. Compared to Sunnis, Alevis feel more represented in the political system.KEYWORDS: Migrant integrationminoritiescivic-political integrationTurkish diasporareligion Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Scholars categorized integration dimensions based on the study purpose and the unit of analysis (e.g. migrant individuals, society, policies). Entzinger (“The Dynamics of Integration Policies”) conceptualizes three integration factors (state, market, and nation) to discuss economic, social, and legal-political aspects. Lacroix (“Collective Remittances and Integration”) studies the social and structural aspects of integration whereas Ersanilli and Koopmans (“Do Immigrant Integration Policies Matter?”) have a socioeconomic vs cultural-religious approach. Huddleston et al. (“Using EU Indicators”) categorize migrant integration indicators as employment, education, social inclusion, active citizenship, and welcoming society, which are known as EU Zaragoza Indicators. Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas (“The Concept of Integration”) introduce cognitive-behavioral and aesthetics dimensions to integration discussions. Heckmann and Schnapper (“The Integration of Immigrants”) suggest an identification dimension along with cultural, social, and structural dimensions.2 Erdal and Oeppen, “Migrant Balancing Acts,” and Unterreiner, Corridor Report.3 Killian, “What or Who”.4 When the Republic of Turkey was founded as a nation-state in 1923, religious identity was a significant component of national identity, therefore, “minority status” was granted only to non-Muslim citizens of Turkey through the Lausanne Treaty. Therefore, Alevis and Kurds in Turkey are considered minorities from a sociological perspective in this study rather than a legal aspect.5 Heath et al., The Political Integration; Ramakrishnan and Espenshade, “Immigrant Incorporation”; Güveli et al., “2,000 Families”; and Spierings, “Electoral Participation.”6 For migrants with minority backgrounds in ethnographic research, see, Dhanda, “Caste and International Migration,” Barrier and Dusenbery, The Sikh Diaspora, Metcalf and Rolfe “Caste Discrimination,” Jacobsen and Raj, South Asian, and, Kayyali “Race.”7 Shaghaghi, Bhopal, and Sheikh, “Approaches to Recruiting.”8 Bishop and Davis, “Mapping Public Participation,” and Heath et al., The Political Integration.9 Castles et al., The Age of Migration, and Erdal and Oeppen, “Migrant Balancing Acts.”10 Entzinger, “The Dynamics”; Heckmann and Schnapper, The Integration;, Koopmans et al., Contested Citizenship; Lacroix, “Collective Remittances”; Mugge and van der Haar, “Who”; and Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas, “The Concept of Integration.”11 Spencer and Charsley, “Conceptualising Integration,” and Heckman and Schnapper, The Integrations.12 Bueker, “Political Incorporation”; Tam Cho et al., “Residential Concentration” and Sanders et al., “The Democratic Engagement.”13 Huddleston and Dag Tjaden, Immigrant Citizens Survey; Pasetti, Corridor Report; and Unterreiner, Corridor Report.14 Tajfel and Turner, “An integrative theory.”15 Assimilation refers to a subgroups’ adoption of the language, values, and systems of a dominant group by replacing its own, whereas acculturation refers to developing a superordinate identity by multiple subgroups together harmoniously. Adaptation, then, refers to the accommodation of one group into the surrounding of a dominant group without compromising their own group identity. Integration, however, includes the ‘acceptance by the dominant group’ as it is a two-way process.16 Budyta-Budzyńska, “Adaptation”.17 Even though the literature on minorities categorizes them as historical, national, and territorial minorities based on their backgrounds and legal statuses, this study focuses on the de facto status of minorities against the majority in terms of size and exposure.18 Rex, Ethnic Minorities, and Killian, “What or Who”19 Carter, The Influence of Race, and Chávez, and Guido-DiBrito, “Racial and Ethnic Identity.”20 Birnir, Ethnicity, and Posner, Institutions.21 Phinney, “A Three-Stage Model.”22 Bell, “Religious Identity.”23 Akgündüz, Labour Migration; İçduygu and Aksel, “Turkish Migration Policies”; and Kirişçi, “Turkey.”24 Sirkeci et al., Little Turkey.25 Groenendijk and Guild, Visa Policy.26 Many Kurds and Alevis in Turkey sought asylum in Europe and UK when the political tension that targeted these communities escalated in the 1980s and the 1990s. A rich literature can be found regarding the Kurds, Alevis, and politics in Turkey, this includes Gunter, The Kurds in Turkey; and Yılmaz, “Process and Debates.” To stay within the scope of the study, this literature is omitted here. As most of these “asylum seekers” are villagers who left Turkey (along with many other internally displaced) not for being politically active, but for being subjects of the political atmosphere in the country (see Demir, “Shedding an ethnic identity”) Thus, rather than arriving as political actors to be embedded in UK politics, most of these individuals have gone through a civic and political integration process. However, compared to the ethnic Turkish majority, returning back to their home country amidst tension was not feasible, which became a motivation to build their future in the UK. The closer bond and network among these minorities due to higher group consciousness also allowed them to learn from each other and this possibly contributed to their integration process.27 Küçükcan and Güngör, Turks in Europe, and Sirkeci, et. al., Little Turkey.28 Bilecen, “Ankara Anlaşması.”29 UK Census 2021.30 Demireva, “New Migrants.”31 Demireva, “New Migrants,” and Bilecen, “The Reflections.”32 Bilecen, “The Reflections”33 