Category Archives: Serbia

02.07.2014 Rroma and stereotypes: Rroma arrested because of organised copper theft

Published by:

Certain (2014) and Labarre (2014) report on the arrest of seven Rroma in the Pays de la Loire. The detained persons are accused of having been involved in the theft and organised trafficking of copper. Most of the suspects live in an informal settlement Rroma in Saint-Herblain. The article suggests, as many before it, that hierarchical organised structures exist among Rroma and favour organised crime: “The network was ultra-hierarchised. With a boss, henchmen and assistants. In order to unravel the involvement of one or the other, and to investigate the black market, it took almost a year of investigation by the theft-brigade of Nantes. This was rewarded this week by eleven arrests, the majority in a Roma camp of Saint-Herblain, the hub of the commerce.” The stereotypes of organised, criminal Rroma clans persist. It has often been pointed out that this is not a Rroma-specific phenomenon and hierarchical structures are not part of Rroma culture. The reference to the ethnicity of the perpetrators is therefore completely unnecessary; it only encourages racial prejudice against members of the minority. Rroma are not more criminal than the representatives of other ethnic groups. Already in June, Le Matin (Grabet 2014) reported on the trial against three Serbian Rroma in Vevey, who are accused of being involved in the organised theft and black marketing of copper.

13.06.2014 The immigration debate and the discussion about safe countries of origin

Published by:

Hofmann (2014) focuses on the German migration policy based on the currently discussed draft bill to declare Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia to be safe countries of origin. The key point of the debate lies in the estimates of how strong the discrimination of minorities in the states in question really is. While proponents of the draft law point to neighbouring countries who also declared Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia as being safe countries of origin, refugee organizations and left-wing politicians refer to Rroma slums and repeated reports of explicit discrimination. The federal government takes the position that the situation of the Rroma in the Balkans is difficult but does not fulfil the claim of an actual persecution: “Although the economic, societal and social situation of the Roma in all three countries is “difficult” – however, “ a persecution of Roma does not take place.” Eastern Europe expert Dusan Reljic is quoted stating that in his opinion, there is no direct discrimination by the state, but an indirect exclusion through the weak economies that favour the discrimination of minorities such as the Rroma: “In societies where there is less and less to distribute, it is hardly possible for the less educated to make a living”, said Reljic. For Rom who was rejected as an asylum applicant, the return to a Southeast European country means “a catastrophe that is associated with greatest personal sacrifices.” Finding a job is possible only with great difficulty.” The European Union should therefore attach conditions to the inclusion into the association of states as the strict observance and enforcement of minority rights. As the debate shows, there are no detailed reports on the effective level of discrimination, only general estimates. This is inaccurate for a detailed assessment, if ultimately human fates depend on these political decisions.

Demir (2014) criticizes in his article about the immigration debate, that the term “poverty immigration” is used in the political discussion as a synonym to the immigration of Rroma. The immigration from the Balkans is clearly not limited to Rroma, but also includes a variety of other ethnic groups. Therefore, the term “Rroma problem” is inappropriate and ethnicizes a phenomenon that includes and encompasses much more than a single ethnic group. The complexity behind the migration movements, the structural conditions, the different ethnic groups, the various educational levels of individual migrants, the economic situations, the political values of the different actors, all these factors are lost in reductionist modes of argumentation. Simplicity is elegant, but from the viewpoint of a scientific will to truth, simplicity is very dangerous.

11.06.2014 Controversy over “safe countries of origin”

Published by:

On the occasion of the current political debate in the German federal council on declaring of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia as safe countries of origin, Baeck (2014) reports on a demonstration in Bremen. All the federal states have to agree to the request. The protesters called the Bremer members of parliament to reject the application. This application is said to affect especially weak, vulnerable migrants, and to undermine the fundamental right to asylum: “The project is motivated by “racism” and “antiziganism”, said a speaker at the rally yesterday. In fact, people should be deterred to come to Germany by law. This is justified by rising numbers of asylum seekers and a low acceptance rate for people from these countries: In the first four months in 2014, a fifth of all first asylum applications came from people from Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina – 6,682 of 32,949 applications. If the three states (along with Ghana and Senegal) are declared as “safe”, the asylum procedure is shortened. To prove individual prosecution would become more difficult, asylum applications would be considered to be “evidently unfounded.”” Critics see it as particularly problematic that the new draft law recognises the social exclusion of the Rroma, but at the same time rejects their persecution. By this, the government is said to downplay the real situation on site. The reason for the increase in asylum applications from Southeast Europe is said to “be due to the social and societal problems of the Roma, but not because of a persecution of this group.”

The Green Party politician Claudia Roth criticized that it is extremely problematic to conclude on the basis of the definition of safe countries of origin that there is no real political persecution and exclusion. German interior minister Thomas de Maizière (CDU) sees this differently and refers to the support of the draft law through the German population. To which part of the population he refers to and how big this one is, remains unclear (Deutschlandfunk 2014). Wagner (2014) meanwhile reports on the case of a Macedonian Rroma-family, which was deported back to their country of origin in the middle of the night. The family became homeless and the father was charged for the „denigration of the Macedonian state“.

