FEATURE: Higher education... what for?

Source: PA

Higher education is meant to be the way to access better jobs. That is, at least, what we have been constantly told. But to what extent is this true? Higher education is, indeed, a via crucis somebody has to follow in order to get to the top positions but this does not mean that everybody that follows a university degree (be it a BA, MA, MSC, MBA or a PHD) will land a good job. Not anymore at least.

Decades ago going to the university was the way to gather all that knowledge that earned you the respect of companies and employers. Since most of the people didn't have the chance to go to university, graduates were scarce and, therefore, in high demand. Now, instead, almost everybody chooses to study a BA at a university. Those who don't take a university course don't actually take it because they don't want to, not because they can't, as it used to be the case. Hence the standarisation and democratisation of higher education (a logical step forward in the educational system, on the other hand) has also brought in its devaluation.

Some time ago those who only had a BA would find a well paid and well regarded job. Now nobody of those do. You are better off working as a shop assistant or as a plumber.

Let's explain it graphically: John and Mark attended the same high school. John decided not to pursue higher education, as he wanted to earn fresh cash as soon as possible, so he started working as a plumber. Mark, instead, thought that his job prospects would be enhanced by pursuing further education, so he decided to enrol on a BA in Journalism. John worked hard, but earned a slightly lower salary than the average. Mark, on the other hand, had to find a part-time job in order to fund his studies at the university, so he worked as hard as John while he studied, during five years. In those five years John bought a car and a house, whereas Mark earned a part-time salary which allowed him to pay for his course fees every year. But it was fine, he thought, as after graduation he would land a good job.

When he graduated, after 5 years, he was already 22. A good age to start his first job. But he soon realised that all he could find were unpaid internships. They told him that it was the price to pay in order to find a place in the industry. A sort of a sacrifice he had to do if he wanted to access to the prestigious and well paid jobs. So he went through two or three internships. In the meantime nothing had changed for John. He kept working hard and earning a fair salary.

After a few unpaid internships Mark could actually land an entry-level job, perceiving the minimum legal wage. It was tough, he had to do many extra hours for free, he had few holidays and a lot of work. But they told him that it was the way to get to better positions. So he worked there. For a year. For two. When he realised that nothing was changing he decided to take a Masters. They told him that an MA in his CV would definitely make the difference. So he took a Masters while he was working fulltime. He even studied a different, more economic-oriented masters, to open up more doors, to make him more appealing for companies. So he gathered all his savings, he spent an awful lot of money, and he struggled for one year combining work and study again. But he managed. And he got the certificate, brand new, that he added to his CV. But nothing changed. So after another year working at the same place and earning exactly the same wage as he was earning three years before (the minimum wage with which he could only pay the basics), he decided to take the big step. In order to boost his job opportunities he decided to study a second Masters abroad, in one of the most prestigious universities in the country. Once again he had to gather the money by combining two jobs, given that the salary he perceived from his main job was too low. So there he was, working from Monday to Friday, nine hours a day, in one job, and from Friday to Monday, six hours a day, in another job. Eventually he gathered the money, he paid the fees and off he went to his new destination.

After another year he had a sparkling CV. 5-year BA taken in two different countries, MA taken in another country. Another MA taken in another country. Four years of work experience in the field. Fluency in four languages.... and still he was unable to find a good job.

In the meantime John still kept working as a plumber and perceiving a better salary than Mark, already 28, would ever get.

And there we have John, 28, working as a plumber for the last ten years, and earning a stable and fair income; and Mark, 28 as well, unemployed, having worked in different low-skilled jobs, some high-skilled ones, having taken three university degrees (two of them while working), and having spent thousands of pounds on an education that did not deliver any result.

The question is obvious: How is it possible that John, basic education and a rather easy life, is getting more money and is living a more stable life than Mark, with different university degrees, languages and different work experience?

Something somewhere went obviously wrong.

Source: Daily Mail

The first reason is that higher education is not a luxury anymore. The democratisation of universities has devalued them. Since everybody can access to university courses, having a BA is the normal thing. It is not something special anymore.

There are of course some exceptions: A degree in a prestigious school or university will probably help you land a good job. But, again, these courses are created by the elite for the elite, and therefore too expensive for a mortal. A Warwick/Oxbridge/Eton... graduate + LSE/London School of Business...MA will land those top jobs. A normal student who can't afford a pricey university is more likely to end up holding a BA and one or two MAs in different universities and, even though in many cases these graduates will be definitely much more skilled and prepared to work than some of those who graduated from top level schools and universities (but who got the money to pay for the course), they won't find a good job. They will land an average-poorly-paid-job.

The second reason is that theoretical knowledge does not prepare you for developing tasks in a practical job. Theoretical knowledge is theoretical knowledge. Decades ago theoretical knowledge was perceived as something extremely prestigious. Those who had this theoretical knowledge would therefore land the best jobs because they were wise and they had been learning in a scholar background not available to everybody.

The third reason is that, even though you can actually find almost a university degree for every single academic field, 90% of them are useless. It is interesting to learn ancient Greek, but you will not be able to compete with someone who can actually manage a business, design a building or simply fix a flooded sewer.

The fourth reason is that many of the tasks needed in a day-to-day basis in a job can be actually done by people who don't necessarily have any theoretical knowledge on the issue. Only an architect is able or even allowed to design a building. Everybody can work as a journalist as long as he is good at it. Everybody can work as a translator if he's good enough in the required language. The journalist who took his degree in Journalism or the Doctor in Philosophy who graduated from a MSC in German Philosophy can't design a building nor fix a flooded sewer. Therefore they won't find a job easily. John the plumber will find a job more easily than them, and will certainly get paid more than them.

The fifth reason is that nowadays companies want people who can develop many different tasks, so rather than hiring three skilled people who will carry out their different skilled work, they want to reduce costs and hire one person who can do the work of the three of them, maybe not as efficiently as they would, but which will definitely be cheaper.

The sixth reason is that in many countries the higher degree you own, the more you should be paid by law. These are called "professional categories" in some countries, and it means that if you hold an MA, you must earn more than someone who just has a BA, even if you are developing the same tasks. Companies don't like that, because this implies that they have to pay more for the same task that some other less skilled worker can do. That is why they either obviate this soft law, or they opt for hiring someone less skilled. This is particularly current in low-skilled jobs that students look for to fund their higher education. The result is clear: some BA students tend to hide to potential employers that they hold a BA in order to land a low-skilled job that will allow them to pay their even further education.

The conclusion, hence, is obvious: if you want to land a good job you need money. An awful lot of money. Save money enough to pay a BA at Oxford University and be good enough to get into Oxford University. Afterward, once you have graduated, save even more money to pay even more money to get into the LSE or the MIT. And after that you're done.

If you don't have the means to do that, the best you can do is spotting the career opportunities before actually choosing a BA. Try to get into the best "normal" universities, cross your fingers, work hard, be one of the best if not the best of the whole university, and maybe you will be able to, at some point, find something not very bad.

