Earlier, Prime Minister Mark Rutte was against the decision of resigning and subsequently dissolving the coalition government. He insisted that there is a need to have political stability in the wake of the pandemic. However, the coalition parties believed that a political backfire was bound to happen, and the consequences were unavoidable after the release of the parliamentary report. [2] 

It was only after this that in a press conference the Prime Minister said: “We are of one mind that if the whole system has failed, we all must take responsibility, and that has led to the conclusion that I have just offered the king, the resignation of the entire Cabinet.” [3]

With this statement, he confirmed that he and his government take full responsibility for the scandal and submit their resignation to King Willem-Alexander van Oranje. [4] 

At the same time, he reaffirmed that although he has resigned, he will play the role of the government’s role until the next general elections scheduled on March 17 this year. As per many political experts, there is a likely shift to the Dutch social policy left after this scandal. Nonetheless, one cannot deny that respite the resignation, and the Prime Minister has instead been able to escape relatively untouched successfully.

What Is the Child Benefits Scandal?

In the Netherlands, childcare is private. Under the tax department’s earlier policies, parents had to pay for childcare, but they did get subsidies that depended on their income. However, after Mark Rutte took over as the Prime Minister in 2010, several changes were made to the anti-benefit fraud laws. These measures were further taken in 2013 after authorities reported illegal methods used by Bulgarian crooks to collect such payments. [5]

With the policies’ changes, the tax department was given more power to make sure that such misuse of benefits does not occur. Also, this allowed the tax department to compensate for the seized funds.

However, things soon started going downhill when the negatives of these laws started impacting the Dutch citizens. Several parents lost both benefits and were further asked by the authorities to repay the child benefits that they had received in the past. It affected over 26,000 families, of which 10,000 households were forced to repay benefits. It led to bankruptcies, divorces and unemployment among those people. [6] Even when the citizens contacted the authorities with their grievances, there was no genuine response. [7] 

These complaints soon started piling up and finally in 2017, the government-appointed an official to look into these complaints. On a thorough check, it was observed that a disproportionate number were of immigrant parents who lost the child benefits. When the need for further information was required for evidence gathering, the parliamentary inquires got only a little information from the ministries with most of the information blacked out. However, one thing was exact, and civil servants had cut child benefits to families from 2013 to 2019. [8]  

By the end of 2019, an estimated amount of € 500 million, about €30,000 ($36,300) for each family was set aside. [9] Also, the current scheme was decided to be expanded. and expanded compensation was set aside when the government accepted its mistake, although payments were not made. [10]

The final nail in the coffin was the parliamentary report, [11] that brought out the government had falsely accused several parents of tax defrauding. It is a grave injustice done to the people of the Netherlands. In a separate investigation, the Dutch Data Protection Authority concluded that tax inspectors had discriminated against citizens with dual nationality. [12] 

In November, a report [13] ranked the Netherlands government is considered a leading global tax haven for large corporations. So the government chasing the individuals for such small amounts thus did not go unnoticed.

Families Reaction to This Scandal

Several families have been affected by these mishaps on the government’s side. So, they are suing the government. Ornaldo Kadir is an attorney who is currently representing over 600 families stated that it was predominantly immigrant Dutch citizens that were target due to the method of ethnic profiling. It used a particular algorithm that characterized immigrant dutch citizens of dual nationals to be a fraudster. Not only that, but even missing signatures were considered as a parameter by the tax authorities to brand the people as frauds. It was not only an injustice but also a violation of the constitution. [14]

Way Ahead

Several ministers such as Health Minister Tamara Van Ark, Finance Minister Wopke Hoekstra, and former Tax Minister Menno Snel and opposition Labour Party leader Lodewijk Asscher have been named court documents.

The Leader of the Opposition Labour Party, Lodewijk Asscher who held the Social Affairs Minister, office from 2012-2017 has also stepped down from his current position due to the “unheard justice” done to people the Netherlands. It was his resignation that forced Prime Minister Mark Rutte to revisit his position on the issue. Eric Wiebes, Economic Affairs Minister, also resigned and stated that he would not be a part of the current guardian government. [15]

With the general elections scheduled in March, the current child benefits scandal is likely to significantly less impact Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s popularity. According to polls, it is expected that his People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy is likely to win a fourth term if he gets the largest share of votes. In other words, Mark Rutte’s VVD party is ahead of the far-right leader Geert Wilders’s party. If he wins, Prime Minister Mark Rutte would continue as the government’s head by forming a new coalition. [16]

With this scandal, the Netherlands in the third European country to be caught up in a political crisis. Earlier, Prime Minister, Giuseppe Conte had to resign due to falling in the majority after their coalition party led by Renzi backed out and also the government in Estonia had to resign due to a corruption scandal.

References

[1] Erdbrink, Thomas. “Playing by the Rules: Dutch Leader Offers a Sober Contrast in a Brash Era.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 2 June 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/05/28/world/europe/rutte-dutch-netherlands.html.

[2] Schaart, Eline. Mark Rutte Pulls Plug on Dutch Government, PLANS Immediate Return. 15 Jan. 2021, www.politico.eu/article/dutch-government-resigns-over-childcare-benefit-scandal/.

[3] Press, Associated. “Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and His Entire Cabinet Resign over Child Welfare Scandal.” Free Press Journal, 15 Jan. 2021, www.freepressjournal.in/world/dutch-prime-minister-mark-rutte-and-his-entire-cabinet-resign-over-child-welfare-scandal.

[4] “Dutch PM Mark Rutte and His Entire Cabinet Quits over Welfare Scandal.” Hindustan Times, 17 Jan. 2021, www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/dutch-pm-mark-rutte-and-his-entire-cabinet-quits-over-welfare-scandal-101610900452800.html.

[5] “Netherlands Uncovers $120m ‘Bulgarian Fraud’ Benefits Scam.” BBC News, BBC, 25 June 2013, www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-23043543.

[6] “Dutch Government Resigns over Child Benefits Scandal.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 15 Jan. 2021, www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/15/dutch-government-resigns-over-child-benefits-scandal.

[7] Berg, Stephanie van den. “Dutch Government Quits over ‘Colossal Stain’ of Tax Subsidy Scandal.” Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 15 Jan. 2021, www.reuters.com/article/us-netherlands-politics-resignation-idUSKBN29K1IO.

[8] Amaro, Silvia. “Dutch Government Resigns after Childcare Benefits Scandal.” CNBC, CNBC, 15 Jan. 2021, www.cnbc.com/2021/01/15/dutch-government-resigns-after-childcare-benefits-scandal-.html.

[9] “Dutch Rutte Government Resigns over Child Welfare Fraud Scandal.” BBC News, BBC, 15 Jan. 2021, www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55674146.

[10] “Dutch Government Faces Collapse over Child Benefits Scandal.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 14 Jan. 2021, www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/14/dutch-government-faces-collapse-over-child-benefits-scandal.

[11]www.tweedekamer.nl/sites/default/files/atoms/files/20201217_eindverslag_parlementaire_ondervragingscommissie_kinderopvangtoeslag.pdf.

[12] Markus, Niels. “Belastingdienst Werkte Zeer Kritische Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens Tegen.” Trouw, 17 July 2020, www.trouw.nl/binnenland/belastingdienst-werkte-zeer-kritische-autoriteit-persoonsgegevens-tegen~b69beed9/.

[13] The State of Tax Justice: Tax Justice in the Time of COVID-19. Nov. 2020, The_State_of_Tax_Justice_2020_ENGLISH.pdf.

[14] “Dutch Government Quits over ‘Colossal Stain’ of Tax Subsidy Scandal.” Mint, 15 Jan. 2021, www.livemint.com/news/world/dutch-government-quits-over-colossal-stain-of-tax-subsidy-scandal-11610728718467.html.

[15] Kok, Laurens. DPG Media Privacy Gate, 14 Jan. 2021, www.ad.nl/dossier-vertrek-asscher/kabinetsval-dichterbij-blijven-zitten-terwijl-asscher-wel-zijn-conclusies-trekt-is-lastig-uitlegbaar~aff58082/.

 [16] CBS News. “Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and His Entire Cabinet Resign over Child Welfare Scandal.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 15 Jan. 2021, www.cbsnews.com/news/dutch-government-cabinet-mark-rutte-resign-child-welfare-scandal/.

The post CHILD BENEFITS SCANDAL AND COLLAPSE OF DUTCH GOVERNMENT appeared first on WISER WORLD.

