Islamic Discourse in German Online Mass Media: Intra-Migrant Muslim Perspective on Refugee Issues

Islamic discourse in German online mass media: Intra-migrant Muslim perspective on refugee issues. Shift in the position of three Muslim individuals: Feridun Zaimoglu, Necla Kelek, and Navid Kermani

L. Liyanti German Study Program, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia

ABSTRACT: Since the late 80s, Germany has been dealing with new social, political, and religious issues brought in by the extended stay of its guest-workers who actually should have returned to their home countries once their employment contract ended. These guest-workers and their family are mostly from Turkey with Islam as their most prominent identity. The Islamic discourse has appeared in many aspects of German’s social and political life since then. In 2006, The German Home Office initiated the First Deutsche Islamkonferenz (DIK) aiming to build a shared future with its Muslim citizens. Not only the Islamic large organizations but also ten individual Muslims from different backgrounds were invited to this conference. My previous research focuses on DIK, the problem of representation, and the position of the three Muslim individuals in proposing the term deutscher Islam. Meanwhile, in this paper, their position is examined based on the new emerging phenomenon raised by the arrival of millions of Muslim refugees in Germany. Van Dijk’s Critical Discourse Analysis (Ideological Square) is applied to analyze the texts.

1 INTRODUCTION

After experiencing a massive destruction due to its defeat in World War II, Germany recovered and successfully achieved significant improvement on its economic and national development known as Wirtschaftwunder in the late 1950s–1960s. This led to the shortage of workers and forced Germany to get additional workers from various countries, including Muslim- majority countries, such as Turkey, Morocco, and Tunisia. These workers were called ‘guest workers’/Gastarbeiter since they were invited to work for certain times and had to go back to their home countries after one year if the contract was not extended (Fetzer and Soper, 2005:99). However, these workers chose to stay and bring their families to Germany. In 1961, there were 65,000 Muslim workers in Germany. In 1989, it increased to 1.8 million, and in 2002 the number of Muslims in Germany was 3.4 million (Fetzer and Soper, 2005:102); the majority, around 1.8 million, came from Turkey (website DIK, 2009). Their presence has brought significant changes in the history of Germany. These Muslim migrants as stated by Martin Sökefeld are often seen as doppelfremder/double strangers and brought double problems: cultural and religious (Soekefeled, 2004). Aside from the religious and cultural differences, the readiness of the first generation of Muslim migrants to live together with the German was polemical. The guest workers mostly had poor educational and economic backgrounds. They did not have professional skills and could not speak German properly. Since the presence of Muslim migrants’ families, the discourse of German Islam has developed. The discussion about Islam has become tenser after 9/11. The German government realized this situation, and they held a dialogue between the State and Muslim representatives for the first time. During 2006–2009, the first stage of the DIK/Deutsche Islamkonferenz was in progress as a part of the political policy to create a future together with the Muslims

