ECPR - JOINT SESSION OF WORKSHOPS, 22-27 March 2002, Turin Workshop 14: Political Participation of immigrants and their

Descendants in post-war Western Europe

REPRESENTING THE OTHER:

Undocumented migrants and their supporters, mobilising in France 1996/97
(First draft, not yet for quotation)

Christine LUDL (FU-Berlin/IEP Paris) Karl-Kunger-Str. 9 D-12435 Berlin fon: +49 (0)30-53.69.84.49 mail: chludel@zedat.fu-berlin.de

1. Introduction: Presentation of the sans-papiers movement

This paper deals with the sans-papiers movement, a movement of undocumented migrants in France, which named themselves without papers and gained wide public attention in 1996/97. The movement started off in March 1996 when 300 mostly African migrants occupied a church in the 11th district of Paris. Some of them started a hunger strike; three days later the police evacuated them. Within these first few days, the main methods of action and the characteristics of the future movement were already laid out: a group of undocumented migrants, sticking together, occupying mainly churches that appeared again at another place almost immediately after the evacuation; a group that uses hunger strike as a method of action and asked for papers, that is to say the regulation of their administrative status. As soon as the information of the occupation of St. Ambroise circulated, French organisations, which traditionally had supported the collective action of undocumented migrants, appeared on the scene. These supporters were mainly nongovernmental organisations working in the field of immigration, churches, trade unions and small, extreme left wing parties. The movement was widely covered by the media and encountered large support and sympathy by the French population. It first gained enormous public attention in August 1996 when the police evacuated the church St. Bernard, which they had been occupying for some weeks. The extreme violence of the police and the broad media coverage of the evacuation together with a broad movement of solidarity that had emerged during the weeks preceding the evacuation, lead to a demonstration of more than 11000 people in the centre of Paris. The second breakthrough of the movement was situated in the context of the demonstrations against the Debr Law in February 1997, a project of reinforcing existing immigration laws. This project encountered widespread resistance within the French population, and lead to mass demonstrations of more than 100 000 people in Paris that finally forced the government to abandon the project. The parliament elections in June 1997 that brought to power a coalition of the socialist party, the green party and the communist party, marked a turning point: the movement is loosing power and started to disappear. It left some leftovers behind which still remain today. In this paper, I will present some results of the research that I have done on the movement, including 4-months of fieldwork in Paris and its surrounding suburbs. I will argue that this case study provides an example for a theoretical shift in paradigm explaining the mobilisation of groups drawing on weak resources. The latter has mostly been analysed in

terms of resource mobilisation approaches, stressing the necessity of economic or political resources like people, know-how, money etc. In the case of the mobilisation of undocumented migrants, people and organisations supporting them are generally considered as their main resource. I will argue that the French non-governmental organisations, churches, trade unions, and parties supporting the sans-papiers do represent still an important resource. Nevertheless, in this example, one can observe that the availability of resources has ceased to be the sole and exclusive explanation of mobilisation. To be more precise, on the one hand one can observe a diversification of paradigms explaining mobilisation. Specifically concepts of framing and collective identity are gaining

importance. On the other hand, the concept of collective identity as I understand it here and which differs from traditional approaches of identity in movement theory, gains special importance as it provides aspects cross-cutting other approaches such as resource mobilisation or framing. My argument will develop in three steps: First, I will discuss approaches of collective identity in social movement theory and explain the concept of identity I am drawing on in this paper. Second, by comparing the actual movement to those that preceded it, I will explain how the sans-papiers could mobilise a considerable amount of French supporters. The movement even gained a new category of supporters, mainly ordinary French people who had had no experience in political action and movements before. This means also to explore the often conflictual relation between the sans-papiers and French supporting organisations. I will argue that a certain autonomy of the sans-papiers constituted the condition for the broad support because it allowed them to develop their own argumentation. These arguments directly and successfully addressed the French society. Theoretically speaking, this means a shift from resource mobilisation to concepts of framing. In addition to that, the effects of this frame complement my conception of collective identity and its crosscutting character: The supporters representations of who the sans-papiers were and what they wanted have to be seen in permanent interaction with the sans-papiers self-representation, that also influenced the self-positioning of the French side. This provides useful insights into the success of the movement during its first phase. Third, I will concentrate on the motivations for action and the perception of political activities by the immigrants themselves. Their representation of political action within the movement is highly influenced by their experiences and relations to their respective home

countries. Evidence will be given to the fact that these perceptions differ considerably from those of the French supporters. This then will strengthen my argument that it is above all the game of intertwined representations on both sides which has mobilising effects - whether these representations correspond to reality or not. I will mainly draw on the example of West-African immigrants who launched the movement. In addition to that, the example of a group of north African women will provide a different view on existing relations to their home countries, though having the same effect: as in the case of the Africans, these relations influence considerably their motivation for participation in the movement. I will limit the analysis to the first phase of the movement from March 1996 to spring 1997. By doing so, I wont explain the reasons of the movements decline, but rather the reasons for a relatively strong mobilisation in its first phase.

