Disinformation

Disinformation vs Democracy in a post-Covid world.

Narratives are powerful things. They shape national and individual psyches, not to mention our global understanding of phenomena like pandemics. In the age of the internet, the power and reach of narratives have increased exponentially. We live, as they say, in the age of information. How can democracies protect freedom of speech and plurality of opinions while avoiding the worst ravages of disinformation? Particularly when it is used purposefully as a weapon of political warfare? Experts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in the US and the Hague Conversations on Conflict in the Netherlands recently discussed this problem with regards to both Russia and China. All agree that the advent of corona virus, has highlighted the extent and power of dis/misinformation.    

Disinformation has been around for decades. It existed before the arrival of the internet and indeed played a significant part in the Cold War, as Professor of Strategic Studies at John Hopkins University, Thomas Rid explains in his recent book on the subject. Active Measures: The Secret History of Disinformation and Political Warfare traces the history of political warfare from 1950 to 2016. A variety of examples, mostly from the so-called Russian playbook but also from China and the US are examined in detail.

Exploiting existing divisions within a society.

The anti-Semitic campaign instigated by the KGB in 1959 at a new opened synagogue in Cologne is now something of a text-book case. It began with the graffitiing of swastikas on the sides of the place of worship, accompanied by the words ‘Jews out’. This was followed by threatening phone calls to Jewish people alongside the desecration of Jewish graves and shops. Little more was needed to re-ignite a deeply divisive narrative. Over the next two months, West German authorities recorded 833 separate anti-Jewish acts. The phenomenon spread globally. The Danish King’s summer home was graffitied and a Jewish MP in Britain was threatened with murder.

In time, evidence showed that the campaign had been instigated by two East German agents whose mission was to infiltrate far-right groups in West Germany and whip up anti-Semitic sentiment. The  idea was the brainchild of a General Ivan Ivanovich Agayants, who headed Department D, for disinformation, in the KGB.  As Professor Rid points out, sometimes the most effective disinformation campaigns are those that fan far right extremism and/or amplify existing conspiracy theories. The irony, is that instigators of such campaigns often lose control over them as happened in this case. Anti-Semitic acts spilled across the Berlin Wall into East Germany, clearly not the intention of the KGB.

‘A pandemic is the best raw material one can hope for in terms of disinformation’ – Professor Thomas Rid

‘A pandemic is the best raw material one can hope for in terms of disinformation’ says Rid. The high levels of fear and uncertainty which ensue provide the perfect breeding ground for such campaigns. Operation Denver was the name given another, now infamous KGB disinformation campaign, designed to portray HIV Aids as a biological weapon created at Fort Detrick by the US military. This campaign tapped into existing far-right conspiracy theories already circulating in the US at the time. The corona pandemic presents some similarities but also arrives at a time when divisions within US society are extremely high. This was before the Black Lives Matter protests began.

Adding yet more fuel to the fire, is the fact that it is election year in the US. Trump’s election to the White House in 2016 gave rise to the Mueller Report, an official report documenting the findings of former Special Counsel, Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 United States presidential campaign. Professor Rid maintains that the extent to which Russian disinformation impacted the results of the 2016 US elections is ‘an unknowable fact’.

He warns against ‘emotional responses’ that site Trump’s election as the result of interference by ‘foreign powers’. ‘Our perception of Russian interference is creating more problems than Russian interference itself’ he notes. Rid notes in a recent op-ed for the New York Times, that US intelligence assessment of Russian intelligence operations in the run-up to this year’s US elections is expected to focus on the support and amplification of white supremacist groups in order to incite violence. They agree that such measures are not employed to strengthen Trump but rather to weaken the United States as a whole.

‘Europe has been a laboratory for Russian disinformation for decades’ – Heather A. Conley, CSIS.

A divided society is one in which disinformation thrives. Combined with the culture of anonymity unleashed by the rise of the internet in the early 2000s, it is ‘a dream come true for disinformation actors’ says Rid. The EU’s 27 member states frequently disagree on a variety of issues. In some circumstances this plurality of views and opinions can prove helpful and healthy. But in terms of disinformation, these divisions are all too easily exploited. Heather A. Conley, Director of the Europe Program at CSIS, agrees that although Europe is becoming increasingly vigilant regarding misinformation operations, it has been ‘a laboratory for Russian disinformation for decades’.  As China has taken an increasingly active role in disinformation campaigns, following the outbreak of corona virus, Conley notes that this has caused increasing political tensions in Europe.  

Director of the European Values Center for Security Policy, Jakub Janda, explained recently in the Hague, that China has focused specifically on increasing disinformation campaigns in Europe in the last year and half. The goal; to get the EU to ‘decouple itself from the US’. He outlines the Chinese Communist Party’s objectives in Europe as follows: silencing Europe on sensitive issues like Taiwan and China’s human right’s record; deflecting blame for the corona virus and pressing hard on Europe regarding 5G, particularly Huawei’s role in it. It’s tool box he says, is similar to Russia’s but China has far more leverage because of its huge economic power.

What to do?  

Professor Rid warns against the temptation to ‘fight fire with fire’. Such an approach is problematic for several reasons he explains. Not least because, ultimately, ‘one can’t excel at democracy and disinformation at the same time’. Conley emphasises the need for the EU and the US to work together on countering disinformation campaigns directed at dividing them. While Janda points out that European countries would do well to stand together and be firm with China, particularly regarding their values.

‘This fear of China is not helpful’ Janda says. Pointing to Australia’s approach to China and Lithuania’s approach to Russia as models for future clever cooperation, he argues that a stronger, more assertive Europe will help ensure it does not ‘get crushed between the US and China’. Nevertheless, respecting a plurality of viewpoints and a range of individual freedoms does indeed make the battle more difficult. ‘Sober, fact-driven intelligence’ on all forms of information is to be recommended, and most of all, ‘Find people to disagree with’ suggests Professor Rid.  

EU budget

Will this EU budget finally bury North/South divides?

Europe’s post-corona recovery budget will include mutualized debt for the first time ever. That’s if Merkel and Macron get their way and remaining Member States agree to an ambitious new budget plan proposed by the EU Commission. The Next Generation financing tool will involve borrowing €750 billion on the financial markets, repaid over a 30 year period. Described by Director General of DG Budget, Gert Jan Koopman, as effectively ‘self-financing’, the Netherlands and Austria are nevertheless expected to oppose it. Such divisions continue to plague the EU project. Changing entrenched national narratives is no easy task and one which national politicians often ignore.  

