NEWSLETTER Anno 5, n. 16 - 13 novembre 2007

["Circolo Africa - Ancona" <segreteria at circoloafrica.org>]

NEWSLETTER DEL CENTRO DI DOCUMENTAZIONE E RICERCA PER LA CITTADINANZA ATTIVA

Anno 5, n. 16 - 13 novembre 2007

A cura di Gabriele Sospiro
Con la collaborazione di: 
Gabriele Sospiro (GS)
Paolo Sospiro (PS)
Jiske van Loon (JvL)
Bengu Bayram (BB)
Tobias Gehring (TG)
Dora Ioannou (DI)

*************************************************************
INDICE 
1.   ATTIVITÀ DEL CENTRO
2.   NINE NEW COUNTRIES TO SCHENGEN FREE TRAVEL ZONE
3.   "KOUCHNER, STEINMEIER AND MUHABBET"  
4.   RELIGIOUS IDENTITY IN EGYPT
5.   IMMIGRANTS WORKING IN AGRICULTURE
6.   IMMIGRATION IN GREECE
7.   FROM RAGS TO CITIZENS
8.   THE TORTILLA CURTAIN - A REVIEW
9.  GERMANY: VICE CHANCELLOR RETIRES
10.  LOESJE: SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT


************************
1. ATTIVITÀ DEL CENTRO
************************
Vi ricordiamo che il Centro di Documentazione e Ricerca per la Cittadinanza
Attiva è aperto il Martedì e Giovedì dalle 10 alle 13.00 e dalle 15.00 alle
18.00. Se avete libri da proporre così che noi possiamo acquistarli fatecelo
sapere! Se state facendo una tesi di laurea o ricerche sull'immigrazione,
sull'economia politica, o su temi riguardanti il terzo settore, etc. presso
il nostro Centro potete ottenere informazioni ad hoc previa prenotazione
telefonica. 
Per contatti ed eventuali prenotazioni 071/2072585


***************************************************
2. NINE NEW COUNTRIES TO SCHENGEN FREE TRAVEL ZONE
***************************************************

Border controls will become a hassle of the past for nine more European
countries starting on November 21, 2007 as EU interior ministers agreed to
expand the Schengen free-movement to the south and east at a meeting in
Brussels. 
The council of ministers agreed that the conditions for the lifting of
internal borders with nine new member states have been met  a council source
told on Thursday, Nov. 8.
 The nine new Schengen members are: Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania,
Malta, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. 
 The first of the two conditions needed for joining was met by the nine in
early September when the countries plugged into an electronic database that
allows authorities to swap details on wanted people, objects or vehicles.
 For the second condition, concerning the security of their borders with
non-EU countries, experts have over the last year inspected the controls and
described them, according to a draft EU text, as "satisfying."
 The European Parliament must also approve nine countries' entry into the
Schengen Agreement, but this is largely considered a formality. 
 Thursday's decision applies only to land and sea borders. Passport controls
at airports are to remain in place in the nine new members until the end of
March 2008.
 "This is a historical event and a moment of great joy -- not a threat --
for Germany," German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schauble said.
 Schengen is the term denoting a body of EU law granting greater freedom of
movement for persons. It abolishes passport checks within its internal
borders and establishes common external borders among members. 
 The expanded Schengen area will comprise 22 member states. Non-EU countries
Norway and Iceland are in the Schengen travel zone, but EU member Britain
has only agreed to participate in its provisions that concern police and
judicial cooperation.
 Bulgaria, Cyprus, Romania and Switzerland, the latter which signed an
agreement on its association with the bloc in 2004, are expected to fully
join the border-free zone in coming years.

