The numbers of the Syrian Crisis

In these days migration is the key word on all the media in Europe. The increase of the numbers of refugees, especially from Syria, has brough different answers from the Eu Countries and the debate about how to manage the crisis is still open.

But what do we know about Syria war? Which are the numbers that can explain us the tragedy that is going on in this Country?

The Syrian war started in 2011 during the Arab Spring, with protests against the president Bashar al-Assad. The conflict sees many different actors: the national Army (supported also by Hezbollah), ISIS, the Free Syrian Army and other forces.

The number of victims seems currently close to 300 thousand, under severe human rights violations.

The gravity of this situation has caused the displacement of around 7 million of Syrians (out of 18 millions in total). It is estimated that 4 million people moved abroad from Syria to  Greece, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt.

More than a million is currently in Lebanon (that has a population of 4.5). Turkey accepted almost 2 million of refugees.

The situation in Syria is every day worst. And that is why people are leaving the Country.

At the same time the reaction of Europe has been, as always lately, incoherent and egoistic. Even if Eu is a leading donor for the crisis with 3.9 billion Euros, the treatment of the refugees has not been the best possible, as we have seen recently in Greece (left alone to face the immigration) and in Hungary.

Number of refugees per Country since 2011 (NYT)

Europe is the richest area in the World. It is not acceptable that it doesn't take actions in a humanitarian crisis that is happening at its borders.

The voice of Germany that wants to change the rules of the European immigration policy, seems finally a good start for changing direction. Let's hope that there won't be just words, but also facts.

Read More

Ireland, Poland, Spain: a week-end that can change Europe

The last week end was exceptionally important for Europe, even if it wasn't perceived like that from everybody.

This is a period of elections and referendum all over Europe. And one week ago three important consultations took place in Ireland, Spain and Poland.

The referendum in Ireland was organized to modify the Constitution and to allow the same-sex marriage. In Spain there were important administrative elections. In Poland finally, the was the second run for the Presidential Elections.

Although the nature of the consultations were different, the results will be deeply change Europe.

Ireland will be the first Country in the world to allow the same-sex marriage in the Constitution. That could have a positive effect also in other Countries and, at the same time, the Church will have to accept that the something is changing in the society.

In Spain, Podemos broke the traditional bipartisan political system, winning in both Madrid and Barcelona. The Popular Party is still the first force, but this is an important signal for the political elections in November.

Poland surprised everybody with the election of the Eurosceptic Andrzej Duda as new President of the Republic. Even if Warsaw is considered the emerging economic power in Europe, also thanks to the Eu funds, a huge part of the Country has not yet touched by the wealth and is asking for a change.

It is interesting to notice that the immobility of the European establishment is going to be overtaken by the choice of the electorate, in a sense or in another. We don't live in a perfect world, but democracy can still amaze us.

Read More

Posh low-cost shops? The way of Tiger

The ways of shopping have deeply changed in the last decade. In particular, the economic crisis has consolidated the growth of the Discount Supermarkets, but it has also left a space for some other kinds of low-cost and posh shops, like the case of Tiger.

Tiger is a variety shop originally born in Denmark. The first store opened in Copenhagen in 1995 and today the chain has 314 stores in Europe and not only (there are also 18 shops in Japan).

What is the origin of this success?

The answer is in the kinds of products sold. Tiger sells quality and fancy products at a quite low price: toys, notebooks, pens, different items for hygiene, stuff for kitchen and many other things.

With the crisis, many people cannot spend  a lot of money. The double idea of Tiger is to sell different item with a low price but that also look nice and appealing. 

It is interesting to point out that, from one side, consumers are always more oriented towards the quality and the good look of the product even if they cannot spend a lot of money. From the other, there is always the way to create a smart and creative business. Even in a such a difficult period like the one we are living in.

Read More

A new story?