465 living in Germany. The German government invited some Islamic organizations along with the German Muslims with a migration background. The main theme was Deutsche Muslim, deutscher Islam/German Muslims, German Islam, which brought about a heated discussion both in the conference and in mass media. My previous research titled Gibt es einen deutschen Islam? Intra-migran Discourse in Ger- many questions the concept of German Islam/deutscher Islam proposed by three Muslim individuals who were invited to the conference and appeared in German mass media. These three Muslim individuals with a migration background are Feridun Zaimoglu, Necla Kelek, and Navid Kermani. Feridun Zaimoglu and Necla Kelek are the children of Turkish guest workers. They came along with their parents when they were children; Zaimoglu was one year old, while Kelek was nine year old. Navid Kermani was born in Germany from middle- class and educated Iranian parents. By questioning the concept of German Islam, the study covers the religious, socio-cultural, and political discourses. This is related to the concept of image, representation, and diaspora of Muslim migrants in Germany. In this paper, the foun- dation of my previous research is applied to see the development based on the current social and political situations: the arrival of refugees and asylum seekers from Muslim countries as the Syrian civil war broke in 2011. The website of BAMF (Bundesministerium fuer Migranten und Fluechlinge Germany) published that throughout 2015, the number of asylum seekers was 476,649 people; this shows the highest number since the Syrian war in 2011.1 In December 2015, there were 46,730 people who legally requested asylum, mostly from Syria (54%), Iraq (10.4%), and Afghani- stan (9%). Their arrival in Germany was pushed by the political stance of the German Chan- cellor, Angela Merkel, who said, “Wir schaffen es”/“We can do it”, and opened Germany to the refugees. The tragedies experienced by the refugees also took part in the acceptance of refugees and asylum seekers. One of them was the picture of Alan Kurdi, a 3-year-old child, who was drowned after the ship bringing him from the gulf of Turkey to Greece wrecked. Although there has been a warm acceptance, there has also been refusal. The increase of crimes and the cultural differences as well as different religious values are the concerns of the people refusing the refugees and asylum seekers. This has led to many discussions and com- ments including those from German Muslims having a migration background: Nekla Kelek, Feridun Zaimoglu, and Navid Kermani. Research Question. In this research, the position of Kelek, Zaimoglu, and Kermani in proposing their arguments on refugees coming to Germany was analyzed through their articles in German online media. Corpus and Justification of Corpus. The articles chosen are from online media from 2015 (the peak of the arrival of the refugees and asylum seekers) up to mid−2016. After collect- ing all articles of those three German Muslims in German online media, one article with an intense discussion about the coming of refugees/asylum seekers was chosen. Theoretical Framework. In this research, Van Dijk’s ideological square theory is applied. Van Dijk defines ideology as socially shared cognitive resources and is fundamental for social practices, interaction, intra and intergroup relations (Van Dijk, 2001:731). He further argues that most ideologies are relevant in situations of competition, conflict, domination, and resistance between groups that result in a polarization on the basis of in-group and out- group differentiation, typically between ‘us’ and ‘them’. Moreover, this often features the following overall strategies of what might be called the ideological square: Emphasize Our good things, Emphasize Their bad things, De-emphasize Our bad things, and De-emphasize Their good things (p.734). His point of the polarized differentiation of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ is stressed in this paper as this paper aims to expose the position of the three German Muslims with a migration background when talking about the refugees coming to Germany. I believe the position can be very dynamic as being Germans and (once) being Muslim migrants. Both

1. The number of asylum seekers in Germany based on year: 53.347 (2011), 77.651 (2012), 127.023 (2013), 202.834 (2014).

466 are parts of their identity: their position as German citizens on the one hand and their background as Muslim migrants on the other hand. Van Dijk’s categories of ideological discourse analysis—that he used in his example when analyzing some fragments from a debate in the British House of Commons on asylum seekers—are applied. Some of them are: actor description [meaning], authority [argumentation], categorization [meaning], comparison [meaning], disclaimers [meaning], evidentiality [meaning, argumentation], generalization [meaning, argumentation] (see, Van Dijk, pp. 735–739). To see the position of the authors, the Islamic discourse in their articles was analyzed. To define the Islamic discourse, I frame it as the opinion, argument, and thought regarding Islam used by the speakers to negotiate their position regarding the refugees.

2 CONTEXT

As mentioned above, this paper tries to see the position of three German Muslims with a migration background when proposing their arguments on refugees coming to Germany. This paper is a development from my previous research which has found several main theses as follows: 1. “The Discourse of Intra-Muslim German with a migration background in the context of Deutsche Islamkonferenz (DIK) is the very product of hybridity within Islam in the Ger- man diaspora, showing that the hybridization of understanding Islam in the diaspora is also influenced by the relation within the Muslim community in addition to the relation- ship with German and Western society or other migrant communities”. 2. Stressing on the progress within the Muslim community, the DIK also shows the improvement of the Muslims’ negotiation regarding their position in Germany as there has been a shift from talking about Muslims to talking to Muslims and for Muslims. 3. The Discourse of Intra-Muslim German with a migration background in the political framework of the DIK accentuates the problem of representation. Representations—as in many other contexts–have a tendency to reduce the complexity of reality. As Zaimoglu argues that the representation of Islam is dominated by the picture of liberal Muslims, his counterpart, Kelek (known as a liberal Muslimah), argues that she has no place anywhere. My finding shows a gap between the two, as the liberal Islam is more acceptable for the Western value, it is more embraced in the political discourse as well as in media discourse; however, since the representation of Islam in the grass-roots level seems to be more dominated by the “non-liberal” Islam representation, there is a stronger confrontation between the value of Islam and Western values. From these three points, the second point is the basis of this paper’s development, which is to see the position of ‘us’ and ‘them’ of the authors.