(BB)

**********************************************
3. "KOUCHNER, STEINMEIER AND MUHABBET"
**********************************************
The French and German foreign ministers were at a studio on Monday in
Berlin's Kreuzberg district, a Turkish section of the German capital, for
singing and recording an R&B song on European integration together with
German-Turkish singer Muhabbet. France's Bernard Kouchner and Germany's
Frank-Walter Steinmeier recorded the song, titled "Deutschland" (Germany),
on the sidelines of a regular summit on integration led by French President
Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, along with the
ministers.
Muhabbet, 22 , is known as a prominent face and young voice of the
German-Turkish community. The song was very popular in Germany last year. 
The idea of visiting Kreuzberg came from the Germans, and the idea for
singing and recording a song came from Muhabbet and two other Turkish youths
who wrote the song. German officials liked the idea and found the song’s
lyrics particularly appropriate and reflective of the social and cultural
lives of Turks living in Germany, Yüksel explained. 
“We Germans need to open up a little bit more to the world,” said
Steinmeier in an apparent criticism of German society. Noting that he owns a
Muhabbet album, he said Muhabbet’s success in Germany and Turkey has
displayed how different cultures have actually completed each other.
Meanwhile, Kouchner expressed great pleasure of coloring the integration
summit via such activity and voiced readiness for recording new songs.
“Everybody accepts that Germany is a country of migration. And we are the
fruits of this migration,” Muhabbet said.

**************************************************
4. RELIGIOUS IDENTITY IN EGYPT
**************************************************

On the website of BBC news Novembre the 13th I read an article with the
title “Egypt denies minority beliefs”: “Rights groups have criticised Egypt
for forcing converts from Islam and members of some minority faiths to lie
about their true beliefs in official papers.” For us it may sound strange,
but Egyptians over 16 years old must carry an ID card that shows their
religious affiliation. There are only three options: Muslim, Christian and
Jew. This is in the first place a problem for people with another religious
conviction, like members of the Bahai community. At this moment a ruling is
expected on whether the government must recognize Bahais, but for so far
they have to lie about their religious conviction in official papers.   
Another group who has problems with the mentioning of religious affiliation
on ID cards, is a group of converts from Islam. There is a large group of
Coptic Christians who became Muslims but want to turn this back. Egypt is a
Sunni Muslim state and conversions from Islam are viewed as apostasy. Muslim
scholars differ on what action should be taken. Soon the government will
decide about seven converts to Islam that want to convert back to
Christianity whether they will be recognized as Christians again. But at
this moment many Muslims that want to convert back to Christianity, still
have to show an ID card that says they are Muslim. 
In the third place there are members of Christian families whose fathers
converted to Islam and left them. When the children get their ID cards, they
find they have been listed as Muslims whether they like it or not. 
ID’s are very important in Egypt and without it the members of minorities
face enormous problems in education and employment. According to Joe Stork
of the Human Rights Watch officials of the Ministry of interior believe that
they have the right to choose someone’s religion. So when they don’t like
the religion someone has chosen himself, they sometimes just change it. That
is why today the Human Rights Watch and the Egyptian Initiative for Personal
Rights are asking the Egyptian government to end this and recognise
someone’s actual religious beliefs.  

(JvL)

**************************************************
5. IMMIGRANTS WORKING IN AGRICULTURE
**************************************************

The nature of immigrant employment in Europe has changed since the 1970s. Up
to the oil crisis in 1973, most immigrants came to north-central Europe
where most of them lived and worked in the cities. Immigration to rural
areas was much smaller then the immigration to the urban areas.
(Schmitter-Heisler, 1986) Nowadays Europe is experiencing a new wave of
non-European labour immigration which exists of immigrants working in the
rural areas in foremost southern European countries. Hoggart and Mendoza
from the University of California published in the year 2000 an article
about African immigrant workers in Spanish agriculture. They wrote:  “The
signs are that agriculture is more central to recent immigrant labour
experiences in southern Europe, and that immigrant farm workers are becoming
more permanent members of the receiving nations' labour forces.” In de
fifties Germany started to recruit foreign workers for agriculture. In 1970
the agricultural sector in France employed about 100.000 seasonal foreign
workers and also in Switserland foreign workers were recruited to fill the
lack of labourers in the agricultural sector. This work was only short-time
and after the season there was rigorous monitoring to be sure that the
workers would go back to there country. Nowadays the situation in Italy and
Spain is different. The workers are not recruited for one season to go back
afterwards, but they stay in the country and go from one job to another.
According to Hoggart and Mendoza in this way it gets a more permanent
character. Most of the immigrants working in the agricultural sector in
Spain and Italy come from African countries, Romania and Bulgaria.  