05.06.2014 “As a Rom in Serbia, life is Hell”

Published by:

Schaefer (2014) reports on the fate of the Serbian Rroma family Novakovic. The mother of the family, the 21-year-old Albena Novakovic, lived with her parents in Germany until she was deported as a ten-year-old, back to Serbia. They faced massive discrimination upon arrival and economic hopelessness: “On that day in Serbia, for this young woman, began a life that she would prefer to forget quickly. “I am Roma. And that is the reason why a normal life in Serbia is not possible for me”, she says with a clear expression. “I’m insulted beaten and discriminated against in Serbia. But the worst thing is that I have no future there as a Rroma. No one wants to give me a job. As a Roma, life there is Hell.” That’s why Albena and her husband oppose the plans of the German government to classify Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as safe countries of origin. The discrimination of the minority is anything but a relic of the past. Currently, the family lives in Germany again, in Heinberg. But the fear remains that the immigration authorities knock at the door and ask the family to come along. To return to a home that is not one for the family. Regarding the assessment of asylum cases, there is still the problem that personal experiences of migrants have no value compared to the official country analyses. Since individual fates are often difficult to prove, the regulatory assessment of the security situation in the countries concerned outweights the individual experience.

30.05.2014 German court decision: Serbia not a safe country of origin for Roma

Published by:

The administrative court of Stuttgart, in what is perhaps a landmark ruling, recognized the refugee status of two Rroma from Serbia. Thus, it challenged the views of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, which at the end of last year came to the conclusion that no persecution of Rroma could be established in Serbia and deportation was therefore justified: “As reasoning, the judges said that the Roma were experiencing extreme disadvantages in their home country and were forced to live on the margins of society, as a spokeswoman for the court said on Monday. The main reason for the judgment was the restriction of the free movement of Roma in the southeast European country. For Roma, under certain circumstances, it is punishable under Serbian law to apply for asylum in another country. This equals a persecution, the court judged.” The verdict has the character of a precedent insofar, because the Rroma are not persecuted in Serbia, according to a federal decree that will be adopted shortly. Thus, the discussion about the discrimination against Rroma in former Yugoslavia and their status as refugees is once more opened. The decision also highlights that the assessment of discrimination against a minority is far from evident and easy. While some assessment are based on the legal foundations of a country, other evaluations are based on everyday practices, such as discrimination in the labour market and the education system, that are far more difficult to prove than law-related disadvantages (see Focus online 2014/I, SWR 2014).

The federal government wants to take a completely different direction. According to the daily newspaper Neues Deutschland (2014) the government wants declare Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as safe countries of origin. German interior minister Thomas de Maizière stated that Cabinet would discuss the bill on April the 30th. De Maizière had previously proposed, to also take Albania and Montenegro onto the list of safe countries of origin, but this proposal failed because of the criticism of the SPD: “SPD and the Union had approved in the coalition agreement, to take the three states of Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina onto the list. Asylum applications from people from these Balkan countries can then be processed faster – and are usually rejected. […] De Maizière said that Serbia had candidate status as a member state of the European Union. Albania and Bosnia-Herzegovina went for it. “From these states one must expect that they deal well with their own citizens”, de Maizière said.” This contrasts with a perspective that emphasizes the individual destinies of those affected. For the German Institute for Human Rights, the concept of safe countries of origin is problematic in itself, because it greatly complicates the presentation and verification of individual persecutions (compare Focus online 2014/II).

28.05.2014 Flooding in ex-Yugoslavia: Rroma are particularly affected

Published by:

Radio Dreyeckland (2014) reports on the impacts on Rroma of the floods in former Yugoslavia. The problem is that Rroma who lived in destroyed informal settlements have no rights to insurance money, as they violated current law practices. Socially disadvantaged Rroma are therefore particularly affected by the floods. Accordingly, many German refugee councils call for a deportation stop of planned expulsions to the Balkans. These deportations are not reasonable due to the current situation. The refugee council of Lower Saxony further states: “Given the devastating floods in the Western Balkans and the thereby once again extremely difficult living conditions of members of minorities in these countries, the refugee councils of Schleswig-Holstein, Lower Saxony, Berlin and Brandenburg demand an official ban on deportation to Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia. […] Even without flooding the situation for Roma in the Western Balkans is extremely difficult. After the deportation, many Roma do not know where they should live, what they should live from and how they will pay for needed medicine. Given the current situation, deportations to Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia are totally irresponsible. […] In addition, the provisional Roma settlements, particularly in Bosnia and Serbia, were especially affected by the destruction caused by floods and landslides. Some settlements were completely washed away or cut off from supply routes. They also fear that Roma living in informal settlements will not receive compensation for their destroyed homes and tens of thousands of people remain permanently homeless. The desolate situation which prohibits deportations will thus persist in the period after the water has dropped” (Flüchtlingsrat Niedersachen 2014). Tesanovic (2014) points out that the Rroma are not only victims of the flood disaster, but also actively participate in assistance programs. The Rroma offered rescue workers their help, including the breast feeding of infants by Rroma mothers.