2. Theoretical perspectives: The choice(s) of identity1

Theories of resource mobilisation generally focus on social movements as political, rational and strategic activities of movement organisations, their internal organisation, structure and function as well as their resources such as money, time, number of supporters and people involved etc. (Hellmann 1998, 13). As a part of rational choice theories, resource mobilisation approaches have the underlying assumption of decision-making-processes that follow a rationale of costs and benefits (Hellmann 1997, 32; Simant 1998, 48). This strictly economic (McCarthy/Zald 1973, 1977) or more political (Obershall 1973) approach has been dominating explanations of the mobilisation of groups with weak resources like homeless people or migrants. For example, Johanna Simant, in her analysis of undocumented migrants mobilising in France between the early 70ies and 1992, draws on the model of Obershall, focussing on the one hand on selective incentives, and, on the other hand, on the role of political entrepreneurs, stating that precisely the groups dont mobilise but are mobilised and sometimes even entirely constituted by political

entrepreneurs, speaking on behalf of a group of which they dont share a ll characteristics (Simant 1998, 53).2 In this presentation I will show that representations and imaginaries as an integral part of identities of actors can turn out to be much more powerful than selective incentives or the

Title with reference to Martin 1995.

role of political entrepreneurs. However, before doing so, I will discuss approaches of collective identity in social movement theories, arguing that, in general, they don't sufficiently take the relations between culture and politics, as well as power relations into account (Poletta 1997, 432-438; Martin 1989, 805). More specifically, they n eglect the role of representations and imaginaries within the concept of identity. Alternatively, I will suggest a concept of identity based on representations and imaginaries, constructed by an interactive process of narration. Generally speaking, approaches of collective identity consider identity as a resource for mobilisation, able to constitute collective actors by discursive and symbolic means (e. g. myths of foundation, symbols, rituals). One can distinguish two different traditions of analysis within the collective identity approach (Roth 1998, 53). One mainly draws on the role of culture, that is to say material culture, in constituting collective identities (and by consequence in analysis (Fillieule 1993, 42)). The other tradition focuses on sociopsychological aspects and the emotional ties one invests in collective action (Roth 1998, 53). Apart from these general considerations, Manuel Castells, Alain Tourraine and Alberto Melucci dealt more in detail with the aspect of collective identity. While Manuel Castells and Alain Touraine only provide relatively rudimentary definitions of identity3, Alberto Melucci suggests a more elaborated, though not sufficient concept of collective identity. Hence I will concentrate on his approach. In general, Melucci considers culture and the symbolic dimension as crucial for the understanding of identity. For him, collective identity is implied in most theories of collective action, though not sufficiently taken into account. He defines collective identity as a system of relations and representations (Melucci 1996, 76), as an interactive and shared definition produced by several interacting individuals (or groups at a more complex level) and concerned with the orientation of action in the field of opportunities and constraints in which the action takes place (Melucci 1995, 44 and 1996, 70f). He distinguishes three dimensions of collective action: 1) A process of cognitive definition of ends, means and the field of action, 2) A network of active relations and 3) emotional ties

Simant completes her analysis by including the role of: formation of actors preferences, their political and social trajectories, the space of mobilisation, as well as repertoires of action.
3

Castells 1997, 6. For a critique of the concept of identity used by Touraine, see Melucci 1996, 67; Roth 1998, 59.

(Melucci 1996, 70f). The permanent interaction of these three levels leads to the process of collective identity construction. Although this definition confers an important role to relations and representations, it turns out to be much less specific on functions and characteristics of representations and relations. To be more precise, one can develop two main critiques: First, the representations in question exclusively concern the ends, means and the field of action. Consequently, they are located within the context of the movement, neglecting the representations emerging from a much broader social, political and cultural context. These more general representations may seem to be in no direct relation with collective action but turn out to be powerful in shaping representations of action and decision-making within a movement. This critique joins the point of view of Hellmann who stated that approaches of collective identity imply a strong concentration of social movements on themselves (Hellmann 1998, 20). Hence, relations of movements with their environment remain outside the analysis and, on the contrary, are taken into account by other approaches like framing theories. This leads to a second critical remark. Not only the general relations of movements to their environment and therefore their position within societal power structures are left unclear but also the character of the relations between the self and the other within the process of identity construction. Alternatively, I suggest a definition of identity that focuses on the interactive construction of representations and imaginaries through a process of narration. It includes every representation that may be relevant for mobilisation and, through the aspect of narration, fills the gap of the characteristics of relations between the self and the other. This predominant role of narration has been stressed by Stuart Hall who considers as most important ... not who we are or where we come from, so much as what we might become, how we have been represented and how that bears on how we might represent ourselves. Identities are therefore constituted within, not outside representation ... They arise from the narrativization of the self, but the necessarily fictional nature of this process in no way undermines its discursive, material or political affectivity, even if the belongingness, the suturing into the story through which identities arise is, partly, in the imaginary (as well as in the symbolic) and therefore, always, partly constructed in fantasy, or at least within a fantasmatic field (Hall 1996, 5). Denis-Constant Martin, referring to Paul Ricoeur provides more details on these processes of narration: "For him [Ricoeur], the comprehension of oneself as an Other, with the others,