However, the 2^nd February verdict was enough for the Russians to come out in support of him. Thousands of supporters of Alexei Navalny poured onto the streets and marched towards central Moscow. These protestors clashed with police in body armour who was also armed with staves to control the protest. According to OVD-Info, an independent monitoring group state that over 1,000 protestors were arrested across the country the following day. [3]

It is indeed a controversial decision as Navalny is one of the most prominent Kremlin critics and Vladimir Putin’s foe. It is not the first time that some Kremlin critic is being put behind bars. Mikhail Khodorkovsky [4] and chess world champion Garry Kasparov [5] are some of the people who were forced to leave Russia in fear of their lives for criticising Putin. However, Boris Nemtsov was not that lucky as he was shot dead in Kremlin, 2015. [6] It makes Alexei Navalny the last critic of the Kremlin to be standing alive and on Russian soil.

During the court visit, one could not miss noticing Alexei Navalny’s wife, Yulia. The verdict included the deduction by the judge of 10 months from the originally designated three-and-a-half-year sentence as Alexei Navalny had already spent that duration in house arrest. Yulia stepped out after the court session when Navalny smiled and shrugged his shoulders and yelled: “Don’t be sad! Everything is going to be all right”. [7] She waved back with Navalny’s two lawyers, Vladimir Kobzev and Olga Mikhailova. They have approached the European Court of Human Rights but to no avail. [8] However, all of these come as no news as Alexei Navalny is a nobody but one of the rising figures in Russian politics and a massive challenge to President Vladimir Putin.

Who Is Alexei Navalny?

Alexei Navalny is a lawyer turned activist. He is a very prominent critic of President Putin and his administration. However, to several Russians, he is not just a challenger to President Putin but is instead considered a contender to the leadership position. President Putin is a former KGB colonel who intends to continue controlling Kremlin for a few more decades. On the other hand, Navalny is seen as a revolutionary leader. 

Navalny is a rising figure who has been a symbol of protest against President Putin’s grey bureaucratic hold and his colleagues from KGB in the Kremlin. Navalny is seen as an opponent by several Russian elites. He worked as an organiser for the liberal Yabloko faction in 2007. However, he was kicked out of the party in 2007 for participating in a march with radical nationalists in Moscow. [9] 

He came second in the mayor elections of 2013 with 27% votes, although he alleged that it was due to the authorities’ ballot-rigging. Even though Sergei Sobyanin won the election, it cannot be denied that it was the first official challenge given by Navalny to President Putin. [10] As a result, alleged corruption allegations were put on his to debarred from the 2018 elections. Not just him, even his allies are frequently prevented from holding any office. Now, in the Duma elections that will take place in September 2021, he and his allies want to challenge the United Russia party. [11]

At the same time, Kremlin is getting ready to keep him away from one of the other reasons. Earlier as well, he has been jailed because of his connection to protests. He has also been convicted twice for financial misdeeds, although he claimed that they were politically motivated. Not only that, but he has also had significant eye damage due to a disinfectant thrown onto his face. [12]

How Is Alexei Navalny a Challenge to President Vladimir Putin?

Alexei Navalny gained prominence by using social media to reach out to people regarding matters concerning Russian politics. He makes videos on the Russian elites’ various details that they would like to keep in the dark. Navalny has over 2.5 million Twitter followers and about 6 million YouTube followers. He uses these social media platforms to expose the truth about the sources of the Russian elites’ wealth. One such video is that of President Putin’s secret Black Sea palace. [13] The video has garnered over 110 million views. Several other anti-corruption videos are made by him that tend to hit these Russian elites’ personal lives and big-shot names in Kremlin. [14] Thus, Navalny is no new to raids, lawsuits, threats, and jail stint. 

Alexei Navalny is evident in his objectives if he comes to power- to end corruption by state officials. Rampant state corruption has been one of Putin’s governance highlights, and President Putin is right in the centre of it stashing billions of dollars from strategic enterprises. It led Navalny to become a shareholder activist in 2007. He used his financial knowledge to purchase several shares of state-run firms that have a suspicious background. [15]

He has several foundations based out form other countries to expose the corruption taking place in the Russian power centre. Moreover, he is not a one-person army. Several people are ready to fight this menace in Russia. Vladimir Ashurkov and Leonid Volkov is the director of the London based anti-corruption foundation [16] and is an aide of Navalny in Lithuania. [17] 

So, President Putin has the state machinery in his realm as his tool to keep control over his critics. However, Alexei Navalny uses social media and his dark humour as a tool to keep up with other people. Many have come and gone, but Alexei Navalny is still standing. He has done something that no one could do before- get under President Vladimir Putin’s skin. He has been brave and has stood firm even when put in the worst of situations. President Putin so far, been unable to break him.

That is the reason why Kremlin has been trying to eliminate him for a year with different methods. Jail, lawsuits, raids, threats. Nothing has worked so far. So, the Kremlin decided to use the shadiest method under their belt to silence him once and for all. Last year, Navalny was poisoned in Siberia by an undercover team of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) spy. They had applied “Novichok Nerve Agent” in the internal parts of Navalny’s underpants. It had earlier been used in 2018 on Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal in Salisbury. [18] However, Alexei Navalny was able to survive due to timely hospital treatment. Navalny was even able to expose the FSB assassins. [19]

With this attempt, the Kremlin finally thought they had got rid of Navalny. Even though he survived, they assumed that he would not return to Russian soil from Berlin, where he was recovering. Nevertheless, Navalny again proved them wrong when he flew back to Moscow on 17^th January. It was seen as a direct challenge to President Putin. It was then he was detained from the passport control at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport within hours of his arrival. [20]

His lawyer Olga Mikhailova told the Echo of Moscow radio station that she could not meet her client. In other words, Navalny was denied legal representation. [21] All of this culminated into street protests in over 100 towns and cities in Russia. [22] From Crimea to Vladivostok on the Pacific, the streets were flooded with supporters. Protestors even gathered in- 50C in Yakutsk to show solidarity with their hero. [23]

International Condemnation of Alexei Navalny’s Arrest

Not just Russians, but there has been an international outcry for human rights violation by both USA and European diplomats and leaders in this case. NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden who is now a Russian citizen, Jack Sullivan, Joe Biden’s incoming national security adviser, and even Mike Pompeo are prominent names who voiced their opinion against the state brutality on Alexei Navalny. Not just them, but even US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and German Foreign Minister, Heiko Maas, have described this act as being “deeply concerning”, “cowardice”, and a “bitter blow” to the rule of law in Russia respectively. [24]

In a video conference with French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel made a statement from Berlin- “We consider this expulsion unjustified and think it is another facet of the things that can be seen in Russia at the moment that are pretty far from the rule of law.” [25]

Showing solidarity with Germany, Poland, and Sweden, Macron stated, “I think this was a huge mistake even for Russian stability today.” Sweden’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mats Samuelsson said that “it considers this entirely unjustified, which we have also conveyed to the Russian side”. Stockholm “strongly rejects Russian claims that the diplomat took part in a demonstration in Russia” and “reserves the right to take appropriate response measures,” he said. [26]

Way Ahead

Nonetheless, nothing seems to change the minds of the Russian officials in this case. To make matters worse, Kremlin went ahead with expelling EU diplomats on 5th February. The Russian Foreign Ministry accused diplomats of Sweden and Poland stationed in St. Petersberg and a diplomat of Germany stationed in Moscow of taking part in the protests on 23rd January to show support to Alexei Navalny. all the three diplomats were declared “persona non grata” and were ordered to leave shortly. [27]

These have further worsened the situation and the EU’s possible attempt to re-engage talks with Moscow that EU Foreign Affairs Chief Josep Borrell was spearheading. In retaliation to this, on 9^th  February 2021, Germany, Poland and Sweden on Monday each declared a Russian diplomat in their country “persona non grata.” All the Russian ambassadors were told to leave the country immediately. [28]

Whatever is happening or will happen, one thing is for sure Alexei Navalny did not lose anything from his prison sentencing. Locking up Navalny for a long time is bound to make him a martyr.

In 2013, when he was arrested, a large crowd had gathered that forced the authorities to leave him. Since then, President Putin is stringent on dissent moves like this. Nevertheless, keeping him long now will surely increase the protest and may lead to political instability. If he is released now, he will be a massive challenge in the Duma elections scheduled in September 2021. Either way, it seems like Alexei Navalny’s win and a loss to the “Vladimir, the Underpants Poisoner.” [29]

REFERENCES

[1] The Moscow Times. “As It Happened: Navalny Sentenced to 2 Years and 8 Months in Penal Colony.” The Moscow Times, The Moscow Times, 3 Feb. 2021, www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/02/02/as-it-happened-navalny-sentenced-to-2-years-and-8-months-in-penal-colony-a72803.

[2] Times, The Moscow. “Russia to Try Navalny on WWII Veteran Slander Charges.” The Moscow Times, The Moscow Times, 5 Feb. 2021, www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/02/05/russia-to-try-navalny-on-wwii-veteran-slander-charges-a72841.