The corona virus has hit all economies with unprecedented force. Optimistic estimates put contraction levels at approximately 7.5% to 8% for the eurozone economy in wake of the pandemic. Although the virus knows no borders, countries in Europe have been affected differently both in death rates and economic impact. Italy and Spain have been particularly badly hit, on both counts. These countries rely strongly on tourism which is one of the worst hit industries and both have less resilient economies than their northern counter-parts.

The management of the corona response, took place at national level and the asymmetric damage caused by the virus has reinforced notions of national responsibility. For those countries less affected, the temptation to view the problem from a national perspective is strong. Here in the Netherlands, solidarity with fellow Member States following the death of thousands across Europe, has been tempered by the belief that each country should use their own economic resources to counter the effects before looking to the EU for financial support. The simplistic attraction of the ‘keep your own house in order’ narrative, does not, unfortunately, take into account the complex relations inherent in a shared currency.

Germany and the Netherlands: once the ‘sick men of Europe’ – William Drozdiak.

The Euro has brought large increases in prosperity across Europe. It has powered economic growth in countries like the Netherlands and Germany who depend on large, stable European markets to sell their goods and services. Former editor and foreign correspondent for the Washington Post, William Drozdiak, recently recalled how different these countries were twenty years ago. When posted in Berlin as a foreign correspondent, he remembers how Germany and the Netherlands were described at the time as ‘the sick men of Europe’ with sluggish economies and bloated social services. The introduction of the Euro helped bring a surge in exports which turned them into the economic powerhouses they are today. Such things are conveniently forgotten, particularly, by national politicians who are quick to take credit for economic growth and low unemployment.

One cannot think of Europe simply as a market place, says French President, Emmanuel Macron. Yet for those who have enjoyed increasing economic prosperity as a result of the common market, it is perhaps difficult not to see it in this way. Markets are not entirely self-sustaining. History shows us that without a certain amount of intervention market forces can prove extreme with harsh consequences for society at large. In times of crisis, the eurozone market needs intervention on a pan-European level. For this, EU institutions like the European Central Bank, the European Commission and the European Investment Bank are well placed to take action. The problem comes when national governments view the EU market place as an external facility. One which they can make use of as and when it suits them but for which they have no fundamental responsibility.

‘The nation state along has no future.’ – Angela Merkel

Such notions are entrenched in the EU’s founding treaties in the form of the subsidiary principle. This essentially states that the EU will not take action unless it is more effective than action taken at national or regional level. This principle can thus work both ways but has frequently been used by Member States to question and limit EU powers. German Chancellor, Angela Merkel’s recent decision to side with Macron in the issuing of mutualised debt significantly empowers the EU as governing body. Her comment that ‘The nation state alone has no future’ is both insightful and deeply significant for the EU’s most powerful nation state.   

With the backing of both France and Germany, the EU Commission has come up with a greatly revised long term budget within the space of only a couple of months. Most significant is the Next Generation EU instrument which Director General of DG Budget, Mr Gert Jan Koopman, describes as ‘very ambitious and very novel’ but ‘absolutely necessary to preserve the internal market’. The plan is to borrow €750 billion on the capital markets. This will be done in the name of the EU for the first time ever. Although it would be a temporary tool, designed to help offset the effects of the corona induced economic crisis,  it clearly sets a precedent for similar actions in the future. Market response to the long-awaited  emergence of a more heavy-weight Euro was immediate and strongly positive.

‘Exceptional circumstances require exceptional measures.’ – Christine Lagarde

But there are those, particularly the Netherlands and Austria, who remained unconvinced. The fear of mutualized European debt has long proved a bulwark of national politics in many Northern European countries. Germany too was long opposed to taking on the debt burdens associated with the free-wheeling spending habits of their Southern counterparts. However, the pandemic is truly exceptional. As Christine Lagarde recently pointed out, ‘Exceptional circumstances, require exceptional measures’.  The EU enjoys a AAA credit rating, meaning low borrowing costs in a climate where interest rates are already very low. Member states will be required to increase donations from 1.29% of GNI to 1.4%. A further 0.6% will be required to guarantee the borrowing costs which will be repaid over a period of 30 years. This means that there is no need for separate guarantees from individual Member States.

Gert Jan Koopman describes the proposal as ‘a positive sum game, not a zero sum game’ as it is largely self-financing. He explains that because the package sits within the next EU budget, it will benefit from all the safe guards already in place for careful monitoring and distribution of funds. Koopman is also quick to point out that at closure of EU programmes, error rates are ‘non material’, meaning that procedures are ‘very robust’.  Distribution of these funds among Member States is based on three criteria: GDP per capita, structural unemployment and population size.

‘A positive-sum game, not a zero-sum game’ – Gert Jan Koopman

Koopman agrees that they are simple but given the complexity of distribution amongst 27 member states, simplicity is vital. Based on these criteria, Italy and Spain will get the largest share of this money in the form of grants. Approximately €63 billion for Spain and €65 billion for Italy. The greatest challenge is getting the money to those who need it most, quickly. Traditionally, EU budget agreement has taken up to two years as it needs to be ratified by all national parliaments. However Koopman is hopeful that this time, Member States will respond to the urgency of the situation so that money can start flowing within 6 months.

This is where countries like the Netherlands and Austria can make their reluctance felt. In the Netherlands, national elections will take place in March next year. Pressure is therefore on for national politicians who have spent years benefiting from a dual narrative. The first is one of economic prosperity apparently, solely the result of the hard work and thriftiness of their electorate. The second, their role as national guardians against the money-hungry EU. An institution dedicated to propping up all those who spend ‘my money on liqueurs and women’ in the now infamous words of former Dutch finance minister, Jeroen Dijsselbloem. Austria’s coalition government has also come out against the proposal, saying that it would simply put too big a burden on the Austrian taxpayer. A burden that may well be worth shouldering if it helps ensure the kind of economic growth and prosperity that the EU has thus far delivered.

China

How will China’s tarnished image affect global relations post-corona?

China’s international image has been decades in the making. Although democracy and human rights have never been high on the Communist Party’s agenda – phenomenal economic growth paired with a reasonable record of line towing with regards to international organisations and diplomacy resulted in acceptance by many Western nations of China’s authoritarian regime. Some even suggested that China might provide an alternative model to Western capitalist democracies for developing nations. But much has changed in the last 6 months. Corona virus has placed China under the world spotlight, not in a manner of Beijing’s choosing. What are the implications for global relations going forward?