In De Volkskrant of Octobre the 15th (De Volkskrant a Dutch newspaper) I
read an article about the situation immigrant workers in the agricultural
sector in Southern Italy. According to the article there are about 12 to 15
million illegal immigrants who are travelling through Sicily and Southern
Italy behind the harvest. In May the season starts in East-Sicily with
harvesting potatoes in Cassibile and Canicatti. In June the tomatoes are
ripe in Pachino in South Sicily and in August they are ripe in the region of
Puglia. Then in September the grapes are ready for harvest in Alcamo and in
Octobre they go to Castelvetrano for the olives. After this tour the workers
can stay in Calabria until February to pick oranges, pell them and make
juice of it. Vervaeke, the writer of the article, says that the living
conditions of the immigrant workers are very bad. When the harvest starts
somewhere, thousands of illegal immigrants go there. They live with many
people is abandoned houses often without electricity or flowing water or
they live in a stable which was used for cattle or in slums. According to
the article the town governing board, the police and the farmers work
together regarding the immigrants. As long as the farmers need cheap
workers, the police leaves them alone and does not intervene, but as soon as
the harvest season is over, the police comes to send them away. In Alcamo
the catholic aid organisation Misericordia established ten tents, where 140
immigrant workers can sleep for two euros a night. But in these camps only
legal immigrants are accepted, because they are not allowed to help illegal
immigrants.  

Hoggart and Mendoza write in their article about the situation of the
immigrant workers in the rural areas of Spain. “The majority of African
workers do unskilled work, on poor pay, in occupations associated with
inferior social status, with short periods of employment, in jobs that are
rarely part of a promotion ladder.” The Africans don’t do jobs which are
based on their skills, but they do the ‘unwanted’ and unskilled jobs that
are available because the local Spanish population doesn’t want to do this
work. The Spanish government directs the immigrants into farm work by making
it easy for them to get a permission to do this work. In between the harvest
seasons most of the migrants do work in another sector then agriculture,
this is a difference with what Vervaeke says in de Volkskrant about the
immigrant workers in the agricultural sector in Italy. In Spain it seems to
be less normal to move from place to place regarding to the harvest time. In
this way they find openings in other economical sectors and often find out
that the wages there are higher. There is a lot more to say about immigrant
workers in Italy and Spain, but in this article I just wanted to show that
there is this development of many Africans, Romanians and Bulgarians working
in the agricultural sector in Spain and Italy. There are no good regulations
for these people and they live in the margins of the society doing the work
that the local population doesn’t want to do.

(JvL)

******************************
6. IMMIGRATION IN GREECE
******************************

•	Greece’s immigrant population, reaches just over one million people.
This represents about 9% of the total resident population, a strikingly high
percentage for a country that until only twenty years ago was a migration
sender rather than host.

•	Until recently, Greece was a migration sender rather than host
country. A brief historical overview of immigration trends into Greece since
the 20th century, is limited mainly to inflows from the Balkans due to the
Balkan wars, and to refugees from Asia Minor (approximately 1,4 million in
the 1920s and again around 350,000 in the 1950s from Istanbul) and from
Egypt.

•	Approximately three quarters of the immigrant population currently
has legal status (work and stay permits). It is interesting to note that
most immigrants have entered Greece illegally and have survived in the
country ‘without papers’ for (frequently consecutive) periods ranging from a
few months to several years.

•	On the contrary, Greeks emigrated in significant numbers mainly to
northern Europe (Germany, Belgium), the USA and Australia. Emigration,
however, came nearly to a halt in the mid to late 1970s after the tightening
up of migration regimes in northern Europe.