16.05.2014 Romeo Franz criticizes the German and European Rroma policy

Published by:

EurActiv (2014) gives a voice to the German European Parliament candidate Romeo Franz. Franz is a German Sinto who has campaigned for the social recognition of the minority for many years. In 2011, he joined the Green Party. Franz criticizes in the interview both the German and the European Rroma policy. Too little is done and many things only half-heartedly, he criticizes. Many journalists have no sense of the discrimination that takes place due to naming ethnicity: “I have been discriminated my whole life as a Sinto. But as a 14-year-old, I was already demonstrating for our rights. It is my duty, as a German Sinto, to get involved and fight racism. […] There are deep-seated clichés and prejudices, which are being passed along within German families. […] such racist prejudice can even be stirred up in the media and politics. In daily local reporting, for example. If someone is a criminal, their ethnic affiliation is not mentioned in the news report – except regarding Sinti and Roma. In that regard, there is no sensitivity at all among journalists.” He sees is as particularly concerning that also Germany consciously promotes the segregation of the Rroma: in his constituency Ludwigsburg, a Rroma container village is under construction that wilfully marginalizes the Rroma. These double standards are also found in the German migration policy: While Angela Merkel just announced plans to better integrate the Rroma in Germany, at the same time the cabinet declared Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia and Serbia to safe countries of origin. This allows the deportation of immigrant Rroma: “The German government wants to make it easier to deport people from the countries mentioned. At the same time, the Roma situation in Serbia is even worse than here – no access to running water, education or healthcare. They are constantly suffering from racist encroachment. Their life is in danger. In Brussels far to little for the social acceptance and integration of minorities is done, Franz criticizes. He wants to change this by pursuing a policy of human rights.

02.05.2014 Germany wants to declare Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina safe countries of origin

Published by:

Several German newspapers reported on the pending draft bill of the federal government to declare Serbia, Macedonia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina to be safe countries of origin. The new legislation would allow to process asylum applications from these Balkan states within a week, what according to critics would clearly happen at the expense of individual cases. Many journalists believe that the vast majority of the applicants coming from the Balkans – in 2013 there were more than 20,000 – are Rroma. How they obtained this information is not discussed any further. In its statistics, according to the law, Germany only records the national but not the ethnic affiliation. Since 2009, for citizens of Serbia, Macedonia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina there is no visa requirement: “The right to asylum in Germany is awarded only to few of them – last year there was a total of three. 120’070 immigrants from the Balkans have tried to sue for the right of asylum in court. 39 Serbs, 26 Macedonians, and 17 Bosnians were then allowed to stay. In nine cases out of ten, the asylum applications of this clientele are “obliviously unfounded”, the authorities argue. Therefore, the federal government wants to declare these three Balkan countries as “safe countries of origin”” (Käfer 2014). With the new legislation, the federal government would lo longer have to justify why it rejects an application for asylum from the three countries. It assumes no profound persecution and exclusion of Rroma in Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. A very different notion is communicated by human rights organizations and left-wing politicians: Rroma in the three countries are still heavily discriminated against, both by the authorities and regarding the access to the labour market, schools, and health care. This view is also supported by several reports, such as the last activity report of the European Commission about the national Rroma strategies (Europäische Kommission 2013). The UN refugee agency criticizes the German Federal Government for focusing too much on the topic of political persecution, and thus neglecting discrimination against minorities and human rights violations. Tom Koenigs, former UN special representative in Kosovo, also emphasizes that the classification of nations as safe countries of origin comes at the expense of individuals who are de facto victims of persecution (Armbrüster 2014). Refugee fates are fates of individuals and have to be treated as such, he states, thus securing the protection of those who are actually in need of help. The Rroma Contact Point shares this viewpoint (compare Gajevic 2014, Geuther 2014, Rüssmann 2014, Schuler 2014, Südwest Presse 2014, TAZ 2014).

Ehrich (2014) furthermore points out that the declaration of Serbia, Macedonia, and Bosnia- Herzegovina to safe country of origin gives the states wrong signals regarding their minority policy, since they are also candidates for the membership in the European Union: “Apart from the consequences for individual Roma who actually need asylum, the declaration of the countries as “safe countries of origin” harbours a threat to Europe. Serbia and Macedonia are already official candidates for EU-membership. Bosnia-Herzegovina is a potential candidate. Declaring these states “safe countries of origin” could destroy incentives to improve the situation of Roma in these countries.”

02.05.2014 Kosovo, Serbia: multi-ethnic police to strengthen confidence in the authority

Published by:

Petignat (2014) reports on the conscious promotion of a multi-ethnic police force in Kosovo and Serbia. It is supposed to consist of ethnic Serbs, Albanians, and Rroma. By this measure, it is hoped that the confidence of the population in the authority is to be strengthened. The project is supported by the OSCE and Switzerland. In Serbia, the reluctance of non-Serbian speaking population to contact the police was significantly higher up till now. The aftermath of the Yugoslav wars is not yet completely forgotten and often leads to disagreements, as lately in Presevo during the construction of a monument to the Liberation Army. The multi-ethnic police in Serbia is planned to include 270 Albanians, 130 Serbs and some Rroma who have so far been under-represented. In Kosovo, the project is less advanced: “The example of the multi-ethnic police has caught on in the Balkans. Quite contrary to the north-Kosovo, where the still divided city of Mitrovica gradually integrates members of the Serbian community into the mixed police force. These are former guards, previously paid by Serbia, that must be re-included into the Kosovar institutions in this region with a potential for secession, following an agreement signed on April 2013 between Serbia and the Kosovo. In this way, 300 “Serbian” policemen are progressively integrated into the regular police forces of the Kosovo.” Petginant’s article shows that the Rroma are also under-represented among the authorities. Only a few Rroma build part of the multi-ethnic police.