is always an interpretation, which finds in the narrative one of its most complete media of expression. The narrative borrows from history as well as from fiction and treats the person as a character in a plot. The person as a character is not separable from its life experiences, but the plot allows for a re-organization of the events that provide the ground for the experiences of the person/character ... One proposes ones identity in the form of a narrative in which one can re-arrange, reinterpret the events of ones life in order to take care both of permanence and change, in order to satisfy the wish to make events concordant in spite of the inevitable discordances likely to shake the basis of identity. Narrative identity, being at the same time fictitious and real, leaves room for variations on the past - a plot can always be revised - and also for initiatives in the future. It is an open-ended identity which gives meaning to ones practice, which makes any one act meaningful. But, as a narrative being an utterance it is meant for oneself as well as for the Other. It therefore implies the utterance by others of their own narratives. In social terms, the interactions of practices are integrated in the interactions of narratives, provoking a multiplicity of interactions and an interweaving of narratives (Martin 1995, 7f.) In the same line of argument, still referring to Ricoeur, Martin considers representations as being the crucial element that allow the shift from individual to collective identities, from psychological to social structures (Martin 1994, 21). In fact, ... in an individual narrative there is always a part that derives from the interiorization - thus the re-interpretation - of collective schemes ... As much as an individual is always attached to groups, a narrative always tells the story of one or several groups, and group identity can be analysed as a narrative, just as individual identity (Martin 1995, 8). In addition to that, a clear distinction between representations and imaginaries may be useful. These two notions can be defined by what Clifford Geertz calls models of and models for: On the one hand, representations, or the worldview, consist of the collection of notions a people have about how reality really is. On the other hand, he defines imaginaries as an ethos, namely an ideal of reality or the general lifestyle, how people like to do things (Geertz 1973, 85ff). On the basis of this brief theoretical discussion, I will show that precisely the intertwining representations and imaginaries of actors allowed mobilisation in the case of the sanspapiers movement. I will focus both on representations prior to the movement as well as those that emerged during the months of collective action. As far as the French supporters

are concerned, I will deal with their representation of French society as it is, with their imaginaries of how it should be and the role the sans-papiers are supposed to play in this process. As for the migrants, both representations and imaginaries, drawing on their cultural background, of how to position themselves between France and their respective home countries via their project of migration as well as the consequences for participation in and representation of collective action will be considered.

mot aux hommes sans papiers : je pense vous, qui signifiez tant pour nous, nous les de-papiers-nantis sans plus de foi, citoyens dgots d'un beau pays dgoutant je passerais vous voir, si je n'avais peur de vous fatiguer plus encore? il fait moche nous pourrions faire un feu que vos amis prparent le petit bois, nous apporterons le papier: nos cartes d'une identit qui nous psent depuis si longtemps, et plus encore chaque jour que vous jeunez Amitis Leos Carax 4

3. The French supporters side: The French society in question

To understand the main issues of the movement in 1996/97, a short glance at the mobilisation of undocumented migrants from the early 70ies to the early 90ies is necessary. Johanna Simant has shown that all categories of traditional supporters are mobilised by single persons, occupying a marginal position within their association or organisation. Because they are not at their place, these activists engage in the defence of those who have no place at all, the sans-papiers (Simant 1998, 435). Consequently, she suggests that the case of the sans-papiers is a heretic case, characterised by supporters with minor positions. At the same time, because of its heretic character, the collective action of undocumented migrants attracts those people. In addition to that, in the 70ies and 80ies, a cultural and political avant-garde of artists and intellectuals discovered parallels between the sanspapiers marginal position and their work (e. g. Michel Foucault working on prison, asylums etc.) or their own position in society, which they also considered as marginal (as in the case of many artists). The heretic character of defending undocumented migrants has to bee seen in the context of immigration discourses in France since the early 70ies. In 1973, the right wing Front National launched the slogan of wild immigration, thus conferring a particularly radical character to the defence of undocumented migrants. In this context, mobilising for the sanspapiers, meant to pass traditional left wing parties and organisations (Socialist Party, Communist Party, trade unions) on the left, and offered a possibility of taking even more

Leos Carax, mail to the sans-papiers http://www.bok.net/pajol/messages.html, 13.01.2000.

of

St.

Bernard,

August

13,

1996,

radical positions. Requesting equal rights between French citizens and immigrants, or e ven illegals, meant to attack the State in its very basis, that is to say in its monopoly of defining and granting the national status (Simant 1998, 159, 191). During the 80ies and the 90ies, the whole range of political parties had to deal with the Front National and its positions on immigration, which lead to a national consensus on immigration, forwarding the idea of regulating and controlling migration flows. At the same time, the public representation of undocumented migrants as a danger to the public order established itself in large parts of the society. These developments considerably reduced the possibilities of mobilisation for undocumented migrants (Simant 1998, 203), and were even reinforced by increasing unemployment, the treaty of Shengen and a constant harmonisation of immigration politics within the European Union. Therefore, the hunger strikes of undocumented migrants in 1991/92 received only marginal support and very little public attention. Considering this context, the relatively wide mobilisation as well as the public attention and sympathy the sans-papiers movement reached in 1996/97 may seem astonishing. The question is wy, going beyond the explanation of the extremely emotionally charged evacuation of St. Bernard and the mobilisation within a broader context against the Debr laws, the sans-papiers movement gained a relatively wide public consensus in 1996/97. The core element of the movements success consists in the successful construction of a positive public self-representation as without papers, replacing the image of illegals. This factor itself is in close relation to the relative autonomy from their supporters. In fact, until 1992 it is true that the French supporters played a dominant and paternalistic role in defining a movements orientations and often even initiated the collective action of migrants. By contrast, the movement of 1996/97 started without any contact to immigrants organisation or other supporters. On the contrary, it started against them: after waiting for months for SOS Rascisme to deal with their dossiers, at about 300 west-African migrants decided to pass to action themselves and occupied the church St. Ambroise.5 They stressed their autonomy right from the start, continued their action notwithstanding the advise of immigrants organisations and insisted on defining themselves the movements orientations. For this, they institutionalised what they called the meeting of the families where major decisions were taken and supporters excluded. The immigrants autonomy was object to

