When asked by a researcher working on the subject, Xavier, 44, a modern day slave in Amazonia, Brazil reported: “They thrashed me with a whip. I treated the cuts with oil from a tree. But when the overseer saw that they were healing, he threw gasoline over them, and then I saw stars.”

Going further in investigating such realities,  it soon becomes apparent that the majority of workers in India and Pakistan are in bonded labour, that child labour in sub-Saharan countries is considered “normal”, and that coerced female prostitution is one of the biggest tourist attractions in Thailand.

The list continues dramatically, when looking at the working conditions of eastern and southern countries: forced labour  is not only still alive, but often takes place in broad daylight.

The problem is far reaching: slavery is a plague that affects even the United Kingdom. The only difference is that we hide it, and people generally ignore the underbelly of what is labelled the “informal economy”.

Talking with activists of the non-profit organization Anti-slavery International (ASI), based in London,  they reported the words of a domestic worker, who didn’t wish to be named,  and who used to work for a couple in their twenties in London: “I would get up at 6am and work all day until after midnight. I never had any breaks, or the time to take a bath or sometimes even to go to the toilet. I was only allowed one day off a month and I wasn’t ever allowed to leave the house”  (M/F) Her example is just one of thousands estimated.

Ironically the United Kingdom is one of the leading states fighting slavery, since its elimination from the colonies in 1807. The British government has also institutionalized a national “Anti-Slavery Day” on every 18^th of October, which was commemorated for the second time this year.

“The day was thought to increase awareness among people.” explained Paul Donohoe who works at ASI: ”We went out doing education in schools and we launched new campaigns against trafficking.”

More than 4,000 labourer are trafficked in the UK every year, to be coerced into work such as domestic labour or prostitution. Given that enslavement is illegal, the entire trade of slavery is hidden in the hands of a few traffickers, working as the missing link between entrepreneurs and slaves, and who are often settled in developed countries.

According to the International Labour Organization the market in trafficking produces $32 million of profit. “Making use of the Antislavery Day,” continued Mr. Donohoe, “we called on people to sign a document asking the UK Government to incorporate a proposed EU directive designed to protect victims of trafficking and increase prosecutions of traffickers.”

Organizations that work to protect human rights and labour freedoms strongly believe in the necessity of an international governmental coalition in eradicating forced labour. To date 27 million people live under conditions of slavery, producing only $13 million of extra profit (less than what the United States spends on Valentine’s Day). (M/F)

Though the new Antislavery Day may succeed in raising awareness among some Britons, these are the real images of deep economic exploitation across several different countries and cultures.

Italy is at a bad turn not because of Berlusconi’s resilience, not for the predicted immigration waves, not for youth unemployment, not for the cuts in jobs and the fall of the small enterprise and not even for the crunching grips of austere economic reforms. Italy is like a patient in depression, looking at himself in the mirror and understanding of being depressed, but unable to think in any other terms than depression. The Italian problem is a problem of imagination. It is a problem of lack of alternative imagination. The imagination of the ideals, of ethics and values, usually triggered by both Realpolitik and theater plays, have all been eaten up by a reinforcing black hole where Berlusconi and his pro and contra commentators have collided. The game is no more Berlusconi’s or the magistrates’. The game is this sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, where critiques are self-evident and foster the things they critique. The lack of imagination has produced a Berlusca-centric system that reduced Italy to a thing and a measure of itself, at this stage devoid of a guide.

Silvio Forever comes about in these uni-versal days. An intelligent movie, a sharp, well-informed, poignant, revelatory and (un)surprisingly wit collage of footage and declarations. A movie that would shake a foreigner more than an Italian. As in any addiction, excess of consumption decreases the effect of every amount: an evening in the cinema to watch Berlusconi’s shows simply reinforces uni-directionality. In actual facts, this movie should be destined to a foreign audience, where alternative imaginations could make a cult out of this deeply enmeshed in the Italian-style, but incredibly actual and pan-communicative film.

Silvio Forever is the story of the effects of power and transgression, from the moment the man believes to be the creator, to the moment the man has to blindly obey to his creation. It is a universal parable, telling the story of a country internationally considered a-normal on daily basis, a story that surely will provoke a deep sense of resentment in any one caring about Italy. Also, it is story that speaks the words of truth, a truth contained in the Pandora’s box of liberal theory, which can paradoxically become an instrument of invisible censorship, of self-destructive implosion, of obliteration of democracy through democracy.