Strand et al., Drivers and Challenges.34 UK Home Office, Office of National Statistics.35 Aydın, “The Role of Institutions.”36 Uysal, “Turkish Social and Cultural Organizations,” and Çoştu, İngiltere’de Türkler.37 Sirkeci, et al., Little Turkey.38 UK Census 2011.39 15 people did not answer the religion question.40 Barrett and Brunton-Smith, “Political and Civic Engagement.”41 OSCE, Civic and Political Participation, and Spencer and Charsley, “Conceptualising Integration.”42 Dalton, Citizen Politics, Ramakrishnan and Espenshade, “Immigrant Incorporation,” Sanders et al., “The Democratic Engagement.”43 Just and Anderson, “Immigrants.”44 Although the literature often measures “civil society membership” as an indicator, it has been observed that Turkey-origin migrants in the UK involve in activities and events organized by the civil society without being formal members. Therefore, the participants were asked about their cooperation with the civic organizations.45 Dalton and Klingemann, Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior; Logan, Darrah and Oh, “The Impact of Race and Ethnicity”; Ramakrishnan and Espenshade, “Immigrant Incorporation”; and Verba and Nie, Participation in America.46 Delanty, Jones, and Wodak, Identity; Huddleston, Niessen, and Dag Tjaden, Using EU Indicators; and Wessendorf, “Migrant Belonging.”47 Fernandez-Reino, “Migration and Discrimination”; Gabrielli, Corridor Report; Hsiao and Wittig, “Acculturation”; Kurtuluş, Yıldırım and Yaşin, “Same Country”; Pasetti, Corridor Report; and Rab, “Ethnicity and Habitat.”48 The survey question asks “How religious would you consider yourself?” However, unlike Sunni Islam, Alevism does not have obligatory practices to evaluate their religiosity, and rather, it is considered as a ‘path/lifestyle.” Therefore, their “religiousness” can be interpreted as stronger identification as Alevi and group affiliation with their community, be it from a faith or ethno-political perspective.49 Barrier and Dusenbery, The Sikh Diaspora; Ersanilli and Koopmans, “Do Immigrant?”; and Connor and Tucker, “Religion and Migration.”50 Schlozman, Burns, and Verba, “What Happened at Work Today?”51 Barrett and Brunton-Smith, “Political and Civic Engagement,” and Itzigsohn and Saucedo, “Incorporation, Transnationalism.”52 Jennings, “Political Knowledge,” Riley, Griffin and Morey, “The Case.”53 The length of stay in the country is not asked in the questionnaire.54 Ersanilli and Koopmans, “Do Immigrant?”; Maxwell, “Evaluating”; and Shiner and Modood, “Help or Hindrance?”.55 Just and Anderson, “Immigrants.”56 Helliwell and Putnam, “Education,” and Just and Anderson, “Immigrants.”57 Schur, “Employment,” and Schlozman, Burns, and Verba, “What Happened?”58 Berger, Galonska and Koopmans, “Political Integration”; Castles, De Haas and Miller, The Age of Migration; Jacobs and Tillie, “Introduction”; and Togeby, “It Depends … ”59 Barrett and Brunton-Smith, “Political and Civic Engagement.”60 ZOOM, Research among Belgo-Congolese.61 Just, Sandovici and Listhaug, “Islam.”62 Statham et al., “Resilient,”63 Tajfel and Turner, “An integrative theory”.64 Dalton, Citizen Politics.65 All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) are informal cross-party groups that have no official status within Parliament. They are run by and for Members of the Commons and Lords, though many include individuals and organizations from outside Parliament in their administration and activities.66 Jenkins and Cetin, “From.”67 https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1164879&subid=068 Clark was previously a councillor in Hackney where the Turkey-origin migrant population is concentrated. Most of the other local representatives are also of Kurdish origin (http://www.t-vine.com/england-local-elections-2018-a-record-38-british-turkish-councillors-elected).69 Indeed, both the Kurdish and Alevi “diaspora” are involved in transnational politics. However, this paper limited its scope to the political involvement in UK politics, even if their involvement might have a purpose to serve their transnational political agenda. Being in the diaspora is a consequence of the group consciousness argument here. Safran (“Diasporas in Modern Societies”) defines diaspora as members who share a strong collective identity. While Safran also adds that diasporas “believe they are not fully accepted by their host country”, this paper argues that minorities use their adaptability skills to get accepted by the host society. (For Kurdish and Alevi diaspora, see: Wahlbeck “Transnationalism”; Massicard “The Alevis in Turkey and Europe”; Berkowitz and Mugge “Transnational Diaspora Lobbying”; and Bozarslan, Güneş, and Yadırgı, “The Cambridge History of the Kurds.”70 The scores slightly vary among different minority groups in the UK. Thus, the average score of all minorities was taken as a reference, which confirms that the Turkey-origin migrants are not an exceptional group.71 Community Life Survey 2017–18 Statistical Release, and Sanders et al., “The Democratic Engagement.”Additional informationNotes on contributorsMeryem Ay KesginMeryem Ay Kesgin received her Ph.D. from Bilkent University Political Science and Public Administration department. Her master’s degree is in Survey Research and Methodology from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and she has a bachelor’s degree in Psychology from the State University of New York - University at Albany. She is currently working as a researcher in the humanitarian sector, where she involves in projects focusing on Syrian refugees in Turkiye and their economic integration. Her research interests include migration, refugees, nutritional well-being, social and labor integration, and humanitarian interventions.