If not you can always forget about all this fuss and focus on sewers and waterpipes and keep working since you are 17 as a plumber, earning more (and more stable) money than your scholar counterparts.

By CDR with No comments

COMMENT: Metropolis vs. Ex-colonies. Roles reversed?

Source: Daily Mail

PIGS' economic situation is not new. Greece's economy is preparing for its second bailout, after the first one, worth €110bn, failed to boost it. In 2010 its sovereign crisis peaked at a 120% of its GDP (€216bn) and over €20bn were thought to be evaded every year from the Greek tax system. Ireland and Portugal are going through a bailout process, Italy recently announced the biggest spending cuts in decades in an effort to tackle the financial crisis in the country and Spain's economy keeps sinking, with the highest unemployment rate of the whole European Union (almost a 21%), with the collapse of its main industry (building industry) and with financial problems that forced small banks to merge in big entities capable of resisting the crisis.

What is rather new, however, is the situation of some of their former colonies. European powers created a vast network of supplying colonies all around the world, that they exploited for centuries. After lengthy struggles (most of them violent), almost all of these colonies became sovereign states, but in most cases what remained after European colonialism were lawless territories with rivalries that led to bloody civil wars, unexisting economies, and a massive dependence from the ex Metropolis.

Now, tables have turned in some cases. In 2011 Portugal and Spain have become some of the most badly hit economies of the whole European Union. But some of its ex colonies, such as Angola, Paraguay or Brazil are experiencing an economic boom despite the financial crisis.

Public debt in 2010 (% of the GDP)

The difficult situation in Portugal has forced many Portuguese to leave their country, some of them transferring to the ex colonies, trying to find a new life. Exactly the same that people from the ex colonies did until recently, but all the way round.

According to The Economist, in 2007-08 there were 45,000 Portuguese registered in Angola. Only one year later, they were 92,000. Also Angolan banks have started buying stakes in Portuguese banks, as Banco BIC has just done with Banco Português de Negócios. The IMF has forecasted a growth of a 7.8% of Angolan GDP in 2011 and a 10.5% in 2012.

The same can be applied to Brazil, where its two economic giant hubs, Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, fight to be considered the most appealing centre where to invest in the country.

Rio has been designed to host the 2016 Olympics, which will bring millions in cash and investments to Brazil's Treasury. Also, in 2010 foreign direct investment peaked at $7.27bn in Rio and $2.73bn in Sao Paulo. The cost of living in both cities has increased in the last year. In 2011 Rio was the 12th most expensive city where to live in the world (it had been the 29th in 2010). Sao Paulo fared even better, entering the top 10 most expensive cities in the world this year (from the 21st position in 2010).

Spain, formerly regarded as one of the most powerful economies of the world (its GDP grew an average of a 3.5% before the crisis and it was the fourth biggest economy of the European Union), is now surpassed by some of its former colonies. According to the CIA World Factbook, in 2009 Spain entered recession, growing a -3.7%. Last year its GDP still grew a -0.1%. On the other hand, in 2010 Paraguay's GDP grew a 15.3%, Argentina's a 9.2%, Peru's an 8.8% and Uruguay an 8.5%.

On the other hand, it is said that the financial crisis is a worldwide crisis affecting every country, but figures show that the hardest-hit economies are those of the so-called developed countries, such as in Western Europe, US, Canada and Japan. South America, Southern Africa, China and even Eastern Europe are doing relatively well (see map above).

Seeing these figures it is easy to understand why foreign investment is shifting to new markets, and why migration trends might have changed.

By CDR with No comments

COMMENT: On the Scottish referendum

Last May, in the regional elections, Alex Salmond's SNP achieved an outstanding victory, retaining 69 seats in the Scottish Parliament, the SNP's best achievement ever, surpassing their important victory in 2007.

A few days after the elections, Salmond stated that since the final objective of the SNP is the independence of Scotland, the new Scottish Government –which will see a majority of SNP's MSPs, therefore being able to pass any law or bill they want without external support from other parties– would hold a referendum on the Scottish independence in the next few years.

The immediate reaction of conservative politicians was to back the celebration of the referendum as soon as possible, therefore trusting that the majority of Scots do not back the break-up of Britain. But the SNP wants to have a few years to prepare the population for a referendum of this kind, hence it will not take place immediately.

But, first of all, would people in Scotland back a referendum on Scottish independence? And second, what does it really imply?

The first movement of the UK Government was admitting and backing the celebration of the referendum, not opposing it. This does not mean that Cons and LibDems are suddenly on Salmond's side, but it may mean that they really know that a majority of Scots would not back Scottish independence, hence they don't see the referendum as a threat. Indeed past surveys have shown that support for independence among Scots is still too small –around 23%, according to the last Scottish Social Attitudes Survey–.

The SNP has to understand that not all of those who have voted them in the regional elections will back a referendum on Scottish independence.

On the other hand, the representation of those who want Scottish independence may be exaggerated at the polls. Most of the people do not care about Scottish independence, and therefore do not take part in surveys. However, a referendum with certain kind of legal validity would drive them to vote and show their opinion, therefore lowering the percentage of those who support Scottish independence. The turnout at the last elections only reached 49%, but a referendum on Scottish independence would see a much higher turnout.

Finally, Salmond has always campaigned for an independent Scotland where North Sea oilfields would finance the cost of independence. But in the current financial and economical landscape it is unlikely that the UK Government would cede the complete exploitation of the North Sea oilfields to Scotland, losing billions of yearly revenues.

Those who back independence have to sit down and stop thinking if Scotland could achieve independence, and start thinking whether it could afford it.

By CDR with No comments

COMMENT: A brief reflection on the Tottenham riots

When you walk down Tottenham High Road you don't see a dangerous, dodgy district; a grey and ugly suburb where criminals wait around every corner to threaten you. Tottenham High Road is, indeed, the main street of a North London neighbourhood. It could be the neighbouring Wood Green. It could also be Stratford, Mile End, Clapham or Hammersmith. It is a neutral place, dotted with small shops, call centres, groceries and so on. Even the part which faces Tottenham's Police Station, one of the hotspots during the riots, is completely normal.

Of course everything can happen and this neighbourhood can change from day to day and turn into a battlefield, as it was the case barely a month ago. But despite its bad reputation, Tottenham does not look like a pretty dangerous zone where to live.

I read in an article in The Economist that most of the faces captured by the CCTV cameras during the riots in Tottenham were those of black people. It, argues the article, does not mean that the riots were merely aroused by the problem of racism. However, as the article points out, most of the other ethnic groups were not involved in the riots. There is a much larger Bangladeshi community in Tottenham, but none of them looted any shop. The same with other Asian communities.

Then, reports the article, behind the riots and the involvement of black people in them, there are a few questions to bear in mind, a few explanations, such as the situation of the black community, which always arouses suspicion among the Police whenever a crime has been committed, whose children tend to be excluded from school and an important percentage of its adults ends up in jail.