[3] Roth, Andrew. “Alexei Navalny: 1,000 Arrested after Protests over Jailing of Russian Opposition Leader.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 3 Feb. 2021, www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/02/russian-opposition-leader-alexei-navalny-jailed.

[4] “Mikhail Khodorkovsky Freed after Pardon from Vladimir Putin.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 20 Dec. 2013, www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/20/mikhail-khodorkovsky-freed-putin-pardon-russia

[5] Williams, Stuart. “Garry Kasparov Quits Russia.” Mint, 6 June 2013, www.livemint.com/Politics/7iTyaOSRom9xGeF2OmaYUI/Former-chess-champion-Garry-Kasparov-quits-Russia-over-fears.html.

[6] “Who Killed Boris Nemtsov? We Will Never Know.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 3 Mar. 2015, www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/02/boris-nemtsov-never-know-who-killed-moscow-vladimir-putin-russian-opposition.

[7] Feehan , Katie. “Russian Police Raid Navalny’s Offices after Wife of Putin’s Greatest Critic Flees Moscow for Germany.” Daily Mail Online, Associated Newspapers, 12 Feb. 2021, www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9252195/Russian-police-raid-Navalnys-offices-wife-Putins-greatest-critic-flees-Moscow-Germany.html.

[8] Staff, Reuters. “Russia Dismisses European Court of Human Rights’ Call to Free Navalny.” Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 17 Feb. 2021, www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-politics-navalny-court-release-idUSKBN2AH1XI.

[9] Coalson, Robert. “Is Aleksei Navalny a Liberal or a Nationalist?” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 29 July 2013, www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/is-aleksei-navalny-a-liberal-or-a-nationalist/278186/.

[10] “Alexei Navalny and the 2013 Moscow Mayoral Election | Princeton University Library.” Princeton University, The Trustees of Princeton University, 27 Jan. 2021, library.princeton.edu/news/general/2021-01-27/alexei-navalny-and-2013-moscow-mayoral-election.

[11] “Russian Presidential Election: Alexei Navalny Barred from Competing.” BBC News, BBC, 25 Dec. 2017, www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42479909.

[12] Kramer, Andrew E. “Kremlin Critic Aleksei Navalny Says Attack Left Him Mostly Blind in an Eye.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 2 May 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/05/02/world/europe/russia-aleksei-navalny-opposition.html.

[13] Putin’s Palace. History of World’s Largest Bribe. 19 Jan. 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipAnwilMncI.

[14] Don’t Call Him “Dimon”. 2 Mar. 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrwlk7_GF9g.

[15] Schreck , Carl Schreck. “Russia’s Erin Brockovich: Taking On Corporate Greed.” Time, Time Inc., 9 Mar. 2010, content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1970475,00.html.

[16] AFP . “Alexei Navalny: Russian Opposition Leader Navalny Aides Push EU for New Russia Sanctions: World News – Times of India.” The Times of India, TOI, 9 Feb. 2021, timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/europe/navalny-aides-push-eu-for-new-russia-sanctions/articleshow/80767361.cms.

[17] Welle, Deutsche. “Navalny Ally Leonid Volkov: ‘Our Aim Is to Outsmart Putin’: DW: 15.02.2021.” DW.COM, www.dw.com/en/navalny-ally-leonid-volkov-our-aim-is-to-outsmart-putin/a-56573967.

[18] Harding, Luke. “’A Chain of Stupidity’: the Skripal Case and the Decline of Russia’s Spy Agencies.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 23 June 2020, www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/23/skripal-salisbury-poisoning-decline-of-russia-spy-agencies-gru.

[19] “’Do You Remember the Underwear’s Colour?’ – Navalny’s Call with Duped Spy.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 21 Dec. 2020, www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/21/what-does-alexei-navalny-say-the-duped-russian-spy-admitted-about-his-poisoning.

[20] “Alexei Navalny Detained at Airport on Return to Russia.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 17 Jan. 2021, www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/17/alexei-navalny-detained-at-airport-on-return-to-russia.

[21] AFP. “Alexei Navalny Lawyer Says Denied Access to Moscow Police Cell.” Hindustan Times, 18 Jan. 2021, www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/alexei-navalny-lawyer-says-denied-access-to-moscow-police-cell-101610962827751.html.

[22] Desk, Sentinel Digital. “The Russian Affair – Sentinelassam.” The Sentinel Assam, The Sentinel Assam, 17 Feb. 2021, www.sentinelassam.com/editorial/the-russian-affair-524975

[23] Troianovski, Anton, and Andrew Higgins. “Pro-Navalny Protests Sweep Russia in Challenge to Putin.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 Jan. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/01/23/world/europe/russia-protests-navalny.html.

[24] Times, The Moscow. “World Reacts to Navalny’s Arrest.” The Moscow Times, The Moscow Times, 20 Feb. 2021, www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/01/18/free-navalny-western-leaders-tell-russia-a72637.

[25] Ap. “Relations between EU and Russia Worsen over Navalny Jailing.” The Economic Times, Economic Times, 6 Feb. 2021, economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/relations-between-eu-and-russia-worsen-over-navalny-jailing/articleshow/80717773.cms.

[26] Staff, Reuters. “Russian Court Made ‘Huge Mistake’ in Jailing Navalny -Macron.” Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 4 Feb. 2021, www.reuters.com/article/us-france-macron-russia-idUSKBN2A42NJ.

[27] PTI. “Relations between EU and Russia Worsen over Navalny Jailing.” The Week, The Week, 14 Dec. 2020, www.theweek.in/wire-updates/international/2021/02/06/fgn49-eu-russia-ld-navalny.html.

[28] Jordans, Frank. “EU Countries Expel Russian Diplomats in Navalny Dispute.” AP NEWS, Associated Press, 8 Feb. 2021, apnews.com/article/eu-countries-expel-russia-diplomats-69e018425fa2d0bc9dde29aa1fad8c60.

[29] Rfe/rl. “’Vladimir The Underpants Poisoner’: Navalny Mocks Putin In Court.” RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty, ‘Vladimir The Underpants Poisoner’: Navalny Mocks Putin In Court, 2 Feb. 2021, www.rferl.org/a/russia-navalny-speech/31082857.html.

Featured Image by – Elena Ignatyeva, AFP

The post ALEXEI NAVALNY: CRITIC OF KREMLIN appeared first on WISER WORLD.

A Peek Into History of Bosnia Municipal Elections

Since 2008, municipal elections had not been held in Bosnia as the SDA and HDZ parties could not agree on electoral rules. However, both the parties had drafted the budget together, although transparency lacked as citizens were unaware were the money was spent. In the present scenario, the citizens argue that elites have had abused power as they had been living on the money of the taxpayer and shied away from showing any responsibility towards them. The unemployment rate in addition had accelerated during this period. The establishment of a city council signifies hope in Bosnia. Multi-ethnic parties are expected to win councillor which is believed to be a positive sign, although the two-party nationalist majority had been the trend. Bosnian city has been the witness to the ethnical division between the Bosnian Muslims and the Serbs. In the collective memory of the Bosniaks, the horror of the genocide remains etched.

ETHNICITY AND RELIGION: CAUSES OF THE GENOCIDE IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINIA

Bosnia-Herzegovina formed a part of the Republic of Yugoslavia. Croatia and Slovenia declared independence which thereafter saw military retaliation by the Republic itself. The violence that erupted in Yougolsovia in 1991 must be perceived as the first major conflict that occurred after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, during this period there was no British intervention because it was argued that this was merely an internal dispute. It had been led by Milosevic, the President of the Republic of Serbia who had been invigorating violent uprisings of Serbian nationalist parties and envisioned an ethnically Serb-dominated state which was hailed by Dobrica Cosic, the most popular writer in Serbia. It was him who espoused that Slavs were the most superior of all the Balkans.

The Croats and Bosniaks, constituting 60 per cent of the population voted for secession which had been opposed by the Ethnic Serbs that led to violence. Gunmen had been deployed to instigate fear in the minds of the minorities. Thereafter, the necessity of cleansing this population began by the ethnic Serbs, first of which began by detaining the Bosniak or the Bosnian Muslims. Then there were deported by a train to Hungary. Many have become refugees, 40,000 of them been Muslims and it has been argued that the Local Red Cross was complicit in this genocide. Not only that, the Serbia militia forces had been supported by the then President (Gutman, Roy, 1993) Yet, it cannot be denied that the United Nations was established by then and could not prevent the Serbenican genocide. It has been argued that the soldiers of the United Nations Peacekeeping forces were complicit in this.

