In the European elections in June, the migration issue will occupy a disproportionate place in the electoral campaigns, which does not correspond to the real impact it has on the daily life of the vast majority of the population. The negative consequences, even if they were true – which they are not – would be far from the importance of issues such as growing inequality and the existence of poor workers, the just energy transition or the lack of housing.
For this reason, it is appropriate to talk about the issue to avoid worries and gratuitous suffering, both for the immigrant population and for the citizens of the host countries. In recent years, suspicions, xenophobia and far-right parties have increased in Europe. The recent community pact on migration and asylum obeys this defensive attitude, which has the main merit of existing and which homogenizes the conditions of asylum and establishes a modest system of flexible mandatory solidarity. The content, unfortunately, is far from what its ambitious statement would suggest.
In this context, what is the situation in our country? What the surveys indicate is that immigration does not appear among the first concerns of the citizen. In fact, there is a widespread opinion that, in Spain, the phenomenon is managed “better” than in most of its European partners. What is the reason for this difference? Firstly, for historical and cultural reasons, of our relationship with the other, with the stranger, which give rise to a certain anthropological egalitarianism, and also to singularities of Spanish colonialism such as the Legislation of the Indies, the sermons of Bartolomé de las Casas or the Jesuit reductions in Paraguay.
Other singularities closer in time, unique in Europe, would be the register of inhabitants and regularization by rooting. Registration is mandatory, for the town hall and for the citizen himself, whatever his situation. This allows the council to know what its population is; the citizen, even if he is an irregular immigrant, allows him access to basic benefits, especially health and education. In this way, current rules are respected (in particular the Convention on the Rights of the Child) and immigrants are given a first recognition of their status as neighbors (not voters).
On the other hand, the regularization by rooting, the result of an amendment that Convergència i Unió introduced to the Aliens law of 2000, allows a continuous flow of obtaining work and residence permits by people with three years of stay, without incident, in the country.
Although there is still work to be done, there are other factors that have contributed to a greater degree of inclusion of the foreign population: from the attitude of the churches, which have encouraged interfaith welcome and dialogue, to the the action of the unions, which before 2000 had already created information and support organizations for immigrants, also unique in Europe, through identification with football clubs such as Barça or Atlético de Madrid. And above all, because Spain began to legislate on reception, integration and citizenship – Andalusia, Catalonia, Central Government – more diligently than in any other European territory when the migratory phenomenon began to emerge in their countries.
It would be necessary to add the daily work of multiple entities and people who contribute to transmitting respect and building social cohesion. And two last relevant facts: the first, that we have been assuming, in particular the local administration, the intercultural method of managing immigration, based on equal rights and duties, respect for diversity and positive interaction. The second piece of data, with an expiry date, is that there are still Spaniards who have lived through a migratory process and who have a special ability to empathize with their new neighbors, who often have surprisingly similar experiences.
Assuming that, indeed, our country is fortunate enough to manage immigration better, what is the response of the immigrant population? In general, the predominant type of relationship is coexistence, ahead of coexistence and clearly above hostility, at the same time reasonably far from conflict, which remains contained. Likewise, feelings of belonging to the host society are identified, compatible with the identities of origin and growing depending on the proximity (neighbourhood, municipality, autonomous community…). An interesting indicator of social inclusion is that the percentage of organ donations from immigrants consistently exceeds 10%, another singularity on a European scale, despite the cultural and religious differences that accompany the experience of death, which do not they prevent a behavior similar to that of the native population.
To conclude, a sociological observation: unlike in other European countries, the celebration of the soccer World Cup did not produce conflicting situations in Spain (even though there was some minority attempt to provoke them). In any case, experience shows that, to build social cohesion, it is not enough to legislate (France, for example, has just approved the Immigration law number 30 since 1980). The most important thing is to stimulate mutual respect, recognition and full equality of rights and obligations.