The perception of racism among the black community is very sensible, as the article points out. Many people in the riots could have acted violently as a way to express their frustration and their exclusion of society driven by racism.

However, we should start thinking whether the important question is who took place in the Tottenham riots, who looted the shops, and start thinking about what did they loot.


A very basic way to understand the riots as a reaction against racism is pointing out that, if racism –or angst against it– drove the riots, people would have targeted those who are imposing racism. So far nobody at the riots targeted white communities or private houses owned by white people.

On the other hand, the rioters protested against something, of course, but they only targeted shops. And what they looted were goods. But not all kinds of goods they could reach. As a matter of curiosity, Waterstones, a famous bookshop franchise, was not even touched. If protests were driven by racism, rioters would have looted everything they found on their way. But they didn't. They carefully selected those shops with cool fashion brands, electronic goods, sports garment and the kind, and stormed them.

The fact that the rioters only looted this kind of shops shows to what extent what drove the protests was not an actual reaction against racism, but a reaction against the frustration caused by not being able to purchase all those goods advertised on TV. Looters did not touch a book, but they did loot Primark. They stole clothes and TVs, videogames and laptops. In other words, they "used" the tense and extraordinary situation to steal –and take vengeance on their disfavoured situation.

There is no justification for the riots, but they were definitely not caused by racism. They were not a public outcry against the racist Londoner society. Maybe we should rethink the cause of the riots, forget the easy explanation and analyse what really underlies these acts.

By CDR with No comments

NEW PROJECT: Worldindepth v2.0. What's new?

The new version of Worldindepth is ready to be launched. So what's new?

*First of all I have decided to keep the design as it was, just making minor adjustments, such as changing the pictures featured on the slides. I want people to recognise the website and it would be awkward if I changed the layout and the design completely from time to time. So aesthetically the site looks the same.

*A closer view shows that some categories have disappeared, as it is the case of "Leisure and travel". When I first created Worldindepth I intended to publish some features focusing on different cities in a sort of "touristic, relaxed" way. Then I decided that these kind of features do not match exactly with the aim of the site, and in fact only one feature to the date was published under that category. Therefore I decided to suppress it.

*The order of the sections have varied. The stories and features will be now archived mainly by regions. There still will be a subsection with the old tags (politics, business..etc), but it will be secondary.

*I have gone through the already published pieces, correcting minor mistakes that appeared on them. Now they should be fine.

*The major improvement, and where the core of this refurbishment lies, is on the new categories. You will have noticed that on the secondary section you can find "politics", "business" and "current affairs". But it also features three new sections: "comments", "features" and "interviews".

The aim is classifying the stories by their nature (there were a couple of interviews and not all of the published pieces were strictly features). But it also has another objective, which is where the new worldindepth version lies: Until now I was able to upload a feature from time to time. This is due to the lack of time and because writing a good, long feature takes a lot of time. Therefore it cannot be done from one day to the other.

By creating a new tag, "comments", I will enable a new way to create in-depth stories. I will write a brief comment on a current story. It might not be as long as a feature, but it will definitely be as appealing as a feature, and it will be quicker to write. This will imply that I will be able to offer much more contents, and I will have the chance to publish almost daily.

I will of course keep publishing features from time to time, but an important part of the new worldindepth will lie on the comments.

And this is it. I hope the new worldindepth will be easier to read, and will provide the reader with fresh information more often than before.

By CDR with No comments

NEW PROJECT: Worldindepth launch

The launch of the new version of Worldindepth will definitely take place on September 1st. The technical issues have been solved and the scheduled date for the launch of the new concept will be met.

By CDR with No comments

NEW PROJECT: Worldindepth v2.0 launch delayed

Although the new Worldindepth concept initially targeted a launch on August 23, the presentation of the new project is to be delayed until September.

I have decided to keep the schedule under review, but I find it preferable, given that I don't want to rush the launch.

The project has been delayed due to technical and logistic issues, but is progressing well and will be ready for September 1st.

By CDR with No comments

NEW PROJECT: The World in Black and White (365 days of B/W)

The World in Black and White (365 days of b/w) is a project launched in August 18 by Carlos del Romero/Worldindepth. It aims to present 365 photographs in black and white, one for each day of the year, from different places around the world, taken in the last ten years. The photographs are then presented as visual poetry, embedded with brief comments that tell the story behind the picture.

In the next 365 days we will see pictures from places in Spain, England, Scotland, Wales, Canada, the U.S., Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Italy, Jordan, Morocco, France, Turkey, Hungary...

Although every photograph will show a feature of a different country, these won't be arranged in a geographical order. The focus of the visual story will be one element in the photograph, regardless of the location.

By CDR with No comments

FEATURE: A paradise lost

Between 1968 and 1973 the inhabitants of a British Overseas Territory known as Chagos Archipelago were forcibly removed from their homeland. In a very controversial decision, the Government of the UK decided to allow the installation of a US military base in the biggest of the islands of the Archipelago, Diego García.

The removal of the islanders was slow but carefully planned. Months before the complete removal of the inhabitants of the Chagos Archipelago, their pets were poisoned and their families were threatened .

Then the evicted Chagossians were confined in small communities in the neighbouring Mauritius and in London. They were also stripped of their British nationality, as the government retired their UK passports. In a matter of weeks the Chagossians were forcibly removed from their land and lost their British nationality, becoming a nation with no land and an invisible community spread all over the world.


The roots of the conflict go back to 1965, when the UK dettached the territory from the colony of Mauritius and Diego García was ceded to the US for, at least, the next 50 years. The island would be used for military purposes only, and the inhabitants had to be removed from Chagos. In exchange, the UK received $14 million and closed an important deal to purchase American nuclear submarines .

Given the insistence of the Chagossians, the UK approved an Immigration Ordinance in 1971, whereby any person wasn't allowed to even enter the whole territory. The situation of the islanders was therefore made unlawful. Secret conversations in the British administration lead to the resolution that the UK had to find the way to remove the islanders at any cost, "providing legal power to deport people who will not leave voluntarily, preventing people from entering, and maintaining the fiction that the inhabitants of Chagos are not a permanent or semi-permanent population" .

During the 80s the UK Government tried to settle down the dispute by giving economic compensations which reached £4m to the surviving islanders, and the case was closed and forgotten.

However, in 1998 some of the chagossians who lived in Mauritius took the case to the British High Court, claiming that their removal was made by illegal means. In November 2000, a historical resolution gave the illois their right to return home, as the Court found that their removal was unlawful. It was then seen as the end of the conflict, but the UK Government was not going to give up the islands so easily.

An article on the Chicago Tribune in October 2001 showed the ongoing conflict and the importance of preserving the US military base in Chagos at any cost. As an expert quoted at the article put it, "the US would be seriously affected if we had to leave the island. It is extraordinarily important to us; it allows us to keep a lot of ammunition and ground equipment near the Persian Gulf".