30.04.2014 Civil courage against discrimination in Serbia

Published by:

Ernst (2014) reports two experiences of discrimination by Serbian Rroma. In both described cases, one the refusal of entry into a McDonalds store, the other the expulsion of a cleaning lady from a bank, the moral courage of those affected had an impact on the outcome of theses injustices. In the first case, the woman who wanted to buy sandwiches in the fast food store for three Rroma children in Novi Sad complained to the local ombudswomen. She in turn sued McDonalds and won. In the second case, the cleaning lady turned to the media: The store manager, who had expelled Mrs Uskokovic from the bank, was put in the pillory of the media. Ernst sees the two incidents as examples of the importance of civil courage against socially tolerated discrimination. Only through the commitment of each and every person, can the exclusion of minorities be ended in the long term: “These are two unpleasant stories that confirm what is known or suspected about Roma discrimination in the Balkans (Mrs Uskokovic, the street cleaner from Nis, has a dark complexion, but it is unclear whether she refers to herself as Roma). Therefore, they is nothing news. […] But what is crucial: citizens as Maja Rogic and Lidija Uskokovic give rise to hope  – because they do not put up with everything.”

18.04.2014 Central Council demands apology because of racist investigations

Published by:

The Central Council of German Sinti and Rroma demands an apology from the government of Baden-Württemberg due to racist investigations in connection with the murders of the National Socialist underground (NSU), and the establishment of an investigation committee because of intra-police racism. On the occasion of the trial against Nazi perpetrators who had committed several racist murders, the chairman of the Central Council, Romani Rose, demanded a concession from the government: “Rose said on Wednesday in Munich, that especially in the case of the murdered Heilbronn police officer Michèle Kiesewetter, there has been a “general suspicion” against Sinti and Roma. He expected at least an apology by the state government of Stuttgart and an assurance that such events never happen again. “It is constitutionally inacceptable to put an entire ethnic group under suspicion”, said Rose” (Focus online 2014). “In July 2009, three detectives travelled to Serbia and surveyed a Roma man. […] The psychologists pointed out that man was “a typical representative of his ethnicity.” That means, lying was an essential part of his socialization. The man “obviously grew up in a world of lies and deception since his earliest childhood.” The racist remarks about the witness, and the Roma in general, were adopted by the state police without a distancing statement into the investigation files” (Tagesspiegel 2014). The case against the NSU-murderers is therefore indirectly also a lawsuit against institutional racism in the German police (compare Die Welt 2014, Stuttgarter Zeitung 2014, Südwestpresse 2014).

12.03.2014 Talking to each other instead of about each other: German visit in Bulgaria

Published by:

Plück (2014) reports about the visit of the German FDP deputies Alexander Graf Lambsdorff and Joachim Stamp in Plovdiv, where 50,000 Rroma are living in mostly precarious conditions. Lambsdorff states that the aim of the visit is to talk with the people concerned and to thereby get rid of the one-sidedness in the debate on Rroma. Unfortunately, there isn’t really anything new to hear in Plück’s article: Bulgaria is said to be an economically weak country that is plagued by severe corruption. Because of nepotism, EU funding programs are very poorly implemented. The Rroma representative Anton Karagyozov meanwhile confirms stereotypical notions of clan structures, widespread crime and misery: “He reported plainly of the financial support for children whose fathers are dead or sitting in jail and whose mothers have left them in Stolipinovo to earn money with prostitution in Western Europe. He reports from the strict clan structures, such that a woman can be “stolen” by a man if she does not want to marry him. In plain language this means rape and a subsequent wedding.” Such stories may be useful for obtaining support funds. But they do not contribute at all to the successful integration of the Rroma. Rather, they nourish the clichéd notions that are mentioned again and again in the debate on “poverty immigrants”. Plück’s article does not change any of these misconceptions.

Merkelt (2014) meanwhile reports on a cultural event in Duisburg. In an old fire station, a Rrom sang “Gypsy Songs” for the visiting Gadje. Author Rolf Bauerdick read from his controversial book, trying to counteract cliché ideas in his own way, even though he inevitably confirms many stereotypes. As he only portrays already visible Rroma in his book, most of which live in economic misery, he does not really confront the public image with new ideas.

Scherfig (2014) complements the theme with a report on the integration project “Harzer Strasse” in Berlin-Neukölln. In 2011, the Aachen housing company bought three mostly inhabited by immigrant Rroma and massively overcrowded apartment buildings, and renovated them. The adult residents almost exclusively work and try to improve their language skills. The housing complex “Harzer Strasse” is considered a showcase project, as it demonstrates the possibility of successful integration, based on promotion and simultaneous demand: “Since the first of January 2014, the free movement of persons is valid for Romania and Bulgaria. [ … ] Critics fear the “immigration into the German social system.” […] However, almost all Roma in the Harzer Strasse have been working for several years and also pay into the social system. […] According to the federal employment agency, Bulgarians and Romanians only make up 0.7 percent of Hartz IV recipients.”