Some of the less savoury aspects of just how the massive apparatus of the Chinese Communist Party works have become increasingly clear. From the Hong Kong protests to the mass internment camps of China’s Uighur Muslims, along with advanced surveillance schemes and claims of the debt trap diplomacy of its Belt and Road initiative – China’s image is showing signs of strain. And this was before the arrival of corona virus. The live and let live approach seems ever more difficult to justify. But what are the alternatives? Hong Kong provides a poignant example of just how difficult a change in approach may be.  

Increasing tensions between China and Hong Kong are perhaps one of the greatest sources of embarrassment for a nation for whom ‘face saving’ is essential. After months of protest by pro-democracy groups, local Hong Kong elections showed that the vast majority of Hong Kongers support the protesters. Contrary to narratives portraying the protesters as criminal thugs, bent on disrupting one of China’s most prosperous financial hubs, these results surprised even Beijing.

The end of One Country Two Systems?

In contrast to Beijing’s trust in the power of economic prosperity to ensure compliance, a combination of factors have created a storm that has proved difficult to contain. For years now, Hong Kong has seen its basic rights eroded and ‘reinterpreted’ by Beijing and its supporters. This, in combination with a lack of social welfare investment in Hong Kong, soaring house prices and erosion of job opportunities by an influx of mainlanders have created rising levels of anger and discontent among Hong Kong’s youth. Beijing has now announced its intention to introduce national security legislation in Hong Kong. It will be inserted directly into the city’s Basic Law framework, by-passing local legislative processes. Widespread international criticism has ensued.

Close on the heels of the Hong Kong protests and Taiwan’s choice of pro-democracy leader, Tsai Ing-Wen, in January elections, came the Xinjian Papers. Over 400 pages of leaked documents, detailing exactly how ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang region would be ‘re-educated’ in government organised ‘training schools’. These internal documents were leaked to the New York Times by a concerned member of the Communist Party. They reveal just how different the sanitized narrative of job training centers for China’s Muslim minority is from the chilling reality of exactly how officials should go about organising the most extensive internment campaign since the Mao era.

Black-listed on China’s social credit system?

Beijing’s social credit system, due to come into full effect in 2020, exemplifies the kind of social control of which any self-respecting totalitarian regime would be proud. Although commentators say that its reach is still patchy, the ideas behind it are draconian. Credit is not only gained, it can also be lost and an individual may be black-listed as a result. If this happens, rights can be removed, including one’s right to travel, buy property or take out a loan. When this happens, as it did to Chinese journalist, Liu Hu, there is little one can do. There was no file, no police warrant, no advance notification, in his case. A lack of due process, makes recourse to justice extremely difficult.  

These are just some of Beijing’s less savoury projects. Much has been written about the so-called debt-trap diplomacy of its Belt and Road Initiative. Designed to bolster China’s image and extend its influence as a superpower, this trillion dollar project was coming under pressure before the pandemic. Global economic slowdown and increasing concerns about a lack of transparency surrounding China’s lending schemes were proving problematic. Rising debt levels associated with the pandemic have meant that many of China’s developing world debtors are unable to meet repayment schedules. China was a signatory to a recent pledge by the Group of 20 rich economies to cease collecting interest from poor countries for the rest of the year. However many large Belt and Road loans are “not applicable for debt relief” China has stated.

China’s struggle to control the Covid 19 narrative.

The irony of course is that the source of the pandemic has been traced to China, specifically, the wet markets of Wuhan. This has become an increasingly sore point for Beijing as Covid 19 continues to cause death and economic destruction across the globe. Numerous countries have called for an independent inquiry into the issue both with regards to the actions of the Chinese government and those of the World Health Organisation. So far Beijing has rebutted these requests and focused instead on forcefully promoting a narrative designed to salvage something of China’s international image. China as role model for its containment of the virus and later as benefactor to other, less prepared countries. It continues to insist on Taiwan’s exclusion from the WHO, although the latter’s handling of the pandemic has been among the most effective in the world.

What does the future hold? At a recent Chatham House rules event, a number of experts on China drew on the country’s history in order to  provide a context for its future path. More than one pointed to the importance of the Chinese narrative of their history staring in the 5th century BC. Their power and dominance continued right up until 1900. After which came the so-called century of humiliation for China. This ended in the 1970’s as China came out of isolation and focused on inclusion in global governance institutions and wider international acceptance. By 2010, China was ready to step forward into a more assertive role . In the last few years in particular, its actions in the South China Sea, border disputes with India and an ongoing trade war with the US highlight an increasingly assertive approach to international relations.

Is it simply a matter of time?

Rising Chinese nationalism has traditionally gone hand-in-hand with the nation’s increasing global dominance. Yet the political and economic fall out of the pandemic have upset this trajectory. China’s image has been undeniably tarnished by the corona virus. What’s more, the ensuing scrutiny has only served to highlight other areas of dubious dealings. Ultimately, the answer lies with the Chinese people themselves. Will the Communist Party continue to be able to provide sufficient prosperity to quieten a desire for more individual rights and freedoms? History suggests not, especially given events in Hong Kong and Taiwan. But the time scale of rising discontent, is also a major factor and that is far more difficult to gauge.  

EU Rule of Law

How best to protect Rule of Law in the European Union?

Respect for the rule of law is one of the pillars of the European Union. It is enshrined in the founding treaties and the majority of EU Member States support its primacy. But what happens when a Member State does not respect the rule of law or indeed actively works to undermine it? This has been the case with both Poland and Hungary. It is also a concern with EU candidate states, Serbia and Montenegro. Should EU funding be tied to Rule of Law compliance? EU Commissioner for Values and Transparency, Věra Jourová, believes this is now necessary. She has recently made concrete proposals for how this could be done in the next EU budget.     

The rule of law means that the law rather than individual people or political parties, is all powerful. It ensures that power resides in legal codes rather than power-hungry individuals or large, monopolistic organisations. In countries where the rule of law is weak or non-existent, it is fair to say that life for the average individual is likely to be more difficult. The rule of law is normally enshrined in a country’s constitution. In the case of the European Union, it is enshrined in the founding treaties, specifically the Treaty of Lisbon, which came into force in 2009. However, there is little reference made to how rule of law infringement might be dealt with. This is largely, Jourová, suggests, due to the optimism and naivety that accompanied the Lisbon Treaty. The desire for freedom and fairness was taken as given.

