Randy McDonald ([info]rfmcdpei) wrote,
@ 2004-02-27 21:49:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Current mood: sympathetic
Current music:Laibach, "The Final Countdown (Juno Reactor Version)"

[BRIEF NOTE] Morocco and the European Union
The European Union has quite a few peripheries unlikely to join the European Union for some time yet. Take the states of the west Balkans--Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia (Former Yugoslav Republic of), non-Yugoslav Albania, and, perhaps one day, Kosova. Had Yugoslavia remained united, three of these states (possibly four, depending on how you see the Serbian-Montenegrin relationship) would have been ready to join the European Union. Yugoslavia was, after all, the most prosperous and liberal of Europe's Communist states. The Wars of Yugoslav Secession changed this. Ukraine and Moldova might be culturally European, and extraordinarily dependent on the future EU-25 for whatever prosperity and stability they might enjoy, but their very desperation makes them unsuitable candidates. Turkey has tried to get into the European Union for forty decades and is only now getting up to the minimal standards of membership.

And then, there's Morocco. As Uganda's New Vision has noted, Morocco's government and people are quite eager to distance themselves from Africa.

This land of 30.5 million, whose coastline is washed by both the Atlantic and the Mediterranean, is geographically misplaced in Africa, so its people love to think.

It could as well have been designated part of Europe, being separated from Spain by just the seven-mile wide Strait of Gibraltar. Though racially considered an Arab land, half of its population speaks French as their mother tongue. Spanish, the other colonial language, is widely spoken too.

For the better part of the 38 years during which Hassan was in power, he was convinced Morocco rightly belonged to Europe so much that the country's policies were decided not in Rabat but in Paris and Madrid.




Europe is so much in the life of the Moroccans that 60 percent of the country's exports go to that continent. The trappings of Europe are evident all over here in Marrakech, where yours truly is penning.

For example, forget about Toyotas ruling the roads as you see in Kampala, giving the impression that everyone is driving Japanese. On the Marrakech roads, it's European cars par excellence: Peugeot, Fiat, Renault - names that are almost extinct on Ugandan roads!

Seeing Europe right in his face and the real Africa far away beyond the vast Sahara Desert, King Hassan before he died in 1999 could not help knocking on the doors of the European Union (EU) asking for Morocco to be let in as a member.

The EU rebuffed Hassan, but his son, the youthful Mohammed V (38yrs) a.k.a. M6, in Moroccan speak, has carried on the fight. The young King is so Euro-centred that he got a PhD in EU matters. But all these pro-Euro credentials of Morocco do not amuse the Europeans.

Brussels sees Morocco as nothing more than another African country with depressing economic stats not worth exporting to mainland Europe-50 illiteracy, massive unemployment etc. Above all, the Europeans view Morocco as the springboard for the illegal African immigrants, a source of drugs-and more dangerously terrorists.

Instead, the Europeans seem to be just content flocking to Morocco as tourists, basking in the more milder winter temperatures, across the Mediterranean.


Morocco's problem is, indeed, that it lacks any one set of skills or traits that it can provide the European Union. Morocco can serve as a source of resources just as well outside the European Union as inside. As a source or corridor of illegal immigrants, most prominently to Spain and France, Morocco is positively unwanted.



Morocco, like Turkey, might be a Westernized Muslim country close to Europe and its Union in more ways than one. However. Turkey might be poor by European Union standards, but it at least is a relatively modern society: mostly urban, modestry industrial, politically modern. Morocco, for its part, remains a rural and tribal society, fundamentally poor and underdeveloped, still run by a fairly authoritarian monarchy.

As the BBC observed, more than 60% of Morocco's exports might go to the European Union, and Europe provides "most of Morocco's tourists, remittances and loans." Morocco might even have a free-trade deal with the European Union that has already caused many European textile companies to relocate to the country for cheap labour. So far, though, in a world economy where free trade and unrestrained flows of finance and (non-dual-use) technology coexist alongside the restriction of labour movements to and from the countries at the heart of the world economy, though, Morocco (and individual Moroccans, of course) look set to be kept perpetually outside the European Union. The best symbol of this might lie in the status of physical connections between Morocco and the European Union:

A hint might lie in the fate of the bridge planned to span the Straits of Gibraltar.