3 ANALYSIS

To begin this research, I collected all articles from Necla Kelek, Navid Kermani, and Feridun Zaimoglu related to the issue of refugees and asylum seekers dated from May 2015 to May 2016. The articles chosen are as follows:

3.1 Necla Kelek One short article titled Fluechtlinge muessen sich aendern, wenn sie in dieser Gesellschaft ankommen wollen (413 words) was published in FOCUS online2 (29th September 2015).

2. http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/gastebeitrag-von-necla-kelec-fluechtlinge-muessen-sich- aendern-wenn-sie-in-dieser-gesellschaft-ankommen-wollen_id_4977927.html.

467 Two long interview articles: Merkel muss darueber nachdenken, was sie uns zumutet (2367 words) was published in Die Welt online3 (12th February 2016), and Muslime brauchen dringend Aufklaerung (4643 words) was published in Deutschlandradio Kultur online4 (13th February 2016).

3.2 Feridun Zaimoglu One short article titled Da Kenne ich die Deutschen aber anders (582 words) was published in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung online5 (7th September 2015).

3.3 Navid Kermani Two long interview articles: first one titled Schaffen wir das? (4996 words) was published in Der Spiegel 23rd January 2016 and can be accessed online6, and Kulturgespraecht, Interview mit Kermani Einbruch der Wirklichkeit, Beobachtungen auf dem Fluechtlingtreck durch Europa (1505 words) was published in SWR7 (28th January 2016). Necla Kelek. Kelek’s short article titled Fluechtlinge muessen sich aendern, wenn sie in dieser Ges- ellschaft ankommen wollen (Refugees Must Be Willing to Change If They Want to Be Accepted in This Society) published in FOCUS online (29th September 2015) was chosen. In this article, Kelek discusses what needs to be done by the refugees if they want to be accepted in the Ger- man society. She begins with a statement of problematic actor description that the coming of these refugees has brought in the potential of ethnical, religious, and cultural conflicts (Z.4).8 Then she provides evidence as she mentions the news of the dispute between the Muslims and Christians in the camp (Z.6).9 Kelek also makes a generalization as she admits that although some of these refugees fled from those plagues; they are culturally still the same (with those). After making the generalization of all Muslims coming to Germany, she compares these Mus- lims with Germans. Islam is fundamentally different from the liberal freedom and social values in German society (Z.16).10 Moreover, there is a disclaimer in her article as Kelek proposes that these coming refugees must learn to respect their and others’ freedom and be willing to change if they want to be accepted in this society (Z.19).11 It is clear that she is very critical towards the arrival of Muslim refugees. She highlights the dispute between the Muslims and Christians at the very beginning and continues to focus on arguing about the negative side of Islam in the rest of her article. Stressing these beliefs as her main argument, she comes up with the solution that the newcomers should change their attitude to be accepted by Germans. Kelek is very critical not only towards the Muslim refugees but also towards the Islamic organizations in Germany. There is a negative other-presentation as she states that “We must

3. http://www.welt.de/politik/article152184546/Merkel-muss-darueber-nachdenken-was-sie-uns- zumutet.html. 4. http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/gastebeitrag-von-necla-kelec-fluechtlinge-muessen-sich- aendern-wenn-sie-in-dieser-gesellschaft-ankommen-wollen_id_4977927.html. 5. http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/feridun-zaimoglu-zu-deutschlands-gastfreundschaft-13788463.html. 6. https://magazin.spiegel.de/SP/2016/4/141826761/index.html. 7. http://www.swr.de/swr2/kultur-info/beobachtungen-auf-dem-fluechtlingstreck/-/id=9597116/ did=16865244/nid=9597116/1uozh0 m/index.html. 8. Z.4 Denn mit ihnen kaemen “etnische, religioese und kulturelle Konflikte”. 9. Z.6 Die Nachrichten ueber Auseinandersetzungen zwischen Muslimen und Christen in den Erstaufnah melagern machen nicht nur den Behoerde und freiwilligen Helfern Sorgen. 10. Z.16 Einige sind sicher auch von diesen Plagen geflohen. Aber alle kommen mit einer kulturellen Praegung hierher, die sich von dem libertaeren Freiheitsbegriff unserer Zivilgesellschaft fundamental unterscheidet. 11. Z.19 Sie muessen lernen, die eigene Freiheit und die der anderen zu respektieren. Sie muessen Gewohn heiten ablegen, sich aendern, wenn sie in dieser Gesellschaft ankommen wollen.