Syriza Logo

Greece is a quite small Country: 11 million of people, a GDP of 180 billion Euro (11th in Eu), a public debt around 180% of GDP and an unemployment rate of 26% (the highest in Europe).

Can a Country depressed by years of austerity and weakened by social tensions, change the history of a Continent? After the elections of the 25th January, maybe yes.

The win of Syriza must be seen in two different perspectives. From the interior side, it is the first time in Greek recent history that a "third party" becomes the main political force beating PSOK and Nea Dimokratia. If the new Prime Minister Tsipras will be brave enough, he will be able to struggle with the corruption, result of a spoiled political system managed for decades by two parties and few families. 

From the external side, the Greek elections are the first (and probably not the last) in Europe that give power to an anti-austerity Party. This means that Eu (and Germany) will have to dialogue with Tsipras and this time it will be forced to listen his opinions. Even if it is too early to understand which will be the real effects of this situation in the future European economic policies, it is defineitely represents something new and positive.

The first public act of Tsipras has surprised the public opinion: the alliance with ANEL, the right and xenophobe Party. But it was probably the only available solution : even if the two new allies are ideologically very far, they are both against the austerity and this explains why To Potami (the new center-left political Party) wasn't suitable to support Tsipras Government for its softer position towards Troika.

Something is changing in Europe: the ECB has adopted a new position to fight the crisis and it seems that Germany is finally understanding the austerity is not a doable way anymore. At the political level, Paris and Rome are waiting to collaborate with Tsipras and press Berlin for less rigidity. Over all, another anti-austerity force, Podemos, could win the next elections in Spain. 

Let's be optimistic about the rest of the year.

Read More

Can Greeks already welcome a Happy New Year?

The time has finally come in Athens. The impossibility to elect the President of the Republic by the Hellenic Parliament has caused the announcement of new elections in January 2015. 

Syriza is considered the winner of the next elections and many observers have written about the possible problems of a government leaded by Alexis Tsipras, who promises a renegotiation of the Memorandum with the Troika.

The Hellenic Parliament in Athens

Europe is scared by the result of the elections. But why?

There are two considerations to do. First, even if Syryza can win the elections, it is not automatic that Tsipras will be also able to create a government. It seems that the other parties are more inclined to keep the Memorandum than having contrasts with European Union and, especially, with Germany. On the other hand, it is improbable that Greece will be able to break the Memorandum or exit from Euro. Brussels and Berlin can keep quiet.

Second observation: as citizens of European Union, can we be satisfied about the management of the crisis in Greece as well as in the rest of Europe? The economic situation is not better than 5 years ago in Athens, the salaries are much lower, the unemployment is the highest in Europe. 

What can we expect from 2015? We can just hope that something will really change: we need a new vision of Europe, new ideas of how to solve the economic and social problems that are killing our generation in favor of few people that have the power and the privileges.

What Greece and Greeks are paying for the crisis is a shame for us. It is a shame for Brussels, as well as for Berlin and Paris.

After the announcement of new elections, Tsipras said that Greeks can already welcome a "Happy new year". Let's hope that it will be a real NEW year and not just the continuation of a sad and demoralizing past.

Happy 2015!

Read More

A grey zone at the borders of Europe: Transnistria

National Emblem of Transnistria

In the last days some observers have pointed out that the situation in Transnistria could represent a further element of instability in the Ukrainian crisis.

But what is Transnistria? And why and in which way is it under the influence of Russia?

Transnistria is a small strip of land of 4000 Km² between the Republic of Moldova and the Western part of Ukraine. The population is made up by half million of people: 32% Moldavians, 30% Russians and 29% Ukrainians.

The region is very poor. The GPD per capita was around 1500 dollars per year in 2007. The economy is based on some old industries, especially in the sector of steel, heritage of the Soviet past. Moreover, the politically instability has facilitated the development of illegal traffics of weapons and drugs.