10

many discussions with their supporters; nevertheless, they achieved a kind of vacuum at the beginning of the movement, which allowed them to develop their own arguments. Madjigune Ciss, one of the leaders of the movement stressed, that the sans-papiers, on the basis of these arguments, explicitly intended the movement as a campaign to convince the media and the public. This media campaign had a twofold objective: first to abolish the representation as solely Africans by stressing the diversity of their origins on the one hand, and their similarities with French citizens on the other (being students, having children, friends, working, paying taxes etc.). This also meant to present, in a very emotional manner, mainly women and children in the media, contradicting the clich of the illegal male immigrant who works on the side.6 In fact, this strategy of underlining their diversity and their frenchness can be explained by the republican context in France, which is very hostile to any mobilisation or claim making on an ethnic basis (Blatt 1997, 46ff). Second, as mentioned above, they succeeded in erasing the image of illegals, linked to illegal activities on their profit that they hide in the dark, thus justifying their persecution by law. In fact, the term of illegals implies a clear culpability. By creating the expression without papers, the sans-papiers inversed the direction of this culpability. By forging their image as without papers they stated that they once had possessed papers, that it was their right to have papers and that it was the French state that had removed them. Thus, the French state was guilty of not according them their papers. At the same time, they voluntarily left the dark of the illegals behind them and presented themselves and their stories to the French public. By this, within a few weeks, the movement had turned the heretic cause of the sans-papiers to an issue that encountered a wide public consensus. To defend the sans-papiers was no more radical or the expression of an extreme left wing political position. By consequence, a much more broader mobilisation that was no longer restricted to extreme left wing parties, NGO, churches or trade unions became possible. Between March and July 1996 regular demonstrations took place in Paris, gathering between several hundred and 1000 people (Le Monde, Mai 24, 1996, 12 and August 14, 1996, 6). During the days that preceded the evacuation of St. Bernard the number of persons demonstrating increases constantly: On

5 6

This is one part of how the movement started; I will come back to a second aspect later. See the manifest of the sans-papiers: http://www.bok.net/pajol/film.html#texte, 15.02.1999.

11

June, 15 a demonstration in Paris gathers 6000 people, on August, 21 between 8000 and 15000 (Le Monde, June 18, 1996, 13 for the lower and Diop 1997, 166 for the higher number). People living in the neighbourhood of St. Bernard and other supporters camp around the church and a survey in August 1996 states that 56% of the French approved the regularisation of the sans-papiers.7 From a theoretical point of view, one can consider that a group of political entrepreneurs, namely Madjigune Ciss and Ababacar Diop, the two Senegalese leaders of the movement, constructed a strategic master frame (Snow 1986; Snow/Benford 1988; Kliment 1988): They successfully staged the theme of protest by clearly pointing out the problem, offering interpretations concerning their origins, naming responsibilities, and opening up to solutions. However, as Francesca Poletta pointed out, if one includes culturally shaped representations of actors, one comes to the limits of framing theories. What the sans-papiers consider as strategic or not is highly influenced by their representations [and] offers important insights into the cultural shaping of instrumental decision making. It suggests that broad semiotic templates mold movements organizations vocabularies of protest, their understandings of what is feasible, strategic, and legitimate. (Polletta 1997, 440ff). I will concentrate on the sans-papiers representations in the next section of thes paper. Yet, one can use this argument also to explain why precisely this frame had been strategic, what dynamics the public self-representation of the sans-papiers launched on the French side, developing their proper representations in close connection to their societal and cultural background. More specifically, this will reveal another important particularity of the movement of 96/97: Apart from the traditional supporters mobilising for the same reasons as usual, and apart from a general consensus on the case of the sans-papiers, a new category of supporters appeared. The interviews that I did with different categories of French supporters revealed that there can be found a considerable number of people, mostly of intellectual background and with slight affinities to the political left, who never had any direct connection to political parties or associations or social movements before. The movement of the sans-papiers thus represented their first experience of active political participation and mobilisation.

Wir mssen den Kampf wieder von vorne beginnen. Interview mit Madjigune Ciss, Sprecherin der Coordination nationale des sans-papiers in Frankreich. December 1997,

12

To explain more in detail the inner French developments that dialogued with the sanspapiers movement I will mention three aspects and give a brief explanation of each of them: First, the movement of the sans-papiers has to be seen in a wider context of the withouts. During the 90ies, the economic crisis and the increasing unemployment rate lead to a growing number of people who shared the prefix without, for instance without a job, without housing, without money etc. As a leader of a trade union pointed out, the ordinary French citizen suddenly became concerned, the sans-papiers only represented one group among others, and a sudden similarity appeared between them and the French (Ein neues Verhltnis zwischen Nord und Sd 1996). Second, during the 80ies and early 90ies, the representation of increasing xenophobia gained important parts of French society, especially slightly left orientated but little politicised intellectuals. This representation of a society drifting towards a generalisation of xenophobia and racism emerged mainly from the National Front winning several local elections in the South of France as well as from the reinforcement of immigration legislation. In this context, the movement of the sans-papiers served as a sort of catalyst for these little politicised people who started now to engage in political action. The following quotation from an interview clearly highlights this development. The narrative starts with the beginning of the movement by which the person felt directly concerned because he had already been sensible to questions of immigration, repression of foreigners and xenophobe legislation in France. At the beginning, as he was no member of an organisation, he followed the movement with sympathy but with a certain distance, namely by participating in meetings or demonstrations organised by the sans-papiers. The story continues as follows:
And then the movement really gained importance ... and the more its importance was growing, the more I wanted to get involved more directly ... and I was searching for an idea what I could contribute to the movement as a citizen directly concerned by questions of immigration etc. ... people like me, and I think we were many in this case, I remember, we were extremely distressed/overwhelmed by the things that happened and by the importance they gained. So, for me, the necessity to get directly involved in the movement became really something inevitable, I could not do in another way; I really had to participate... I had had no practice of militantism. Nothing. I hadnt been member of any party, I hadnt been member of any association, therefore I had followed things with a certain distance by going to important demonstrations ... and then, I remember, I started collecting press articles on the situation of foreigners, evolutions in legislation. For

http://www.contrast.org/borders/kein/hintergrund/cisse.html, 18.02.1999.