Announcing the project in 1988, the late King Hassan undertook to complete it before 2000. Work has yet to begin.



(18 comments) - (Post a new comment)


(Anonymous)
2004-02-28 02:35 pm UTC (link)
I think that if any Maghrebi country is admitted to the EU, it will be Tunisia after it gets its democratic act together.

Jonathan Edelstein (http://headheeb.blogmosis.com)

(Reply to this) (Thread)


(Anonymous)
2004-02-28 03:20 pm UTC (link)
I think that if any Maghrebi country is admitted to the EU, it will be Tunisia after it gets its democratic act together.

The problem with admitting any of the North African countries is that it removes any clear geographic barrier between rich Europe and poor Africa. This isn't like letting Turkey in, and just having the porous border move from Italy and Greece eastwards -- this is the creation of a new porous border where none existed before.

Never is a long time, so I certainly won't say that none of these countries will ever be admitted, but I'd be shocked if they make it in this century. We're entering a period of civilizational conflict -- one that isn't going to fade away for at least another generation or two -- and in that time Europe is far more likely to expand into Ukraine, the hard-core Balkans, and her settler colonies than into areas that are popularly seen as part of an alien, and deadly dangerous, civilization.

We haven't yet seen Islamist terrorism strike Europe like it struck the US, Russia, India, and possibly China (the news that we get out of there is so filtered . .) but we are going to see an attack, and it'll probably take place in France, though the UK and Germany remain more than theoretical targets. When the fight has been joined, Europe's attitudes are going to harden. That isn't to say that they'll mirror those of us in the US -- after all they've had decades of experience with terrorist groups already, from the IRA, to ETA, to the Red Brigade to just name a few. But, the Islamists are different because there terrorism is indiscriminate, and they are willing to die while killing. In the end, we're all going to end up taking a page from the Israelis and build walls. North Africa is going to remain firmly beyond the pale.

Alexander

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]rfmcdpei
2004-02-28 05:19 pm UTC (link)
I'm not sure about North Africa, though. The horrors of Algeria apart (and big horrors they are), neither Morocco nor Tunisia seem to have suffered significant Islamism. (Jonathan?) Also, they rank along with Turkey as relatively Westernized areas; arguably, they surpass it inasmuch as a European language (French) might be a home and mother language for a substantial minority of the population. The region needs much more development, but even in the event of an intercivilizational conflict--perhaps particularly because of one--it might still throw its lot in with the EU.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2004-02-29 12:32 pm UTC (link)
The horrors of Algeria apart (and big horrors they are), neither Morocco nor Tunisia seem to have suffered significant Islamism.

From what I know, I'd agree with you here. But, reality and perception interplay heavily in this kind of situation. We're engaged in a global war against the Islamists. Fairly or not, Arab countries (and it seems to me that most Westerners have no idea who the Berbers are -- and if they do, recall the Barbary Pirates, which isn't exactly a help.

The region needs much more development, but even in the event of an intercivilizational conflict--perhaps particularly because of one--it might still throw its lot in with the EU.

Given the relative power imbalance, the question isn't whether they'll throw their lot in with the EU, but rather whether the EU will feel comfortable enough to have Moroccan or Tunisian MEPs and ministers. I just don't see it yet.

To bring this into a North American context, assuming that the US, Canada and Haiti were all similarly sized/populated, I wouldn't worry about having to share power with Canadians. You're relatively similar in cultural outlook, well governed, wealthy, etc. On the other hand, I'd be very worried about importing Haitian instability, poverty, etc.