Gian Antonio Stella and Sergio Rizzo, together with Roberto Faenza, acted somehow predictably, as they produced a movie not able to increase the audience already conquered with the books “La Casta” and “La Deriva”, and that slice of population barricaded behind the parallel reality of investigative journalism, the magistrate’s justice and deep “anti-berlusconismo”. Similarly, the three acted very unpredictably too, fact epitomised by the Left’s caustic reactions to the movie. What was different? The movie’s sobriety and ambiguous nature are of rarely paralleled manufacture in Italian docudrama: Silvio Forever could have easily been about a distant autocrat, both in time and space.

In addition to that, the editing of the movie was about one possible alternative for Italy: the lack of an orienting voice, if we consider Silvio’s voice as ‘within’ the narrative and not as the ‘narrating voice’. The movie has met unconscious, deep audience’s dissatisfaction by the fact that there is no clear moral, as the stark contrast between Rosa Bossi Berlusconi’s (Silvio’s mother) declarations and their dismissal by the unfolding of history, or the juxtaposition of a 1910s betrayal of Caesar movie and the fairy-tale like tone of the ending song are elements framing the nebulous state of the Italian real. The movie’s cynical, witty and ambiguous alternative style smells of the unknown Italy, of a country brave enough to completely dismiss itself and build a new cosmos: possibly, it smells of the non-televised alternative country. Silvio Forever deserves to be the last act of a play where all Italians are unconsciously playing, as it feels like that not only there is no light at the end of the tunnel, but that the tunnel is not even felt. Nevertheless, the few subjects still gravitating around the imaginative black hole are wondering how to escape the aggrandising magnetism. And they also feel that they cannot do it through neither the large or the small screen.

‘3 millions de chômeurs ce sont 3 millions d’immigrés de trop!’

Unable to face the economic crisis that is affecting most of their population, governors need to find an external enemy to blame, to divert attention from their own failures. This is one of the oldest and most efficient tactics in politics. That is how the migrant, the stranger, becomes the natural enemy on which people are legitimized to reverse their rage. Funnily enough, in Europe the countries with the largest proportions of immigrant workers, Luxembourg and Switzerland, are the richest.

Many have argued that immigrants displace local workers. Yet, migrants are likely to do the so called “3-D”: dirty, dangerous and difficult jobs, which local people do not want to do anymore, such as clean, pick fruits or construct buildings. Not only will they do them, but they are likely to do them better. In fact, as Legrain rightly wrote in his book, ‘immigrants, your country needs them’, ‘they start at the bottom of the pile, economically and socially’. They do not enjoy our comfort; they risk their life to ensure themselves a better future. How can they not be enterprising and hard-working?

In the rich countries of today, people have greater expectations and aspirations; and politicians encourage them by trying to raise the educational level. Everybody wants to be a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher, a journalist, an engineer, an ambassador… and the list could go on forever. Yet, the young mother who wants to work will still need a nanny, the enterprising couple who work the whole day will still need somebody to take care of their elderly parents, the 5 stars hotel manager will still need people to clean the premises, the garbage will still need to be taken…and th list could go on forever!

This is not to say that migrants are happy to do any jobs, that they have no aspirations and are all unskilled and uneducated. We should be careful not to conclude that all Filipinos are only able to be nannies, that all Arabs are only able to be builder, and that all Black African are only able to clean tube stations. The point is that many of these people are likely to earn better doing those kinds of jobs in the West than being nurses or teachers back in their countries. What’s more, the simple fact of owning enough money to feed their families back home can make them proud of their jobs.

Finally and most importantly, people cannot only take jobs, they also make jobs: the more the people, the more the jobs needed. Workers need to be fed, transported, and housed, and all of these activities have to be done by other workers. And not only do migrants make jobs, they can make them more innovative and attractive, by putting in these jobs a bit of themselves. How many people complained about the introduction of Japanese sushi and Chinese spring rolls? As a final note, when all of these workers spend their wages, they increase the demand for goods and services; when they pay their taxes, they increase the revenue of the state. In sum, they boost the whole economy.

Can migrants still be accused of the increasing unemployment?

Immigration has always been a controversial issue and no more so than in the twenty-first century, viagra when the opportunities to cross the world in search of improved economic conditions have significantly increased. Yet beyond providing a source of cheap labour and fodder for right-wing tabloids, what effects do the movements of these people actually have? We often hear speak about their impact on the countries that host them, but what about those on their countries of origin?

Until recently we lacked the kind of reliable data necessary to analyze migrant characteristics and patterns of movement. There is however one indicator that remains a constant measure of one important aspect of migration: remittances; the money that migrants send to their families back home.