THE DAYTON AGREEMENT AND AN ANALYSIS OF ITS SUCCESS

The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia-Herzegovinia known by the name of Dayton Agreement of Peace ended the long-drawn conflict. An agreement was officially reached in 1995 at Wright Petterson Air Force. The Agreement epitomized the triumph of diplomacy by the Western Powers. Annex 1A which is concerned with the deployment of the Implementation Force, whereas Annex 1B outlines regional stabilization, security measures and as well as principles regarding regional arms and ammunition. Although it was against the wishes of the Serb and Croatian ultra-nationalists, Bosnia had been announced as a unified state which allowed those displaced to return to their homes.

The Federation was established as well as the Republic of Srpska or Republic of Serbia was recognized as a political entity which was awarded rights to self-govern itself. The media has indeed portrayed the Serbs as the criminals of the genocide and the Commemoration Day only deepens this memory which is of despair. (Murphy, 2011) Nevertheless, Serbian leadership undermines the legitimacy of the Dayton Agreement. The US involvement has been heralded because of their might to end war-torn Bosnia. In addition to that, the Clinton administration wanted to ensure the signing of this agreement as he would be running for re-election campaign against Robert Dole.

Now Bosnia has three separate armies, police forces and a national government whose functioning can be clearly argued is only on paper. Power remains still in the hands of its nationalists who aim to prohibit refugees returning to their homes. However, it can be argued that the Dayton Agreement has succeeded only in the prevention of armed conflict after it had been signed. In addition, SFOR or the NATO-led force in failing in the execution of the agreement.

CONCLUSION

The Municipal elections must be perceived as an indication of improvement in Bosnia as there will be the establishment of the City Council. It may lead to reconciliation as its leaders have forgone issues of ethnicity and ready to propound issues of employment and the economy. Nevertheless, it remains a necessity that the United Nations must play an active role in ensuring that the holding of the elections are not disrupted and can return to normalcy.

The post BOSNIA MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS 2020: FIRST LOCAL VOTE IN 12 YEARS appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Nevertheless, such a political crisis is not new to the country. Italy has always been at the centre of political turmoil for decades. It is quite evident with the fact that the country has seen about 60 governments since WWII. Conte and Renzi’s drift has been known to the public for a long time, and hesitation escalating was very much anticipated. So far, the drift was kept at bay by this centre-left coalition due to the coronavirus emergency. However, the pandemic situation has also now escalated, and it seems that it outlasted the political goodwill. [2]

Why Did the Problem in Italian Politics Start?

The reason for this drift started due to the approach of Conte and Renzi concerning financial matters. [3] Back in 2020, the GDP of Italy slumped by about 10% due to COVID-19. [4] Adding on to that, was a stimulus package that was given by the European Union (EU) worth €750 billion that was allocated to several EU nations. In July 2020, Italy was allowed to get the lion share of the EU stimulus package, amounting to over €200 billion (about $243 billion) in a grant and low-interest loans. [5] Because of such loans, Italy is now the second most debt-ridden economy after Greece. [6]

For weeks, Matteo Renzi had criticized the plan laid out by Conte to use the EU funds to use these handout purposes and less on serving the health needs. Even when the plan was improved on Tuesday night as per the request, Matteo Renzi was still not satisfied. Finally, the usage of €200 billion worth of that package was approved during the night of about 12th and 13th January 2021 by the lawmakers. However, the lawmakers of the Italia Viva abstained from voting on it. Also, two members of resigned including Elena Bonetti, the former minister for family and equal opportunities.  Both Conte and Renzi have a different opinion on how this recovery money given by the European Union should be used.

It increased the difference between Renzi and Conte, as the issue became a matter of political vote bank and both the centrists are competing for the same voters. [7]

Matteo Renzi’s move has been met with a mixed response, ranging from anger to confusion to chaos. One opinion poll even suggested about 70% of the Italians feel that this move by Renzi is not due to the difference of opinion, but rather for his political gain. Some experts also state that this move by Renzi may be due to him being side-lined by the coalition in recent times. [8] So, Renzi was doing nothing but using this opportunity to improvise on his political gains.

However, on Wednesday, Renzi argued in a news conference that dealing with the pandemic also meant “solving problems, not concealing them,” He has taken issue with Conte’s strategy for rebuilding Italy’s tattered economy.

Nonetheless, it cannot be denied that Matteo Renzi is a very well-known political figure in Italian politics and holds an even more crucial role in the current government headed by Giuseppe Conte.

Why Renzi Is Crucial to the Italian Government?

Italia Viva was formed by Matteo Renzi in September 2019, after he quit the centre-left Democratic Party. After the populist right-wing League Party’s departure, Renzi and his party played a significant role in forming the coalition government by Conte. The coalition government comprises the centre-left Democratic Party, Five Star Movement (MS5) and the left-leaning parliamentary group called Free and Equal.

According to recent polls, even though Renzi has only 3% public support, his party Italia Viva has 30 lawmakers in the lower house and 18 lawmakers in the upper house, thereby making them a junior coalition partner.

Way Ahead

Renzi had elected as the Prime Minister in 2014. So, he understands how the situation prevails while on that post and how politics needs to be done to rule the state. Not only that, but he also has been known for mediating conflicts among parties having varied political inclination- ensuring that the far-right parties are out of power by making sure that a coalition is created between populist and centre-left parties. 

With the decision of Renzi, there are only a few alternative options that can be viable for moving ahead in this situation. First, that Conte and Renzi come to a compromise by keeping the current coalition government. In other words, without escalating the situation, Conte needs to convince Renzi to support the government. It is still possible as Renzi is still. However, if this does not happen, the country would be on the brink of losing a government in the middle of a pandemic. Alternatively, the Conte government can go through a no-confidence motion. If he loses, the situation of Conte’s government will be like Schrödinger’s cat. In other words, Conte would only be left as the caretaker of the government, and he would also not have much power over Renzi. However, a coalition is still possible. After all, with a lack of public support, Renzi would not want to put his 48 lawmaker seats at risk. Nonetheless, if this not, the situation may move ahead in a different path.

Second, if the coalition government does not move ahead, then considering the pandemic, a government of national unity will be sought to be created by President Sergio Mattarella.

Third, the country could go ahead with the national vote. It would mean that the country may end up going into an election right in the middle of the pandemic. In case of an election, either Conte would win the third term as the Prime Minister, or the far-right wing parties would form the government. The far-right in Italian politics comprises of the League Party and the Brothers of Italy. They have been gaining support for the past few years and hold about 40% of the electoral vote. So, in case an election happens and the far-right wins, then there Italy will have the most anti-European government in Western Europe. [9]

In this way, one can state that Italy is currently in such a political situation that it will not be suitable for the nation if escalated. [10] Hence, sorting out the differences is the best possible way out of this situation.

References:

[1] Italy – COVID-19 Overview – Johns Hopkins. coronavirus.jhu.edu/region/italy

[2] Harlan, Chico. “Italy’s Government Falls into Chaos, Further Complicating the Covid Response.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 13 Jan. 2021, www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/italy-government-renzi-conte/2021/01/13/dd65f6bc-55c6-11eb-acc5-92d2819a1ccb_story.html.

[3] Roberts, Hannah. “Italy’s Coalition Fights for Control of EU Recovery Cash.” POLITICO, POLITICO, 5 Jan. 2021, www.politico.eu/article/matteo-renzi-giuseppe-conte-coalition-government-recovery-fund-cash-coronavirus/.

[4] Amaro, Silvia, and Sam Meredith. “Italy’s Government in Crisis after Former PM Pulls Support for Ruling Coalition.” CNBC, CNBC, 13 Jan. 2021, www.cnbc.com/2021/01/13/renzi-italys-government-in-crisis-after-former-pm-pulls-support.html.

[5] Speak, Clare. “How Italy Plans to Spend €209 Billion of EU Money.” Thelocal.it, 17 Sept. 2020, www.thelocal.it/20200917/more-growth-lower-tax-for-families-italy-sets-out-plan-for-spending-eu-recovery-fund.

[6] Samuelson, Robert. “Opinion | Why Italy’s Debt Matters for Everybody.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 24 May 2020, www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-italys-debt-matters-for-everybody/2020/05/24/12b2f310-9baf-11ea-ac72-3841fcc9b35f_story.html.

[7] Roberts, Hannah. “Italy’s Coalition Fights for Control of EU Recovery Cash.” POLITICO, POLITICO, 5 Jan. 2021, www.politico.eu/article/matteo-renzi-giuseppe-conte-coalition-government-recovery-fund-cash-coronavirus/.

[8] Bozza, Claudio. “Sondaggio: Crisi Di Governo Incomprensibile per Un Italiano Su 2. E per Il 73% Renzi Persegue i Suoi Interessi.” Corriere Della Sera, Corriere Della Sera, 13 Jan. 2021, www.corriere.it/politica/21_gennaio_13/crisi-governo-italiano-due-non-capisce-motivi-il-73percento-renzi-persegue-suoi-interessi-59b0ac42-5515-11eb-89b9-d85a626b049f.shtml.