While I certainly am not trying to imply that North Africa is as poor Haiti -- one really needs to go to sub-Saharan Africa for that level of poverty -- it is seen as a region with problems that just isn't European. A Hungarian or Cypriot MEP isn't a big deal the way that the Tunisian MEP would be. It also threatens to open the door to illegal immigration from the entire Arab world (we're certainly not going to be able to differentiate them).

These kinds of fears play a big role in enlargement. Take a look at the Blair government's attempts to keep Slovak immigrants -- specifically gypsies who are likely to turn to "benefits tourism" out of the UK after Slovakia joins the EU.

I really don't see lesser fears when it comes to North Africa, and no strong pressure from any current EU members to bring those countries in. That contrasts with the current new members, and even the next few countries slated to join: Romania (France, Belgium and Italy), Bulgaria (and possibly Croatia) (Germany), Turkey (UK, to an extent), and even Albania (Italy, if only to make the problems of Albania a European, rather than an Italian, problem).

Alexander

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(Anonymous)
2004-02-29 01:08 pm UTC (link)
The horrors of Algeria apart (and big horrors they are), neither Morocco nor Tunisia seem to have suffered significant Islamism

There are Islamist movements in both Morocco and Tunisia, but from what I understand, Islamism is no more of a political threat in either country than it is in metropolitan France. In Tunisia, it may be considerably less so. One of Tunisia's main Islamist thinkers (and the exiled leader of the Renaissance Party) is Rashid al-Ghannushi, who sees no inherent contradiction between Islam and the West and supports democracy, voluntary veiling, equality for women and non-Muslims and freedom of expression. A Renaissance government might be as tractable to EU human rights standards as, say, the current AKP government in Turkey.

Tunisia won't be a candidate for membership until it democratizes and drastically improves its human rights record, but its relative prosperity, modern economy and French-language penetration would seem to make it a more likely prospect than Morocco.

Jonathan Edelstein (http://headheeb.blogmosis.com)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Islamism...
(Anonymous)
2008-02-18 06:14 pm UTC (link)
Why is everyone ging on about Islamism??? The only reason why the EU does not allow African countries to enter is because they are Islamic countries - i.e. Morocco. It's a bit obvious that they are scared of Islam as it is, Alhumdulillah the Fastest growing religion!

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]rfmcdpei
2004-02-28 04:58 pm UTC (link)
Tunisia, apart from being economically advanced, does approach a the construction of a nation-state much more closely than either Morocco or Algeria.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Morocco and EU
(Anonymous)
2004-02-29 07:46 am UTC (link)
Despite being a monarchy, Morocco can easily be said to be more democratic than Tunisia. I'm Moroccan-American (with a touch of Belgian) and I've been to both countries in the past year. Tunisia is clean, relatively prosperous and a quasi-Stalinist state. Morocco is a poor, but optimistic, semi-authoritarian oligarchic state. I went to Tunisia as a journalist and was followed and my room was bugged.

All of this, in any case, doesn't matter as far as the EU is concerned. I just don't understand why people want to keep expanding the EU to include everybody -- I even disagree with the recent expansion into Eastern Europe, and the debate over the Iraq war in Europe has reinforced my fears that politically and economically this is more trouble than it is worth.

The association agreements in place with countries like Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt are more than enough. They should be reinforced by cultural exchanges and other initiatives, but there is really no need for full union with everyone within a thousand kilometers of Brussels!

Issandr El Amrani (http://homepage.mac.com/issandr)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Morocco and EU
(Anonymous)
2004-02-29 07:52 am UTC (link)
I should also add: no one in Morocco believes this crap that Hassan II seriously expected to be accepted as a member of the EU. But it was a very clever symbolic gesture to make to stress Morocco's desire to expand its relationship with Europe -- and more specifically expand them beyond France (hence the rise of Spain in what use to be a French fiefdom.) There are also areas of common concern with the EU, such as fisheries, the drug trade, migration and other issues that deserved something like the Association Agreement as a framework.