468 ensure that mosque organizations do not spread conservative Islam in the name of human- ity” (Z.26).12 The negative other-presentation is stronger as she argues that these organizations integrate the migrants into their groups but not to the German society (Z.30),13 and she warns the German society not to “let the fox guard the hen house” (Z.21–22).14 In my previous research, her dispute with Zaimoglu over the issue of secular and conservative Mus- lims appears in this article as she stresses the danger of conservative Islamic organizations in Germany. From this article, Kelek’s position is clear. In the beginning, she tries to be neutral by mentioning both the refugees and the aufnehmende Gesellschaft using the word “sie”/they, but then she further uses the word “wir” and “uns” to identify herself with Germans (Z.26). All notes about the arrival of the refugees are connected to their religion and have a negative tone when comparing them to Germans. In this point, the ideological square from Van Dijk which emphasizes their bad things is clearly shown. However, it is interesting to see how Nekla Kelek introduces (or is introduced) at the end of the articles: “German social scientist and writer Necla Kelek, born in Istanbul. She was a member of Deutsche Islamkonferenz”.15 All information highlights Kelek’s identity as a part of Muslim that has a migration background. The strategy to show her identity as a Muslim and migrant can be seen as an attempt to strengthen her argument, which she really knows, because she is part of it. From another perspective, we can read her argument in criticizing Islam as her attempt to propose her definition of Islam that fits into the German society. Moreover, she is a fine example for this kind of Muslim. Feridun Zaimoglu. Zaimoglu’s article titled Da Kenne ich die Deutschen aber anders (But I Know Germans Are Different) published in FAZ online (7th September 2015) was chosen. Different from Kelek’s article that stands as an independent article, Zaimoglus’ article is an answer to the previous article written by Milos Matuschek Warum macht unser Mitge- fuehl schlapp? In his article, Matuschek argues that Germans do not have enough empathy for the refugees and states that German’s Willkommenskultur (Welcoming Culture) existed only in the 2006 World Cup and ended there. Matuschek also argues that the refugees are mostly seen as a threat rather than an opportunity. Zaimoglu who does not agree with Matuschek, wrote this article as an answer. Like Zaimoglu, Matuschek, who came from Poland 33 year ago, is a German with a migration background. Having the same background as a migrant, Zaimoglu gives another side of Germans—that he knows for sure— that German’s Willkommenskultur is not only seen nowadays, but it has been known for a long time (Z.5),16 and indeed the hospitality of Germans in welcoming people from all over the world is das zweite grosse Wunder des deutschen Staates (the second great wonder of Germany) (Z.20).17 Furthermore, in his article, Zaimoglu criticizes what he calls as Eli- tauslaender or ‘the one who always blames’, and he is willing to teach the people who once accepted them (Z.27).18 In his final word, Zaimoglu concludes one very interesting point, “My country is hospita- ble, and in my country the guest will, in the future, be the host (Z.56)”.19 This emphasizes his important point. His voice is very positive and optimistic regarding the wilkommenkultur in