13

example, I was interested in the Pasqua laws because I was directly concerned, I had to fill in fiches dhbergement [registration forms for visitors from abroad, C. L.] and I realised that this was becoming completely absurd ... So, it came like this, its because of strictly personal reasons and this is also the reason why, when the sans-papiers occupied St. Ambrois in March 96, I felt a relief. I told myself, this is something new that happens here and it proved also that this kind of insatisfaction and frustration and discontent that what was growing over the years, I was not the only one to feel it. If there were 300 Africans in a church, this was to say that I wasnt alone, that there were lots of other people feeling that there was a xenophobe drift going on against which you had to mobilise. This was my impression: at the point where I am, I am not alone. I am not alone feeling that because at this time, I hadnt been part of any associative network etc. and I told myself, this is strange, I dont understand why we are having such an absurd legislation, after all, this is unbelievable. This had been my personal reflection at this time. (Interview, September 15, 1999, Paris).

Apart from that, not only the movement acted as a catalyst to political participation but also, in the eyes of some supporters, it became a mirror of French society and at the same time the key to solve its problems: And then, I told myself, really, if we have the will to further things, here we have an extraordinary key avec this problem of the sans-papiers ... I mean, what a pertinence, these people read in the deepest way in our society ... the sans-papiers put the finger where it hurts, really willing to, I think, deeply, to help the French society to get along with its immigration problem. (Interview, September 16, 1999, Paris). Third, for the supporters, these issues of immigration, increasing xenophobia, and racism are closely linked to central values of the French society like human rights, generosity, solidarity, and hospitality. The point is then, that according to the supporters representations, the French society is in crisis because it had lost these values. The movement of the sans-papiers revealed and highlighted this crisis of society and at the same time developed to an extraordinary possibility of revitalising these values by defending the sans-papiers. This aspect is clearly illustrated by Sthane Hessel who was member of a group of mediators between the movement and the French government. At a press conference at the very beginning of the movement he stated: We wish to have the possibility, in the next days and weeks, to highlight our point of view that is the following one: France has to be, to stay and to become again what it had ceased to be at a certain moment, a human place of welcome and respect of the rights and dignity of all persons staying on its territory. (Hessel in Kebadian 1999). At the end of the same press conference, Christiane Hessel declared: I have a dream: that my country finds back to its values. (Hessel 1997, 311, underlined by S. H.).

14

Consequently, a kind of a parallel French movement developed. The supporters invented their own rituals like the parrainages, a sort of partnership for sans-papiers and which allowed them to restore in part the heretic and revolutionary character of the movement, as it is prohibited by law to support undocumented migrants. Some parts of the ritual, even explicitly excluded the participation of the sans-papiers. Further more, at some places, there existed collectives of sans-papiers where the members were exclusively French citizens trying in vain to find some sans-papiers to support. Similarly, in the end of the movement, there were much more supporters left than sans-papiers.

15

... par exemple comme cette femme, ... o elle est devant la tour Eiffel, donc a montre quelle est en France et on la voit l au village avec des enfants. ... je les ai mis cte cte, l, cest la mme femme ... donc il y a vraiment la cohabitation entre lAfrique et puis la russite ici, quoi ... ... la carte tlphonique o cest marqu Pourquoi pas vous?. Elle, elle lavait tout le temps sur elle, elle tait vide mais elle trouvait a tellement. Ctait un papiers pour elle, un papier didentit, Pourquoi pas vous?.8

4. The immigrants side: Links to countries of origin and the role of a legal status in France
As far as the immigrants representations of collective action are concerned, I will present two examples from different periods of the movement. Despite they refer to very different groups of migrants with different approaches to migration and the movement, they converge in their effect: They both provide an example for the crucial role of countries of origin in shaping the actors approach to migration as well as representations of collective action and, by consequence, the role of the legal status. Evidence will be given to the fact that these representations can have mobilising effects that go far beyond the explanations provided by resource mobilisation approaches. The first example is provided by a group of North African women who joined the sans-papiers during summer and fall 1997, at a stage where the decline of the movement had become obvious. The second example is drawn from West-African migrants who played a central role at the very beginning of the movement. To start with the North African Women, first I will briefly present the group, then resume and analyse their narratives. The 10 Moroccan and Algerian women, on whom one part of my fieldwork is based, mainly came to France between 1983 and 1994. They are aged between 30 and 50 and work mainly as domestics, nannies etc. They were organised in a unit of the movement in a western suburb of Paris. In summer 1999, a network of French feminists close to the movement contacted them. During the following months, regular meetings of the women and the network were held in Paris w ith the aim to further their regularisation, as well as the writing of a manifest of women, that was supposed to make the point on gender issues within the broader context of the movement and its relation to administration services.

