Future planning. It would make sense for Tunisia to consider the long-term implications of its attitude to the young Tunisians who have left Tunisia for Europe and to stop and think before making it difficult for them to return. One can understand the current attitude, but if one steps back a bit, things look different. In issue 10365, we published useful information in this connection, along with further details in yesterday's newsletter, on Germany and Austria's scrapping of the last round of restrictions on the opening of their labour markets to people from Eastern European Member States. The eastern states are now concerned, about a brain drain because Germany is planning to encourage young people to come and work in Germany once they have finished their training.
Tunisia trains a huge number of young people at great cost every year, people with considerable financial know-how who will be priceless when it comes to boosting the national economy. It is understandable that these young people want to come and work in Europe once they finish their training in their own country, but is it really in Tunisia's interest to let the newly trained elite leave the nest? Europe is not here to leach other countries' life forces, as a leading figure put it recently. Legal immigration and exchanges of young people as part of their education, yes, but it is not a good idea to pay people to leave.
Europe needs to consider the following two sentences - History takes time. It took several centuries for democracy to develop in Europe. Europe must not lecture other parts of the world and should understand that freedom, sexual equality, European-style democracy and a secular state take time to develop. It is hardly surprising that, apart from in Tunisia, the fruits of the Arab Spring do not match expectations. Europe must not allow any undermining of Europe or the Schengen Agreements, one of the rare European success stories that has captured the public's imagination.
Nothing decided yet in Egypt. Why have I only discussed Tunisia in this column when it comes to the prospects for a genuinely free and democratic system in the near future? Why do I have doubts about Egypt, the second country involved in the Arab Spring? Because the situation is far from clear in Egypt. Amnesty International protests about the way women have been totally sidelined, but this is only one area of concern.
Power in Egypt is in the hands of the military. They are preparing for free elections and have pledged to respect international treaties, but will they keep their promises? Will the non-military government to be elected at the end of the year take the same line? One of the most important treaties to be respected is the 1979 peace treaty with Israel, and then there are deals on the supply of gas. But polls suggest tat the majority of Egyptians want both treaties scrapped.
This is no theoretical opposition. The gas pipeline has already been attacked - most recently only a few days ago. It is being repaired and should be operational again in a few weeks' time. For how long - if the sabotage continues? The gas pipeline supplies gas to Jordan, the Lebanon and Syria, but most of the gas goes to Israel (more than a third, covering 40% of Israel's gas supplies). Will the Egyptian non-military government simply renegotiate the gas contract or will it query the peace treaty with Israel? The Egyptian army gets a lot of its funding from the United States and this cash may no longer be forthcoming if the peace deal with Israel is undermined. The idea of religious freedom is being questioned by some political forces, but they are keeping a low profile for the moment.
These queries are fundamental. Egypt will no doubt become more open and remove the most blatant abuses of power of the past, and that's already good news. But whether a free and democratic state will emerge is an entirely different question.
Define your terms. The Franco-Italian compromise on changing the safeguard clause in the Schengen Agreements includes words that are of no interest to anyone but Nicolas Sarkozy and the EuroMed bureaucracy (see issue 10365). The term 'Union for the Mediterranean' is used, but this is strictly meaningless because there is absolutely no unity in the countries in question. It would be more accurate to talk of 'coordination' on a handful of common programmes, but rhetoric has its rules and bureaucracy its interests…
(F.R./transl.fl)