Note also that Morocco is in the last stages of a free trade agreement with the US (which was delayed recently), much to the chagrin of the French, yet again!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Morocco and EU
[info]rfmcdpei
2004-02-29 10:50 am UTC (link)
I should also add: no one in Morocco believes this crap that Hassan II seriously expected to be accepted as a member of the EU. But it was a very clever symbolic gesture to make to stress Morocco's desire to expand its relationship with Europe -- and more specifically expand them beyond France (hence the rise of Spain in what use to be a French fiefdom.)

The expansion of Spanish influence in Morocco is something that I've noticed in a lot of commentaries on the country. Do Moroccans see any continuity between this and the colonial-era Riffian protectorate?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Morocco and EU
(Anonymous)
2004-02-29 12:16 pm UTC (link)
The expansion of Spanish influence in Morocco is something that I've noticed in a lot of commentaries on the country. Do Moroccans see any continuity between this and the colonial-era Riffian protectorate?

On the Spanish thing, Spain's influence is definitely rising -- one of the biggest example of which is massive Spanish investment, notably in telecoms. But one of the key things is fishing licenses, which in Morocco are overwhelmingly controlled by army generals (especially those serving in the Western Sahara.) Another interest recent development was the dispute over Mediterranean islands a few months ago. A few days ago someone told me that there has been some oil discovered on near those islands and in the Spanish provinces of Northern Morocco. It's a story worth watching with all kinds of interesting dimensions -- for instance that the governor of the Spanish provinces in Morocco is some kind of neo-fascist business tycoons with interests in a lot of the local economy.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Morocco and EU
[info]rfmcdpei
2004-02-29 04:02 pm UTC (link)
Interesting. The situation with Ceuta and Melilla seems to be a potential irritant in bilateral relations, particularly given the deepening relationship between the two countries. It probably won't be a spoiler--the UK and Spain get along fine despite Gibraltar--but still.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Morocco and EU
[info]rfmcdpei
2004-02-29 10:45 am UTC (link)
Despite being a monarchy, Morocco can easily be said to be more democratic than Tunisia. I'm Moroccan-American (with a touch of Belgian) and I've been to both countries in the past year. Tunisia is clean, relatively prosperous and a quasi-Stalinist state. Morocco is a poor, but optimistic, semi-authoritarian oligarchic state. I went to Tunisia as a journalist and was followed and my room was bugged.

Hmm. Thanks for correcting my impression!

All of this, in any case, doesn't matter as far as the EU is concerned. I just don't understand why people want to keep expanding the EU to include everybody -- I even disagree with the recent expansion into Eastern Europe, and the debate over the Iraq war in Europe has reinforced my fears that politically and economically this is more trouble than it is worth.

I don't think it'll be a deal-breaker for European Union federalism. We've seen this in the past before--Europe undergoes a massive expansion, whether in the 1970s (Britain, Denmark, Ireland) or now (the 10) that forces integration to slow down for a bit, then a decade or so later as a new equilibrium gets struck integration picks up ago. With luck, it'll force the EU to confront long-standing structural problems, moving towards QMV and economic reform.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Morocco and EU
(Anonymous)
2004-02-29 12:43 pm UTC (link)
I just don't understand why people want to keep expanding the EU to include everybody -- I even disagree with the recent expansion into Eastern Europe, and the debate over the Iraq war in Europe has reinforced my fears that politically and economically this is more trouble than it is worth.

As territorial animals, we think in terms of territory. Expanding the EU increases EU prestige, and that's assumed to increase EU power.

I fundamentally disagree with you on not enlarging into Central and Eastern Europe. The big problem that we had in the 20th century was that Central Europe was a power vacuum that could be filled either by the Third Reich or the Soviet Union. Europe's stability in the 21st century requires that we fill that power vacuum with a relatively humane ideology -- and that's far more likely to come from the Euro-Atlantic institutions than anything imposed by Russia, or even developed internally. The minimal costs of integrating Central Europe into NATO and the EU are minimal compared to the costs of keeping them out, and then having to trying to keep them from exporting instability.