Another aspect of the immigration debate are immigrants from former Yugoslavia. Blasius (2014) reports on the sharp rise in the number of asylum procedures by immigrants from Serbia, Macedonia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, many of them are said to be Rroma. Almost all applications for a permanent residency permit are rejected because the citizens of the former Yugoslavia are not recognised as political refugees: “Despite the often miserable living conditions, Roma are not recognized as political refugees from former Yugoslavia. Unlike Roma from the EU-countries Bulgaria and Romania, they have no permanent right to stay.” In response to this, Blasius states, many of the rejected just file new applications, as they are entitled to under the law. Therewith, the flood of applications can be explained. The German grand coalition meanwhile plans to classify Bosnia, Macedonia and Serbia as safe countries of origin in order to enable accelerated deportations. The classification will be done at the expense of the immigrants who get no voice in the process, but de facto are affected by precarious conditions in their countries of origin. While the proponents of deportations rely on country analyses, which declare no or very minimal discrimination against minorities in countries like Serbia, the proponents of the asylum seekers state the exact opposite. Subjective experiences, which can rarely be proved with documents, are usually neglected in favour of official country analyses that assess the social situation in a country.

11.04.2014 Robert Kushen: the integration of Rroma remains a challenge

Published by:

On the occasion of the international Rroma Day, the chairman of the European Rroma Rights Centre, Robert Kushen, reflects on the situation of the Rroma in Europe and the continuing challenges for this minority (Kushen 2014). He arrives at a sober view: the decade of Rroma inclusion, which was adopted in Sofia in 2005, and encompassed the countries of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Spain, unfortunately cannot fulfil the expectations that it raised. Rroma are still affected by widespread poverty, discrimination, unemployment and insufficient access to public institutions such as schools and hospitals: “Despite this political recognition of an unconscionable social crisis, Roma remain among the poorest, unhealthiest, least educated and most marginalised European citizens. The data are devastating: Across Central and Southeast Europe, 90 percent of Roma live in poverty. Fewer than one third of adults have paid employment. Only 15 percent of young Roma have completed secondary or vocational school. Nearly 45 percent of Roma live in housing that lacks basic amenities. Life expectancy in Roma communities is 10-15 years less than in non-Roma communities, with many Roma lacking access to insurance and health care.” Kushen refers in his judgement to information from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP 2013). Reasoning with such figures is not without dangers, since the representation of the Rroma as uneducated, poor, and unhealthy is often interpreted by the polemical, public discourse as a cultural peculiarity of the minority, although these characteristics are inevitably a poverty phenomenon. Although is not to deny that numerous Rroma are poor and uneducated, the relevant question is whether such an argument can contribute to the  integration of the Rroma. In addition, surveys often only take into account the visible Rroma, because the integrated ones are hard to identify as Roma and difficult to contact. Not only images of misery are needed, which generate compassion, but also images of success that allow a positive identification.

Kushen continues with information about the marginalization of the Rroma in Italy, France, Sweden and Hungary, and then gets on to the latest report from the European Union on the situation of the Rroma. The report published on April the second this year, can not present success stories either: “In early April, the European Commission convened a “Roma Summit” and issued a report assessing how member states are doing in addressing the interconnected problems of poverty and discrimination which the Roma are facing. The report noted “the persistence of segregation” in education, a large and in some cases widening employment gap between Roma and non-Roma, big differences between Roma and non-Roma in health insurance coverage, and an “absence of progress” in addressing the need for housing. Finally, the report noted that discrimination remains “widespread” (compare European Commission 2014).

26.03.2014 Stereotypes: Article about tricksters reinforces prejudices

Published by:

The Landbote (2014) reports on a case of confidence trickster in Winterthur. The article explains in detail the details of the crime, which revolves around the attempted fraud against a Swiss merchant. The perpetrators of the crime are called Serbian Rroma, which is a clear allusion to racist notions of culturally-related crime: “The merchant should have changed 240,000 francs for 200,000 euro and would have received a commission of 10,000 euro. In truth, the native Serbian Roma simply wanted to give the victim counterfeited euro notes.” Mentioning the ethnicity in connection with criminal offenses is unnecessary and nourishes misconceptions about culturally related crimes.

19.03.2014 The Rroma and the European free movement of persons

Published by:

Rosendorff (2014) reports on an informal Rroma camp in the Gutleutviertel of Frankfurt am Main. The 19 Romanian Rroma who lived so far on an industrial wasteland must vacate the location. The social security office will clarify whether the residents of the settlement have pursued social insurance work. If not, they are not entitled to social security benefits and are likely to be expelled, Rosendorff states. The 37-year-old Rrom Mirkea sees the asylum system as unfair. He criticizes: “My country is terribly corrupt, and I can not get a job there”, he says. “Why does Europe exist? We are all colleagues. I do not understand why so many German say ‘shit Romanians’. We have financed our food by collecting returnable bottles. We do not steal”, asserts Mirkea.” The deportation method described is in conflict with the free movement of workers within the European Union, to which Romania and Bulgaria belong since January 2014. Under this scheme, residents of member states are allowed to reside six months or longer in another EU-member state if they are actively looking for a job.