In 2007, the World Bank estimated remittance flow to have exceeded US $ 318 billion. In fact, the amount sent through formal channels, like Western Union for example, is a small percentage of the overall amount. Generally, migrants prefer to send money through friends or family, or to bring it personally when they go back, in order to avoid paying taxes on the exchange rates or loosing money with money transfers. If we add these informal transfers to the World Bank estimates it appears that the actual amount is almost double the official figure.

Some argue that remittances increase the inequality between people, and that they are not always well invested. Yet there is clear evidence that remittances generally reduce the level, depth and severity of poverty. How does this happen and why?

To begin with, remittances inevitably increase the GDP of the receiving country, injecting wealth into areas that might otherwise be left stagnating. In addition to this, remittances have been showed to efficiently do the job that official aid money so often fails to do. While aid and foreign investment often has to go through government channels, remittance money goes directly to the people in need, skirting corrupt officials or inefficient bureaucratic channels.

Remittances can also reduce some of the damage caused by natural disasters. Senders are likely not to be directly affected by those disasters, their income remains unchanged and so they tend to send more money at home. The Sri Lankan Central Bank, for instance, registered an increase in the amount of remittances from the Gulf State in the months following the 2004 tsunami that had devastated much of the country’s coastal areas.

There is evidence that suggests that people use the money they receive as a building block on which to develop their lives. Budding entrepreneurs can use remittances to invest in small enterprises, such as stores or restaurants, or on houses. Impoverished families can use it on the education of their children. In Nicaragua, for instance, a significant rise in remittance related self-employment has been registered. All in all, these strategies can lead to a long-term growth of capital and resources, which can benefit the country on a wider level.

People also send back money aimed at more than their immediate families but to the communities they came from. Many expatriate organizations now invest in community businesses and infrastructures from abroad, cooperating with community members and the governments of their countries. There are more and more hometown associations of this kind, like, for example, the French organisations de solidarité internationale issues de migrations (OSIM).

Although remittances are unpredictable, thus making it difficult for governmental economic policies to rely on them, their benefits on a macro-level are clear: they improve the creditworthiness of a country and stabilize its national balance of payment.

Let’s take as an example a Nicaraguan man who migrates to England. He sends back home some British pounds, which his wife converts at the bank in the local currency, Córdoba. This then increases the demand for Córdobas, and thus, according to the theory of supply and demand, makes its creditworthiness improve. As a result, on a large scale, the Nicaraguan government will be able to borrow more money abroad, and take part in the international market. In a similar way, remittances can improve the national balance of payment. In fact, the Nicaraguan worker will take money from England and send it to Nicaragua, which will have a higher money entrance and a lower money exit. 

Of course remittances can also lead to inequalities within the community. In fact, when the cost of migration is high, the worst-off often cannot afford to move. Again, we can fairly assume that even when they can migrate, poor or non-educated people will receive a low wage, and then send less money back home. However, whenever people leave their community, they enlarge the migration networks. It follows that even poorer families will be able to send migrants, decreasing the initial inequality.

Still, looking at the dark side, some may claim that emigration of skilled workers, the so-called ‘brain drain phenomenon’, damages host countries that have invested in the education of these people and do not receive any advantage after. Despite the undeniable importance and extent of this problem, the money that these workers send back home can still be used in the process of development of their countries.

Speaking of migration as a wholly positive phenomenon for both the country of origin and the host country, is obviously a blinkered approach as it excludes lots of the issues that accompany it. Yet it remains important to attempt to balance the problems and the benefits that it brings. From an economic angle however, it seems safe to assert that there is clear evidence that migration cannot but help the long-term development of both countries.

Image credits: Brandi Strickland

IDP Camp

The white tarpaulins donated by the UNHCR are not made to withstand the toll of time. As rips and holes begin to appear in the fabric of the plastic sheeting, store they are progressively sealed together by bags, pills potato sacks, shop or whatever else is at hand. Some of the tents appear to be sturdier than others and an odd Canadian tent occasionally peeks out from a plot, maybe a donation from a charitable individual or a testament to a family’s better times.

It’s mid-morning at the Nakuru Pipe Settlement, a temporary camp set up for people who were displaced by the post-election violence in early 2008. There are only a couple tiny shops serving the thousand plus people here and most of the youth seem to be congregated in the pool tent, shooting holes without so much as a few bob in their pockets to buy themselves a beer or a soda. The bitter taste of unemployment hangs deep in the air.

“Where is the government?” they lament “why won’t others help us out of an existence we were forced into without any warning? What good is my right to vote if it only brought me misery, hunger and displacement?”