Transnistria can be considered independent de facto, but it is not recognized from the International Community. It was part of Moldavian SSR (part itself of USSR) till 1991 when it declared its own independence unilaterally. The region also hosted  the Soviet 14^th Guards Army and for this reason it has been the location of a huge deposit of weapons.

In 1992 there was a conflict between Moldova and Transnistria, ended after 5 months after a negotiate that included Moldova, Romania, Ukraine and Russia. The agreement between the two parts of the conflict indicated Russia as peacekeeper with a military contingent of 1200 soldiers. Even if there have been many negotiations for the withdrawal of that contingent, after more than 20 years it is still present in Transnistria. Officially the military presence of Moscow guarantees the peace, but substantially let Russia keep an important influence on the region.

It seems that the majority of the population is pro-Russia. In a referendum of 2006, the 97% of voters declared the will to be annexed to Russia. The Government of Tiraspol expressed the same desire after the facts in Crimea few days ago.

Even if Transnistria is less strategic than Sebastopol, the annexation could represent another victory for Putin. There could be two main consequences: from one side, it could strengthen the influence of Russia in the region, also obstructing the negotiates of partnership between Moldova and European Union. On the other side, it could intensify the Ukrainian crisis, with unpredictable consequences in the area.

Read More

Crimea: some information to understand the current situation

The Ukrainian crisis is at the center of the international attention. The 11th March Crimean Parliament has voted the annexation to Russia, position confirmed from a contested referendum five days later. The 18^th March finally, this decision has been formalized with an agreement between Putin and the Prime minister of Crimea, Sergey Akesenov, while the official Government of Kiev  and the International Community haven’t recognized the vote.

I didn't have enough information to understand the situation in Ukraine, but I really wanted to know something more about Crimea and its history. In particular, I wanted to answer to three questions: how is the population of Crimea make up? Which are the most important pillars of the Crimean economy? Why is this Region so strategic for Moscow? 

First of all, Crimea has a population of around 2 millions of people officially made up by the 58% of Russians, 24% of Ukrainians and 12% of Tatars. It is important to remember that in 1944 the entire population of Tatars was deported in Turkey, accused by Stalin of collaboration with Nazis. So the percentage of Tatars in Crimea doesn’t reflect the importance of this group in the history of the region. The wide majority of Russians can be considered obvious: the region belonged to Russia till 1954, when it was donated to Kiev by Khrushchev in occasion of the 300th anniversary of Ukraine becoming a part of the Russian Empire. 

Regarding the economy, Crimea is a quite poor territory: the most important sectors are tourism and agriculture, but the region is reach of natural gas. The GDP per capita is around the 66% lower of the average in Ukraine and the 80% of the Russian one. Some sources estimate that the economy of the region depends for the 75% directly from the Government of Kiev. 

Crimea doesn’t seem attractive enough to justify the interest of Russia. The economy in quite modest and about the population, there are larger Russian communities in Countries like Kazakhstan (4 million), Belarus ( 1,2 millions) and in Ukraine itself there are 8 millions of Russians.

So why is Crimea so strategic for Russia? There are at least two reasons: one military and one energetic. 

Sebastopol hosts the main military base of the Russian Navy in the Black See (and consequently in the Mediterranean). Russia has two other basis, Novorossiysk and Temryuk, but the deep waters of Sebastopol and the better position explains why Russia has assigned on Crimea the development of its navy. Moscow also has built port infrastructures ex novo: the lost of this region could represent the inability to use its navy in that area and also huge investments for the construction of new basis. 

Moreover, there is an energetic reason that makes Crimea so important: there are two pipelines crossing the Black Sea, the Blue Stream from Russia to Turkey and the South Stream from Russia to Europe. The control of the Black Sea means also the protection of two important energetic lines.

Finally, it is clear why Russia wants to get Crimea. I think it will be more difficult to comprehend if Moscow will be able to face the political and especially the economical sanctions of the International Community, while someone has estimated the annexation of Crimea for the Kremlin economy will cost around 3 billions of dollars per year.

Read More