But electorates in Poland and Hungary have shown that this is not always the case. In Hungary, right wing nationalist party, Fidesz, lead by Victor Orban, has won seven consecutive landslide victories, in national, municipal and European elections since 2010. Orban has used his power to reform Hungary’s judicial institutions. He has also concentrated as much power as possible at central government level, while taking controlling of the national media. Hungary’s parliament recently voted by a two thirds majority to allow Orban’s government to rule by decree without a set time limit.  This ruling includes steps to prevent fake news, by threatening individuals with between 1 and 5 years imprisonment for publication of untrue or distorted facts.

Will of the people?

In Poland, the ruling Peace and Justice Party has also enjoyed an absolute majority in both houses since 2015. This has allowed them to push through reforms that undermined the independence of the judiciary. For example, the European Court of Justice ruled at the end of last year that a disciplinary committee for judges was not in keeping with EU law. The introduction of a ‘muzzle law’ in January this year, was designed to discipline judges who question government judicial reforms.

The ruling party claims to represent traditional Catholic values and has strong support in the rural regions where it has rolled out approximately 15 billion euros worth of social welfare programmes. Parties like these provide security and apparent safety in times of uncertainty and the increasing pressures of globalisation. They epitomize the era of the nation state. An experience that many in Eastern Europe were robbed of, as they became Soviet satellites after World War Two.

Do not touch the independence of the sovereign state?

This issue of how to deal with rule of law infringements by European governments, elected by their citizens sits at the core of the European Union’s central dilemma. This is highlighted in the European Parliament, Jourova explains, where the division between those who say, ‘do not touch the independence of the sovereign state’ and those who say, ‘the Commission needs to be stronger’ is ever present. But the Commission’s toolbox is limited.

Article 7 is the strongest sanction the EU currently has to deal with Member States who have violated fundamentals rights. It is an infringement procedure that allows the EU Council to give a formal warning to the country in question. This may be followed by imposing sanctions and suspending voting rights. However, two and half years have passed since Article 7 was triggered against Poland and a year and a half since it was triggered against Hungary. No sanctions have been imposed nor voting rights suspended. 

‘Those who don’t understand values, might understand money.’ – Vera Jourová.

 Jourova admits that she previously launched numerous infringement cases as Justice Minister for the EU. However, these were always preceded by lengthy dialogues. She is currently in frequent dialogue with  Hungary’s Minster of Justice regarding the situation in that country. However, in 2017 she proposed the connection of funding with the Rule of Law principle. ‘Those who don’t understand values, might understand money’, she says with resignation.

The Commissioner is hopeful that they will reach a consensus on this proposal in the next budget discussions. ‘We need it, we really need it’, Jourova concedes. Freedom House has recently categorized Hungary as a hybrid or transitional regime – it is no longer even a semi-consolidated democracy. Indeed together, Poland, Hungary, Serbia and Montenegro lead the so-called ‘Democratic Decline’ in Europe following a ‘decade of democratic deficits’.   

We have come to a cross roads with the power of the European Institutions – Vera Jourová.

The Rule of Law problem is in fact part of a wider, more fundamental issue. How should power be divided between the EU bodies in Brussels and the national governments of the Member States? Croatia currently holds the EU presidency and made it clear that it prefers dialogue about rule of law issues with Hungary and Poland, rather than sanctions. The recent ruling of the German Constitutional Court regarding the actions of the European Central Bank is yet another example of a Member State pushing back against perceived primacy of EU doctrine.

Jourova agrees that this most recent development in Germany is worrying because it stands in direct opposition to the 2018 ruling of the European Court of Justice. We are indeed ‘at a cross roads with the power of the European Institutions’ she admits. The pandemic has simply highlighted this issue. But the Commissioner is positive. ‘Democracy is a discussion’. If this is true, the EU provides plenty of examples of democracy in action.

Green corona recovery

Green corona recovery plan, could it unite Europe?

This EU budget will include an economic recovery plan for the pandemic. Traditional divisions between north and south, east and west may prove even more stark than usual. Many also question whether Von der Leyen’s much publicised Green Deal will survive a post-corona world. But what if the Green Deal could be re-purposed to drive economic recovery in Europe and bridge political divides? Many wealthy northern European nations are deeply committed to going green and may well be more willing to fund a Green corona recovery plan.

EU Commission president, Ursula Von der Leyen has spoken of a one trillion euro corona recovery fund. As yet, however, it is unclear where this money is coming from. The EU has a variety of so-called instruments or economic tools at its disposal. It uses them to collect and re-distribute funds to countries and industries most in need. However, it is not able to collect taxes like a nation state. So its revenue is entirely dependent on donations from Member States. At present, each Member State transfers approximately 1% of its national budget to the EU. The EU in turn allocates this money in the form of grants to selected Member States, foreign countries, farmers, researchers etc. The EU budget must balance each year, this means that the EU cannot borrow money. If it wants to make more grants, it needs more revenue.

The question of loans versus grants has been a vexed one. In general, the Northern member states led by the Netherlands and Austria, have pushed for loans, which will require repayment, with interest. The more hard hit southern member states, including Spain and Italy, have called for more grants or money transfers which will not require repayment. Italy even raised the idea of issuing coronabonds – mutualized debt, provided through the European Stability Mechanism (ESM). These differences are not new.

European Stability Mechanism credit lines to come with minimal strings attached.

The financial crisis of 2008 raised similar divisions between the more frugal, debt-wary north and the less stringent south. It took much wrangling and negotiation last month to reach agreement on the terms of the credit lines associated with the ESM. All member states will now have access to 2% of their GDP for corona related costs including prevention. The loans will come at very low cost, around 0.1% with maturities of 10 years. This €240 billion package should be available from 15th May. The Commission has proposed that these loans be free of normal conditions such as debt sustainability. Brussels will simply check that the funds are used for coronavirus related health spending and no more.

But what of post-corona economic recovery measures?  Eurozone economies are expected to shrink by 7.4% this year – the worst recession in the Union’s history. National politicians will come under increasing pressure from their respective electorates to deliver, as unemployment rises and businesses close. Whatever the final amount and mix of the EU corona recovery plan, the issue of how exactly this money will be spent is crucial.

No discussion thus far about how exactly corona recovery funds will be spent.

Director of the Bruegel Institute, Guntram B. Wolff, points out that there has been little discussion and no agreement thus far on which companies and industries will benefit from EU support in the recovery period. Wolff worries that member states will support different companies and industries based on political rather than economic concerns. The result, could be fragmentation of the single market. This in turn will weaken the EU economy, just when it needs all the strength it can muster. Belgian economist, Andre Sapir, agrees that ‘coordination is absolutely central to all economic solutions to this crisis.’