The sense of dejection is palpable throughout the camp. The self-help mechanisms put in place by the chronically poor have not been established here. Until two years ago most of these people enjoyed the comfort of a roof, four walls and some form of employment that saw their families fed and clothed.

The shock, the sense of injustice at their predicament has left them listless.

The best they say they can hope for is to soon find some better materials with which to fortify their waterlogged homes. They own this land now, although who has exactly what is not clear and they hold no legal title to sell their individual plots.

Mathare

The sun is setting on the tin roofs of Nairobi’s Mathare and the shadows are lengthening in the thoroughfares of the slum. A man with a knife sharpener made out of a bicycle wheel is busy tending to the last customers of the day, women walk down the path with bags of sukuma wiki (literally: “push up weekly”) and ugali in their hands and the children scamper around pushing little cars made out of plastic cola bottles and tops near a dirty sewage stream that  that flows to the bottom of the settlement.

At the bottom of the valley runs a murky little river where people are busy distilling chang’aa, homebrewed liquor similar to South Africa’s moonshine.  I’m told the substance is initially fermented in large barrels inside people’s shacks. The ingredients that make up each special recipe are secret but one can expect anything from vegetable peelings, marijuana stalks and human faeces. When the fermentation has finished its course, it gets transported down to the river where the distilling stations are awaiting.

Al[1], the genial, eccentric, excitable and ebullient architect, is surveying the scene from up on the hill. As he indicates different points of interest in the surrounding slum, he looks like a lord who is standing above his own personal fiefdom, proudly observing the movements of his villagers.

We walk over to a nearby shack and find Lucas hooking up a coat hanger to a wire on an electricity pole outside the door. Inside a light bulb starts shining brightly and the television splutters to life.

We are ushered in and a bag full a Kenyan-style pre rolled joints is pulled out. Everyone is handed one. As I light the thin, tightly rolled cigarette, a skinny cat slinks in and plonks itself on the armrest of my threadbare armchair.

The men are talking a mixture of Kiswahili and English and by the sounds of it plans are being discussed. The man in charge of Mathare’s newly established waste disposal program walks in and perches on the bed. Al says something to him and hands him a few thousand shillings.

A couple of barefoot children appear at the door. They smile at me and say hi but do not seem overly surprised by the presence of a Muzungu (white person) in their midst.

We watch al Jazeera on the crackling screen as the men wrap up their discussion. Then Al and I head back towards the road to catch a Matatu. We go our separate ways at the busy Ngara intersection, where a booming evening market that specialises in women’s underwear has sprung up. As I walk I clutch my cotton bag tightly to my chest – the international symbol for: “foreigner is afraid to get her bag snatched and probably has valuables on her too”

Gashie

Gashie is only a short ride from Gigiri, the neighbourhood that houses most of Nairobi’s UN buildings. I had originally assumed that it was part of the city’s periphery but John told me that it was I fact a village unto itself.

The compound that John, his wife Sephora and the three children in their care live in, is on the opposite side of the road from a little hospital. The tarmac peters out a couple of kilometres before the town begins and the road is made of compressed, dark red earth. Lush green vegetation seems clamouring to get out in a battle for ground with the humanity encroaching on all sides. The late afternoon sky is a deep blue and peppered with fluffy white clouds.

We duck through the low iron door in the brown gate, into a pleasant enclosure made up of a wide-open space and two rows of neat wood shacks with corrugated iron roofs. An avocado has branches that extend far over one of the rows of shacks. I imagine how the avocados must resonate as they rain down on the iron roofs at night. On the far corner of the compound next to the landlord’s squat grey house, a mango tree stands tall.

A small child runs towards me and wraps her arms around me in a hug. John, who is 24, tells me it’s his five-year-old daughter. The girl doesn’t look a day above three.

Sephora is standing by the door to their shack. Their youngest, Joy, is strapped to her back by a worn yellow and blue kanga. She flashes a wide smile at me, revealing two rows of straight, white teeth. “Karibu!” she says and ushers me into their single room.

I am entirely entranced by Sephora’s unassuming beauty and wonder to myself how a country bumpkin like John managed to bags himself such a pretty city girl.

Inside the television is showing a Philippino sitcom. It looks quite fun, although it’s hard to get used to the dubbed American voices. Blessed, the five year old and her equally petite cousin Shanique, run into the room and jump up onto the sofa so that they can touch my short crop of straight hair.

I get the impression there aren’t many muzungu who drop in for a cup of tea round here. Poor they may be but people for the most have steady jobs here and no one is going hungry. This is not the kind of community to whom development practitioners come rushing to the rescue.