12. Z.26 wir muessen auch strickt darauf achten, dass die Moscheevereine diese Menschen nicht- unter dem Deckmantel der Hilfe- in ihren alten Mustern des konservativen Islam bestaetigen. 13. Z.30 Mit den Islamverbaenden, die sich als Missionare von der Tuerkei, aus Kuwait, Katar und Saudi- Arabien finanzieren lassen, macht man den Bock zum Gaertner. Sie werden wie bisher die Einwanderer in ihre Gemeinden integrieren, aber nicht in dieses Land. 14. macht man den Bock zum Gaertner. 15. Die deutsche Sozialwissenschaftlerin und Publizistin Necla Kelek wurde in Istanbul geboren. Sie war Mitglied der Deutschen Islamkonferenz. 16. Z.5. Die herzliche Aufnahme wird bei uns nicht nur in diesen Tagen buchstabiert. 17. Z.20 Die Aufnahme fremder Menschen aus aller Welt das zweite grosse Wunder des deutschen Staates. 18. Z.27 Elitauslaender, kann nicht anders, als das Volk, das ihn aufnahm, geringzuschaetszen und erziehen zu wollen. 19. Z.26: Und mein Land ist gastfreundlich. Und in meinem Land werden aus Gaesten kuenftige Gastgeber. 469 Germany. He believes that in German the guests are welcomed and live a good life as in the future they will also welcome and host others. Pointing many interesting and positive points towards the refugees coming to Germany, Zaimouglu does not bring up the Islamic discourse in his text but rather general consensus of migrants and refugees. This might be because he responds to the previous article that focuses on the argument of German’s attitude and does not mention the Islamic discourse. Zaimoglu’s position of ‘us’ and ‘them’ in this article cannot be identified clearly as he seems to flow between these poles. On the one hand, he identifies himself as a German using the word “we” when writing about Germans and showing many examples of Germany’s Willkom- menskultur. On the other hand, he states a positive argument towards the arrival of migrants/ refugees by providing a statement explaining that Germans with a migration background make Germany richer.20 Zaimoglu also mentions that in the future migrants will welcome others coming to Germany, and this can be seen as a continuous process since in Germany “They” will always become “We”. Thus, seeing from one perspective, the ideological square from Van Dijk cannot be used properly in this regard, as the position of ‘us’ and ‘them’ here is not clear in relation to Zaimoglu and the Muslim refugees, but the position of ‘us’ and ‘them’ here is between Zaimoglu and Matuschek. For the same reason, the categories of the ideological discourse analysis can only be understood in terms of doing a positive self-presentation when talking about both Germany and the refugees. Considering this argument from another perspective, the ideological square from Van Dijk can be seen in a point of “Emphasize Our good things”. The absence of Islamic discourse in Zaimoglu’s text is in accordance with his profile information at the end of the text. Different from Kelek who states herself as a member of Deut- sche Islamkonferenz, Zaimoglu concludes the information by highlighting only his migration background and promoting his book Siebentuermeviertel: born 1964 in Bulo Turkey, coming to Germany when he was one year old, a child of a guest-worker, raised in Munich, and pub- lishing his roman, Siebentuermeviertel.21 It is interesting to see why Zaimoglu promotes his book in this article. As I searched the book, I came up with an interesting result. The book tells the story about a German man and his son who fled to Turkey in 1939 to avoid NS and got a shelter from a Turk man in Turkey. This is a reversal of what happens now in which Germans become a host to people (mostly Muslims) who flee from their county to avoid a dangerous condition. Navid Kermani. Navid Kermani is very engaged in the refugee’ issues. Since 2014, he has been doing a project with the refugees by joining their journey from Iraq to Europe and Ger- many via the Balkan route to picture their journey and understand everything much better. He wrote a report of his journey and then published it as a book titled Einbruch der Wirkli- chkeit, Beobachtungen auf dem Fluechtlingtreck durch Europa. He was awarded Friedenspries des Deutschen Buchhandels for these reports (Der Spiegel: 2016, interview article Schaffen wir das?). This project also attracts the media to write about him and his book, have him as a speaker, or offer him an interview session. Thus, it can be understood that during this time there was no article written by Kermani himself in German online media. From some cover- age, I found two interview-articles with Kermani in online media. I chose one titled Schaffen wir das? Because this article focuses more on the issue of the refugees, Germany and Europe, while the others are concerned more about his book. At the beginning of the text, there is a very interesting standpoint of Kermani as the interviewer writes: “The writer (Kermani) proposes that if we remain calm and be realistic, our life will be uncomfortable”.22 Furthermore, at the beginning of the interview, Kermani starts with a comparative statement that from now on Germany will be much more interesting

20. Z.50–53 Es wird immer gesagt, dass herkunftsfremde Deutsche auf welchem Betätigungsfeld auch immer, ob in der Gastronomie oder in der Literatur, eine Bereicherung für das Land seien. 21. Der Schriftsteller Feridun Zaimoglu wurde 1964 in Bolu in der Türkei geboren und kam als Einjähriger nach Deutschland.Als Kind von Gastarbeitern wuchser in Muenchen auf.Soeben veröffentlichte er seinen Roman Siebentuermeviertel. 22. Der Schriftsteller schlaegt vor, cool zu bleiben. Und realistisch: Unser Leben wird unbequem.