Die Linke (2014) criticizes in a recent statement the efforts of the government coalition to classify the countries Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as safe countries of origin. With this decision, asylum reasons such as discrimination and exclusion would no longer be recognized: “As long as even only one asylum seeker from these countries is recognized as requiring protection, there can be no acceleration of proceedings by law. In 2013, at least 64 Serbian and 43 Macedonian asylum seekers were recognized as refugees or were given protection from deportation on humanitarian grounds. In two thirds of these cases, recognition was granted only by the courts, because the measures taken under an emergency procedure by the federal office for migration and refugees were wrong.” Die Linke criticizes correctly that the discrimination against Rroma is insufficiently highlighted by such country analyses. When determining migration policies, economic and not socio-political considerations are central to decisions, which is done at the expense of minorities such as the Rroma.

Gedziorowski (2014) spoke with Joachim Brenner, director of the Förderverein Roma. Brenner criticizes the widespread reservations about the minority and the polemical discourse against immigrants that is not dominated by facts but suspicion and emotions: “The whole terminology of tide, currents and wave – this is scaremongering. We took notice that we have to do more in the social counselling, but we also have to work with more people who live in poor conditions. [ … ] The last demoscopic studies by sociological institutes show that the resentments have not diminished, but still are manifest. When looking for housing Sinti and Roma have major problems.” Brenner further criticizes that it is above all a lack of political will, which leads to the marginalization of poor people and minorities, and not the lack of financial resources, which are certainly present. This may be seen with reference to the housing project Kulturcampus Bockenheim, which encountered great resistance by the welfare department from the very beginning.

28.02.2014 Die Zeit criticizes the victim discourse about Rroma

Published by:

In her article in Die Zeit, Lau (2014) criticizes the victim role to which Rroma activists are said to refer to constantly in Germany. In the debate about poverty migrants from Romania and Bulgaria, one mainly talks about the immigrants, but not with them. This also has to do with the focus of the activism of Romani Roses, who has been working for the rights of the Rroma in Germany for several decades. Rose focuses his policy on the recognition that Rroma were victims of the Nazi genocide, whereby other topics are to receiving less than enough attention: “Ironically, the central council and Romani Rose prevent elsewhere that the understanding between newly arrived Roma and the majority society improves. Since he can remember, Romani Rose fought for the recognition as victims of genocide, a fact repeatedly disputed by historians. […] Since they share neither religion nor written culture, there is actually only one link between the Sinti and Roma: the experience of persecution. And that is the reason why discrimination is the central topic in the political statements of their community, rather than strategies of advancement.” Lau’s article tries to find out why there is a lack of solution strategies in the current debate about immigrants from Southeast Europe. However, she is wrong when she accuses Rroma to stick to a victim status. This criticism was already expressed in the beginning of 2013 by another author: In his book Zigeuner – Begegnungen mit einem ungeliebten Volk, Rolf Bauerdick criticised the lack of self-initiative in improving the social integration of the Rroma. This criticism is one-sided and hides the mechanisms of exclusion. Although it is right that a successful integration involves two sides, promotion and self-initiative, the latter one can only happen if the necessary conditions are given. Otherwise, suppression remains the dominant factor.

Just the opposite is argued by the TAZ in its interview with the historian Patricia Pientka. Pientka researched the story of a Rroma detention camp in Berlin-Marzahn. The historian is shattered about how bad the persecution of the Rroma in Germany was researched so far, also concerning the Berlin-Marzahn detention camp. In 1936, Rroma were selected via by sociographic criteria for the camp: caravans, many children and certain profession groups were decisive for the internment as well as the living on welfare. In 1938, the pseudo-scientific criteria of the racial hygiene research unit under Robert Ritter were implemented. The continuity between the war and the post-war period is particularly shocking. Perpetrators from the Nazi era were appointed as experts in courts, where they could play down or even qualify the war horrors with false statements: “In Berlin and elsewhere, the police departments for “Gypsy questions” established at end of 1938 are of central importance. In Berlin, the head of the department was Leo Karsten. After the war, he was superintendent of the police of Ludwigshafen and throughout Germany was the appointed expert on compensation issues for Sinti and Roma. His testimony led, among other things, to the verdict that the senate didn’t recognize the Marzahn detention camp as a labour camp […]. One can definitely say that the racist persecution of Sinti and Roma in Nazi Germany hasn’t been critically analysed until today. We have a huge deficit. This is also reflected in the case with Roma from South Eastern Europe, for instance Serbia, who are absolutely not perceived as descendants of Holocaust victims – what they definitely are” (Memarnia 2014).

28.02.2014 Germany wants to declare Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina “safe countries of origin”

Published by:

Schäfer (2014) reports on the plans of the German federal government to declare the Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina “safe countries of origin”. As a result of this, asylum applications from these countries can be processed more quickly in the future. The letter of the German federal ministry of the interior states: “that in all these countries ( … ) neither political persecution nor torture or inhuman or degrading treatment takes place and no threat by reason of indiscriminate violence in situations of international or internal armed conflict.” Left-wing politicians like Ulla Jelpke demanded the deputies of the federal states to withhold the authorization for this policy. The new policy is said to primarily affect Rroma: “As a matter of fact, “90 percent of these people are Rroma, who are fleeing systematic discrimination and hazardous exclusion and poverty.” In the countries concerned, Rroma are exposed to “multiple forms of discrimination, taken together they certainly justify refugee protection”. But this protection  “is sacrificed on the altar of a populist debate”, said Jelpke.” While proponents of deportation rely on country analyses that state none or only very minimal discrimination against minorities in countries like Serbia, Macedonia or Bosnia-Herzegovina, proponents of the asylum seekers state the exact opposite. Subjective experiences, which can rarely be proved with documents, usually are dismissed in comparison to the official analyses that assess the social situation in a country. Bernd Mesovic from Pro Asly criticises that restrictive asylum practices are already in place now and serious examinations of the reasons for flight are not applied (compare Tiroler Tageszeitung Online 2014, Die Welt 2014, Zeit 2014).