The decision of the High Court evidenced that the UK administration back in the 70s had acted in an illegal way. But, what is the current situation of the conflict? Are the Chagossians in a better situation than ten years ago?


The situation of the Chagossians hasn't improved much in the last decade, and the conflict has reached a stalemate difficult to break. After the Court ruled in favour of the Chagossians, allowing them to return home after more than 30 years, the UK government decided to act quickly in order to prevent the islanders to go back to Diego García, something that could threaten the military base and would put at risk the good relationship between the UK and the US administrations.

In 2004 the UK Government enacted the so-called Constitution and Immigration Orders, whereby the islanders were again refused their resettlement because it would be too expensive and environmentally unsustainable. But again, the High Court ruled in favour of the illois, stating that the 2004 Orders were unlawful. However, the UK Government appealed in 2007 before the Court of Appeal. As John Howell, QC for the Foreign Secretary stated, "this appeal raises issues of constitutional law of great importance. If the approach of the High Court was correct, it represented a revolutionary change in the constitutional law involved, which will affect all British Overseas Territories".

On May 23rd the High Court ruled in favour of the islanders for the third time, dismissing the UK Government's claims. However, the Court also ruled that the UK Government could appeal to the House of Lords directly. Only one month later, the UK administration appealed to the Law Lords and after one year of deliberation they ruled in Goverment's favour by a margin of only three to two votes.

In a public speech, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary at that time, expressed his satisfaction after knowing the ruling. "Our appeal to the House of Lords was not about what happened in the 1960s and 1970s. It was about decisions taken in the international context of 2004. This required us to take into account issues of defence and security of the archipelago and the fact that an independent study had come down heavily against the feasibility of lasting resettlement of the outer islands of BIOT", stated.

The ruling of the Law Lords proved controversial when one of the experts that had been commissioned to carry out an environmental study about the feasibility of the resettlement of the illois was forced to remove his opinion, which was favourable to the return of the Chagossians, from the document .

After the ruling of the Law Lords the Chagossians, throughout the Chagos Refugee Group, took the case to the last instance, the European Court of Human Rights, which is still deliberating.


In April 2010, the UK Government, in a maneouvre apparently not related to the case, decided to set up a marine reserve in the British Indian Ocean Territory. The Government claimed that this decision showed the commitment of the UK with the environment. Several conservation groups backed the decision. "The MPA will cover some quarter of a million square miles and its establishment will double the global coverage of the world's oceans under protection. Its creation is a major step forward for protecting the oceans, not just around BIOT itself, but also throughout the world. This measure is a further demonstration of how the UK takes its international environmental responsibilities seriously", said Foreign Secretary David Miliband.

The decision was criticised by the Chagossians, who argued that the decision of setting up a Marine Protected Area in the Archipelago was taken to avoid the resettlement of the islanders, if the European Court of Human Rights finally ruled in favour of them.

The suspicions of the Chagossians were later confirmed by whistle-blower website Wikileaks, which leaked 500,000 top secret documents from US diplomatic outposts all around the world to four big newspapers in the UK, Spain, Germany and the US. In one of the embassy cables published by Wikileaks, the Director of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office stated that "establishing a marine park would, in effect, put paid to resettlement claims of the archipelago's former residents" .

"We do not regret the removal of the population, since removal was necessary for the BIOT to fulfill its strategic purpose", reads the leaked document .

The decision of setting up a marine reserve also aroused ignited discussions in the neighbouring Mauritius, which has been claiming sovereignty over Chagos Archipelago since 1965, and is currently holding a dispute with the UK administration .

With the creation of the marine reserve, the last hope for the Chagossians is almost gone. The Marine Protected Area forbids any human settlement in the whole Archipelago. Even if the European Court of Human Rights rules in favour of the islanders, it is unlikely that they will be allowed to return to their homeland.

On May 19, 2011, different Chagossians' support groups held a conference in London on the future of the Archipelago. The new situation forced the islanders to change strategy. The support groups presented a new project, based on the settlement of small eco-villages in the outer islands of the Archipelago, where some of the Chagossians who are still willing to return would be allowed to live in short-term periods.

Currently there are only around 4,000 Chagossians still alive. Some of them have given up any hope. Some others don't want to fight anymore. As for the rest, those who want to return, time is running against them. They have been fighting for over 40 years and now, in their eighties, they still hope that one day, before they die, they will be allowed to recover their lost paradise.

By CDR with No comments

FEATURE: Beyond the Libyan spring

Rebels on top of a captured tank. Source: AP

On March 2004, Tony Blair, then the British Prime Minister, visited Libya and received a warm welcome from Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. It was the first British politician to visit the country on a diplomatic trip after UN and US sanctions were lifted in 1999 and 2006 respectively. Blair then praised the booming economy of the country and the government's commitment in the fight against Al-Qaeda. As he put it, "I have been struck by how Colonel Gaddafi wants to make common cause with us against extremists and terrorism. The signs are better than they have been for many years. And the future prize in terms of security not just of this region but the wider world, indeed our own country, is great".

Exactly seven years later, on March 2011, UN's Security Council approved resolution 1973, imposing a no-fly zone over the country and authorising "all necessary measures" to protect the civilians against the Libyan army, boosting the rebels' aspirations. Only a few days before, France had become the first country to recognise the rebels as the legitimate government of Libya. But who are the rebels?

First time the world heard about the Libyan rebels was last February, after demonstrations held in the main cities of the country against Gaddafi's tough regime were firmly repressed by the use of military force. A few weeks later, the demonstrators organised themselves and occupied Benghazi, Libya's second biggest city, making it their stronghold. Further combats drew Gaddafi's forces back, while the rebels advanced towards the capital Tripoli.

According to Imad El-Anis, Libya specialist and lecturer in International Relations at Nottingham Trent University, "the ‘rebels’ are a diverse range of people: some are soldiers who in effect defected, some are people who are still closely linked to one tribe or another, but basically they are a patchwork of ordinary Libyans from all walks of life who have the same cause: reform of their government. The military response that the regime took against the pro-reform movement in its early stage also pushed ordinary civilians into the ‘rebellion’ in order to defend themselves."

On the other hand John Pike, director of defense think tank Globalsecurity.org points out that the conflict between the rebels and the Libyan government is the result of clashes between different tribes in the country. He argues that when Libya was created it forced different existing ethnias and tribes to form part of the same political territory, sharing an artificial governance in an artificial country.

