UN Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
with support from the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) /
Typology & geography of European mass migration (text)
*****************************************************************
This document is being made available by the Population Information
Network (POPIN) Gopher of the United Nations Population Division,
Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis,
in collaboration with the European Association for Population
Studies and the IUSSP. For further information please contact
Professor G.C. Blangiardo, Local Organizer, EAPS Conference, Milan,
University of Milan, Istituto di Statistica, V. Visconti di Modrone
21, Milan, Italy.
*******************************************************************
EUROPEAN POPULATION CONFERENCE
CONGRES EUROPEEN DE DEMOGRAPHE
Milano, 4-8 settembre 1995
Plenary III
Where did they all come from?
Typology and geography of European mass migration
in the twentieth century
by Rainer MYnz
Münz, R. (1995): Where did they all come from? Typology and geography of European mass migration in the twentieth century. Working paper. Population Information Network (POPIN) Gopher of the United Nations Population Division, Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis, in collaboration with the European Association for Population Studies and the IUSSP
1. Introduction
Spatial mobility is a crucial element characterising open
societies. Only totalitarian regimes prevent their citizens from
travelling abroad or emigrating, or force them to settle in
certain areas. Democratic societies in contrast uphold the right of
their citizens to choose their place of residence freely. This
includes the right to emigrate. During the Cold War and the
division of Europe this was a central stumbling-block not only
between East and West, but also among the socialist countries
themselves. There the governments rightly feared a mass exodus of
dissatisfied citizens, while many of the people living under
communist rule secretly hoped for such an opportunity to arise. The
western countries for their part made it a point to keep their
borders open, at least for migrants from the East1.
The perspective has changed dramatically since the fall of the
Iron Curtain. The poorer countries in Eastern Europe and south of
the Mediterranean regard the possibility of their citizens to
emigrate to Western Europe as a chance for them to find work and to
help reduce demographic pressure. The remittances of successful
migrants, both in cash and in kind, are equally welcome and can
help stabilising the sending countries. This is true for Poland and
Romania as well as for Turkey and Morocco.
Today however, western societies are frightened by the
possibility of mass immigration from Central and Eastern Europe,
the Balkans, North Africa and Central Asia. The inflow of poor or
persecuted citizens from these and other regions of the world is
seen as a threat. The fact that, at least in the past, the
countries of destination generally profited economically from the
immigrants hardly plays a role in the public debate. Instead,
migration has become one of the main topics of Western European
domestic and security policy. Scenarios of ethnic or cultural
infiltration of West European societies, a dramatic decline of law
and order, increasing competition between domestic populations and
immigrants for housing and jobs, growing demographic and unsolvable
ethnic, religious or political conflicts are discussed.
Some of these fears are justified. Others are obviously unfounded
or have much more to do with the receiving societies than with the
immigrants themselves. The geopolitical context also plays an
important role. Countries like France, Belgium and since the late
1980s also Italy and Spain tend to see demographic pressure from
North Africa and the Middle East as main problem. In Germany,
Austria and Scandinavia the main concern is about immigration from
the East. To the extent to which countries like the Czech Republic,
Hungary and Poland became destinations of immigrants from the CIS
countries and the Balkans they also started to share this concern.
In fact, the end of Europe's political division led to an
unexpected wave of mass migration. Between 1989 and 1993 more than
4 million Europeans left their home countries. Most of them went
from the eastern part of Europe to the West (Fassmann / MYnz,
1994b). Another 5 million lost their homes on the territory of the
former Yugoslavia because of war and ethnic cleansing (UN-Ece,
1995). Since 1945-1948 in Europe there has not been any migration
of comparable size.