•	1989, the country was quickly converted into a host of mainly
undocumented immigrants from eastern and central Europe, the former Soviet
Union, as well as from the Third World. The dramatic and sudden increase of
immigrant influx was an unexpected phenomenon for both the government and
the population. Xenophobic behaviour and racism has been registered.

•	The first law that tackled the influx of foreigners into the country
was law 1975 of 1991 with the eloquent title ‘Entry, exit, sojourn,
employment, removal of aliens, procedure for the recognition of refugees and
other measures’. The aim was mainly to curb migration, to facilitate
removals of undocumented migrants apprehended near the borders and, if
possible, to remove illegal foreigners sojourning in Greece. The law made
nearly impracticable the entry and stay of economic migrants, seeking for
jobs.	

•	1998 the first immigrant regularisation programme:
- applied for the white card (limited duration permit) which was the first
step in applying for the temporary stay permit.
 -applied for the green card (of 1, 2 or 5 year duration).
 -work
 -home
Only 44.3%  managed to submit an application for a green card.
- 52.7% were Albanians,
- 6.1% Pakistanis,
- 4.8% Bulgarians, while
- 4.5% were Romanians
- 4.5% were Poles. 
In addition, there were more female applicants among the following
population groups: Bulgarian, Polish, Ukrainian and Filipino.        

•	2001 This law had a twofold aim. 
- First, it aimed at attracting all the applicants
- Second, return to their country of origin

•	2001-2005  Plan includes measures for their inclusion in the labour
market, their access to health services and overall a series of measures
promoting cultural dialogue and combating xenophobia and racism within Greek
society.

•	Athens 2004 Olympic Games and the political spheres were
concentrating on the national elections of 7 March 2004 and intra-party
politics.

•	In August 2005
The objective of this new legislation is to rationalise the co-ordination of
Greece’s immigration policy, simplify procedures and cut red-tape. The core
innovative features include unifying residence and work permits into one
document, clarifying family re-unification conditions, addressing the status
of victims of human trafficking and strengthening regional migration
commissions. However, this bill has been criticised for continuing to ignore
the majority of the country’s illegal migrant population and effectively
hinders approximately 70% of these immigrants from obtaining residence
permits. The Greek Minister of Interior has reacted to these criticisms by
noting that the necessary changes will be made if gaps or problems surface
during the law’s implementation.

•	1991 census, there were 10,260,000 residents in Greece of whom
167,000 were foreigners.
      2001, there are 10,964,020 inhabitants in Greece, 797,091 of which are
foreigners.

In addition, it is interesting to consider certain characteristics of this
workforce, based on data collected during the first regularisation wave in
1998 in the Athens metropolitan area :
• 49.1% of the immigrant population is between 21 and 30 years old;
• 73.6% of the immigrant population in male;
• 46.4% is married;
• the religious denominations of this population can be grouped as follows:
29.5% Muslim, 22.4% Christian Orthodox, 13.2% Christian Catholic, 27.7%
Christian (other) and 1.8% are declared as atheist;
• while 54.1% of this population expressed the desire to reunite with their
families in Greece.

Total number of foreigners 797,091 of which approximately:
Albanians 438,000
Pontic Greeks 152,204
Nationals from EU15 47,000
Bulgarians 35,000
Georgians 20,000
Romanians 20,000
Russians 17,500
Cypriots g 17,000
Poles 13,000
Pakistanis 10,000
Ukrainians 10,000
Indians 10,000
Undocumented immigrants 200,000

(DI)

**************************************************
7. FROM RAGS TO CITIZENS?
**************************************************

The book The Tortilla Curtain (1) describes the hopeless struggle of
Mexicans to realize the American Dream. Are chances for illegal Mexican
immigrants to rise “from rags to riches” in the “land of unlimited
opportunities”?

