Integration Contract, Really?

Quoted from the BBC Article: Europe's identity crisis

"In future an immigrant arriving in Germany and wishing to stay may have to sign an "integration contract". That is the idea of the Integration Minister, Maria Boehmer.

The contract would set out basic German "values," including "freedom of speech" and "equal rights for women". The idea behind this is the club: if you join you have to accept the rules. "Anyone who wants to live here for a long time," says the minister, "and who wants to work has to say 'yes' to our country"."

I was very surprised when I read this today. It came as a bit of a shock to me to see how clueless people can be especially when they are in positions of power.
The mere 3 people that commented on the Article all seemed to disagree with this, and so do I.

I think that idea is so off point it's ridiculous! The idea that a contract is the thing that will govern the way immigrants choose to live their life shows how weak of a grip Europe really has on its integration problems. You cannot sit on the outside and watch a hot mess and think you can solve it. The people thinking of solutions need to understand how those immigrant communities think, understand without passing judgement. Once you understand a problem, then you can start to fix it, and it's obvious that some countries are no where near understanding things.

I think if they take a few examples of well integrated immigrants and compare their characteristics with those who are not well integrated they might get some idea as to why people behave the way they do. My feel is that they will find that the reasons are closely tied with the goal one has for immigration. There are those who seek immigration for financial reasons and those who seek immigration to improve their quality of life. Those who cannot survive in their countries seek immigration to the EU since they will be able to survive off of the minimum wage and will reap the benefits of a good social welfare system. Then there are those who seek immigration in order to fulfill career aspirations, better quality of life and a good future for their children. The main things that differentiates those two groups are money and education.
Generally, well educated and well off people are more respecting of women's rights and freedom of speech.
I'm not saying a clear cut solution is obvious, but I think some understanding of the realities of immigrants is necessary before jumping into actions that will not add any value.

Another problem I see is that - to Europeans - the sight of a veiled women, more often than not, represents female oppression, devout religiousness - sometimes even fundamentalism - and inequality. This is not always the case, some women are open minded and independent and choose to wear the veil. The problem is that a person's looks already alienate him/her when they are different from the main stream, add to that all the social factors and religious ones too and you find that people on both sides prefer this separation, and would much rather stick to their own world than be open to challenging their own views and perhaps changing or adjusting their convictions.

Finally, I think we need to acknowledge how difficult is it for human beings to change. Expecting a middle aged man/woman to change his/her ways is not realistic. Change is gradual. For immigrants to develop ownership to their new country and integrate with them and adjust their values and belief systems takes generations not years. Which can also indicate that maybe a big part of the problem may be resolved in time.

I think it's sad, how little progress has been made to understanding - not even solving - a problem that has been out there since as long as I can remember. You'd think the developed world would do a better job at handling their problems.