These are the main reasons why the euphoria about the end of the
Cold War and the creation of a greater Europe without frontiers
faded away so quickly, at least in the West. Many West Europeans
soon felt the need for sealing off their countries2. And during the
late 1980s and early 1990s both hostility towards foreigners and
ethnocentric attitudes became more common (Wiegand, 1992;
Hofrichter / Klein, 1994; see also figg. 14-16). As a reaction
most European countries and the USA have enacted tighter border
controls, sanctions against airlines carrying would-be migrants,
new procedures and regulations restricting the right of asylum, and
a variety of other anti- immigration measures. In general, since
the late 1980s, migration has become a ®hotŻ issue both at the
foreign and the domestic policy agenda of most industrialised
nations (Teitelbaum / Weiner, 1995; Heinelt, 1994; Baldwin-Edwards
/ Schain, 1995; Velling / Woydt, 1993).
2. Types and stages of mass migration in Europe
In spite of the recent renewal of public interest in migration,
we have to keep the following in mind: Mass migration is neither a
new phenomenon, nor can we say that migration is the historical
exception. At least ever since the Industrial Revolution, spatial
mobility has been a regular phenomenon characterising European
societies. But the balance has changed. Europe as a whole, once a
continent of emigration (Bade, 1992; Hoerder, 1985), has turned
into a world region mainly consisting of countries with a positive
migration balance (Chesnais, 1995; Council of Europe, 1994; Muus,
1993). Sometimes Europe is even called a ®white fortressŻ (Ruffin,
1993; Chesnais, 1995) and a continent ®under siegeŻ (Coleman,
1994c).
Between 1815 and 1930 more than 50 million people left the old
World for North and South America, Australia and New Zealand
(Hoerder, 1985). During the same period large numbers of Polish
and Ukrainian workers migrated to the emerging centres of the coal,
iron and steel industries in France (Lorraine), Germany (the Ruhr,
Upper Silesia) and even England (the Midlands). Large numbers of
ethnic Italians moved to France, Switzerland and Western Austria,
Irishmen to Britain. The growing cities of continental Europe also
attracted large numbers of Slav immigrants from the Czech lands,
from Galicia and from the Prussian parts of Poland. Eastern
European Jews fled from the rising tide of anti-Semitism, pogroms
and economic misery in the Ukraine, Galicia and the Baltics and
established themselves as large ethno-religious minorities in the
booming metropolitan areas of the late 19th and early 20th
centuries: Berlin, Vienna, Paris and cities like Lviv, Warsaw and
Prague.
2.1. The inter-war period
After 1918 the influence of ethno- nationalistic, religious and
political push factors became even more evident as the winners of
World War I had reshaped the political map of Europe. The
establishing of new nation states also created large numbers of new
ethnic minorities. In many places they were not recognised, but
oppressed or even terrorised and forced to leave the country. Some
cases are still part of our collective memory, others can only be
recalled by descendants of the respective groups.
Tab. 1 - Types of mass migration in the
inter-war period
Main types of mass migration migration directly related to the
results of World War I and the change of borders; migration,
displacement and ethnic cleansing directly related to the creation
of new nation states; migration related to the recruitment of
foreign labour; migration of political and ethno-religious refugees
(mainly from the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany).
Source: Jungfer et al., 1993; Kulischer, 1948; MYnz / Fassmann,
1994.
During the inter-war period some 6 million people were
affected by forced resettlement, ethnic cleansing or repatriation
due to a change of borders. Among them were ethnic Greeks
displaced from Istanbul and western Turkey and resettled in
Greece; ethnic Truces and other Muslims from the Balkans who were
forced to leave Romania, Bulgaria and Greece for Turkey; ethnic
Hungarians who left Romania, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. Ethnic
Poles had to leave their homelands that had just become part of
the Soviet Union (Kulischer, 1948; MYnz / Fassmann, 1994). Ethnic
Germans and Jews holding German or Austrian citizenship emigrated
from the Baltic states, Poland and from other newly established
Central and East European countries to Germany and Austria.
Tab. 2 - Types of mass migration since World
War II
Main types of mass migration migration, displacement and
ethnic cleansing directly related to the end of World War II and
its consequences; migration related to the decolonisation of
Africa, South and Southeast Asia and the Caribbean; post-colonial
migration from the former colonies to Western Europe; migration
related to the recruitment of foreign labour, and subsequent
migration of family members; migration of business elites and
wealthy elderly Europeans; migration of victims of war, political
refugees and asylum-seekers.