John is applying to study Development at the University of Nairobi. He says he knows that working for an NGO will not make him much money but that he wants to do it because, in his words, he wants to “bridge the bad gap our fathers have created so as not to pass it on to the next generation”.

John also aspires to living in a house with gas and running water and possibly to have a separate bedroom in which him and Sephora can enjoy the benefits of married life without three little ones in the bed with them.

As I am leaving a few hours later, Sephora lowers her head and starts reciting a prayer for me, thanking the lord that he has brought me to them. I can feel the heat of my cheeks, as they turn red with embarrassment.

Great Rift Valley Lodge

“Baridi! Baridi!” squeal the excited children as they come off the slide into the pool’s ice-cold water. All around are well-dressed groups of Kenyan youth, chatting to each other and making like teenagers across the world.

Baridi means cold in Kiswahili and although the vast majority of the people staying at the golf resort are Kenyan, you’d be hard pressed to hear more than the occasional word in this language.

The people around me are all speaking English. Kiswahili here  appears to be a language made for talking to others but not amongst family and friends. Accents vary, often betraying the places abroad in which people have studied but Kenyan English has its own particular timbre. The stress in a word generally is at the end and sentences are often punctuated by a sharp “eh”. Kenyans speak a lilting form of English, which is far removed from the low gruff version their Nigerian cousins on the opposite side of the continent have developed.

This could almost be Hobe Sound Florida, where wealthy Americans go to retire and the younger generations pass their privileged vacations sailing, playing golf, sunning themselves by the pool and downing bloody marys in the evening at the private members’ clubs. The perfectly tended to lawns and hedges are peppered with brightly coloured birds and the villas have been built along the perimeter of the ridge, so as to be able to benefit from the best views.

From our balcony we can look down on a shimmering Lake Naivasha in the distance. At night the lights from the flower farms sparkle in bright rows. From here it’s impossible to tell how polluted its waters have become.

Nissan 4×4s and Land Rovers compete for dominance on the paved roads of the resort while children charge around on their shiny rented bikes.

Conversation, in the evening, when there is no game of Kenyan Poker going on, often focuses politics. At least one member of our party has taken the time to read the proposed constitution and argues that if it goes through, it might actually make a difference towards addressing some of the issues that are plaguing the country. People’s concerns seem to mirror those of many others I have spoken to, although the language used to support their arguments is significantly different.

Football makes up another large chunk of the subject matters discussed. I occasionally retire and read the biography of a recently retired Kenyan politician, one of Kibaki’s peers. The first chapter tells of what life was like working on the prominent colonialist Lord Delamere’s farm.  “Almost every African child was dressed in his or her traditional cloak. It was not a matter of fashion or status to be dressed in a skin; it was a normal, everyday habit, just as was the carrying of clubs and sticks by boys  … children were occupied by family chores and did not go to school”.[2]

Things have changed.

[2] Njenga Karume Beyond Expectations: From Charcoal to Gold English Press Ltd, Nairobi Kenya, 2009

After this demonstration, pills the Shah felt better. He seemed to be getting back on his feet. Until then he had been playing cards marked with blood. Now he made up his mind to play with a clean deck. To gain popular sympathy, pills he dismissed a few of the officers who had been in charge of the units that opened fire on the inhabitants of Tabriz.

“My strongest memory of those days are the marches, the sea of people covering miles and miles of the main avenue in Tehran. How can I ever forget those scenes, wave after wave of men and women from all walks of life marching next to each other?” (H. Esfandiari, Reconstructing Lives)

These words – reported by a woman who participated to the Iranian revolution- describe a scenario strikingly similar to that which followed the post-electoral rallies last June.

As the world watched incredulously at the masses of people spilling into the streets of Tehran many external commentators misleadingly saw this as a prelude to a second or counter- revolution. People of all ages and social backgrounds – feeling betrayed and defrauded – decided to impose their voices which had been ignored at the polls. This came as a surprise in a country in which political dissent is generally assumed to be either repressed or dormant.

The substantial differences between 1978-1979 mass mobilizations and the June 2009 rallies are so vast that any comparison is unlikely to be of any analytical value. With thirty years between them, it is in their form that these two events display most points of contact. The image the demonstrators chose to project of themselves was heavily charged with symbolic parallels with its unwitting predecessor – the 1979 revolution.

