Courage and clarity are required when dealing with the problem of the Roma and immigration in general. It is remarkable how many people lack this courage even, on occasions, at the European Parliament or among human rights activists. Clarity means recognising that the problem of the Roma will not be resolved through infringement procedures. Why? Because the Commission's legal approaches can only target possible infringements to rules on the freedom of movement of Community citizens, which is only part of the problem and does not respond to the fundamental question: the integration of the Roma into European society whether they are Community citizens or not.
Tough conditions. The Commission was right to criticise France for a mistake it made (a text stipulated that the Roma were the priority objective of certain measures - the error was subsequently corrected in Paris) and to call for clarification and explanations. It was its duty to intervene and it managed to obtain, despite a few gut reactions and unfortunate turns of phrase, recognition of its role as guardian of the treaties - and France made a formal commitment to respecting Community provisions. Respect for the rules, however, is a long way from providing an adequate response to the scale and import of the problem. Certain thunderous affirmations are mistaken and demagogic. They allow for attacks to be made on political adversaries but do not benefit the cause of the Roma or that of other immigrants. This is for two reasons. The first has already been evoked and is that, by definition, the Community rules in question only affect EU citizens whereas a considerable number of the Roma are not from the Union. The second reason is that for Community citizens, the right to remain beyond three months is legally subordinated to tough conditions: having a job, an address and respecting compulsory schooling for children, etc.
The Community directive on the free movement of persons includes mandatory conditions in the event of expelling Community citizens: written procedure, case-by-case examination, a month's warning and the right of appeal. But as soon as a member state is in compliance with the transposition of this directive into its national law, it has the right to expel, three months after Community citizens arrive but who do not have a job, address or fail to respect compulsory schooling for children, etc. It is easy to understand that even if the Commission extends procedures to all five member states that have not completed transposition of the Community directive into their national legislation, it will not be these procedures that will seriously help the effective integration of the Roma into European society. Certain virulent political positions sometimes create the impression that the chief concern of the person pushing this position is not to resolve the problem of the Roma but to defeat their political opponents. A more correct application of the directive in question will not, in fact, help towards greater integration.
A few results but no solution. The initiatives by the Commission are certainly appropriate and will obtain certain results: expulsions will be better organised and will respect the rules. But these expulsions could persist. A form of excommunication is certainly not the answer. The answer can be found in social inclusion and integration, thus in the mutual respect for different traditions and mentalities. MEPs who, because of where they come from or for other reasons, are closer to the Roma; those who know their traditions and mentality better, highlight what initiatives should be launched and the financial support that Europe can and must give to these initiatives. I get the impression that within the EP a majority of goodwill may come together to press for far-reaching European programmes facilitating integration.
Effort must be mutual. Why do people who have assimilated immigrants from completely different origins and with completely different faiths refuse to do the same thing for the Roma? Things often start off with difficulty: certain distrust and misgivings are, to begin with, even understandable. Nonetheless, in general, two or three generations, sometimes fewer, are enough to attain a level of assimilation compatible with the desire to live together in mutual respect. On one condition - that effort is made on both sides. Religious freedom and respect for tradition (which often facilitate an enrichment that goes in both directions) are of course indispensable, but so is respect for the laws of the host country, in accordance with the balance between rights and responsibilities. If this is not forthcoming, the years will go by and the EU will still be stuck in endless debates about the integration of the Roma. No additional funding, programmes or projects, no matter how well devised, will be able to prevent the subsequent misunderstanding and clashes.
(F.R./transl.fl)