Interview, artist, project Les papiers des sans-papiers, Paris, July 21, 1999.

16

During the meetings, the women told their stories. As they had had no experience of political or feminist action before, the meetings, where only women were allowed to participate, provided an extraordinary possibility for them to tell their story, for the first time, in a semi-public space. In fact, they all attached much significance to the meetings and to the very fact of speaking. The structure of their narratives follows a common scheme of life stories (on life histories and their structure: Passeron 1990, Bourdieu 1986; Gergen 1997, 172-176; Polkinghorne 1997, 27-31). They centre on the justification of getting papers and, in a coherent way, coordinate the different elements of their stories to arrive at this end. The womens stories start with their arrival in France and end implicitly with their regularisation or a forced return to their countries of origin. On the one hand, their narratives dont transcend the starting point of arrival in France. Aspects of their life before emigration are completely absent of their stories and thus can be understood as life histories without depth (Girola 1996). On the other hand, the stories do not exceed their ends either. The women neither have any imagination of a life with papers nor concrete information what might happen if they had to leave the country. As far as the details of emigration are concerned, all women mention a difficult economic situation (low wages 6 of 10, unemployment 2 of 10, job offer by a French employer 1 of 10, one women came to France for medical treatment). For 5 of 10 women the decision of emigration goes with a difficult personal situation (divorce or break up of a long relationship, death of the partner, traumatic experience). Thus, the decision to migrate is located in a combination of events that distinguish clearly from life as usual and combine to an extreme situation that forces them to leave their country. The stories end with the impossibility of return, which is due to the same economic reasons that lead to emigration: We would have to begin right from the start, we wouldnt have money or a job (Meeting RAJFIR, Paris, July 18, 1999). In addition to that, their families depend economically from the womens income in France. They all need us! (Miriam), with our work on the side we make them live (Malika) (Meeting RAJFIR, Paris, September 19, 1999). What is even more important, gender relations implicitly play an important role in their representations. In general, they enjoy the independence of women in French society compared to their Muslim home countries: In France we are used to a way of living, we are used to the habits (Tania), we appreciate the liberty of women, in Morocco, a

17

women cant go out at any time (Khadija), we cant take any responsibilities (Khadija) (Meeting RAJFIR, Paris, July 18, 1999). Miriam concludes: When you have seen some light, you cant go back. (Meeting RAJFIR, Paris, September 19, 1999). The important point is, that most of the women do not use these possibilities, for example they dont go out late etc. What is important is their existence. The women mention these aspects as a reason why they are not willing to return. In addition to that, in the case of return, they would be considered as liberal women, as a prostitute (Meeting RAJFIR, Paris, July 18, 1999) for having lived alone or with relatives (which is the case for the majority of them) in France at an age between 30 and 50. Under these conditions it would nearly be impossible to get married, nor would it be possible to live on their own; the fact of emigration makes them loose their position in their countries of origins society. Between these two fixed points of the inevitability of leaving and the impossibility of return, their narratives place the life in France. Due to their status as undocumented migrants, this life is suffering or suffering in silence (Miriam, Meeting RAJFIR, Paris, July 18, 1999): The fact of having no papers separates them from their families for years and implies low wages, insufficient health services, the constant danger of having to leave the country etc. Therefore, following the logic of their stories, the only solution to a better life in France is receiving papers. Hence, the impossibility of return, related to gender issues, turns out to dominate the womens representations. In addition to that, by telling their story to French feminists, they not only make sense of their own story that consists in justifying their migration project but also develop these emerging gender identities as one part of the story. Despite a relatively weak general mobilisation of the movement at this time and despite of political entrepreneurs that had lost their credibility and thus their force of mobilising the unit, the women were extremely determined and motivated to action. Hence, in this case, the actors representations turn out to be more powerful in motivating to collective action as the role of political entrepreneurs: The leaders of the womens unit lost their power; the French feminists took in some way over their role but never could have succeeded without meeting the womens representations. The second and last example refers to the West African migrants who launched the movement. One can distinguish two notions that are crucial to the immigrants representations of migration and collective action as well as the way they conceive the ties

18

to their countries of origin: On the one hand their representations centre on the notion of justice, on the other hand on the notion of dignity. First, the notion of justice is situated in the context of colonial and neo-colonial relations between France and their countries of origin. The sans-papiers used the argument of colonial ties as a strategic argument to address the French public and media.9 On the other hand, it constituted a powerful means of mobilisation of their own basis precisely because of the representations of social relations it expressed. The sans-papiers considered the fact of living without papers in France as unjust, regarding the devasting effects of colonialism and neo-colonialism. By doing so, they expressed a representation concerning the structure and functioning of social relations that is based on exchange and which can frequently be observed in many African countries (Olivier de Sardan 1996). Even if the partners are by no means equal, the fact of giving something to someone or of doing someone a favour implies the obligation of the latter to do so in turn. Malik, a sans-papiers from Senegal put it this way, expressing the entire ambiguity of colonial relations: Africa is in the ownership of France, colonisation has also b een for showing the way but France has also taken profit of Africa, France has an obligation towards Africa (Interview, Paris, September 21, 1999). What is called obligation in this quotation, is expressed in more political terms by Madjigune Ciss who spoke of shared responsibilities (Interview, Berlin, December 12, 1999). In a similar way, the West-African migrants conceived politics within the movement. For example, most of them precisely considered this contract as broken, when the left who had expressed its sympathy with the movement in public, after winning the elections of 1997, proceeded only to insufficient measures of regularisation, according to the sanspapiers perception. Malik, from Senegal, expressed this fact as follows: The left had won the elections with the help of the sans-papiers, the left has taken profit of the sans-papiers, French people approved [the regularisation of the sans-papiers], the left had claimed regularisation of all but it didnt keep its promises. (Interview, Paris, September 21, 1999). The notion of justice can also be found at the very beginning of the movement. During the presidential elections of 1995, African migrants without papers supported Jacques Chirac