[9] Zampano, Giada. “Giorgia Meloni Is Rising Star on Italy’s Far-Right Stage.” AP NEWS, Associated Press, 18 Oct. 2019, apnews.com/article/fa37b62daab246f2a9ccb0887284aaee.

[10] “Italy’s Government in Crisis after Junior Coalition Partner Quits.” Euronews, 13 Jan. 2021, www.euronews.com/2021/01/13/italy-s-government-close-to-collapse-amid-row-over-covid-recovery-cash.

The post ITALIAN POLITICS: FALLOUT OF ITALY’S GOVERNMENT appeared first on WISER WORLD.

There is no denying the fact that the United Kingdom had a significant impact on the European Union’s Foreign Policy. Brexit, in terms of the Middle East, the UK has shared the same concerns as the leadership in Brussels. This has included securing the flow of oil, ensuring non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and combating radical groups. However, cooperation with continental Europe has not always been the UK’s top priority when it came to Foreign Policy. As seen most notably in 2003 when the British government, under Labour Prime Minister joined the US-led coalition in invading Iraq, abasing strong criticism from Germany and France. To analyze Great Britain’s withdrawal from the confederacy, we look at three specific effects.

EU’s Loss of Power — Brexit & Middle East

We have already established the centrality of the British in the European Union’s economic development, foreign policies, and trade activities. Given the UK’s heightened power with the confederation, Brexit has not only left a gaping wound within the EU but has also shown the fragility of the union. Cracks within the European Union are so evident that political experts and heads of state, have entertained the possibility that the confederation may eventually break down completely. Since the Brexit referendum, there have been various right-wing discussions across European countries. The most glaring example of this is Poland. There has been a set of disagreements between the Polish government and the European Commission over contentious judiciary reforms.

The seriousness of the disagreements between the two entities is reflected through the words of the European Council President Donald Tusk who said, “The Matter is dramatically serious. The risk is deadly serious. Polexit is possible.” A similar situation of contention has developed between Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s Hungarian right-wing government, which has been at odds with the EU, ever since the union voted overwhelmingly to label Orban’s government as a “systemic threat to the rule of law”. Given the current state of the Union, a weaker and inward-looking Europe is predicted to be less involved in the Middle East. The nature of Europe’s dealings with actors in the Middle East will significantly be altered as it strikes to bargain with authoritarian figures in maintaining border security and stability while paying lip service to its values and ideals. In terms of seeing the actual effects of Europe’s or the UK’s dealings with the states of the Middle East, post-Brexit, it will be interesting to see if the EU still enjoys its power to promote its values of the rule of law and democracy, given the significant erosion in soft power after the Brexit.

UK’s Interventionist Policy

The second aspect that we focus on is the prediction that the United Kingdom may adopt an interventionist policy following Brexit — Even though, in regards to the Middle East, historically the UK has followed an independent foreign policy. Breaking away from the European Union, grants the country freedom from its regional commitments to mainland Europe and could lead to a more pragmatic and self-interested approach to its dealing with Middle Eastern states.

With the UK adopting a more selective role in the region, it is expected that the country will pursue short term goals over long term goals. This might include its interests in fighting terrorism and promoting UK business, rather than focusing on establishing a peace process in states like Syria. This however does not mean that the British will overlook the peace process completely. Being an important stakeholder in the Middle East Peace Process is vital for the country to maintain its relevance and influence in the region. If anything, a post-Brexit future may be the most ideal time for Britain to assert itself in the Middle East region, especially as the EU could be further weakened by Britain’s future departure and its internal problems. In terms of the business expansion in the Middle East, the Global Risk insight has predicted that the country will extensively focus on the Gulf region, along with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Regional and International Actors

Given the probability of the EU adopting a more inward-looking policy and the UK following a more self-interested pattern in its interactions with Middle Eastern Actors, there is a possibility that this could result in a greater role for global powers such as China, to develop strategic partnerships and political alliances with the countries in the region. There could also be an increased role of regional actors in combating security dilemmas and economic issues through the involvement of the Gulf Cooperation Council. In terms of the Council, the GRI has predicted that blocks such as the GCC will step-in to essentially develop security and economic frameworks to address regional issues. However, this seems a bit too idealistic given the current political issues the Middle East is plagued with, and the splintering of various member states into their network groups, such as the Saudi-Emirati Coordination Council.

Conclusion

From our discussion on the effects of Brexit, it is clear that the process has not only redefined relations between the Middle East, the United Kingdom and the European Union and reshuffled the intentional economy, but also has the potential of significantly altering Europe’s and the UK’s relations individually with other international actors. There exists tremendous insecurity and anxiety in markets around the world, as experts stand by to see the effects of these changes. A great amount of diffidence can be felt in the case of both the EU and the UK, as both remain unsure of how Joe Biden, the President-elect of the United States of America might react to the current situation. Had the Brexit deal gone through under Trump we could have expected him to adopt a more pro-British stance, but with Biden, the ball can be in anyone’s court. Only time will truly tell.

Featured Image: AFP/Getty Images

The post 3 MAJOR EFFECTS OF BREXIT ON THE MIDDLE EAST appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The Cyprus conflict has remained remarkably a major bone of contention between the Greek and Turkish communities as the 1950s witnessed the unleashing of inter-communal violence. It was the National Organization of Cypriot Fighters, a guerilla force which rebelled against the British Raj during this period that compelled the United States and the United Kingdom to rethink its foreign policies. On the other hand, a paramilitary group was established by the Turkish Cypriots which became known as the Turk Mukavemet Teshkiati or TMT. Rather, enosis has fitted well into the vision of pan-Hellenism or the Great Idea, known also as the “Megali Idea” and has been the sole goal for Greek Cypriots since British colonization and even after its independence. With no assistance from the United Nations, enosis had to be forgotten and a compromise was sought for, whereas the British authority realized the dominance of Cyprus military bases would fulfill its strategic necessities (Bishku, Michael M, Turkey, Greece and the Cyprus Conflict, 1991, p: 169). Therefore, independence of Cyprus was sought by Archbishop Makarios, the Greek Cypriot as the formidable choice, although many Greek Cypriots demanded union with Greece, termed as “enosis” which was refuted by Turkish Cypriots as they believed partition known by the nomenclature of “taksim” was the only solution. However, Makarios desired for alteration in the constitution which the Turkish Vice President, Dr Fasil Kucuk feared would sabotage their minority rights and led to inter-communal fights. The new constitution for Cyprus was then ratified on 16th August 1960. However, London and Zurich Agreements became the foundation of the three treaties as well as the embodiment of the constitution of 1960. By this, the presidentship would be headed by a Greek Cypriot whereas the position of the Vice-President must be awarded to a Turkish Cypriot. The Treaty of Establishment defined the territory of the Republic which excluded the British military bases; the Treaty of Guarantee which erased enosis as a proclamation and permitted Great Britain, Turkey and Greece to engage in ensuring the constitutional and institutional integrity of the Republic. Lastly, the Treaty of Alliance stated the utilization of Greek and Turkish servicemen to be working towards the defence of the region. It was again in 1963 that peaceful co-existence between communities was disrupted when the Greek Junta, a paramilitary group overthrew the government of President Makarios. The purpose was to demand reunification with Greece and as a result of this, Turkey deployed troops in Cyprus in 1974 which finally cumulated into the partition of this region. Northern Cyprus was occupied by Turkey and Southern by the Greek counterparts. Nevertheless, because of the existence of allegiance of both the communities in Cyprus to their motherlands, namely Greece and Turkey has resulted in absenteeism of patriotism in this region (Kaloudis, George, Cyprus: The Enduring Conflict, 1999, pp: 7).

Quandary: Defining the Turkey-Greece Diplomatic Ties

The Aegean is a semi-closed sea which separates the mainland constitutes to function as a bickering territory between Greece and Turkey. The former argues that Turkey has been violating Greek sovereignty, whereas the latter believes that Greece has been aiming to turn the Aegean into a Greek lake. In 2017, a Turkish vessel had been shot down by the Greek coastal guard and it was in April 2018 that two patrol boats came neck to neck in Kardak islets. It was in July 2020 that Turkey was sending a research ship which would carry out a survey over the close to Kastellorizo, which covered the region between Cyprus and Crete. Rather, the conflict has become militarized as both countries are mobilizing ships in the Mediterranean. Thereafter, Ankara had signed a deal with Libya to establish an Exclusive Economic Zone or EEC from the Turkish southern coast to Libya’s north-east coast. Both Cyprus and Greece stated that the treaty violates the International Law of Sea or the United Nation Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS). Both have accursed this move as they perceive that this may emerge as a barrier to the development of the Eastern Mediterranean. Not only that, Greece was horrified when President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan decided to transform the Hagia Sophia museum into a mosque, which is a United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) heritage site. This museum had been built by the Roman Emperor, Justinian in the year 537 CE. This was condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church, based in Greece. These instances have only accentuated the relationship which is fuelled with animosity.