"Libya is a divided country, and one underlying dynamic in play here is the conflict between Cyrenaica and Tripolitania. Although both territories had been united into Libya at independence in 1951, for the previous three thousand years these two territories had persisted as separate and distinct entities. Decades of Libya had not overcome the differences of millennia, and a territorially based civil war was the natural product of these distinctions. In Cyrenaica, the tribe was the chief focus of social identification. In Tripolitania, by contrast, loyalty that in a social context was reserved largely to the family and kinship group could be transferred more easily to a political party and its leader. The separateness of the regions is much more than simply geographical and political, for they have evolved largely as different socioeconomic entities, each with a culture, social structure, and values different from the others. Cyrenaica became Arabized at a somewhat earlier date than Tripolitania, and beduin tribes dominated it", explains Pike.

Children play on a tank in Benghazi. Source: EPA

Libya's rebels have become an armed group that fights a guerrilla-like warfare against government forces in the country. The emergence of this insurgent group is linked with the events that took place in Egypt and Tunisia early this year.

Tunisia and Egypt undertook a relatively peaceful revolution, removing the historical leaders of both countries from power, Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. They had ruled their countries firmly for decades, but massive pacific protests and social pressure made the two leaders step down from power, putting an end to these tough regimes without a shot being fired.

Libya's situation, however, was different. Here Gaddafi reacted with violence to the first protests, ordering the army to open fire to the demonstrators. Whereas in Tunisia and Egypt the army decided not to intervene, in Libya it was tightly controlled by Gaddafi. The violence by which government forces reacted to the protests led to a military uprising in the East of the country, carried out by a force later known simply as "the rebels".

According to Dr. Eugene Rogan, Director of the Middle East Centre at Oxford University, "the uprising has led to civil war in Libya because the army has split, so there were armed elements in Benghazi siding with the opposition, and loyalist military units in Tripoli to support Gaddafi. It could be simply that those furthest from the capital were able to rise up against the regime with less risk than those closest to Tripoli".

Dr. El-Anis, on the other hand, argues that the difference between Libya, on one hand, and Egypt and Tunisia, on the other, underlies in the social and military structure of these countries.

"The military response that we saw in the early stages of the movement in Libya is the key difference. In Tunisia and Egypt the military was not used against the civilian movement. In both cases the military refused and instead basically sided with the masses. The military structure in Libya is quite different and is very closely controlled and connected to the regime and the ruling family in particular. Furthermore, the military response that the Gaddafi regime insisted on in the early stages was quite disproportionate and did not leave room for any kind of negotiated process of reform like we have seen in Morocco, Jordan and Oman", explains El-Anis.

The rebels, an heterogeneous group of armed militia, soldiers and civilians, didn't seek for Western military support from the very first moment. In the first weeks they carried out a blitzkrieg-style offensive that took them almost as far as 20km away from the capital, Tripoli. But a counter-offensive by the government forces, through their 22,000-man strong air force, pushed the rebels back to Benghazi. The rebels' strategy changed then, seeking for support from Western countries.

The Libyan conflict and the pipelines. Source: Stratsis Incite

On March 18, only 24 hours after Resolution 1973 was approved by UN's Security Council, French planes bombed, for the first time, positions held by Gaddafi. It was seen as a victory for the rebels, which conceived the Western intervention and the setting up of a no-fly zone as a definitive boost to their interests. But the Western support proved insufficient as Gaddafi forces resisted the strikes and advanced farther towards the rebels' stronghold of Benghazi.

The Western intervention also aroused ignited discussions among the allied countries. The initial discourse was based on the premises of protecting the civilians through a series of air strikes that would hit Gaddafi's military forces. The irruption of land forces was rejected since the very beginning. Only now, after months of a stalemate in the battle and the continuous claims of the rebels for Western support, UK, France and Italy discuss the possibility of sending "advisors" to the rebels .

"I do not think the Western powers will commit land forces to Libya. They seem to regret getting so deeply involved already, and the recent strike on the Gaddafi family residence suggests they are trying to hasten an end by killing Gaddafi himself. While the Afghan war continues, neither the US nor the UK will be willing to enter any new Afghanistans", says Dr. Rogan.

Dr. El-Anis also points out that the situation has reached a critical point. "We can be sure that on the ground and behind closed doors in decision making circles there is still a lot of activity. I think NATO forces understand that the situation will not be eased for quite a few weeks and months. There is very little chance of NATO or any other soldiers on the ground in Libya any time soon", explains.

The situation has reached a point in which none of the combating forces seems a clear winner. According to a research carried out by IHS Global Insight, an American think tank, "NATO allies will be stuck between a rock and a hard place for the foreseeable future, fearing being dragged into a prolonged conflict for which they might be forced to take responsibility. The more active allies, UK, France and US might therefore seek fresh means of engagement, through non-lethal military aid, such as the package declared by the US on 20 April, and logistical and training support. However, without a strategic military shift that swings the power balance decisively in the hands of the rebels, the stalemate is set to drag on ".

The UN has also warned that more funds would be needed to support "relief operations" in Libya. "Unless funds are swiftly committed by donor countries, this shortfall will likely impact vital humanitarian assistance for tens of thousands of people displaced by the recent fighting", said UNHCR spokesperson Andrej Mahecic .

The shortage of Western military and economic support would be a hard blow to the rebels' aspirations.

A Libyan rebel guards a checkpoint in Brega. Source: Stratsis Incite

The current situation seems far from being resolved. Experts have already warned that the conflict in Libya could evolve into a permanent civil war with the presence of NATO forces, transforming the country into a new Afghanistan. Former Libyan Foreign Ministry, Moussa Koussa, which fled the country in early April, told the BBC that "taking Libya into civil war would lead to so much blood and Libya would be a new Somalia".

A rebel victory in the conflict seems unrealistic right now, and it will certainly never happen without Western support. In that unlikely situation, Libya could end up being ruled by an unknown leader under the close surveillance of the UN and the Western powers. This would appease all the factions involved in the conflict, as happened in Afghanistan with Mohammed Karzai. Western leaders have asked Gaddafi to step down from power and go into exile in several occasions. Still, even if the rebels win with Western support, there is a high risk of confrontation between different factions, given their heterogeneous nature.

"The future in Libya no doubt will involve regime change. The US, UK and France have all pledged not to stop until Gaddafi goes, so they have made that much clear. In the absence of sound state institutions, the scope for collapse and further conflict is a present danger. A UN trusteeship cannot be ruled out to help the Libyans secure their country post-Gaddafi while shaping new institutions of government", says Dr. Rogan.

Middle East experts at Quilliam, a counter-extremism think tank, argue that the Western powers should indeed back the creation of a national anti-Gaddafi coalition. "Such a broad national coalition could become the basis for a transitional government that could guide Libya towards achieving a just, representative and democratic government. The creation of a broad-based, respected and widely-accepted transition government with a large military component will be necessary to create a suitable environment in which Libya’s first free and fair post-Gaddafi elections could be organised", explain.