By doing so, they dialogued with the representations of French supporters who experienced the discussions on colonialism as reconciliation: We spoke of history, we spoke of the history of France, obviously, I mean, of what touched us and of what weight heavily upon on us in this history. And I think,

19

because of his discourse on social cleavages and social injustice. After his election, he expected him to keep his electoral promises. As concrete measures did not come, they decided to pass to action (Interview, Paris, September 17, 1999). Closely linked to this notion of justice is the sans-papiers representation of their relations to the French state and society. For them, it went without saying that they had the right to stay in France under human conditions. Malik stated I will lower my head in Germany but I wont lower my head in France, we have the right to be here. Other countries had the right to restrict immigration, if Germany says, we do not want to have any immigrants, it has the right to do so, on the contrary, this wasnt true for France (Interview, Paris, September 21, 1999). During the occupation of St. Bernard, a young woman expressed this representation of the sans-papiers concerning their position in France: We have to explain to the French that they must change their legislation. That is why we are here and why we continue. (Hahn 1996, 11). As far as the notion of dignity is concerned, like the notion of justice it has to be understood with regard to the cultural background of African migrants and the relations between migrants in France and the families in their respective countries of origin. In fact, these relations remain very close and the migrants consider their project of migration as a kind of adventure aiming at a significant contribution to the development of their village (Timera 1997, 99f). In general, the whole family takes the migration decision, organises, and finances the journey. Therefore, the migrant has a duty of reimbursement towards the family. In general, the family takes the decision of migration. It is discussed within the family and, in fact, there will be someone chosen to leave and who has to represent the interests of those who remain. Thats it. There is a kind of debt vis--vis the rest of the family (Madjigune Ciss, Interview, Berlin, December 12, 1999). It follows that the migrants aim above all at economic success, the latter determining their hierarchical position within the community of migrants in France but also with respect to their families (Timera 1997, 101f). And precisely this success and its location within cultural patterns is constitutes the centre of the notion of dignity: A friend of mine keeps saying, I dont know, it is a question of dignity. Because I left my country not for fun, you know. It is precisely because I couldnt stand the situation there anymore and I wanted to help my parents, my family etc. ... So, he keeps saying, if you ever find my in a plane, with

this was really extraordinary, because after all, it was something like reconciliation (Interview, Paris,

20

handcuffs and without luggage and nothing ... this concerns my dignity (Madjigune Ciss, Interview, Berlin, December 12, 1999). If a legal status is not necessarily a condition for economic success, it is certainly the condition for a stable contract, a regular income, and the possibility to visit ones family in his or her home country. It follows, that a legal status in France determines ones position in hierarchical relations to other migrants and within family relations (Timera 1997, 102). Work without papers is not valued as real work because of its uncertainty in time and income (Meeting Collectif des sans-papiers, Paris, August 31, 1999). On the other hand, economic success is honoured by ones family and village: Madjigune Ciss reports the case of one of the sans-papiers of St. Bernard who, while staying in France, had been elected mayor of his village in Mali because of his success and his considerable contribution to village development (Interview, December 12, 1999, Berlin). As far as participation in the movement is concerned, the sans-papiers often understood their action in these terms of dignity and obligation to success: Being sans-papiers is like hunting, you know. And if you ever come back from hunting with empty hands, you are ashamed ... So, this is like he [person of whom she was speaking above] understood it. So, we went occupying St. Ambroise etc. and he, he said, I even couldnt return to the place where I live. Because some of the people there asked me, what are you doing? You will be presenting yourself to the television etc. And he, he said, If I come back without papers, I never could look at these people because this concerns my dignity (Interview on December 12, 1999, Berlin). Thus, this example offers important insights into the migrants motivations for participating in the movement. These motivations transcend the selective incentive of handing in ones dossier to an association etc. Precisely, the representations presented in this example, explain more in detail ones motivations, or interests to reach special gains provided by selective incentives.

5. Conclusion:
To conclude, the results of this research on the movement of the sans-papiers provide an example of how actors representations, understood as a central part of their identity,

September 16, 1999).

21

constructed by an interactive process of narration, transcend approaches of resource mobilisation. Further more, they also crosscut theories of framing, the latter gaining special importance within the movement of the sans-papiers. The conclusion of representations crosscutting theoretical approaches can therefore be completed by the result of a diversification of theoretical approaches (resource mobilisation, framing, collective

identity) explaining the mobilisation of groups drawing on weak resources.