470 and lovely in comparison to monoculturally dull Germany in the 1950s (pp. 99–104).23 He is realistic that the life could be uncomfortable, and the danger is real (pp.315–320), but he is also optimistic that all of those can be dealt as he quotes Hoelderlin’s words “where there is danger, there will be a hero” (p. 436).24 In this interview, Kermani uses one interesting word unsereiner to define a person like him (a German with a migration background). This unsereiner would lose the most if something wrong happened in Europe, and pushing the unsereiner to leave Europe (pp.673–677).25 The reaction of the interviewer is also interesting, saying Kermani is also a German citizen, just like he is (p.678),26 and that Kermani belongs the Volks all these times, talks in the German Federal Parliament, and knows more about German literature than he does (pp.687–691).27 Kermani responds in this context that the interviewer belongs to the Volksgemeinschaft that is ideal for Mr. Gauland and Mr. Hoecke, who want to build a “pure” Germany (even if the interviewer does not agree with that concept). Kermani argues, at the moment when the Ger- man people would be grouped between those Volks and all the newcomers or Islam, he will be placed as the others (pp.679–686).28 This is because he believes that “if our Gesellschaftmodell collapses, then the ethnic root will matter” (pp.692–697).29 From these points, we can see how Kermani formulates his position in the context of new- coming migrants. He identifies himself as a German, using the word “we” and “our” when discussing about German and Germany (p.265), but shows a great empathy and hope for “them”, showing they can add more colours to Germany and describing their suffering of becoming refugees (p.303). Furthermore, he admits that he is part of the unsereiner, a person who does not belong to the Volksgemeinschaft as he has an Iranian ancestor. In this context, we can see that he is aware of the fact that his position is not fixed. He is not only part of Ger- mans but also part of the unsereiner. The ideological square from Van Dijk here is in the same context as in Zaimoglu’s article, which is to “emphasize Our good things”. However, after reading and discussing Kermani’s text, I find the voice of Kermani different from that of Kelek (that is more pessimistic) and Zaimoglu (positive-optimistic). Kermani sounds clearly realistic-optimistic. He can see what Kelek argues as a potential conflict, and he also sees that these people could make Germany better, similar to Zaimoglu’s argument. Kermani’s optimistic voice is even more solid because at the end of the interview, when the interviewer asked him about Merkel’s slogan “das schaffen wir” and whether they can really do it, Kermani’s answered, “I don’t know, but at least we try”.30

4 CONCLUSION

As the development of my previous research’s findings, I proposed the question of Kelek, Zaimoglu, and Kermani’s position of ‘us’ and ‘them’. To answer this, I searched their focal

23. Z.99–104 Moechte ich, mochten Sie zurueck zu einer Monokultur, gar zu einer homogenenen Volksgemeinschaft? Mir erscheint das Deutschland von heute spanneder, auch liebenswerter als, sagen wir, der Muff der Fuenfzigerjahre. 24. Z.436 Der Schriftsteller schlaegt vor, cool zu bleiben. Und realistisch: Unser Leben wird unbequem. 25. Z.673–677 Kermani: […] Und ausserdem: Unsereiner, also jemand wie ich, hat mehr zu verlieren als Sie. Wo soll ich denn hin, wenn es kein Europa gibt? 26. Z.678 Spiegel: Sie sind genauer deutscher Staatsbuerger wie ich. 27. Z.687–691 Spiegel: is das nicht ein bisschen kokett? Sie gehoeren laengst dazu. Sie reden im Bundestag. Sie wissen mehr ueber deutsche Literatur als ich. Die Bedrohung ist fuer uns dieselbe. 28. Z.679–686 Kermani: Aber Sie gehoeren nun einmal der Volksgemeinschaft an, auf die sich Herr Gauland und herr Hoecke berufen, auch wenn Sie das vielleicht doof finden. In dem Moment, da hier plotzlich jemand aufteilen will-die gehoeren zum Volk und all die Zugezogenen oder etwa der Islam nicht-, gehoere ich zu den anderen. 29. Z.692–697 Kermani: Ja, das stimmt. Dennoch: Wuerde unser Gesellschaftsmodell kippen, spielten eth- nische Zugehoerigkeiten eine Rolle, fiele ich auch wieder heraus. [...] 30. Z.999 SPiegel: Schaffen wir das also? Kermani: Keine Ahnung, aber versuchen wir es doch wenigstens. 471 voice in their articles. I found that Kelek is more pessimistic, Zaimoglu is positive-optimistic, and Kermani is realistic-optimistic. Kelek’s position of ‘us’ and ‘them’ is very clear (We = German, They = Muslim Refugees). Van Dijk’s ideological square can be seen in a point of “Emphasize Their bad things” as she describes immensely how bad “They” are. In Zaimoglu’s article, the position of ‘us’ and ‘them’ is not clear in the relation of Zaimoglu and the Muslim refugees, but the position of ‘us’ and ‘them’ here is between Zaimoglu and the previous writer Matuschek. In this text, we can see the shift between ‘us’ and ‘them’ (We = German and Muslim refugees) as he has drawn a positive self-presentation in talking about both Germany and the refugees. Van Dijk’s the ideological square can be seen in a point of “Emphasize Our good things”. The same is found in Kermani’s article in defining his position (We = German and unsereiner, Muslim refugees). The ideological square from Van Dijk here is in the same context as in Zaimoglu’s article, which is to “Emphasize our good things”. Using van Dijk’s ideological square to analyze the texts in the context of intra-migrant context, I found that this is interesting as the people’s position of ‘us’ and ‘them’ shifts from one side to another.

