For an European Gypsy Jay Treaty I

Using recent examples of discrimination against Romanian [most likely] Gypsies, I am arguing that Europe should give Gypsies the same cross-border roaming rights North America has given its First Nations.

As you may have heard, a supermarket in Toulouse – Lindl – is now refusing to serve Romanians:

Ce vendredi 17 février, à 17 h 45, Maria se présente à la caisse n° 1 du supermarché Lidl, avenue d’Atlanta à Toulouse. Elle dépose sur le tapis roulant des bouteilles d’eau, du chocolat et une canette. Le caissier demande à sa collègue la plus proche : «Je l’encaisse ou pas ?» Courte hésitation. Puis le jeune homme saisit les articles et les range sur le côté. Terminé, client suivant. Pas un mot pour Maria, un peu désemparée, qui s’en va lentement sans les marchandises.

«On ne nous laisse pas acheter l’eau, ni à manger»

Maria est roumaine. Comme ses compatriotes installés dans un bidonville à quelques hectomètres du supermarché, elle est refoulée aux caisses de ce supermarché Lidl. Pourtant, vendredi, cette mère de famille avait avec elle l’argent pour payer les articles. À l’extérieur du magasin, elle raconte que, plusieurs fois déjà, on lui a refusé des achats ici, sans plus d’explications. (..)

The funny thing is, less than a month ago a French citizen (O. Bruno) was caught doing the same in a Romanian supermaket, yet nobody is talking about banning the French. Truth be told, they aren’t probably so many, anyways.

Still, our image is suffering almost everywhere else in Europe. From London, where “Romanian” women (because they happen to be whiter, in contrast with the darker Romanians whom the Ro press almost invariably calls “Gypsy”) steal clothes, to Netherlands, where a website launched by a right-wing party invites complaints about Eastern European immigrants:

Ambassadors from 10 central and eastern European countries have written to the Dutch parliament demanding the removal of a website launched a week ago by Geert Wilders’s right-wing Freedom Party (PVV). The website invites complaints about Polish, Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants. (..)

The Netherlands is home to about 125,000 immigrants from central and eastern Europe, about 80 per cent of whom are Poles, and most of whom work in farming and market gardening. Romanians and Bulgarians still require work permits, despite being EU citizens.

Before going further, let us direct our attention to a treaty signed in 1794 between Britain and USA.

jay

A few years after Britain had recognized American independence, the old great power continued to constantly “smack” the emerging new one with every-which occasion it got (cf wikipedia):

• The British were still occupying forts on U.S. territory in the Great Lakes region (the Northwest Territory).
• The British were continually impressing American sailors into British service
• American merchants wanted compensation for 250 merchant ships which the British had confiscated from 1793 through 1794.
• Southerners in the United States wanted monetary compensation for the slaves whom the British Army had evacuated with them during the Revolutionary War.
• Merchants in both America and in the Caribbean wanted the British West Indies to be reopened to American trade.
• The boundary with Canada was vague in many places, and needed to be delineated clearly.
• The British were believed to be aggravating Native American attacks on settlers in the Northwest.

Washington sent John Jay, Chief Justice of the USSC to negotiate and he included as part of the treaty the rights of the native populations to roam across the border:

Article III states "It is agreed, that it shall at all times be free to His Majesty's subjects, and to the citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the said boundary line, freely to pass and repass, by land or inland navigation into the respective territories and countries of the two parties on the continent of America, (the country within the limits of the Hudson Bay company only excepted) ... and freely carry on trade and commerce with each other." Article III of the Jay Treaty declared the right of "Indians" ("Native Americans") as well as of American citizens and Canadian subjects to trade and travel between the United States and Canada, which was then a territory of Great Britain.Over the years since, the United States has codified this obligation in the provisions of Section 289 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, and as amended in 1965. As a result of the Jay Treaty, "Native Indians born in Canada are therefore entitled to enter the United States for the purpose of employment, study, retirement, investing, and/or immigration". Article III of the Jay Treaty is the cause of most Indian claims.

This treaty was opposed by the Jeffersionians who preferred to be closer to France than to Britain, but imposed by Hamilton and his allies, who liked stronger ties to Britain and didn’t like the French. Obviously, the “native” clause was added because it was quite obvious that the Native population had been decimated by European diseases and war, were no longer a threat and the entire European claim to Native land was on shoddy moral ground. The “founding fathers” had a guilty conscience w.r.t. to the “First Nations”.

back..

..in Europe, what is it that prevents a similar attitude toward Gypsies from the main powers?

In Romania, there’s no question that there is a prevailing intolerance and racism toward Gypsies – presented mostly in the l3st conjecture – and this is met with a similar attitude in Western Europe, except that there it is less discriminatory, in a sense that they make no difference between ethnic Romanians and Gypsies: to them it’s the same bird.

Sources / More info: hn-lidl, hu-lidl, dep-lidl, hn-bruno, wiki-jay, cn-us, aadnc, uk-family, rferl, inbo, ptla

asa.zamo.ca, france, french, franta, jay treaty, uk, britain, anglia, tigani, gitanes, schengen (Tags)