22

6. References
Ein neues Verhltnis von Nord und Sd (1996). Der Kampf der Sans Papiers in Frankreich. Radiobeitrag fr den WDR, Kritisches Tagebuch am 13.11.1996. Blatt, David (1997): Immigrant Politics in a Republican Nation. In: Hargreaves, Alec G./McKinney, Mark (Hrsg.): Post-Colonial Cultures in France. London, New York: Routledge. Bourdieu, Pierre (1986): Lillusion biographique. In: Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, no. 62-63, juin, S. 69-72. Castells, Manuel (1997): The Information Age. Economy, Society and Culture. Vol. II: The Power of Identity, Oxford. Diop, Ababacar (1997): Dans la peau dun sans-papiers. Paris: Seuil. Fillieule, Olivier (1993): Lanalyse des mouvements sociaux: pour une problmatique unifie. In: Fillieule, Oliver (sous la dirction de): Sociologie de la protestation. Les formes de laction collective dans la France contemporaine, Paris: LHarmattan, S. 29-64. Geertz, Clifford (1973): The Interpretation of Cultures, New York: Basic Books. Gergen, Kenneth J (1998): Erzhlung, moralische Identitt und historisches Bewutsein. In: Straub, Jrgen (Hrsg.): Erzhlung, Identitt und historisches Bewutsein. Die psychologische Konstruktion von Zeit und Geschichte. Frankfurt am Main: suhrkamp, S. 170-202. Girola, Claudia M ( 1996): Rencontrer des personnes sans abri. In: Politix , no. 34, S. 8798. Hahn, Dorothea (1996): Aufstand der Heimatlosen. In: die tageszeitung, no. 4999, 13.08.1996, S. 11. Hall, Stuart (1996): Introduction: Who needs identity?. In: Hall, Stuart (Hrsg): Questions of cultural identity . London: Sage. Hellmann, Kai-Uwe (1997): Marginalisierung und Mobilisierung. Konzeptionelle berlegungen zur Emergenz und Mobilisierung von Marginalisierten. In: Forschungsjournal NSB, Jg. 10, Heft 2. Hellmann, Kai-Uwe (1998): Paradigmen der Bewegungsforschung. Forschungs- und Erklrungsanstze - ein berblick. In: Hellmann, Kai-Uwe, Koopmans, Ruud (Hrsg.): Paradigmen der Bewegungsforschung. Entstehung und Entwicklung von neuen sozialen Bewegungen und Rechtsextremismus. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Hessel, Stphane (1997): Danse avec le sicle . Paris: Seuil. Kebadian, Jacques (Regie) (1999): Dune brousse lautre/Hommes de pays loin. Dokumentarfilm, Paris: La Lanterne. Kliment, Tibor (1998): Durch Damatisierung zum Protest? Theoretische Grundlegung und empirischer Ertrag des Framing-Konzepts. In: Hellmann, Kai-Uwe, Koopmans, Ruud (Hrsg.): Paradigmen der Bewegungsforschung. Entstehung und Entwicklung von neuen sozialen Bewegungen und Rechtsextremismus. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, S.69-89.

23

Martin, Denis-Constant (1989): A la qute des OPNI. Comment traiter linvention du politique?. Revue franaise de science politique, dcembre. Martin, Denis-Constant (1995): The Coices of Identity. In: Social Identities, vol. 1, no. 1. Martin, Denis-Constant 1(994): Introduction. Identits et Politique. Rcit, mythe et idologie. In: Martin, Denis-Constant (Ed.): Cartes didentit, comment dit-on nous en politique? Paris: Presses de la Fondation nationale des sciences politiques. McCarthy, John/Zald Mayer N (1973): The Trend of Social Movements in America: Professionalization And Resource Mobilization. Morristown: N. J. McCarthy, John/Zald Mayer N (1977): Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory. In: American Sociological Review, vol. 82, no. 6, S. 1212-1241. Melucci, Alberto (1995): The Process of Collective Identity. In: Johnston, Hank/Kandermans, Bert (Eds.): Social Movements and Culture, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, S. 41-63. Melucci, Alberto (1996): Challenging Codes. Collective Action in the Information Age. Camebridge. Obershall, Anthony (1973): Social Conflict and Social Movements, New Jersey. Olivier de Sardan, Jean-Pierre (1996): lconomie morale de la corruption . In : Politique africaine, 63. Passeron, Jean-Claude (1990): Biographies, flux, itinraires, trajectoires. In: Revue franaise de sociologie , no. 1, vol. 31, S. 3-22. Polkinghorne, Donald E. (1998): Narrative Psychologie und Geschichtsbewutsein. In: Straub, Jrgen (Hrsg.): Erzhlung, Identitt und historisches Bewutsein. Die psychologische Konstruktion von Zeit und Geschichte. Frankfurt am Main: suhrkamp, S. 12-45. Polletta, Francesca (1997): Culture and Ist Discontents: Recent Theorizing on the cultural Dimensions of Protest. In: Sociological Inquiry, vo. 67, no. 4, november, S. 431450. Roth, Roland (1998): Patch-Work. Kollektive Identiten neuer sozialer Bewegungen. In: Hellmann, Kai-Uwe, Koopmans, Ruud (Hrsg.): Paradigmen der Bewegungsforschung. Entstehung und Entwicklung von neuen sozialen Bewegungen und Rechtsextremismus. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, S. 51-68. Simant, Johanna (1998): La cause des Sans-papiers. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po. Snow et al. (1986): Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization and Movement Participation. In: American Sociolgoical Review, vo. 51, S. 464-481. Snow, David A./Benford, Robert D. (1988): Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization, in: Klandermans, Bert (Ed.): International Social Movement Research. vol. 1, S. 197-217. Timera, Mahamet (1997): Sans-papiers africains face aux communauts dorigine. In: Fassin, Didier/Morice, Alain/Quiminal, Catherine (sous la dirction de): Les lois de linhospitalit. Les politiques de limmigration lpreuve des sans-papiers. Paris: La Dcouverte, S. 95-106.

24