These symbols stemmed from a wide array of cultural contexts – from global revolutionary movements such as the Russian and Cuban revolution and the 1968 student revolts, to the founding myth of Shiite Islam, namely the martyrdom of Imam Hussein in Kerbala at the hands of Sunnis in 680. The milestones of the Iranian revolution itself – such as the mass mobilisation, the fall of the Shah and the return of Khomeini – became defining elements of the post-revolutionary rhetoric.

The revolution is no longer as effective in conferring legitimacy to the Islamic Republic. Many have come to resent the omnipresence of this anachronistic revolutionary rhetoric – school textbooks, TV shows, street murals and even stamps are pervaded by the establishment’s revolutionary discourse.  This is the case especially for those born after 1979 – which today make up over 70% of Iran’s the population. As the Twitter craze showed the world, many young Iranians are in tune with the global youth-culture, hardly escaping the “Youtube Generation” label.

The iconographic references to the revolution, were borne out of a conscious decision of Mr. Mousavi’s supporters to legitimize an act of political disobedience by precisely appealing to the regime’s own rhetoric – heavily dependent on the “symbols” of the revolution. A few examples follow…

Green. Not any shade of green but a particularly bright green, the colour of Islam which became the colour of Mr. Mousavi’s electoral campaign. T-shirts, wristbands, headscarves, and even baby sleep-suits became politically charged virtually overnight. A simple and clear and means to declare one’s support for the Reformists’ cause and disaffection with the establishment. So widespread did this phenomenon become that the movement as a whole has been referred to as  “the green wave” and even “the green revolution” – prompting the Revolutionary Guards to respond firmly against allusions to an approaching “coloured” revolution.

Allahu Akbar! God is great. For several weeks after the announcement of Mousavi’s disputed defeat – every night, around ten – an old cry rises from hundreds of rooftops across Tehran. The cycle is broken by an occasional marg bar dikatur, death to the dictator. Thirty years previously, with the complicity of the night, these cries filled the air in a crescendo that defied the curfew and anticipated the fall of the Shah.

The bloodstained hand was another staple of the post-revolutionary repertoire which was experienced a political revival. This powerful iconic image has a strong symbolic connections to Karbala and symbolizes fighting until the last drop of blood. During the processions in commemoration of Hussein’s martyrdom, it is common for people to leave red handprints on public walls as part of the mourning – a practice that was adopted in the course of the anti-Shah demonstrations of 1978-79 and reproduced during the June 2009 rallies.

The mass demonstration in itself, however, was probably the most powerful symbolic (as well as substantial) act of defiance. The collective experience of popular participation became the defining feature of the post-revolutionary imagined community, conferring popular legitimacy to the Islamic Republic. The violent reaction at the hands of the Basij and special police during the rallies turned riots is in itself a crushing symbolic defeat for the Islamic Republic. During the popular uprisings of 1978-79, as part of the traditional mourning cycles, large demonstrations were organised for those who lost their lives in clashes against the Shah’s armed forces -  a ritual which traditionally takes place forty days after someone’s death. In turn, these mourning ceremonies brought more and more people in the streets to march against the Shah in a growing revolutionary momentum. Fearing this precedent could repeat itself, the current government prohibited the funeral of Neda – the symbolic martyr of the recent clashes – from being open to the public.

During the June rallies this symbolic repertoire – kept alive over the years by the Islamic Republic’s propaganda machine – was thus familiar and accessible to most people, making it an efficient and “safe” means of communication. The establishment’s anachronistic rhetoric was thus redefined to legitimize contemporary discontent. What’s more, by appropriating this rhetoric for themselves, the demonstrators deprived the regime of a key political tool and implicitly accused those in power of having betrayed the basic ideals of the revolution. Instead of confronting this attack, however, the establishment decided to bypass this ideological framework opting instead for repression. In the long-run, the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic  will have suffered the biggest blow.

People’s participation in the elections of the Islamic Republic is a great deal since the political system is based on the cooperation of different nationalities. As a result, salve the government decided to heat up the elections by organizing public debates between candidates as it happens in western elections. All candidates engaged themselves in being respectful in criticizing the others. Nevertheless, try the candidate of the conservative party, Mr. Ahmadinejad, openly insulted M.Moussavi, the reformist candidate, and his sponsor Mr. Hashemi Rafsanjani, one of the most influential clergymen. President Ahmadinejad accused Mr. Rafsanjani and his family of exploiting national property for their own interest and said that the three candidates opposing him were part of an alliance agaist him.