Source: Ilo / Iom / Unhcr, 1994; Fassmann /
MYnz, 1994a,b; van de Kaa, 1993; Salt, 1989.
During the inter-war period the largest single wave of
emigration was caused by the Soviet revolution. Between 1917 and
1922 some 1.5 million Russians, Ukrainians, and Belorussians left
the country (Kulischer, 1948). Nazi Germany was the other regime
causing mass migration for political reasons. Some 450,000
Jews and other political refugees managed to emigrate from
Germany, Austria, and Bohemia-Moravia occupied by Nazi Germany
in 1938-1939 (Bade, 1992). Others were sent to concentration camps
and murdered in the holocaust.
In Europe the inter-war period was also marked by a considerable
amount of labour migration and return migration. Between 1918 and
the mid-1930s some 1.2 million labour migrants and family
dependants moved within Europe. During this period Poland became
the main country of origin and France the main destination of
migrant workers (Jungfer et al., 1993; MYnz / Fassmann, 1994). In
the early 1940s, Nazi-Germany became the main destination for
forced and voluntary foreign labour. In 1944, the size of this
foreign labour force reached 8 million (Dohse, 1981).
2.2. Mass migration since 1945
In the second half of the 20th century, in Europe at least
several types of mass migration had a major impact (see tab. 2).
2.2.1. Post-war migration, displacement and ethnic cleansing as a
result of World War II, Yalta, and Potsdam
During the collapse of the Nazi regime and in the second half
of the 1940s some 12 million ethnic Germans (estimate for
1945-50) either fled or were expelled from the eastern parts of
the former ®Third ReichŻ and territories formerly occupied by the
German Wehrmacht (Poland, the Baltics, Bohemia-Moravia, Slovenia,
Serbia, Ukraine) or ruled during World War II by allied fascist
and authoritarian regimes (Slovakia, Croatia, and Hungary). Another
2 million lost their lives as a result of this ethnic cleansing
(Benz, 1985; Reichling, 1985).
In some countries, like Poland and Czechoslovakia, the
expulsion of ethnic Germans and former German citizens was
accepted or even encouraged by the Allies. In other places this
expulsion was arranged by local authorities or resulted from
collective measures against German minorities, who were
generally suspected to be Nazi collaborators (e.g. German-speaking
citizens of Yugoslavia and Hungary). Between 1945 and 1949 almost
8 million of these German refugees and expellees came to the
western part of Germany, then occupied by the western Allies, and
some 3.6 million to the eastern part of Germany, controlled by the
Soviet Army (Lemberg / Edding, 1959). Smaller numbers made their
way to Austria (530,000; Stanek, 1985).
During the same period, most of the 10.5 million displaced
persons, Pow's, forced labour and survivors of the concentration
camps living in Germany and Austria in 1945 returned to their
countries of origin (Bade, 192). Especially Pows and displaced
persons from the Soviet Union were forced to return against their
will. In late 1946 only the Western Allies stopped forced
repatriation to what then became the communist part of Europe.
After the foundation of the Federal Republic of Germany
(FRG) and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) in 1949, West
Germany also had to deal with mass migration from East Germany.
Some 3.8 million Germans crossed the line which gradually became
the border between the two German states and gradually part of the
Iron Curtain. The construction of the Berlin Wall in August 1961
closed a last loop hole and largely reduced this flow (Ulrich,
1990; Rudolph, 1994).
Ethnic Germans were not the only group affected by expulsion,
allied arrangements and the new national boundaries drawn in Yalta
and Potsdam. 1.5 million ethnic Poles had to leave their homes in
former eastern Poland, i.e. areas that are now part of Lithuania,
Belorussia and the Ukraine. They were resettled in areas, cities
and houses just ®purgedŻ of their former German inhabitants.