The EU Green Deal is Von der Leyen’s flagship initiative. Upon launch in December last year she described it as ‘Europe’s man-on-the-moon moment’. Described by some as ambitious and others as merely a set of targets, nothing similar has been attempted before. Economic progress since the industrial revolution has been heavily reliant on fossil fuels. It is as Jeffrey Sachs says, ‘the first comprehensive plan to achieve sustainable development in any major world region.’

‘Going green might be less painfully done now’ – Guntram B. Wolff.

The New Green Deal will involve an overhaul of nearly every major aspect of the EU economy, including energy, food, transport and manufacturing. Clearly this is not going to be easy. But a comprehensive response to the economic effects of the pandemic will require similar attention to all aspects of the economy. Under the circumstances, ‘going green might be less painfully done now’ says Wolff, as switching costs may be lower.

The Green Deal is going to cost money. The plan involves allocating 25% of the EU budget to climate action. In order to pay for this, the EU wants to reallocate funds from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and infrastructure toward environmental protection. The plan also makes mention of various initiatives designed to make future EU financing for Member States dependent on compliance with Green practices.

The European economic governance framework, for example, may be strengthened in order to incentivise green public investment. Further, the European Investment Bank will be supported in its efforts to become a climatebank. A Just Transition Fund has also been proposed to provide assistance to companies and regions to go green. Countries like Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic have thus far pushed back against the plan. They are all heavily dependent on fossil fuels and their economies less developed than those of Western Europe.

Why not make it Green?

Tying the corona recovery package to the Green  Deal would not be easy. But given that large amounts of EU funding is going to have to be distributed and accounted for in the wake of the pandemic, why not make it Green? So far discussions have been largely economic, but the EU suffers from a lack of political unity. The real question then is, could a Green corona recovery plan, provide that much needed unity? A goal behind which the majority of Europeans and their Member States could get behind?

Would Northern states be more willing to put their hard earned money into the communal pot, knowing that it would be used to help further Europe’s green transition? Would this idea be one that national politicians could sell to their voters? This time last year Greek economist and politician, Yanis Varouvakis, suggested that a radical Green New Deal has the potential to unite progressives across Europe. Could a green corona recovery plan prove to be the great leveller across north and south, east and west?

‘Farm to fork’ – finding fertile ground in lockdown France?

2 Comments

Does the corona pandemic present us with an opportunity to rethink our approach to what we eat and where we get our food? Closed borders and enforced lockdowns have, unintentionally, reduced carbon footprints and shortened supply chains. Sustainable approaches to food production and consumption have inadvertently become the default option. In countries like France where agriculture is strong and the village market is deeply embedded in cultural and social identity, this trend is becoming increasingly evident. In March this year, the European Commission released its Farm to Fork strategy. Some of these ideas are being realised in lockdown France via a rise in small, local initiatives that sell fresh produce directly to customers on a weekly basis.  

Before coronavirus struck, Europe’s agricultural industry was under increasing pressure from EU green initiatives. In France, farmers drove their tractors on to the streets of Paris to protest the rise of ‘agri-bashing’. For example, the banning of common pesticides and protests from activists about animal rights. Farmers complained of being scapegoats for a society in which green concerns are becoming increasingly dominant.

Similar activities by Dutch farmers were reported in the Hague, parliamentary capital of the Netherlands, toward the end of last year. Farmers arrived en masse, with their tractors to protest government policies designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from animal farming. ‘We are mad and sad’, one Dutch dairy farmer told me. ‘We don’t think the government will listen to us. But we will come back next time with more tractors if we have to’, he promised.  

‘A fair, healthy and environmentally sustainable food system’ for Europe.

Traditional farming methods are coming under increasing attack as EU countries, commit to greening their economies. Farmers argue that they are being unfairly scape-goated in spite of the fact that they put most of the food on our plates. The EU’s new flagship food policy, Farm to Fork, emphasizes the importance of sustainability and shortened supply chains in food production. Designed to secure a ‘fair, healthy and environmentally sustainable food system’ for Europe, it is part of the wider EU Green Deal. It has links with the Circular Economy Action Plan, the Zero Emissions Strategy and the Biodiversity Strategy.

An increase in land dedicated to organic farming is also one of the key Farm to Fork targets. At  present, there is a lack of demand for organic products but the pandemic might be instrumental in changing this as consumers look to support local producers who can offer fresh, pesticide free produce. Farm to Fork also focuses on reducing obesity linked to unhealthy diets. Plans to adapt labelling on food are aimed at making the origin and nutritional profile of certain foods mandatory. In France and the Netherlands, government and food companies have proposed re-evaluating the use by/best before dates on packaging to help address the issue of food waste in Europe.  

Regional produce initiative, Meet the Normands, uses community currency.

A readiness to embrace local produce is taking hold in France, the largest agricultural producer in the EU and home to a rich culinary tradition. I spoke recently with Laurence Pons Wood, who lives in Provence and has been buying her fresh produce locally for 8 years now. She is a member of AMAP, an organisation modelled on the the American supported agricultural project. Consumers have a yearly contract with local producers and pay them on monthly basis for home grown produce. This helps the local farmer she explains because it means s/he can decide how much to plant in advance and there is less overall waste. Over the years they have developed a good relationship with their local producers and have visited their farms. ‘It’s almost like having a grandfather who has his own super allotment and shows you and explains how it all works’ she laughingly confides.

A variety of direct sales platforms, designed to bring producer and consumer together are increasing. For example, the Meet the Normands (Au rendez-vous des Normands) website, opened just two weeks ago, already has 700 registered producers. Launched by the local Normandy government, it uses community currency, RolloN, to further support local producers. Although use of community currency is not obligatory. The website features an interactive map which helps you locate local producers who sell dairy products, fish, meats, fruit and vegetables.

The ‘Beehives that say Yes’ initiative, (Ruche qui dit Oui)  began in 2011 and now has hives nationwide. A person, association or company can take charge of a beehive and is then responsible for contacting producers and finding members. Customers register by entering their address, after which they can order from a list of fresh products including fruit & veg, bread, meat, beer and cheese. All products have been sustainably produced and manufactured within a 250km radius, including things like coffee.

Farm Drive initiative reports quadrupling of weekly sales since corona crisis began.