These words faced the serious objection of the reformist party and Mr. Rafsanjani himself. Thus, he requested a comeback on TV  that has been denied. The official reason was that it could have been a distraction during the period of elections; therefore, it has been postponed to sometime after the elections. M.Ahmadinejad’s straightforward words and charges against Rafsanjani caused in a way a strong reaction of the people against both figures. Due to the fact that the majority of the Iranians has been under an enormous economic pressure during Ahmadinejad’s governement, they decided to support Moussavi massively. The western medias supported the nation’s decision by fulltime sponsorship of the reformist party.

On the day of the elections, the Guardians of the Islamic Republic intensified the massive security presence in the country. Each party should have had its representatives in the polling stations but, besides Ahmadinejad’s conservative representatives, they have not been permitted to enter the polling stations. The majority of the people was sure that the first round of elections would have been won by Moussavi and the reformists but, surprisingly, the results gave 24 million votes to Ahmadinejad, the absolute majority. The fraud which took place in the course of the elections was clear to everyone and the other candidated immediately asked for the nullification of the election results.

Peaceful protests took place, organized by Moussavi’s supporters also called as the ‘Green Party’ from the colour they used to mark their opposition. These protests have been frequently interrupted by military troops and many demonstrators have been killed and injured as an outcome. The government paid some people from relatively low social classes to face the peaceful protesters and beat them. The government officials offered these people free university entrances or scholarships and promised to give economical aid to their families. This situation is still going on.

It is a right of all citizens in democratic countries to elect a person who they believe is a good leader and to nullify the candidacy of an unsuitable person. In Iran, on the other hand, this fundamental right has been suppressed and stolen from the people. Amongst the awful repressive acts carried on by the government, was the murder of many youth such as ‘Neda Agha Soltan’ and ‘Sohrab Aaraabi’.

Regarding the strong opposition of the Iranian nation towards the government of Iran and the quest for changing the system, it is necessary to receive collaboration and support from the western countries. The government of the United States has broken off all relations with Iran since the commencement of the Islamic Republic and has imposed severe economic sanctions on the country. These sanctions, however, did not cause much effect on the economic situation in Iran since they were not supported by countries with huge economic exchanges with Iran, such as China and Russia.

However it’s worth mentioning an other aspect of economic sanctions: countries like China and Russia, led by dictatorial governments, are seeking their own benefits in this situation. They have been able to obtain a great deal of profit by selling merchandise of relatively low quality to Iran. As an example, the purchase of Russian airplanes from the ‘Topolov’ aircraft company, that are forbidden to fly in Europe, has caused a great amount of damage due to their low quality standard. Up until now many of these planes precipitated or have been demolished. The last incident caused 168 loss, all the passengers in the Topolov were killed on their flight to Armenia. Another flight from a Russian aircraft company collided with the ground and led to many deaths and injuries.

These incidents occur because of the American economic sanctions held against Iran and because of the refusal of the American aircraft companies such as ‘Airbus’ and ‘Boeing’ to sell their planes to the country. In this way the nation will have to pay the heavy price of losing their lives.

Based on the previous matters, the Iranian nation, which is a liberal and peace seeking nation, requests the serious collaboration of the western countries to put an end to the Islamic Republic and to create a new democratic regime through free elections. We can only hope that the blood that was shed from our youth will not be squandered and that the people responsible for these terrible murders will pay the price of their violence.

Only in the past few years has Italy become a “victim” of immigration, a phenomenon that other European countries have been battling for decades. One of the major problems has been the integration of these immigrants, the solutions vary, the effectiveness doubtful. The latest has been Sarkozy’s grand idea of proposing to ban the burqa for fear that it poses a threat to the secular nature of the French constitution. Are you being Serious?! How can these people integrate if they can’t follow what is dear to them. The answer I have received: Let them go back to their country if they don’t like it here, if we go to their country we would have to do what they want. Again, are you being Serious?! Should we not be setting an example of tolerance and respect with the hope that others follow? People move with the hope of building a better life for themselves, giving their children more than they had. Instead, they have a difficult time integrating, they become more extreme, more marginalized, and hating where they are but forced to stay as back in their country of origin the prospective of work is almost inexistent. Imposing such a ban does not improve anything. Rather it enforces the hostility that exists. Muslim women have the choice to wear the veil just as Jews have the choice to wear the Kippa, it’s a matter of tradition, of belief. Why can we not accept this? If France is worried about women’s dignity and freedom, let us show these women that we respect their choices, let us provide them with jobs, let us educate them, let us make them feel at home that way they may go back to their country of origin and share their positive experiences with other women and bring change where equal rights don’t exist.