Conclusion

Turkey’s history of such acts against the minorities constitutes what she envisions himself: a visionary leader. No doubt, she believes that expansionism can give her this recognition. NATO must remain true to its core values which have been its foundation, yet her indecisiveness to take a stand in Greece and Turkey conflict has proved to be fatal.

The post GENESIS OF THE GREECE-TURKEY CONFLICT appeared first on WISER WORLD.

These attacks set in motion a chain of action. Minister of Interior Gérald Darmanin announced the elimination of people who spread hate through the internet. Baraka City which is a humanitarian NGO has been dissolved by the government because it took pleasure in such terror attacks. The government has additionally, threatened to ban Le Collectif Contre l’islamophobie en France, a nonprofit organization that claims to combats anti-Muslim racism: According to Mr Darmanin, the C.C.I.F.’s work is against the Republic of France.

After the attacks, Macron spoke in favour of Mr Paty by reaffirming the right to free speech, including the right to satire and blasphemes. President Emmanuel Macron believes that Mr Paty was killed for embodying the French Republic and vowed to hold “laïcité” up high. This has angered Muslims not only in France but all around the world. Thousands of people in Pakistan, Lebanon, and other Palestinian territories entered into a fury after Macron vowed to protect the right to caricature the Prophet Mohammad. The decision of the Charlie Hebdo magazine to republish the cartoon caricature has also been seen as an act of violence against Muslims. A crowd in Bangladesh was seen burning an effigy of Macron, while a rally in Pakistan resorted to throwing stones at the police who were trying to control the angry mob. France itself remains on edge after the attacks and Macron ordered 7000 soldiers to guard the schools and religious sites. Macron’s latest speech in favour of the caricature has skewered relations between Turkey and France further. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan accused Macron of Islamophobia and went ahead to question his mental health. Erdoğan has since then called on Muslim countries to boycotts all French goods.

Dalia Mogahed, a former advisor on faith for former US President Barrack Obama, now a research director of the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding claimed that the President of France was wrong to support a cartoon caricature that “pits freedom of speech against blasphemy”. She said that the cartoons clearly showed how the country is suffering from Islamophobia. She said, “They are the equivalent of the N-word. They are equivalent of blackface. They are racial slur.” The cartoons “target a vulnerable, marginalized, disempowered and demonized community by a powerful institution, which is then further demonized, sometimes by the state, for protesting those slurs.”  

Before the attacks took place, Emmanuel Macron had spoken about the new government plans to combat separatism. In his Republic in Action: Speech, he differentiates between Islam and Islamic terrorism. He said, “Let’s not fall into the trap of conflating issues, set by polemicists and extremists, which consists in denouncing all Muslims. That trap is what the enemies of the Republic set us; it consists of making all citizens of the Muslim faith objective allies because they are supposedly the victims of a well-organized system. Too simplistic.”

“What we must tackle is Islamist separatism. A conscious theorized, the political-religious project is materializing through repeated deviations from the Republic’s values, which is often reflected by the formation of a counter-society as shown by children being taken out of school, the development of separate community sporting and cultural activities serving as a pretext for teaching principles which aren’t following the Republic’s laws. It’s indoctrination and, through this, the negation of our principles, gender equality, and human dignity.”

Therefore, we see that the President’s notion of separatism assumes that a minority of Muslims are setting themselves apart from French society and creating their societies in the suburbs. The problem here is that the speech portrays Muslims as being immature, which is far from true. Many studies have shown that the Muslim community is well integrated. According to a study in 2019, 70% of  Muslims claimed that they were allowed to practice their religion freely. 41% said that they should adopt some of the principles of laïcité as French citizens and 37% said that they wished laïcité to be more flexible. The Muslims do not criticize the age-old republic version of the 1905 law about the separation of the State and Church. They attempt to criticize the recent interpretations of the law that seems to blame the Islamic community for terror events.

 In his research, Vincent Geisser found that many Muslims called upon the mosque to pray for the preservation of France. Many others also grieved for non-Muslims who were victims of Islamist terror attacks. It has been observed by the Centre of Strategic and International Studies, a Washington DC-based think tank, which the US right-wing was responsible for 76% of the attacks but the Islamic extremists were blamed for them. Many argue that a vast majority of French Muslims are equally horrified by the terror attacks but feel the entire community cannot be stereotyped because of the actions of a few. However, many others in France now feel the urgent need to protect French secularism from what they see as a fundamentalist Islamist onslaught.  

The wedge between not only the Muslim community and the rest of the world but amongst every religious community is not new and has had a notorious effect on us. In Uttar Pradesh, renowned poet, Munawwar Rana was arrested by the police for spreading the already existing enmity between communities, when he said that he would kill whoever made an obscene cartoon of his father or mother, he would kill that person. He went on to say that he would feel like killing whoever made obscene and objectionable cartoons of Sita, Lord Ram, and other gods and goddesses. While anger revolving around the insult of one’s religion is understandable, the easy usage of the terms “killing” and actual murders for it is unacceptable and only shows how deeply religion is rooted in the minds of the people and the depths to which an individual, irrespective of his or her age, is willing to go.

Religion and actions based on religion have always been a hot topic of debate for women and men around the world and such terror attacks make one wonder how far this fight amongst the various communities will go.

The post RADICAL ISLAMIST TERROR ATTACKS IN FRANCE AND ANTI-FRANCE PROTESTS appeared first on WISER WORLD.

BACKGROUND

To better understand the Kosovo problem, first, let us delve into the background of the region. The region was previously together known as Yugoslavia and was internationally non aligned until the end of the cold war. In 1991, when the Soviet Union got dissolved, even Yugoslavia saw the rise of the nationalistic movement. The main actors were Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Albania. All the countries are now independent but the most violent revolutions were in Croatia and Bosnia. It is important to keep in mind that Serbia had been the major power of Yugoslavia and it didn’t want Yugoslavia to be disintegrated, to maintain its power in the region. Further, Serbia made attempts to gain territories in both Croatia and Bosnia but had been mostly unsuccessful. Croatia too had tried to gain ground by using its military over regions with mostly ethnic Croats but again had faced criticism from the international community. Same goes with Serbia. Now coming to Kosovo, it is a comparatively small tract of land in between Serbia and Albania. It had, historically, been a part of Yugoslavia but upon its breakdown, had been claimed to be a part of Serbia by the Serbian government. The residents of the region did not recognize themselves as part of Serbia. 95% of the residents in the region are native Muslim Albanians which is the other neighbour of Kosovo. This places Kosovo between two belligerent states and makes the whole situation much more complicated.

Ethnic composition of Kosovo

THE KOSOVAN WAR

The Kosovo conflict began in 1974, when Tito, the then head of the former Yugoslavia, officially integrated Kosovo within Yugoslavia, making it an autonomous region. However, this autonomy was only in the paper as most of the political and economic aspects of Kosovo were controlled by Yugoslavia. It was only Tito and his ideology of unification and integration which kept the region from breaking down but all that changed when Tito died in 1980. After nearly a decade and half of the political discrimination faced by the Albanians in Kosovo, resistance started. By the end of the millennium Yugoslavia was a shadow of itself. Kosovo, however, had gone through two years of atrocities and war crimes. By 1998, two factions were formed in Kosovo, both fighting for independence from Serbia, although by different means. The more famous was the Kosovo Liberation Army which used violent means and a militia to fight the Serbian army. The other faction led by Ibrahim Lugoba was Democratic League of Kosovo which preferred the rather peaceful approach. Eventually, the Serbian or Yugoslavian army had come into conflict with the KLA. The Serbian army had been humbled for the majority of 1998 and this led to a rise in war crimes against Albanians residing in Kosovo. An increase in rape, executions, killings of prisoners of war and even ethnic cleansing was visible. Thousands from the Kosovo side and nearly 1500 Serbians had died. More than 600,000 people had left the region, crying for their lives, creating one of the biggest European refugee crises since the Second World War. Initially, there was a very less foreign intervention, that too indirect, but in the next few months, such massacres happened that the international community could not remain silent.  The massacre in Prekaz, Klecka and Ljubenic had shocked the international community, but it was on 15th January 1999, in Racak province that 45 people including women and children were killed, which prompted NATO to join in.

