6 ideas
Each person's identity is made of many allegiances: religion, nationality, language, profession, region, family, tastes. No other person has exactly the same combination, so identity is singular even though every component is shared with others. Asking someone what they are 'deep down' falsely assumes one essential allegiance hidden beneath the rest.
Violence in the name of identity starts when a person's many allegiances are collapsed into one, usually the one that feels threatened. That single affiliation then becomes total and exclusive. It turns neighbors into enemies and makes killing feel like self-defense or loyalty.
People identify most strongly with whichever part of themselves is under attack or humiliated. They may even hide it, but it grows to define them. To predict where identity will harden, look at which affiliation is currently being disparaged, not at which one is theoretically most important.
Well-meaning people keep asking whether he feels 'more French or more Lebanese'. He refuses to choose, because amputating any part would distort who he is.
Migrants and people of mixed heritage, who live across two or more cultures, can act as translators and links between communities. That only works if they are not forced to pick a side. When a society demands a single loyalty from them, it turns potential bridges into casualties or extremists.
Integration should be two-way. The migrant accepts the host country's laws, language, and core values, and the host society accepts that the migrant's origin culture becomes part of its own evolving identity. The more newcomers feel their heritage is respected, the more readily they open to the host culture. Demanding total assimilation makes them retreat into the original identity.