Dr. El-Anis, on the other hand, warns that the conflict will be long, and the possible future scenarios are not very clear. "The rebels don’t have much chance of success if international pressure on Gaddafi eases off. Financially speaking the regime is running out of funds and this is probably going to be the key. Ultimately though I don’t think the rebels are likely to be able to overthrow the regime militarily and likewise Gaddafi’s forces are not likely to be able to militarily re-assert their control over much of Libya as long as NATO is involved. Eventually I think we will see some kind of progressive political process alongside the military one and the removal of the Gaddafi regime is still what I think will happen", argues.

Saif Al-Islam, heir to Gaddafi's regime. Source: AFP

Another situation could see Gaddafi fleeing the country and his second son, Saif Al-Islam, ruling it but undertaking several reforms which will try to appease the Western powers. Mr. Al-Islam, who studied at the London School of Economics and owned a mansion in London, still enjoys a close relation with prominent figures in the UK. He also told in an interview published in The Spectator, back in 2002, that once in power his policy would be focused on transforming Libya into a Western-like democracy .

Whatever happens, the prospects of a rapid and clear victory of the rebels seem highly unlikely.

By CDR with No comments

COMMENT: A stagnant economy?

Source: Treasury

The announced cuts and the increase of the taxes are trying to boost the British economy, which now face the hard task of overcoming the hangover left by the deep financial crisis that hit the whole world in 2008. However, Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, also was forced to announce that despite the reforms and the cuts the 2011 growth forecast for the British economy will be downgraded from 2.1% to 1.7%. Similarly, the forecast for the following year, 2012, will decrease from 2.6% to 2.5%. Finally, the economic forecasts point out that inflation will remain between 4% and 5% in 2011, and will fall to 2.5% in the following year.

The aggressive cuts announced by the British Government will affect various key sectors. The good news is that concerning fuel, the duty is being cut by 1p per litre, and the planned inflation rise in fuel duty, scheduled for last April, was delayed until 2012. These measures will be covered by an extra £2 billion tax applied to the main oil firms present in the North Sea. However, the VAT on fuel will not be reduced. Concerning other key products, the Government won’t reform the planned rises in alcohol and tobacco tax, of 4p on a pint of beer and 15p on a bottle of wine.

Regarding the borrowing, the forecast is £146 billion for this year, £2.5 billion lower than expected. Osborne forecasted that the borrowing will fall to £122 billion in 2012 and £29 billion by 2015-2016. The national debt forecast for this year will reach the 60% of national income, rise to 71% in 2012 and finally fall to 69% by 2015.

Source: Treasury

Is the British economy facing a real threat of stagnation?

All these measures aim at reforming the badly-hit British economy but, will they be enough? Most business groups hailed the Budget, and agreed that would create new jobs, but there are fears among the oil and gas producers, who argue that the £2 billion tax in oil companies will damage a key sector in the UK. On the other hand, the Institute of Fiscal Studies calculated a loss of £200 per household on average after the announced measures were finally applied, last April.

The new measures are regarded as little adjustments that won’t fix the whole problem in the British economy. They are seen as a plan that hopes for growth, rather than an actual plan designed to boost economic growth.

Source: Treasury

Wales, the poorest region in the UK

Wales eyes the Budget with hopes and fears. The planned extra £65 million over the next five years is good for the Welsh economy, yet it fails to balance the negative impact of the announced cuts in the region. Wales is currently the smallest economy of the whole United Kingdom, with an average GDP of less than half as that of London.

Wales also faces the problem of big unemployment rates, the highest of the whole country, peaking at 9%, some 126,000. It is obviously becoming a very worrying problem, and the cuts announced in the previous Budget won’t do any good to it.

The words of Plaid Cymru’s MP, Jonathan Edward, make it clear: “The truth is that the UK Government has no plan B for Wales, and worryingly there is a very real threat of a decade of economic stagnation”.

Yet an extra £65 million over the next five years, including up to £34 million in 2012 is a gift that Wales has to embrace. Yes, it fails to relieve the Welsh economy, but still, it is equivalent to a 0.1% increase in the Assembly Government’s resources. And we see it as the stepping Stone for the recovery of the Welsh economy.

By CDR with No comments

INTERVIEW: Chasing lights and shadows

DAVID HURN (England, 1934) is one of these persons that can be described as self-made men. He self-taught and became an assistant at the Reflex Agency at only 21. Decades later he set up the renowned School of Documentary Photography in Newport. His photographs have registered everything from political demonstrations to the everyday life in Wales. He has already been 55 years on the business, and at 76 he is still an active photographer. His photographs showed the best and the worst, the prettiest and the dullest things, the most glamourouse and the most vulgar scenes; and for several decades he worked with the best and for the best. The Navigator chats with him about his career and the profession of photographer.

What is your latest work about?

Well, now I am focusing on the idea of perspective. Landscapes. I want to imitate those cityscapes and countryside views that the dutch painters depicted on the 17th Century. One of the things I have learned about landscape is that it is a completely different thing, it has nothing to do with what I have been doing in my life.

When did you feel attracted by photography?

In 1954. I was a kid and discovered that there was a Camera Club in my city. I was very shy, and taking pictures behind a camera was a good way to start, I didn't need to be exposed. I went to the club and asked them whether I could join, and they said that I needed a camera to join them, so i bought one. The I started taking photographs. I wanted to be a photographer and I showed photographs of what I knew: weddings, parties, local celebrations...

How were your beginnings?

I took my first photographs in 1955. The first equipment I had at this time was a small Kodak, and I used to sell photographs of weekend celebrations and weddings in Harrods. Now I still keep selling some of these prints. Then I bought another camera, a second-hand Leica, and used it all my life. Just recently I switched to digital. I do still take pictures with film cameras, I think Leica is the best camera ever made and has the best lenses.

Source: Magnum

How did you get to master photography?

I self taught, I learned from how the pros worked. When I started there were no schools, you just learned from making mistakes. It is very important to understand that you need a perfect technique, you cant do anything without having a perfect technique, and the way to learn is practising and practising. I once talked to a pianist, Baremboim, and i asked him what does make a great pianist. And he said "playing the piano a lot". It is the same with photography, you have to shoot and shoot in order to improve. I learned from experience, and especially from other people's experience.

You were one of the first Western photographers to document the Hungarian uprisings in 1956. How did you feel?

In 1956 me and a friend decided to go to Hungary to document the uprisings. We hitchhiked to Austria and then we discovered that some ambulances departed from there and entered Hungary. We asked one of the drivers and he took us. When I went to Hungary I didn't know hot it would be. You learn that things don´t take place when you expect they will, so that´s why I decided to follow journalists. Life had only a photographer there and then they saw me, so they said: "why don´t you work for us?", and once you are there you just have to take pictures on focus, because everything is happening around you.

How did you join Magnum and what did it mean for you?

One of the most difficult things as a photographer is getting access. I didn't know anything about Magnum, they didn't have an office in London, but I met some guys from Magnum, they saw my pictures and they asked me to join Magnum. For me it meant working with people that were better than you are, and you can learn a lot out of it because you watch and you learn. It was a clever thing to do.