All this time, the Kosovo region was formally under the Serbian government. Even though in name, Yugoslavia still existed, a lot of people think that the war in Kosovo was just an indirect fight between Serbia and Albania who, historically had been at loggerheads. Initially, NATO wanted Kosovo to remain a part of Yugoslavia, but eventually, after the prolonged fighting, NATO supported the claim of full independence by Kosovo. NATO gave an ultimatum to the Serbian/ Yugoslavian forces to leave the region or be bombed. Soon, the Serbian forces withdrew under military pressure from the west. Nonetheless, the Serb President Slobodan Milosevic refused to recognize Kosovo as a country and some reports claimed that the terror attacks by nongovernmental forces were given the green light by Milosevic himself. All this prompted further NATO bombings in Yugoslavia, mainly the key cities of Serbia. Eventually, on June 10, 1999, the UN Security Council passed UNSCR 1244 which made the Kosovo region as a UN governed until stability was reached. The UN forces were welcomed with open arms as for the first time in nearly two decades, hopes of stability and peace were visible. The Kosovo war had officially ended but there have been small escalations between the countries, especially in the north of Kosovo.

POST WAR KOSOVO

Kosovo People after declaration of independence | Credit: Andrew Testa for NYT

Soon after the war ended in Kosovo changes were visible. In 2001 the organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe supervised the first-ever elections for the Kosovo assembly. As a result, Ibrahima Rugova became the President and Bajram Rexhepi was elected the Prime Minister. It was in 2006 that for the first time since 1999 talks happened between ethnic Serbian and Kosovo leaders to decide the future of Kosovo. There was a lot of back and forth during and after these talks. Plans were proposed by the United Nations but were constantly rejected by the Serbs. An important step forward was the formation of European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo which reassured the region that in the future, Kosovo will be supported by the European Union. All this led to the declaration of independence by Kosovo on 17th February 2008 which was followed by recognition all over the globe including NATO, EU and OECD. It is to be noted that throughout these years, several clashes broke out between the Serbian and UN forces. Eventually, Kosovo was able to form its force, trained by NATO and the number stood at 2500. Another important development was the ruling of the International Court of Justice that the declaration of independence did not violate any international law. The biggest escalation since the end of the war was the North Kosovo Crisis which initially started after clashes in 2011 and ended in 2013. The escalation started after Kosovo police entered Serbian controlled territory without previous consultation. Even though the escalation ended, even today North Kosovo is a key area of conflict. Ever since then, the EU has been mediating talks between the two countries, with a minimal positive outcome. Serbia has maintained its stance of recognizing the Kosovo government but not the country. Debates have been going on whether Kosovo is a country in itself. In the UN, 97 countries already recognize Kosovo as a sovereign country but the Veto of Russia prevents the region from gaining UN membership.

CONCLUSION AND WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS

The future of Kosovo has been subject to fierce debates and at this point, one can only guess. Serbia has always been vigilant of the fact that Kosovo might become a part of Albania which will only make it’s rival much stronger, economically as well as culturally. Most recently, discussions had been going on between Serbia and Kosovo regarding a land swap where the Serbian majority region in the north of Kosovo will be transferred to Serbia and a small Albanian Muslim majority region in the south of Serbia will go the other way. This land transfer is not concrete in any way and as things stand the transfer might not happen at all. Further, looking at the future of Kosovo, one can predict a few possibilities. The most likely of which is that UN forces remain in Kosovo for about 8-10 years so that Kosovo gets membership status in the UN, it becomes economically stable and can host a stronger armed force. Other than this, it is also likely that UN forces withdraw sooner than expected which might open up room for conflicts to escalate with Serbia. The last possibility in the foreseeable future is that Kosovo integrates itself within Albania. This is the least likely outcome as Kosovo has started to establish relations with other countries and hopes to be much more stable. Lastly, one point that needs to be raised is whether the idea of Kosovo being a country is sustainable in such a hostile region. Economically, Kosovo is not anywhere close to being stable even though it’s been more than a decade since its independence. Kosovo will be highly dependent on building foreign trade relations due to its lack of resources. Even in that case, Kosovo doesn’t have a port which can facilitate trade. Moving on, the armed force of Kosovo is nowhere near to that of Serbia. In case of a UN withdrawal, it is almost assured that Serbia will be able to swipe Kosovo and take back control. Lastly, a key to maintaining long term stability, Kosovo needs to build an impeccable political system. Before independence and even afterwards, there have been cases of large level corruption which have disrupted the workings of the region. The system needs to assure that there is no consolidation of power with one institution up to a level that the people have to fight another enemy within the country. On the ending note, Kosovo has been able to fight its way through to independence due to the sheer determination of its people and cultural integrity, and that itself should be the way ahead.                                        

The post BREAKING DOWN THE HISTORY OF THE KOSOVO CRISIS appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Talking of political culture, people in Eastern Europe are still characterized as having less personal autonomy, less responsibility as citizens and members of a global community. In some cases, people also struggle with seriously disturbing national and social identities.

Source: PEW FORUM

As far as economic efficiency is concerned, east European countries have made remarkable progress in the past years, but this progress isn’t enough. The differences in per capita income, productivity and efficiency, output, capitalization, savings, investment, integration into global networks are still huge.

Trading and Colonisation

One historical factor in the development of west European nations is the influx of wealth associated with its sea trade and exploration. Their favourable locations on the Atlantic and Mediterranean gave them advantages in trade and exploration through the sea route with minimal cost. The colonization of lands in America, Africa, Asia and Oceania by several Western European countries brought a huge influx of wealth and resources, which stimulated the economies of these countries. These resources made them global superpowers as early as the 16th century. The effects of colonisation are still being felt in these countries.

Division of Germany

In the aftermath of World War II, defeated Germany was divided into four zones by the allied powers. The Soviet Union occupied the east, while the rest of Germany was divided amongst the United States, Britain and France. With hundreds of thousands of wealthy American soldiers posted in West Germany and spending their American currency, the area flourished. The Deutsche Mark was introduced in 1948 which added to the region’s growth. In the 1950s and 1960s, West Germany experienced industrial growth and low inflation contributing to their prosperity. The security of private property rights and reliance on the price mechanism also contributed to the success of these economies.

Much of the European side of the Second World War happened in Eastern Europe, in today’s Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic countries, the Balkans and Russia. These countries were utterly ravaged. Russia and Germany stole many assets. The Soviets literally dismantled many factories and took many industrial machines East. In addition to this, East Germany inherited highly specialised industrial districts, which were cut off from their major suppliers of inputs as well as their market which was in western Germany. This caused a departure of skilled labour and a number of small and medium-sized firms.

Communism

East Germany, under the authoritarian rule of the Soviets, saw much worse conditions than its Western counterpart. When the rest of the world experienced strong economic growth after World War II, the nations of eastern Europe suffered due to socialism which caused shortage of resources, a highly politicised system and a regressive attitude to progress. Soviets neglected the economy and focused on military power causing an economic crisis. Western Europe, not being the vassal state of the USSR for 40 years probably made a difference.

To start with, Eastern European nations weren’t that developed as they have mostly been the borderlands between various empires. Apart from some exceptions like Hungary, they were Russian hinterlands, not real centres of development, industrial or otherwise.

Communism was ultimately very inefficient. There was no incentive for work as individuals knew that the reward will be the same. Accumulating wealth was not really possible. It led to stagnation in economy, technology and culture. It was the mix of the intense poverty, injustice and the presence of absolute anarchy that crippled these economies.

Marshall Plan

America supported western European countries with aid to stop communism from spreading during the years of the cold war. Dollar aid enabled recipient nations to eliminate raw material shortages in exchange for trade liberalisation. The resource funds allowed governments to finance public projects without the need to cut back on welfare spending.

The U.S. provided $13.3 billion in assistance between 1948 and 1951 to 16 Western European countries through the Economic Cooperation Authority. The Marshall Plan helped in reviving the western economies by controlling inflation, reviving trade, restoring production and rebuilding infrastructure. The Soviet Union rejected the aid on behalf of eastern Germany.

When the Marshall Plan ended in 1951, industrial production, trade and exports had increased far above pre-war level. Employment and standard of living were rising. Politically, communist parties lost influence everywhere.

It encouraged the economic integration that led to the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community among six nations in 1950. It took a leap into a more integrated European Economic Community (EEC) after eight years. It finally became what is called the European Union today. This integration helped the nations to revive their economies through trade.

Demographic Dynamic

The population density in the 19th century was much more in Western Europe more than Eastern. In addition to that, across Western Europe, the casualties of war were offset by natural population growth and post-war mass migration. The impacts of the war and the post-war settlement were different for the eastern and western regions. The population growth was scanty in Eastern Europe which deprived it of flexible labour supply that has been recognised as an imperative factor in western reconstruction and development.

In the Eastern Front, millions fled west, running from the advancing Soviet troops. The effect of war casualties combined with the post-war settlement was devastating. The populations of Hungary, Romania, and Yugoslavia stagnated in the 1940s. Czechoslovakia, Poland, and the Soviet Union faced a population decline over the same period. The shortage of skilled labour proved to be detrimental. The province of Prussia was temporarily depopulated resulting in its industrial districts losing their pre-war labour force level.