14.02.2014 Debate about social conditions in the countries of origin of people threatened with deportation

Published by:

With the debate over the right to stay of a Rroma family from Macedonia in Germany, the massive disagreements over the conditions in the countries of origin of people threatened with deportation became apparent. While proponents of deportation rely on country analyses, which state that no or very minimal discrimination against minorities in countries like Macedonia exists, supporters of the asylum seekers claim the exact opposite: “With a deportation to Macedonia the Roma family faces a hopeless fate”, writes member of parliament Kühn-Mengel to Rosenke. If the family will be deported, the Rustems will be exposed to “institutional discrimination”, warns the politician.” The father of the Rustem family had been beaten so heavily in his home country that he lay in comma for several days, according to his own statement. Subjective expertise, which can rarely be proved with documents, usually face hard resistance against official analyses that assess the social situation in a country (Kölnische Rundschau 2014, Wochenspiegel 2014).

Gajevic (2014) reports on the deportation of Rroma from Germany to Kosovo. She points out that in the opinion of social scientists and left-wing politicians, the situation for many Rroma in the Kosovo is precarious. Because they often do not speak Albanian, an enrolment into school is usually not possible. The supply of water, electricity, food and sanitation is often poor and discrimination as a minority is anything but irrelevant:  „Largely unnoticed by the public, Rroma living here in Germany are increasingly forced to move back to Kosovo. According to the left party viewpoint, this is often a return into misery. The response to a request by the left party to the federal government shows that in the past two years, nearly 850 people were reported into the Balkan country, nearly half of whom were Roma. [ … ] The federal government signed in 2010 a readmission agreement – against fierce criticism – with the republic that split from Serbia, which allows to send back 2500 refugees every year.”

24.01.2014 The Focus magazine propagates the mass exodus from Romania and Bulgaria

Published by:

Dometeit/Lehmkul (2014) report from Romania. Armed with dubious facts they argue that there indeed a mass migration to Western Europe and especially Germany is taking place. They portray poorly trained Rroma in western Romania who hardly earn a living and see their future opportunities in Western Europe. According to the authors, all Rroma that have a reasonably decent life have been abroad for a shorter or longer period of time: “When the labor markets in the EU open at the beginning of the year, everyone will go”, predicts Stefan and grins. “Then we will all meet like on a huge wedding party.” The big goal: North Rhine-Westphalia. Tens of thousands of Romanians and Bulgarians migrate annually. 30’000 people from the two countries came in 2012 (comparing to 18 500 people emigrating). 2013 there will be even more immigrants, the Ministry of Labour, Integration and Social Affairs of North Rhine-Westphalia predicts.” Dometeit/Lehmkul totally ignore that the statistics, as has already been discussed several times, count seasonal workers and therefore are massively exaggerated. That all Romanians and Bulgarians living in poverty will migrate to Germany is very unlikely, as the expansion of free migration to Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland has already shown. Masses of immigrants didn’t show up. Dometeit/Lehmkuhl provide a highly one-sided picture of Rroma. Those who have become rich are immediately associated with illegal activities: “On the so-called rose park there are palaces Roma clans have built through business in Germany. Most of them are empty, the shutters are lowered. Two or three times a year the families come to celebrate. Then the Porsches and Ferraris show up. Two years ago, the police raided some of the villas at the request of the German prosecutor’s, based on suspicions of tax evasion, money laundering and human traffeking.” Such reporting is simplistic and patronizing. Dometeit/ Lehmkuhl completely ignore that there are well integrated, upright Rroma

This one-sided perspective is shared by the Schweizer Magazin (2014). The online newspaper favors polemical generalizations and simplifications: “Sinti and Roma, as well as other social welfare benefiters from Romania and Bulgaria – the two poorest countries in Europe – are ready to flood Germany and to enrich themselves with the social benefits. Only the economy may approve, since every immigrant from these poor countries depresses the wages and thus complicates the lives of all Europeans and only increases the profits of the companies.” To designate the Rroma people generally as social welfare benefiters is racist and stupid. Much more need not being said about this.

The Baltische Rundschau (2014) strengthens fears of a mass immigration from Eastern Europe. The article is openly racist and speaks of social parasites and brown rats who are supposedly coming from Serbia to plunder the German welfare state: “After the wave of Roma who migrate as official EU citizens from Romania and Bulgaria to the German welfare state, more and more Gypsies are now coming from Serbia. However, these do not use the “privileged” status as EU citizens to flood the labour market and welfare system, but make use of the German asylum law. In 2013, the asylum applications from Serbia increased by 40 percent, almost all asylum seekers are Roma.” The Rroma Contact Point has stated very often that the prognosis of a mass immigration to Western Europe is wrong. Moreover, not all immigrants automatically become welfare cases. A reduction of the west migration to the case of the Rroma is racist and ethnicizes poverty problems.