Source: Magnum

You also photographed posters for Hollywood movies, especially those about James Bond...

Yes. One of the problems with the photography I do is that they pay low. I discovered that working on movies was a way to make money. I had a friend who worked with Sean Connery and told me that they were planning to do a low budget film called "James Bond". They didn't have a poster for the film, so I did it for them. When we were about to shoot it they told me that Sean Connery didn't have a gun. At that time I collected air pistols, so we made the photograph with my air-pistol. Years later we put the gun on auction and it sold for 300 pounds. I read that two months ago this same pistol was sold for 220,000 pounds.

Tom Carlyle, who did the James Bond movies, did also Barbarella. He rang me once and told me that they had problems with Jane Fonda and asked me to come over. I stayed with her for nine months, photographing her for the movie.

Later on you worked on three books about Wales. What was your purpose?

I have always photographed people doing things. I have curiosity and I try to participate in others' lives, in what you see around you. But you get older, and when I came back to Wales I wanted to show what was culture. What did mean being Welsh? I decided to do three books: how we live in Wales, people who live in Wales and a third book on the landscape of Wales. I left it the last because is more leisure. I´m 76 and wanted to try myself to slow down, that is why I decided to do landscape. What does the landscape, how is it done, the human use of landscape...

What is, in your opinion, the best advantage of being a photographer?

Living as a photographer you meet people and you do those things you want to do. I do take pictures for a purpose. I can´t just wander around and take a picture of something I like. I only record what interests me, but I have to make clear which kind of photograph I am looking for before going out and shoot. I think the world is a wonderful place, it never stops evolving, and I find interest on trying to record what I see. That is such a privilege.

By CDR with No comments

FEATURE: Manning's uncertain fate

For the past ten months he has been held in a tiny obstructive jail of only a few feet wide, first in an army prison in Kuwait, and later in the military prison in Quantico, Virginia. He is held in what the US goverment calls 'maximum security conditions'. Bradley Manning, the american private accused of leaking hundreds of thousands of top-secret documents to whistleblower website Wikileaks, languishes in inhuman conditions, waiting for a trial that could end up with the application of the death penalty.

In the last months Manning has spent 23 hours every day closed in a windowness 6,7 square metre cell. His only companions there are a bed, a sink and a toilet. He is allowed to leave the cell only for one hour a day. He is also prevented from practising any type of exercise while being in the cell. Only in the scarce hour that he is allowed to walk outside his solitary prison, he is taken to a slightly bigger cell, where he can walk in figures of eight and is not allowed to run or practise any physical activity.

He is held awake between 5am and 8pm. If he falls asleep, guards awaken him. During the day, he remains under 'Prevention of injury' regime to prevent any temptative of suicide, whereby he has to respond 'yes' every five minutes to the two guards that stand beside his cell. For two months he was held in 'full suicide watch', another perverse euphemism that involved stripping him to his underwear and having his glasses confiscated in order to prevent any self-injury. He is also allowed to have either a book or a magazine at a time. If he has any visitors, he is shackled by hand and foot, and two guards monitor every movement he does and listen to every word he pronounces.

The inhuman conditions of his confinement have been described in an 11-page letter that Manning wrote to his lawyer, David Coombs, and later confirmed by the few friends that were allowed to visit Manning at Quantico. The situation has also been denounced by different lawyers and campaign groups such as Amnesty International. Several protests around the world have pleaded for Manning to be held in better conditions.

Manning, an ex-US private, was born in Oklahoma in 1987, and when his parents divorced he flew with his mother to Wales, where he lived for four years. Since 2000 to 2004 he attended the Tasker Milward school in Harverdfordwest, Pembrokeshire. Now, protesters all over the UK rely on the fact that, according to the 1981 British Nationality Act, any person born after 1983 to a UK citizen, even if not living in the UK, obtains immediately the British nationality. However, according to Amnesty International the UK government has failed to visit Manning and demand better confinement conditions for him.

Protests were also held in front of the US embassy in London, were around 100 people demanded better conditions for Manning’s imprisonement and a fair trial. Welsh campaigners also joined the protests.

Plaid Cymru’s MP Ann Clwyd, who is also member of the All-Party Parliamentary Human Rights Group, raised Manning's case in Parliament and asked for a debate. “Manning's confinement situation serves no purpose other than to humiliate and degrade him. Manning is being subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. This is particularly disturbing when one considers that he hasn't even been brought to trial, let alone convicted of a crime. I regard myself as a great friend and admirer of the United States, but this treatment of one of their own soldiers ill-becomes that otherwise great nation. I do not say this lightly, but Bradley Manning's treatment has uncomfortable echos of the treatment of detainees in Guantanamo Bay. I implore the US Administration to treat Bradley Manning humanely whilst he is detained. There is increasing concern about Bradley Manning's case in the UK, and in particular in Wales, so I will continue to raise te case of Bradley Manning with the UK Government. I do not think it is acceptable for the UK Government to refuse to engage with the case and I call upon the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, to officially raise Bradley Manning's case with his US counterpart", said.

Amnesty International also launched a worldwide campaign to support Bradley Manning in which the organisation asked people to get involved by sending petitions to the US authorities in order to improve Manning’s confinement conditions. Susan Lee, Amnesty International’s Americas Programme Director expressed her concern about the situation of private Manning. “We are concerned that the conditions inflicted on Bradley Manning are unnecesarily severe and amount to inhumane treatment by the US authorities. Such repressive conditions breach the US’s obligations to treat detainees with humanity and dignity. We are also concerned that isolation and prolonged celular confinement may undermine Manning’s ability to defend himself. We urge the US authorities to review Bradley Manning’s situation. Under international standards, prisoners who have not yet stood trial should be treated in accordance with their right to the pressumption of innocence. Our concerns regarding his treatment are further heightened by the fact that military pshychiatrists have repeatedly recommended that Bradley Manning be removed from ‘Prevention of injury’ status”, explained Lee.

The secret files

When in late 2010 Bradley Manning leaked more than 250,000 documents to different international newspapers, nobody had a grasp of the consequences of one of the biggest leaks in the history of the United States. The cables showed dispatches from 250 US embassies and consulates around the world, which pictured an in-depth image of the US diplomacy. The files, which are top-secret documents that could only be accessed by US intelligence officers, included political analysis, detailed accounts and embassy officer’s impressions about the different countries intended to be read by the US authorities in Washington.

Before becoming a US private Manning used to be a high-skilled hacker. When he joined the US army he was assigned to a support battalion at the Forward Operating Base Hammer, Iraq. From his position he could access to a SIPRNet, a digital platform that the US Government used to transmit classified information.

According to the published chatlog of the conversation that Manning had with a friend, Manning came to the base with a CD labelled ‘Lady Gaga’, he erased the music, wrote a compressed file with all the documents. "I would come in with music on a CD-RW labelled with something like 'Lady Gaga'. No one suspected a thing. I listened and lip-synched to Lady Gaga's Telephone while exfiltratin possibly the largest data spillage in American history. I have unprecedented access to classified networks 14 hours a day seven days a week for eight months", he said in the conversation.

