July has left France and Germany appalled in front of an expected surge of violence. Nice, Rouen, Ansbach, and Wuerzburg have re-sparkled the debate over immigration. All the attacks, claimed by the Islamic State (IS), seemed to indicate that the war is on Europe’s doorsteps, if not yet inside its border.

But the situation is more complex than that. Blaming immigration for the events of July is an oversimplification that does not take into account the social context in which these immigrants have plotted and executed their actions.

It ignores the background stories behind those unspeakable acts. Stories of unemployment or under-employment, of barely treated psychological problems, and of social exclusion.

While none of these issues justify their attacks, linking the recent events only to extremism confines the whole debate to only a portion of the overall picture.

Even more importantly, it channels the narrative toward the immigration issue, in this way forgetting the integration component of the discussion.

France and Germany, two countries considered to have achieved, in different ways, a significant level of integration, should be the ones triggering a new discussion on what Europe can and should do to improve the participation of immigrants in its society.

But French and German Governments seem so far to have decided to stubbornly ignore that.

And neglecting this review this topic has 2 dangerous consequences. One on side, to marginalize from the beginning the newly arrived immigrants, with a potential for dramatic consequences, as the July events have shown. On the other, to shift the second and third generations toward a more radical position.

While Europe is talking about its borders, there are many second and third generation immigrants who cannot find their place in the EU society and might linger on the verge of religious fanatism.

There are currently between 15 and 20 million Muslims living in Europe and they will be as many as 40 million by 2025. Only a profound revision of the current monolithic integration practices can avoid a definitive cultural, social and religious clash in less than a decade.

The mono-identity trap.

French integration policies rely on 2 pillars: assimilation and secularism. Assimilation requires for all immigrants to acquire the French social values completely. As a consequence, comes the strong secularity of the society, a secularity that does not cater to the needs of the most religious part of the population which thus tends to withdraw inside its original communities, instead of reaching outside toward the French cultural environment.

Germany has always been looked up as a model of integration in Europe, thanks to its more flexible approach. However, it also pushes immigrants toward a mono-identity that can be unrealistic to achieve. Germany links integration with citizenship. Because of that, it forces immigrants to renounce their original nationality to become German. For non-EU refugees, there is no possibility to maintain a double passport. While this might seem little more than an administrative issue, it carries with it the idea that, to become citizens, the ties with the countries of origin must be severed.

Both these policies leave the second and third generations facing a conundrum.

EU born immigrants do not want to limit their existence to their community of origin. Living only among fellow immigrants was sufficient for the first generation, which also found a security net in their compatriots. But it is not enough for their children, born and raised as European. They seek to merge into the bigger national societies but to do so they are often asked to waive their original values, in the name of the national identity.

This is a request no one coming from a multicultural background can fully comply with. Identities are by definition a complex mix of several cultural layers. Demanding someone to stick with one and only one identity is an oversimplification that can only impoverish the culture of both the individual and the society.

Still, second and third generations are expected to mold their beliefs based on the EU culture. It is a culture they have lived in and by, but it is only one part of the set of values they carry with them. Not fully European nor real immigrants, they miss the safety that stems from having a defined cultural self.

It is in the cracks of this dissociation that extremists find a fertile terrain for recruitment.

Alienation and dissociation.

Second and third generation immigrants who have become disenchanted and alienated by and from the society, are more prone to follow those who promise to provide them with what they lack the most: identity.

Neglected and often looked at with suspicion in the countries they lived their whole life in, they try to go back to their roots.

And in doing so, they might indeed become more radicalized than their parents and grandparents. Because, differently from the first generation, they expected their countries to consider them as full citizens. When immigrants first arrive in their new country, they have already taken into account that they will be seen as foreigners. When the second and third generation is still kept on the outskirt of the national social integration, it is perceived instead as discrimination, as an unjust punishment due solely to their different origins.

And thus they look back those origins more profoundly than ever and the results might turn ugly. Because where their countries fail in granting them a sense of belonging, extremists might succeed. Adding to the equation that second generations (and to a lesser extent thirds) are frequently still relegated to lower paid jobs, with an inferior education than people with full local origins, the final outcome is a social tinderbox ready to explode.

 

Talking about immigration is easier and more convenient, especially in times of elections (France and Germany will both vote in 2017) than reflecting on what needs to be adjusted in the integration area.

But on the long term, only a more flexible, inclusive and respectful of differences integration model will prevent the situation to degenerate into a full-fledged social and cultural conflict on the European soil.