It seems to me that we are building so many walls in different sectors and places of the world, from the invisible ones to the physical ones, the worst example being the one constructed between Israel and Palestine. Did you know that at some points the wall is 8 meters high and 680 km long? The Berlin Wall was 4 meters high and 155 km long.    Have we learned nothing from history? Do we consciously repeat what has happened? As children, we were continuously taught to learn from our mistakes, to do good, to lend a helping hand, what has happened? How can we expect peace in this world when we teach our children from a young age to hate a People that they have never met? What has perplexed me the most is how we can do unto others what has been done to us and caused us great suffering. I don’t think that I will ever have an answer to this question.

In Italy we are at a crucial moment trying to decide what to do with immigrants, testing different methods, what will we opt for at the end? Will we be able to learn from the mistakes of others and set an example to be followed? I have faith: Build Bridges, Not Walls.

This year the same group of students decided to repeat the experience given the new challenges in the region and the world politics. This initiative is important both because of the quality of professors and expert that will guide participants into a better understanding of the strategic and political game that is being played in the Middle East and for the internationality of the participants. In fact as in last year conference people from Lebanon and Afghanistan attended the entire week, this year people from South Korea, Pakistan and Indonesia have already subscribed to the summer conference.

The quality of the program is what makes this conference an unbiased and serious event for whoever desire to improve his or her negotiation skills, learn the complex diplomacy behind the Middle East states’ behavior and meet people with the same interests and enthusiasm from all different part of the world. The fact that participants come from the Middle East itself, Asia and the Western World makes it clear that the program is appealing and gives the opportunity to learn how to deal with different cultures and how to come to an agreement with partners, no matter how difficult it can be.

MESC2 will take place between August 2nd and August 6th, for more information can be found at MESC2’s website: www.mesc-tlv.com. Applications’ deadline for this year is July 7th, 2009.

Netanyahu, in his last premiership was more flexible than Europe, the Arab world, and the United States would have thought, especially with regards to peace efforts and grand gestures to appease Arab leaders. Here is a short list and prospective measures that Netanyahu can [and perhaps will] execute.

Firstly, Gilad Shalit issue; Bibi, and its counterpart the future foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, are interested in having international community’s credits in order to promote urgent matters on other issues. A grand pardon which will be followed by the release of Hamas’s prisoners list in return for Gilad, will depict Netanyahu and Lieberman as more liberals and flexible that they have assessed. Also researches showed in the past that most of heaviest terrorists which has been released from Israeli prisons, changed profession. If not, Israeli technology would get them. Hence Lieberman and Bibi can attain international acclaim by signing an agreement with Hamas.

Secondly, the Palestinian peace process; Netanyahu, known in Israel as The Magician for rescuing Israel’s economy and turning reduction into growth, has a good reputation for being practical. In the last campaign he used the term ‘Economical Peace’, i.e. building cooperation (and in time confidence) between the Palestinians and the Israelis on an economical level. Netanyahu knows a simple truth – life is stronger than any ideology – when economies prosper and co-dependency grow the will and confident in both sides in peace is easier to practice. Netanyahu also pacifies those which are afraid from the ‘one state’ solution (which is naturally considered under these circumstances), due to his world view of how Israel should remain a Jewish democracy. Co-dependency doesn’t necessarily mean in the end a one state solution.

Thirdly, Benyamin Netanyahu is considered, by most of western leaders, as a reliable ally. For example, in 1997 when a failing attempt by the Mossad assassinating Khalid Mash’al took place in Amman, Netanyahu released Sheikh Ahmad Yassin from the prison in order to appease King Hussein and as an act of faith. A year later, King Hussein was a champion of Netanyahu’s commitment to the peace process with President Clinton and Yasser Arafat, when the Wye Plantation Agreement was in risk to become a ’shelf agreement’. Thus when considering Netanyahu’s declarations on respecting previous agreements with the Palestinians, world leaders can be assured – he speaks the truth.

Fourthly, and perhaps the most important, Netanyahu faces an historical term, in which he will be remembered as the prime minister who saved Israel and the middle east from a nuclear Iran, or will go down as the last fallen guardian of Israel’s sense of regional security (and most of moderate Arab countries as well). By having that on his agenda, the Palestinian challenge, including Hamas, seems as an minor obstacle that should be putted out of the way in order to ‘clear the table’ in order to face the eastern threat.

In conclusion, Netanyahu – at least on the Palestinian issue – shows more will than the west assumes; although he Bibi represents the (overwhelmingly-elected) right wing in Israeli politics, one may assess that he will come around in dealing with the Palestinians, at least in light of Iran. And we didn’t even start analyzing the economical aspect of his premiership.