The Welcome to the Farm (Bienvenue à la Ferme) label, begun in 1988 is associated with the French Chamber of Agriculture. This agritourism network brings together nearly 8000 members with the goal of opening up farms to the public for visits that include tastings, camping trips, picnics and educational tours. With the advent of coronavirus, this group have launched initiatives like Farm Drive and Eat Farmer (Mangez Fermier). They involve sourcing local products and offering them for sale via delivery or from various collection points. They have reported a quadrupling of weekly sales since the health crisis began.

But perhaps more importantly, producers and consumers agree that these sorts of initiatives create a greater sense of community. Describing its members as ‘ambassadors of sustainable and responsible agriculture rooted in the regions’, Bienvenue à la Ferme emphasises the importance of trust and transparency in relationships between producers and consumers.  There is a growing feeling of autonomy as communities take back control of their diets and ‘reclaim the Beehive’ as one Ruche qui dit Oui manager put it. Laurence Pons Wood is adamant that we all need to be much more invested in the process of food production. ‘Food doesn’t come to your plate by magic. It’s a complicated process’ from which we many of us in the modern world are too far removed. Perhaps it’s time for a change.

contact tracing

Contact tracing coronavirus – Big Tech giants to the rescue?

Surely the century’s deadliest pandemic calls for some of Big Tech’s strongest firepower? As governments around the world start looking toward exit strategies without a vaccine for COVID 19 yet available, Apple, Google and Facebook are stepping in to fill the gap. But will contact tracing work? And what about data privacy? The social credit system in China may well make tracking apps and symptom reporting more readily acceptable. But other countries must tread the fine line between individual privacy and communal protection.

The use of technology to help combat the highly infectious coronavirus, began even before its status as a pandemic was established. The tracking ability of apps is clearly helpful in tracing the path of infection as it moves from person to person. This is called contact-tracing in medical circles and is not new. Contact tracing was used in the fight against HIV and the 2015 Ebola outbreak in Africa. It involves asking people who test positive for the names of everyone with whom they have recently been in contact. People who may then have been exposed to the disease are traced and contacted in order to provide them with advice on how to proceed.

This has traditionally been done by human beings. The provision of advice on an individual basis is still best done by people rather than apps. In Massachusetts for example, 1000 contact tracers have been hired to interview people who’ve become infected with coronavirus. But given the speed of transmission of COVID 19, digital tracing methods are increasingly attractive. Contact tracing can also work if one self-reports, assuming of course that one is reasonably honest and accurate. For example, the Governor of Rhode Island, asked the entire population to keep a journal of the people they met and the places they visited each day. If they fall sick, this journal can be handed over to health officials and used to trace those who may have been infected.

Carnegie Mellon University very happy with Facebook and Google survey results so far.

Facebook has begun work with Carnegie Mellon University in the US to create a map, showing the proportion of people who say they have experienced coronavirus symptoms, by State. The data was gathered from more than a million Facebook users who completed a survey compiled by Carnegie Mellon University. It is voluntary and depends on respondents accurately reporting their symptoms. Nevertheless, researchers at the university say that they are very happy with both Facebook and Google survey results so far. Updated on a daily basis, these results, combined with other data sources, provide real time indications of COVID 19 infections. This information helps health officials and local governments make decisions about how to allocate limited resources such as ventilators, testing equipment and face masks.

Google and Apple have recently announced their joint effort to use Bluetooth technology  in order to create the foundation (application programming interface) for contact-tracing apps that will work across both iOS and Android phones. The idea is to use low energy Bluetooth waves, which have a range of about 9 meters, to track whether a smartphone owner has come into contact with someone who may be infected with coronavirus.

No one knows for sure if Bluetooth will work for digital contact-tracing.

Importantly, Apple and Google say that the system will be anonymized. This means there will be no identifying data stored on a server and it won’t involve location data.  Data experts agree however that Bluetooth was not designed with this in mind. So no one knows for sure if it will work, warns Bennett Cyphers of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. ‘It is highly experimental and we certainly shouldn’t put all our eggs in one basket’, he says. Nevertheless Cyphers agrees that the current Apple/Google initiative is ‘relatively good’, in terms of transparency and decentralization.

Currently in the development phase, it is later that issues concerning consent will come to the fore. ‘Consent is going to be critical at every stage’ emphasises Bennett.  This means that even after a user has opted in for such an app, it should still be possible to change one’s mind and op out, taking one’s data with you. Further, any new data collection from an individual who has previously given consent should require further requests for consent. There should also be no compunction to download the app, this includes from your boss or child’s school. Voluntary use of these apps, which is clearly linked to trust, is vital for success.

Data scientists concerned about slow eroding of data privacy over time.

Data Scientist and researcher at the Brookings Institute in the US, Alex Engler, supports what he terms ‘a cohesive effort for digital contact tracing’ because of the relative ease and low cost of such projects. However, he worries about ‘the slow eroding of data privacy over time’, especially if the pandemic drags on over a period of years.  Engler also points out that privacy issues can arise simply from combining different sets of data. So-called re-association can take place with just a few other data points. Data Protection Officer for Uber, Europe, Simon Hania, agrees that ‘Anonymized data is not necessarily innocuous data’.

Clearly digital contact tracing requires consideration of multiple issues. In the European Union, Member States are approaching the challenge individually. The Netherlands, for example recently trialed 3 pilot apps but concluded that none reached the requisite privacy requirements. Anna Buchta, Senior Official at the European Data Protection Supervisor, notes that from one member state to another, there will likely be slightly different combinations of technological and non-technological solutions to COVID 19.

GDPR will not stand in the way of combating COVID 19 – European Data Protection Supervisor confirms.

But she points out that the GDPR regulations, in force across the EU since 2018, are in fact ‘quite flexible so should not stand in the way of combating COVID 19’. A European-wide contact-tracing app has been proposed, but its adoption by Member States is voluntary. Buchta stresses however that before such technology can be really useful, definite exit strategies will need to be agreed. Experts from both the US and the EU ultimately agree that technology will always remain only part of a co-ordinated response to COVID 19.      

Universal Basic Income – a solution to the economic chaos caused by Corona?

The idea of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) has been around for decades. For supporters on both sides of the political spectrum it is seen as a legitimate response to new trends in work and pay that characterize globalization. And this was before coronavirus hit. The Spanish parliament’s recent agreement to introduce UBI for the poorest segments of society has renewed interest once more in this idea.

Universal Basic Income involves giving people a guaranteed income in the form of regular cash payments. Unlike traditional welfare payments it is not tied to specific needs like housing or food. Recipients can spend it however they want. As the pandemic spreads and unemployment rises, especially amongst blue collar workers, UBI is gaining ground. It’s simplicity means that administration costs are reduced. Although others argue that it may result in reckless spending and discourage people from looking for work.