Admittedly, if I'd been in charge of EU enlargement, I'd have done cherry picking, bringing in two or three new members every two or three years, giving the laggards an incentive to try and catch up. But, enlargement was a necessary, and fundamentally good, decision.

Alexander

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]orlandobr
2004-03-01 08:28 am UTC (link)
First:

Turkey has tried to get into the European Union for forty decades...

I think it's more like four decades, or forty years. :P Just kidding.

Now, seriously: Morocco, besides the problems you've pointed, has too other problems which make it ineligible for membership: a) the Sahauri question: even when POLISARIO can't win militarily, it still can muster some support from Algeria and Libya, and some political sectors in Europe (mainly Spanish) are interested in the Sahauris (or their phosphates and fisheries?) A thorn in the Moroccan side, definitely. b) Internal security concerns and Islamism: even when Islamism is not strong in Morocco (the position of the King as "Leader of the Believers" has made the monarchy relatively immune to Islamism questioning), the thread is there, from native militants or FIS members or sympathizers operating in the countryside, just like in Tunis. c) the division between the Berber and Arab communities: AFAIK it's not degenerated in open violence, but the equilibrium is instable.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]rfmcdpei
2004-03-01 11:11 am UTC (link)
Turkey has tried to get into the European Union for forty decades...

I think it's more like four decades, or forty years. :P


It's been a struggle to get accepted ever since Lepanto?

Now, seriously: Morocco, besides the problems you've pointed, has too other problems which make it ineligible for membership: a) the Sahauri question: even when POLISARIO can't win militarily, it still can muster some support from Algeria and Libya,

Less so now that Algeria's preoccupied with internal affairs and Libyan policy seems to be shifting to something less rhetorically over the top, but point.

and some political sectors in Europe (mainly Spanish) are interested in the Sahauris (or their phosphates and fisheries?)

ObWI: Franco doesn't decolonize in Africa, and Equatorial Guinea and the Spanish Sahara become overseas communities of Spain like the Canaries?

c) the division between the Berber and Arab communities: AFAIK it's not degenerated in open violence, but the equilibrium is instable.

We've a Moroccan posting here. It'd be interesting to hear his perspective.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]orlandobr
2004-03-01 12:57 pm UTC (link)
It's been a struggle to get accepted ever since Lepanto?

I guess so! :D


Now, seriously: Morocco, besides the problems you've pointed, has too other problems which make it ineligible for membership: a) the Sahauri question: even when POLISARIO can't win militarily, it still can muster some support from Algeria and Libya,

Less so now that Algeria's preoccupied with internal affairs and Libyan policy seems to be shifting to something less rhetorically over the top, but point.

If the claims of POLISARIO are not met, which is the most probable outcome, what would happen with this marginalised -and armed- people? They will become an easy prey for Islamism or other (Algerian?) plans for destabilisation. Add to this a future Morocco encompassing Western Sahara and having territorial disputes with a frail Mauritania in regards of the status of the port of La Gouera and the rail link from Zouerate to the sea...

and some political sectors in Europe (mainly Spanish) are interested in the Sahauris (or their phosphates and fisheries?)

ObWI: Franco doesn't decolonize in Africa, and Equatorial Guinea and the Spanish Sahara become overseas communities of Spain like the Canaries?

One friend of my family, a senior Spaniard (so senior he remembers when his father left home to fight in the civil war!) told me once that Franquist Spain wished to keep the Western Sahara, due to economic (phosphates and fisheries) and security concerns, but couldn't care less about Equatorial Africa: the only economic activity then was wood cropping.

c) the division between the Berber and Arab communities: AFAIK it's not degenerated in open violence, but the equilibrium is instable.

We've a Moroccan posting here. It'd be interesting to hear his perspective.

Good.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(Anonymous)
2004-03-09 02:59 pm UTC (link)
"half of its population speaks French as their mother tongue" is totally mistaken. I think they meant Berber.

(Reply to this)


(18 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…