The war left a distorted demographic structure with a shortage of able-bodied young men. Conventionally, they were the one who constituted the backbone of the industrial workforce. It all brought the region an excess of industrial and commercial enterprises without their original owners, the necessary skills and managerial know-how required to operate them.

The Fall of the Berlin Wall

The Berlin Wall was a concrete barrier that cut across and divided the city of Berlin from 1961 to 1989 and was constructed in the aftermath of World War 2. The fall of the Berlin Wall symbolised the fall of the ‘Iron Curtain’ that divided the Eastern countries from Western Europe during the Cold War.

East Germany was provided with aid of around €1.6 trillion by the government and private German businesses to bring it at par with the West. The dismantling of the wall had a profound impact on the neighbouring economies as well. Hungry and Czechoslovakia opened up their borders and allowed East Germans to take refuge in Austria. The influx of people meant the economies of neighbouring countries took a hit.

Shortly after the collapse of the Wall, the German Democratic Republic (GDR), the party which was in power in the East also came to an end. Unemployment escalated to extremely high level and the economy was thrown into uncertainty. Those who had government jobs found themselves suddenly out of work. The GDR economy also faced bankruptcy due to the change of currency. Before the reunification of the two regions, 1 Deutsche Mark was the equivalent of 4.5 GDR Marks.

When eastern countries joined the EU, it made it easier for the Western companies to buy up assets in the east. Some also took advantage of the cheap labour market and started companies. Eastern European companies found it challenging to compete with gigantic Western corporations who could afford to undercut prices. In certain industries, prices were set for a certain amount of time so that Eastern European companies could not undercut Western companies which took away their advantage and eventually many Eastern European companies went bankrupt.

Agrarian Economy and Raw Material Exporter

When Western Europe started on the path of capitalist development, the Eastern part of the continent was transformed into an exporter of raw material for the West and an importer of finished goods. The result was a never-ending loop that strengthened Western industries and system that promoted capitalism. Specifically, as the West became more urban, there was a growing demand for agricultural goods, animals and other raw goods. East European people satisfied this need by transforming their domains into farms that exported for the Western market. With the exception of what became the Czech Republic, most of Eastern Europe became more agrarian and therefore poorer than much of Western Europe.

The post EUROPE: EAST, WEST AND THE GULF BETWEEN appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Academics have been seeing this region as a role model for making policies and providing social security. These countries are unique in the sense that they have adopted a socioeconomic model which combines the features of capitalism like free markets and efficiency with social benefits like free education, healthcare and pension payment for retirees. These social welfare schemes are financed through the taxpayers’ money and are administered by the government keeping in mind the interest of all the citizens. This system essentially minimises the gulf between the rich and poor through redistributive taxes. The model is popularly known in the world as the Scandinavian Model or the Nordic Model.

Social Democracy or Democratic Socialism?

The prevailing sentiment in the world is that the Scandinavian nations achieved what they did by adopting socialism. The truth is far from that.

• The only element of socialism which seems to exist in the Scandinavian model is the rampant presence of welfare schemes provided by the state. Apart from that, the means of production are owned by private individuals and the resource allocation takes place through the forces of demand and supply, not through central planning.
• It is important to point out that the Scandinavian nations developed their current economic system after years of free economy and trade. They were economic successes even before they built their welfare states. It was not the government benefits that created wealth, but it was the wealth of people that allowed the luxury of such generous programs by imposing high tax rates.
• In contrast to the general perception about the Scandinavian economies, there is actually an absence of government interference. None of these Scandinavian countries have minimum wage laws. Instead, wages are decided by collective-bargaining between unions and employers, and not through government-imposed floors. In fact, the Nordic nations have some of the highest unionization rates in the world.
• Sweden has complete school choice as the government provides its citizens with education vouchers. The vouchers provide funding to a student at any school whether public or private. This choice benefits the citizens and the future of the nations. If these nations were to be socialist, they wouldn’t have promoted free choice.

In addition to these facts, the Scandinavian countries rank quite high on the index of economic freedom given by the Fraser Institute. All the countries are in the top quartile in the rankings. In fact, all the three Scandinavian nations are among the top ten countries to start a business according to the Ease of Doing Business Ranking, 2020 given by the World Bank. The best proof of the free-trade background of Scandinavian countries might be Volvo’s buyout by Geely of Hong Kong in 2010 and the bankruptcy of Saab in 2012, in which the Swedish government did not interfere in any way even though they were two of its most iconic companies.

The Nordic countries offer government-paid healthcare, tuition-free education, and generous social safety nets for all. It is allowing businesses to be productive without interfering which in turn produces the high incomes that support the tax collections. The system prevalent in these nations is actually social democracy in which the government aims to promote the public welfare through heavy taxation and spending, within the framework of a capitalist economy. This is what the Scandinavians practice.

Is it Sustainable?

Though it is working wonderfully for the time, it is losing ground due to many reasons. There is two fundamental phenomena which come into play namely the “Wagner’s Law” and the “Baumol’s Law”. Wagner’s Law says that the demand for welfare services tends to increase faster than income. According to Baumol’s Law, productivity in the production of welfare services tends to increase at a lower rate than that in the production of goods and services. If we assume equal wage growth across all sectors, costs must increase faster in the production of welfare services than in the economy as a whole. These two taken together imply that the total spending on welfare services rise faster than GDP over time. As these services are tax-financed, the tax burden must also rise continuously with GDP. Starting from an already high tax burden, further increases in tax wedges will eventually cause serious harm to employment and growth. This is particularly imperative in view of the consequences of globalization and demographic change.

Globalisation is in general beneficial to economic growth as it provides an opportunity to increase the returns to factors of production through the international exchange of goods and services and factor mobility. Nonetheless, increasing international mobility of labour can jeopardise the welfare state and the Scandinavian model. As social welfare schemes belong to all citizens, it becomes increasingly possible for them to benefit from the services without paying the taxes (bearing the cost) due to international factor mobility. For example, citizens who have spent most of their working lives abroad may return to their home country after retirement to collect the benefits of free hospital care and care for the elderly.

The most serious challenge to the Nordic model is caused by the changing demographics given the extensive role of the public sector in providing age-dependent social services and benefits. The age composition of the population in most European countries have changed dramatically in recent years. The shift is driven by two factors: a “baby boom effect” as the generation has reached retirement age, and a continued increase in life expectancy. As a consequence, dependency ratios have been increasing since 2010 in all the Scandinavian nations and now stands at 57% in Denmark, 53% in Norway and 61% in Sweden. The balance between those contributing to and those benefiting from the welfare state is shifting to such an extent that the financial sustainability of the system is in danger.

How it evolved?

Till the 1950s, Nordic countries were the top free-market, competition-based nations in the world. In the ‘70s, however, intense social government and regulatory systems were put in place with high tax rates. All of the economic growth came to an end in the early ‘90s with the burst of the housing bubble and the advent of a recession. Sweden’s economic growth fell to 1% lower than the rest of Europe and 2% lower than in the United States of America.

By the ‘90s, government spending was up to 70% of GDP, and the debt to GDP ratio was 72%. Even the unemployment rate rose by 5%. The Scandinavian states were strained and were forced to increase taxes drastically to keep their model alive. As soon as policymakers saw the socialist approach failing, things changed. In 1991, parts of health care were privatized, schooling vouchers were first introduced, and some welfare programs were cut back. In 1993, the collapse of the housing bubble forced the Swedish State to scale down their generous welfare system in a context of lower growth, growing unemployment, and to manage public accounts. Between 1995 and 2000, the debt-to-GDP ratio was dropped down to 50%, and citizens earned more income owing to the new 28% tax rate. As of today, Sweden’s public spending has decreased to 49.3% of their GDP, and their corporate tax rate is 22%, below the OECD’s average of 23.9%. Denmark and Norway allow private firms to run public hospitals and Sweden has privatized part of its retirement system.

Conclusion

Are the Scandinavian countries a model for the rest of developed countries? We may answer in affirmation by looking at the top rankings achieved by them for most of the elements that make a country successful: education outcomes, health and life expectancy, happiness index and economic development. But a large part of the Scandinavian system is unique and reflects the Scandinavians’ long tradition of governance which emphasizes on consensus, compromise and trust. Also, the Scandinavian nations raised the taxation rate only after their economy grew and the citizens had high incomes. A government should never begin with enormously high rates and expect its citizens to keep pace. The population of the region is merely 21 million which is fundamentally homogeneous and thus any big and multi-ethnic state might not be able to adopt the Nordic model. Instead of adopting the model, nations should view it as an inspiration and customise their policies according to their needs and demographics.

The post NORDIC ECONOMIC MODEL – IS THE GRASS GREENER ON THE OTHER SIDE? appeared first on WISER WORLD.