www.koreaverband.de Berlin / Germany Volume 25 2016 SPECIAL NO. 4 ASYLUM MIGRATION INTEGRATION similar challenges, different patterns Supported by EPRIE 2016 MEMORANDUM – UNITY IN DIVERSITY EPRIE 2016 engaged with a particularly topical issue: asylum, migration and integration - similar challenges, diff erent patterns. With refugees continuing to try to enter Europe, the program was appropriately held in Poland, Germany and France where we visited organizations and institutions involved in helping refugees and governing migration, discussed with experts in the fi eld, and compared attitudes and policies with those in East Asia. Th e topic felt relevant and personal to us, not merely because we engage with it in our studies or professional lives, but because many of the participants had personal experiences of migration and the challenges of integrating into a new country. In spite of the personal nature of our experiences, the complexity of the topic and the fact that we come from six diff erent countries, we had largely similar opinions about the current state of migration governance, as well as similar ideas about how to improve it. Th is memorandum lays out some of those ideas. First, it describes the current state of aff airs by detailing regional attitudes towards migrants in China, Japan, Korea and Europe. Next, it highlights the importance of cooperation and networking between those regions in general before moving on to suggesting that cooperation is best achieved through shifting power away from the nation-state, both to a global and a local level. Finally, the memorandum delves deeper into the special importance of local initiatives for successful integration. We conclude with a call for cooperation and a continuing exchange of ideas. REGIONAL ATTITUDES TOWARDS MIGRANTS Immigration policies in China, Japan and Korea are decided at the nation-state level. Th e European Union (EU) has a common asylum system, however EU member states have their own policies on issues such as migration and integration. Generally speaking, the immigration policies of China, Japan, Korea and Europe are similar in that all four regions encourage migration of the highly skilled and are wary of low-skilled migrants. Regarding other forms of migration, there are some diff erences, for example, marriage migration is actively encouraged in Korea but discouraged in Europe. Further, China, Japan and Korea are more reluctant than Europe to take in refugees, however it should be noted that the willingness to do so varies between European countries. China is experiencing mass internal rural-urban migration due to industrial development, increasing urbanization and labor imbalances between east and west. Generally speaking, the Chinese government has not acted to legislate for refugee settlement until now, despite the presence of many refugees in China from Vietnam, Myanmar, Syria and various African countries. Th e Chinese government has worked together with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and temporarily accepted refugees according to the »Exit-Entry Administration Law« that it enacted after signing the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees in 1982. Despite this, an eff ective integration policy is still pending in China. As the second-largest global economy, China must play a more important role in solving refugee crises in the future. Similarly, in Japan, there is no offi cial immigration policy to encourage migrants to integrate into Japanese society. However, at the community level, there have been many attempts by local governments to support migrants through integration policies. Hamamatsu City, which has one of the largest populations of migrants, particularly Latin American Nikkei, is an example of such a local- level attempt. Th e city declared itself EPRIE 2016 part of a global network... EDITORIAL ASYLUM, MIGRATION, AND INTEGRATION – SIMILAR CHALLENGES, DIFFERENT PATTERNS For five years now, EPRIE has offered young people from Europe and on Germanys Integration Law from a postcolonial perspective, and East Asia the opportunity to intensively discuss and exchange ideas criticizes that the ›Regulation on Integration Courses for Foreigners‹ about current problems that have historic roots during a ten to twelve- does not prescribe the right, but rather the obligation, to take part in day seminar. Topics considered so far have concerned reconciliation in a controlled language and orientation course. The restrictive policies each region, nation building at the beginning of modernization, and of the integration course system are applied mainly to Muslim immi- national identities, among others. In EPRIE 2016 we focused on the grants from Third World countries. prevailing and crucial topic of migration and integration. This topic is The current state of Migration Policies in Korea is reflected by highly controversial within the EU and has already led to substantial Kim Sagang. She examines immigration and integration policies and changes in cooperation between EU member states. While migration shows how those policies have been implemented for different groups and integration are also the subject of controversial discussion in East of migrants. Among long-term migrants in Korea, the proportion of Asian countries, they address these issues in different ways. marriage migration is very high because it was supported by govern- In the seminar we discussed several aspects of migration with a mental institutions as a solution to low fertility rates and low marriage number of experts, and recognized that we only could cover some rates, especially in rural areas. aspects of the topic. In this issue, we did not want to repeat what Kim You Gene reflects on the odyssey of North Korean Defectors. experts have already widely discussed. Rather, we have focused on She focuses on their different situations, especially between South Korea new thoughts and ideas and on critical perspectives of integration. and the USA, and discusses issues of their migration and identity. As a consequence, integration has to involve both the minority and Civil society activities are presented by two writers: Kato Jotaro the majority populations of a society. We want to give a forum to sheds light on the problem of undocumented residents in Japan and refugees and migrants who actively fight for their rights and needs. introduces the onsite support work of the civil society organization We also want to provide a forum for specialists and experts working Asian People’s Friendship Society (APFS). Thilo Körting introduces with them in the field. ›Women in Exile‹, an initiative of refugee women in Brandenburg The opinion of the participants expertise is reflected in the memo- State in Germany, which was founded by refugee women. In his article randum, an excerpt of the ideas and thoughts shared during the refugee women talk about their troubles and hopes. seminar, which all twenty participants of EPRIE 2016 agreed upon The EPRIE 2016 Program gives insights into the various expert at the end of the program. They argue that the nation-state has failed talks, topics discussed, and institutions visited. At the end of each to handle the challenges of migration and opt for a shift in power to years program former participants can join in. Martha Jaworska a global and local level. presents a summary of the Alumni Meeting 2016. Last but not least, After the »summer of migration« in 2015, Germans policy has we present the EPRIE 2016 memorandum translated into the par- changed a great deal. Since the arrangement with Turkey was put into ticipants’ respective languages (Chinese, French, German, Japanese, effect, the dominant debate has focused on the question »Who can Korean, and Polish). come?«, as Sina Arnold phrases it in her critical essay. She believes this New concepts of migration and integration will also be discussed question is inappropriate, and she opts for asking different questions in EPRIE 2017 in East Asia. We look forward to obtaining a broader like »Who is coming?« or »What do they need?« Asking these alternate understanding of the situation in China, Japan, and Korea. questions would have concrete consequences and also shed light on We are very grateful for the generous support we have received the needs of all people in a pluralistic and »post-migratory« society. from our cooperation partner the Robert Bosch Stiftung which has Albert Denk criticizes current approaches to integration which supported EPRIE from the very beginning. We would not have been lead to a polarization of society. In his article »Beyond Integration« able to organize EPRIE without their help. We are also very thank- he shows a new approach toward strengthening social cohesion, ful for the various local institutions that give us additional support, especially in times of increased global migration. For him the core like the Japan office of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, East Asian of the concept is that everybody takes part in the social negotiation Foundation and many others. process. This is also linked with a power shift from the nation-state level to civil society and global institutions. Kien Nghi Ha examines how coercive integration is linked to colonial discourses and Euro-centrist thoughts. In his article he focuses Han Nataly Jung-Hwa & Rita Zobel ASYLUM MIGRATION INTEGRATION similar challenges, different patterns Exchange Program for Regional Integration in East Asia and Europe EPRIE 2016 3 Editorial 6 Memorandum – Unity in Diversity by EPRIE 2016 participants