The right-wing populist platform unzensuriert.at (2014) is even more racist. It propagates the concept of a culture war and the collapse of the German welfare state. The pretentious statements are one-sided, distorted, highly selective interpretations of the real situation. The platform forecast an additional influx of 200,000 Romanians and Bulgaria to Germany for the current year: “The city of Duisburg is paying dearly for the unrestricted immigration of Roma clans. For the year 2014, the city administration predicts additional costs of at least 12 million Euro for the “integration” of immigrant Gypsies from Romania and Bulgaria. Meanwhile, some 10,000 Roma live in the Ruhr city. Entire neighborhoods such as Duisburg-Rheinhausen are firmly in the hands of the Gypsies. Germans, but also guest workers from Turkey and former Yugoslavia living here for many years, already feel as strangers.” With such polemical statements unzensuriert.at does intellectual arson and endangers social peace. Such xenophobic statements have nothing to do with freedom of speech and freedom of the press. 

A differentiated and liberal attitude towards the immigration debate is taken by Maike Freund (2013). She argues for complexity and rationalism concerning the predictions of a mass immigration: “Who goes through Neukölln in Berlin or the northern city of Dortmund, knows that such scenes or similar belong to the reality in Germany – but they are only one part of the truth. Because the numbers say: there are many highly educated immigrants, also from Romania and Bulgaria, and Germany relies on these professionals.”

Mappes-Niediek (2014) speaks of the conflicting reactions to the polemical predictions about the mass immigration from Romania and Bulgaria. Thus, ethnic Romanians and Bulgarians often separate themselves from the Rroma in response to the Western European criticism: “That’s not us, that’s the Roma: This is still the first reflex when some of the German and British debates over poverty migration spill into the Rumanian and Bulgarian public.” Mappes-Niediek criticizes that a poverty problem is turned into an ethnic problem by distinguishing between ethnic Romanians and the Rroma. After the collapse of the socialist system, the ethnic Romanians were given back the possessions of their ancestors, who had been collectivized. Since a large part of the Rroma had possessed nothing before socialism, they emerged as losers from the change of system: “Only the Roma got back nothing because their grandparents hadn’t possessed anything. They moved into the slums, from which the poverty immigrants of today emerge. This allows both the German and the Romanian public to keep the poverty problem a Roma problem – which it is not. If there were no Roma, there would not be any more jobs.” The migration debate is also dominated by a double standard: one hand, one likes to get the well-trained professionals for the German economy – especially doctors – on the other hand one wants to keep out the less well-off.

Antiziganism researcher Markus End criticizes the term “poverty migration” as being negatively charged and equated with Rroma in the public debate. The Rroma are discredited as being lazy and social parasites. End criticizes this depiction and reminds one of the integrated, invisible Rroma: “They were sweepingly referred to as lazy and welfare scroungers. It was said that they are noisy, produce garbage, and are prone to crime. People who follow the media regularly have learned that Roma are poverty immigrants. [ … ]. In the debate, Roma are represented as strangers, even though many have being living in Germany since generations. Also that there are educated and uneducated Rroma, rich and poor, is totally neglected in the debate. The term Roma is used almost synonymous with poverty, crime or waste.” Liberal journalists are also spreading antiziganist stereotypes, even though they welcome the immigration of skilled workers. A liberal journalist from Die Welt compares well-educated, ethnic Romanians and Bulgarians with criminal, antisocial Rroma, producing a value list of welcomed and unwelcomed immigrants. End comes to the conclusion that the coverage of the Rroma is the most biased of all minorities (Grunau 2014).

17.01.2014 Rroma in Kosovo

Published by:

Based on selected informants, Woker (2014) presents an unbiased, nuanced view of the fate of Rroma in Kosovo. He portrays various projects in Pristina and the suburbs that were co-sponsored by returning or remaining Rroma. In the Serbian municipality of Gracanica they run a hotel, which was co-sponsored by a Swiss official. Nrecaj, a Rrom, wanted to set up small libraries in all public schools to improve children’s education skills. However, the Kosovo authorities showed no interest in his project. Andreas Worms, an official who assessed the return of Kosovo exiles in late 1999 on behalf of the Swiss Federal Government and some aid agencies, confirms the difficulties of reintegration. Not infrequently, the houses of the Rroma were destroyed in Serbian minority areas:  “Wormser had to assess the reasonableness of a return in the event of asylum applications. The current situation of the minority was often delicate: their homes in Serbian villages were destroyed and in the Albanian settlement area they were seen as collaborators with the Serbs and had to fear for their lives.” Woker’s conclusion is that the situation for the Rroma in Kosovo is still unsatisfactory. The conflicts from spring 2004 encouraged many in the decision to seek their luck abroad. From originally around 200’000 Rroma today about 50’000 remain in the Kosovo. Despite efforts by organizations such as  “Voice of Roma”, who work for better educational qualifications among the Rroma, there remain strong tensions between the two other ethnic groups in the country: the Kosovar Albanians who make up the majority of the population and the Kosovo Serbs, who constitute the second largest group. Whether the Rroma hotel will become a model project or not, will have to be seen.

rroma.org
en_GBEN