Spain’s planned UBI would be well below the minimum wage.

Spain’s left wing coalition government has agreed however that they will roll out a modest UBI in the region of 440 euros a month for those in greatest need. This certainly doesn’t constitute a living wage. In Spain the minimum wage is 950 euros a month. However in a country where 30% of children are at risk of poverty, deputy Prime Minister, Pablo Iglesias says the measure was needed even before the arrival of the corona pandemic. Some commentators argue that other EU countries like France and Germany have had basic income support for the most vulnerable for years. Spanish Labor Minister Yolanda Diaz calculates that some 5 million of Spain’s 47 million population may be eligible for this UBI.

I recently heard two staunch labourites talking about the future of work: Guy Standing, author of The Precariat (2011) and long-time advocate of basic income and Paul Mason, author of PostCapitalism (2015) and Clear Bright Future (2019). Mason stresses the importance of human agency and blames neoliberalism for the ‘hollowing out’ thereof. Standing argues that the introduction of a universal basic income can counter these tendencies. Citing a pilot study in India as evidence, he points to its transformative effects in terms of welfare, equity, growth and emancipation.

Beware the ‘new dangerous class’ – Standing.

Standing makes a simple but compelling argument for the difference between work and labour. Work is all human activity including that often done by women within the home like cooking, cleaning and child-rearing. Labour is what the market recognises as worthy of financial remuneration and thus excludes all those who are not part of this system. He calls for the values of work to be placed above those of labour. He also raised concerns about ‘a new dangerous class’, who rely almost entirely on money wages. The so-called precariat’s relationship with the state is characterized by an ever increasing loss of rights. As the world economy heads into ever deeper recession, the precariat’s position may well prove ever more precarious.

Emancipatory value of UBI far greater than its monetary value – Standing.

The central idea behind UBI is that a greater range of human endeavour will be automatically rewarded. It extends current, limited definitions of work and provides a safety net so that each can follow his/her own passions and talents. This might include spending more time with one’s family or going back to full time study. Strangely enough, coronavirus has inadvertently presented many with just these opportunities. UBI assumes that human beings, given the chance, will choose to self-actualise, to improve their own lives and those of their loved ones.

Citing three recent unconditional basic income schemes in India, funded by UNICEF, Standing claims the primary value of UBI is what he calls, its emancipatory effect. It is not, he explains, a panacea. Rather, it should be an important part of a package of reforms that can be used as development aid and as regional policy in the European Union, with regards to migration.

But what of UBI in developed economies? The Finnish government recently completed a 2 year pilot study in which monthly payments of 560 euros were made to 2000 unemployed people. The trial was launched by a centre-right government at a cost of approximately 20 million euros. The idea was to see whether unconditional income might incentivise unemployed people to take up work. Two years on, it was found that this group was happier but employment rates were no better or worse than a control group. God is in the details.

Is money better spent on improving Universal Basic Services?

Anna Coote, co-author of Universal Basic Income: A Union Perspective wrote in the Guardian newspaper of the findings of a meta-study (May, 2019) conducted for a global trade union federation. Sixteen practical projects, each of which has tested various ways of distributing regular cash payments to individuals across different income groups, were investigated. No evidence of the sustainability of such schemes nor of their ability to achieve lasting improvements in wellbeing and equality was found. The report concludes that the money would be better spent on improving Universal Basic Services (UBS). As Coote clearly states, ‘Collective provision offers more cost-effective, socially just, sustainable ways of meeting people’s needs than leaving individuals to buy what they can afford in the marketplace.’ 

So we return to familiar ideological divisions regarding the  advantages or disadvantages of markets and the importance of individual vs communal choice. Economists on both the left and the right have argued for UBI as a source of personal empowerment. It allows greater choice for citizens – concerning work, caring, leisure and education. Such views clearly chime with the humanist perspective of someone like Paul Mason. Yet they have also found an ear amongst the entrepreneurs and venture capitalists of Silicone Valley, Mark Zuckerberg included.

Can UBI help to trim the excesses of the welfare state?

From a traditional libertarian perspective, UBI may be seen as a solution to the intrusiveness and inefficiency of the welfare state. Furthermore, in an age of what some economists have termed ‘cognitive capitalism’, characterised by the growing importance of cognitive labour rather than traditional material production, UBI could reward the growing amount of unpaid, communal work that increasingly characterises the internet age.    

UBI is perhaps better understood as an umbrella concept that includes a variety of options. Key questions like what level of payment to use, how it might be combined with or even replace other social security benefits and how the tax and pension system should treat it, require further research. Will the current pandemic provide the kind of incentives needed to experiment more widely with some of these options? Ideologically attractive to humanists on both sides of the political spectrum, it is as complex as many other economic models and vulnerable to similar political manipulation. However UBI does provide a bold, more enlightened view of human endeavour. It acknowledges the large amounts of untapped wealth and potential that an increasingly globalised world has to offer, in spite of coronavirus.

sewar alrashdan

Sewar Al-rashdan on justice in Jordan.

Sewar Mahmoud Al-rashdan is one of Jordan’s few female judges. She recently visited the Hague to speak about her work but had to return to Jordan sooner than expected due to that country’s corona lock down. Sewar became a judge at just 28 years of age. Her polite manner and serene appearance belie a steely resolve and strength of character that she attributes to her mother. We spoke via skype about her commitment to empowering women in Jordan’s judiciary and how she reconciles Sharia law with women’s rights in her role as a judge.   

‘I was raised in a legal house, where my father was a judge for 37 years’, Sewar tells me. She explains that it is common in Jordan for children to follow the careers of their father. Such was the case with Sewar and her siblings. She and her brother and sisters all studied law and went on to complete Masters degrees in this field. However, her family are perhaps less typical in their attitudes toward gender equality. ‘I was lucky’, Sewar admits. ‘My dad and my mother were both open-minded. They believed in equity and equality, so they never favoured my only brother over me and my sisters. We were all equal’. Sewar explains that she and her family are Muslims and describes her father as ‘very religious’ but also ‘open-minded’. She agrees that these attitudes had a great impact on who she is today, the principals in which she believes and what she stands for. 

“‘My mother is my first supporter’ – Sewar Al-rashdan.”