REFERENCES

Bundesamt fuer Migranten und Fluechtlinge. (2016) Asylzahlen. Nationale Asylzahlen. Retrieved from: http://www.bamf.de/DE/Infothek/Statistiken/Asylzahlen/asylzahlen-node.html;jsessionid=563972 F506C853 ADCE64DBB849E8913B.1_cid368 [accessed on 25th August 2016]. Bundesamt fuer Migranten und Fluechtlinge. Das Bundesamnt im Zahlen. Asyl. (2015) Retrieved from: http://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Publikationen/Broschu-eren/bundesamt-in-zahlen- 2015-asyl.pdf?__blob = publicationFile [Accessed on 25th August 2016]. Deutsche Islamkonferenz. (2009) Geschichte der muslim in Deutschland in muslime in Deutschland. Retrieved from: http://www.deutsche-islam-konferenz.de/DIK/DE/Startseite/startseite-node.html Feridun, Z. (2015) Da Kenne ich die Deutschen aber anders. Retrieved from: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung [Online] http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/feridun-zaimoglu-zu-deutschlands- gastfreundschaft-13788463.html. Joel S.F. & Soper, J. C. (2005) Germany: Multiple Establishment and Public Corporation Status. In Mus- lims and the State in Britain, France, and Germany. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Kelek, K. (2015) Fluechtlinge muessen sich aendern, wenn sie in dieser Gesellschaft ankommen wollen. Retrieved from: FOCUS [Online] http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/gastebeitrag-von-necla- kelec-fluechtlinge-muessen-sich-aendern-wenn-sie-in-dieser-gesellschaft-ankommen-wollen_ id_4977927.html. Kermani, N. (2016) Schaffen wir das? In: Der Spiegel. Retrieved from: https://magazin.spiegel.de/ SP/2016/4/141826761/index.html. Liyanti, L. (2010) Gibt es Einen Deutschen Islam? Intra-Migrant Discourse in Germany. Universitaet Tuebingen (Master’s Thesis). Sökefeld, M. (2004) Das Paradigma Kultureller Differenz: Zur Forschung und Diskussion über Migranten aus der Türkei in Deutschland. In: Sökefeld, M., (Ed.); Jenseits des Paradigmas kultureller Differenz. Bielefeld, Transcript. UNHCR. (2015) Global Trends Forced Displacement in 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.unhcr.org/ sta tistics/unhcrstats/576408cd7/unhcr-global-trends-2015.html. Van Dijk, T.A. (2001) Critical Discourse Analysis. In: Schiffrin, Deborah, Deborah Tannen, and Heidi E. Hamilton (eds). The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Blackwell Publishers, pp. 352–371. Van Dijk, T.A. (2006) Politics, ideology and discourse. In: Ruth Wodak, (Ed.), Elsevier Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Volume on Politics and Language, pp. 728–740.

472