Almost 600.000 ethnic Ukrainians, Belorussians and Lithuanians
had to leave Poland and Czechoslovakia and were resettled in
territories that had become part of Soviet Union in 1945 (Kersten,
1968; Urban, 1993). Under similar auspices more than 100,000
Czechs and Slovaks were resettled in the former Sudetenland and
in Southern Moravia, also purged of their former German-speaking
population (Stola, 1992).
At the same time (1945-50) more than 100,000 ethnic Italians
were forced to leave Istria and Dalmatia. Some 300,000 members of
the Hungarian minorities in Southern Slovakia, Transylvania
(Romania) and the Voyvodina (Serbia) were transferred to Hungary
or ®exchangedŻ by order of their respective governments (Kosinski,
1982; Dsvenyi / Vukovich, 1994). This list of enforced ethnic
cleansing in central and south-eastern Europe could easily be
prolonged.
2.2.2. Migration and de-colonisation
The second type of post-war mass migration was and still is
related to the colonial history of the major West European nations.
During the process of de-colonisation ®whiteŻ colonists and
settlers, troops and civil servants moved back to their home
countries in large numbers. In some cases this process created a
steady flow of return migrants, in other cases the former colonial
powers were confronted with big waves of immigrants. E.g., in
1962-3, as a result of the źvian peace treaty with the FLN, more
than 1 million people left Algeria for mainland France. Return
migration from other former French colonies was of comparable size
(Tribalat et al., 1991). Since the early 1950s, sizeable numbers
of people migrated from Indonesia to the Netherlands. In the
1970s, immigration from Surinam and the Dutch Antilles followed
(Entzinger / Stijnen, 1991). In the mid 1970s Portugal was also
confronted with a sudden surge of returnees and immigrants from its
former African colonies. Since the 1950, several hundreds of
thousands of people remigrated from overseas territories back to
Belgium, Italy, and Britain. In the late 1990s, a last flow of this
type will take place when Hong Kong (1997) and Macao (1999) will
become part of China.
2.2.3. Post-colonial migration
The third type of post-war mass migration is closely linked to
the second one. Following the remigrating colonial masters,
®nativeŻ migrants from South and Southeast Asia, Africa and the
Caribbean moved first to Britain, France and the Benelux
countries, later also to Italy, Portugal and Spain. The
deterioration of living conditions in several Third World
countries, ethnic and political conflicts in the newly founded
states of Africa, Asia and the Caribbean, but also the growing
demand for cheap labour in Europe led to considerable migratory
flows. (Coleman / Salt, 1992; Entzinger / Stijnen, 1990; Tribalat
et al., 1991).
The colonial legacy - a common language shared by the citizens
of former colonies and the former colonial power, cultural
orientation towards London, Paris or Lisbon, established traffic
channels - made it easier for people from Pakistan, India, Bangla
Desh, and from the anglophone countries of the Caribbean to come
to Britain, for Arabs from Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and for black
people from West Africa to come to France, for Surinamis and
Indonesian Molukkers to come to the Netherlands. At an early
stage this kind of migration was amplified by several European
countries granting citizenship to the residents of their
former overseas territories or facilitating their
immigration by granting them special legal status as quasi-
nationals or privileged aliens (Cohen, 1994; Coleman, 1994a;
Entzinger, 1994).
This type of migration has transformed the metropolitan areas
of western Europe into multicultural ®nutshellsŻ. It has led to the
establishment of ethnic networks and so- called ®visible'
minorities. Since the 1970s, these networks and minorities have
created chain migration, explaining continuous streams of
immigration (Zlotnik, 1992). This type of migration persists
despite high rates of unemployment and anti- immigration policies
in most West European countries (Coleman, 1994b).
But the minorities from Third World countries do not only
remind us of Europe's colonial past. Their presence has also re-
imported racist and ethnic tensions and led in many places to the
re-emergence of populist right-wing movements, ethno-centric
rhetoric in everyday life, and to new forms of xenophobia, inter-