The chatlog register also shows that Manning knew that the leaking of these documents would have a massive impact in the US international relations. "Hillary Clinton and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning and find an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format, to the public. Everywhere there is a US post, there is a diplomatic scandal that will be revealed. It's beautiful, and horrifying. Information should be free. It belongs in the public domain", said Manning to his fellow hacker-activist.

After saving all the documents in the CD, he uploaded them to whistleblower website Wikileaks, but Julian Assange, the man in charge of the page, decided not to publish them immediately. The Wikileaks activists went through all the documents and disclosed the most important information. Early in April the website published the footage of an Apache helicopter shooting at the crowds in Iraq. Finally, the disclosed cables were leaked to four main international newspapers. A few days later, Assange was accused with having carried sexual assaults to two women in Sweden, and Manning was arrested and imprisoned. The friend whom he spoke with at the chatlog, Adrian Lamo, was the one who turned him to the FBI.

Manning's situation

The future of Bradley Manning is hard to predict. Last month the US Army added 22 new charges against the ex private, among them 'aiding the enemy'. If found guilty, this charge could carry death penalty. Manning faces, at least, life-long condemns for 34 charges such as high treason, leaking classified documents, theft of public property or records, transmitting defence information and computer fraud. Manning was also recently accused of attacking his stepmother with a knife before joining the army in 2007.

Manning's imprisonement conditions have already caused some reactions among the US politics. Early in March, US department spokesman PJ Crowley quitted, arguing that the treatment of Manning was being counterproductive for the american interests. Crowley said that the prosecution started against Manning is well grounded, but the fact that he is being held in such inhumane conditions has eclipsed the whole case.

In the meantime Bradley Manning still languishes in the same tiny cell where he has been held since June 2010, waiting for a trial that, it seems, never comes.

By CDR with No comments

FEATURE: Muhammad's unrest

King Muhammad VI

As Saudi Arabia intervenes in Bahrain and Col. Gaddafi fights back the rebels in Libya, the rest of the Arab world tracks expectantly the evolution of the uprisings in the troubled countries, fearing contagion to their own lands.

The first protests in Tunisia and Egypt and, above all, the positive result they achieved, shook the political roots of the rest of the countries in the Arab strip in north Africa and in the Middle East. Within weeks, almost all the Arab countries registered major protests in the main cities, where citizens demanded, at the very least, political reforms.

The unrest spread even to Morocco, one of the most stable countries in the region, and a Westernised nation ruled by king Muhammad VI. The protests have achieved their goals in Egypt and Tunisia, overthrowing the dictators that firmly ruled the countries for decades, and have led to an almost open civil war in Libya. But, will ever Morocco fall into such turmoil?

Contrary to what is commonly thought, currently Morocco is one of the countries with less GDP of the region, with a GDP per capita much lower than Egypt's and roughly half that of Tunisia, for instance. Yet experts say that it is highly unlikely that Moroccans will ever try to remove king Muhammad VI from power.

Source: CIA factbook

Amid the turmoil

The wave of protests which shook all the Arab world arrived to Morocco on February 20th, when over 5,000 demonstrators gathered at Bab al-Had square in Rabat, calling for change. According to Human Rights Watch, hundreds of people demonstrated also in the main cities such as Casablanca, Agadir and Marrakesh.

The protesters set fire to police stations in Marrakesh and Larache, and vandalised a stadium, two political offices and two hotels in Hoceima, according to the Moroccan Association for Human Rights. During the unrest five people died at a bank that was set on fire.

Just one day after the demonstrations took place all over the country, king Muhammad VI announced the creation of the Social and Economic Council, which would have the task of monitorising and carrying out reforms. It was a first movement towards the citizenship. Muhammad also added that the main priority for the executive would be fighting against poverty.

The last Wikileaks cables revealed that the royal Alaouite family was corrupted, and had been wasting thousands of dollars in the last years. On the other hand, the official unemployment rate of the country is only at 10%, but several Moroccans don't have any job, raising the doubt of the actual accuracy of these figures.

Source: BBC

Morocco's future scenarios

The removal of Ben Ali and Mubarak and the clashes registered in Libya and Bahrain lead to a question difficult to answer: will these 'Jasmine revolutions' spread all over the Arab countries, deposing all the long-term monarchs and dictators that have ruled these nations for decades?

Albeit the question remains complicated, experts agree that it is unlikely to see a change in the Moroccan regime. According to Jillian C.York, a freelance journalist based in Morocco, the public opinion is strongly divided between support for the monarchy and a move toward a parliamentary democracy. Yet the king has only been in power for 12 years -unlike in Libya, Egypt and Tunisia-, and hence the Moroccans don't have the same sense of frustration. On the other hand the demands of the protesters were mainly directed to a move to a parliamentary democracy where the king will play a minor role -like the Spanish one-, an end to corruption and more economic balance.

Journalist Matt Schuman explains that the situation in Morocco is very different from that of Egypt, Libya and Tunisia. Despite having a lower GDP, the poverty is not oppressive, and the Moroccans can live a simple life without being rich but neither without starving.

Another difference, according to Schuman, is that whereas in Egypt and Tunisia the protests were driven by a cultural elite of educated youngsters and intellectuals, Morocco suffers from a lack of literacy. Only around 50% of the population is educated, and therefore "Moroccans' illiteracy hampers the spread of information in general, and would definitely impede the organization of any type of protest movement".

Finally, Moroccans don't want to depose the king. Although there is a Prime Minister, political parties and elections, the lesser political bodies are corrupted. However, the royal family is seen as a 'credible figure'. On the other hand, since he was crowned king of Morocco, 12 years ago, Muhammad VI has carried out some political and social reforms, allowing certain freedom and democracy in the country.

According to Jillian C.York, "Moroccans who support the protests are generally taking advantage of the current political climate on the region, but they are not seeking the same things; they are not hoping to overthrow the king. The king is well-liked and has not been in power for very long. He has made major changes during his 12 years of rule and much of the country is happy with that".




The revolutions' third way?

Last week, and after nearly a month watching in silence the evolution of the uprisings in the neighbouring countries, king Muhammad VI announced in his first national address since the uprisings "comprehensive constitutional reforms", where "individual and collective liberties will be expanded". He also promised that the power to name the Prime Minister will be transferred to the Parliament. Moreover, he added that some powers will be devolved to Morocco's regions and the figure of Prime Minister will have more powers. The proposals for the reforms will be carried out by a special committee created ad-hoc, and will be submitted in June. It might be the beginning of a more democratic Morocco, meeting some of the demands of the protesters and becoming the Jasmine revolution's third way, aside from the overthrowing of the ruling class in Egypt and Tunisia, and the open war in Libya.

By CDR with 1 comment