Sewar recalls how her father used to speak to them of the difficulties faced by female judges with whom he worked. For example, many asked how a female judge was equipped to deal with dangerous criminals. He advised her to listen carefully to each complaint and try to respond with patience and humanity. In this way, respect is gradually gained. ‘That really affected my personal life and my daily work. I always try to treat people equally and this affects the society positively I think’ she says modestly. Nevertheless it was her mother who she describes as her ‘first supporter’. She didn’t study law, she was a school teacher. But her strong personality and ability to maintain a balance between work and family life, was an inspiration to Sewar. She describes her mother as ‘a powerful woman’ whose strength of character she has always admired, particularly working as a judge in a patriarchal society. 

Men and women have equal opportunities to become a judge in Jordan, Sewar explains. Nevertheless, she agrees that some of the traditions in Jordan ‘really stand in the way of women’s rights’. For example, some women are forced into marriage by their relatives. While others have to hand over their share of the inheritance to their brothers or need their husband’s permission to work. The judge repeatedly draws a distinction between what she terms ‘traditional families’ and ‘open-minded families’. Attitudes towards women and their role in society differs across families. But Sewar tells me that she thinks the mentality of the Jordanian people is now changing and they are becoming more open-minded. The first female judge was assigned in Jordan in 1998. In 1999 there were just five female judges in the country. However almost 22% of judges in Jordan are now female.  

‘I always planned to be a judge, like my father. It is my dream.’ – Sewar Al-rashdan

‘I always planned to be a judge, like my father. It is my dream’. Sewar Al-rashdan initially studied law in Jordan. She was then awarded a scholarship from the Ministry of Justice as part of a programme called Future Judges. Those with high grades were granted bursaries to study for a Master’s degree in law  in the UK. In 2008, Sewar was one of just 12 Jordanian law graduates who obtained admission to study IP law at Brunel University, London.

Both Jordan and the UK are signatories to the same international conventions, including the Bern Convention and the Paris Convention which means their legal codes in this area of law are similar. However, as a Muslim country, the main source of Jordan’s legal codes is Sharia law. I asked Sewar if she felt that Shariah stands in the way of justice for women? She admits that there is still ‘a lot to do, but she is optimistic’. The judge believes that it is not Shariah itself that is the problem but rather the manner in which the legal texts are interpreted.  

Sewar tells me of a case in which she was involved, and recalls very clearly. It involved a man and wife who had married and bought an apartment together. However after they divorced the man brought his new wife to live in the apartment in spite of the fact that his ex-wife was still living there and legally owned half of the property. The apartment had been divided in two with two kitchens, living rooms, offices. ‘It was entirely split, like two apartments in one’, explains Sewar. As a devout Muslim woman and observer of hijab, the situation was intolerable for the claimant who was forced to live with her husband and new wife under one roof. She finally won her case for the apartment to be sold and the revenue divided equally between the two of them.

‘As a female judge I have to support women’’ – Sewar Al-rashdan 

During her eight years as a judge, Sewar tells me that she has faced many legal situations which made her realise the lack of legal awareness amongst women in her country. She saw many women whose brothers or male relatives wanted to kick them out of the house and take their money because these women were not fully aware of their property rights.  ‘As a female judge I have to support women.’ Sewar tells the story of Fatima, a woman in her mid-fifties, whose case she was responsible for but whose son was there in her place. Sewar insisted that Fatima, whose name was on the case file, come into the court room and exercise her right to justice as a Jordanian citizen. Sewar took time to put Fatima at her ease as she noticed that she was clearly uncomfortable and embarrassed to find herself in court.

Through her work, Sewar was inspired to study for another Master’s degree. This one in Women’s Studies at the University of Jordan (2019). As part of her course, she was required to design a practical project. This resulted in her plans for the creation of a gender unit within the Judicial Council. At the moment, nothing like this exists she explains. Sewar believes that it is important to establish such policies, programmes and mechanisms designed to enhance and promote gender equality within the judiciary.   

The judge is still working on the finer points of her project before submission to the President of the Judicial Council. She is drawing on a research paper by the King of Jordan himself in the hope that this will add the necessary weight to her proposal which will be assessed by a group of 11 senior judges. ‘I’m not sure if all the judges will be convinced’, she admits in her typically modest way. ‘There is only one female member and all of them are over 65 years old.’ A lack of gender awareness is common amongst female judges too, Sewar tells me. ‘When I discuss gender equality with my female colleagues, the majority don’t understand or show little interest.’    

‘If we have more women on the judicial council, the mentality will change’. – Sewar Al-rashdan  

In spite of her modesty, it is clear that Sewar Al-rashdan is a woman who is not afraid of hard work, nor is she without ambition. She currently holds the position of Chair on a number of legal committees and is a member of the Arab Women’s Legal Network and of the International Association of Women Judges.  She hopes one day to sit on the Judicial Council but tells me that currently it is a struggle for female judges to reach such leadership position. ‘Many of my colleagues and I are working hard to gain their trust and prove that women are able to make positive change in the judiciary. We need to make a change in our society’. But changing the mentality with regards to gender equality in Jordan is clearly something that is going to take time.

Sewar shares the story of one of her female colleagues. A fellow judge, who had a plaintiff come into her courtroom and ask where the judge was. When she explained that she was the judge the man became agitated and demanded a male judge. He did not want to leave his case file in her courtroom.  Sewar explains that her colleague kept calm and dealt with the situation with patience and empathy because this man had been raised in a culture in which women are not judges. Looking forward, Jordan is planning to activate the Security Council decision 1325. This involves developing a national plan to empower women so that they may reach leadership positions. The national strategy for women for 2020 – 2025 aims to be compatible with sustainable development goals for 2030, particularly the 5th goal focusing on gender equality.

‘Our King is the one who gives us strength. He is very strong and kind at the same time.’ – Sewar Al-rashdan

Jordan’s ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), has helped to provide ‘more flexibility’ for women in Jordan, Sewar explains. Previously women could not travel or live by themselves Although small and not oil rich like some of its neighbours, Jordan is one of the few Middle Eastern success stories.  It has, for example, recently welcomed thousands of Syrian refugees, providing them with shelter and livelihood.  

‘I think the secret is our leadership’, Sewar tells me. ‘His Majesty, our King is the one who gives us strength. He is very strong and kind at the same time. Both the King and the Queen always support the Jordanian people, that’s why we all are strong, we support each other.’ Sewar’s own family continue to support her so that she can pursue her legal career. In the future, the judge hopes that, ‘Women will no longer stay in the shadows and their voices will be heard.’ Sewar Al-rashdan’s own story is certainly proof of this.