Whoever works hard, whoever is equipped with diligence, perseverance and at
best also lives is morally unblemished life can – and will, if willing to
make use of these aptitudes – one day gain success, notwithstanding the
social and economic milieu he originates from. This is, in short, the
American Dream, one of the most powerful myths of the more recent past.
Millions of emigrants answered its call and travelled to the “new world” to
make most out of their lives. And also today, the prospect of wealth is one
of,  if not the one, main reasons for illegal immigration from Mexico to the
United States.
The Dream is endured with great appeal; although its call nowadays sounds
from the grave. For despite 80 percent of the Americans still believing in
this part of their national identity, enormous vertical social mobility is
not reality in the United States (any more?). “Who is poor usually stays
poor, who is born in the lower social stratum has hardly a chance to scale
up”(2), yielded the study “Understanding Mobility in America”(3), including
both “intergenerational” and “short-term mobility”(4). According to this,
chances for a child appurtenant to society’s wealthy class are twenty-two
times the chance of an underclass child to enter “the top five percent of
the income distribution.” Furthermore taking into account that middle-class
children have a chance of ca. 40 percent to gain wealth, but only a 1.8
percent chance to enter the wealth pinnacle, we face a social situation
comparable to the Roman Republic’s one where a small part of society has
bulk-headed itself off the plebeians and holds financial wealth as well as
economic and political power in its hands. Numerous plutocratic lineaments
the US’s political system features nowadays – see e.g. the importance of
money in the topical pre-Presidential election campaigns, leaking enormous
influence to rich financial backers of the candidates – destroy the American
Dream also on another field, which is that also children of poor,
non-academically inclined background should, if gifted, have the chance to
become President. The American Dream in its classical meaning, raising from
the bottom to the top of society, is thus illusionary both from a financial
and from a political perspective.
To illegal Mexican immigrants, of course, this applies to a greater extent.
Hertz’s study names “education, race, health and state of residence [as]
four key channels by which economic status is transmitted from parent to
child.” Getting granular on these “key channels” unsheathes that the
preconditions worsening an average American’s chances to fulfil the Dream
come to fruition especially large-scaly within the illegals’ milieu, which
is naturally part of the low class. The factor education is negatively
impacted by many illegals’ insufficient knowledge of the English language,
which prevents eventual education from being put into practice outside
Spanish-speaking communities. Since also in Mexico there is a correlation
between adherence to social class and education (5), the education
disadvantage would still persist in case of appropriate lingual capacities.
Concerning race, the study discloses a disadvantage for Afro-Americans
“persist[ing] even after controlling for a host of parental background
factors, children’s education and health, as well as whether the household
was female-headed or receiving public assistance.” This racial
discrimination does however not span on illegal Mexican immigrants, since
“[t]he inclusion of family background measures reduces the Latino/Anglo gap
to statistical insignificance.” For health issues, it is enough to say that
illegal immigrants are not integrated into the American health care system
and thus often cannot afford proper treatment for maladies which are
contrariwise more likely to spread if you live under circumstances as
illegals who, especially in the time following their arrival, are houseless
and at a lack of hygienic providence. As far as the states are concerned,
illegal Mexicans usually settle down predominantly in California, Texas,
Florida, New York and Arizona (6). The regions with the worst upward
mobility are, with the exception of Arizona, not amongst the favourite
stays; but then, the study doesn’t provide the necessary information for
individual states to examine on further influences of the immigrants’
whereabouts on their chances.
More exhaustive cognisance is provided if we change our approach on wealth
from absolute wealth or wealth relative to the environment’s wealth to
wealth relative to one’s own former financial situation. By doing this, it
becomes possible that a person belonging to the objectively poorer classes
of society is subjectively wealthy because he had been much poorer before. I
take it for necessary to open this new vista in this article’s context,
because the motivation of a Mexican to go to the USA is probably less to
become a member of the “high society” around Gates, Murdoch etc., which it
would be if they would follow the American Dream the Americans dream. Much
more it is to become richer than they were in Mexico, to achieve a lifestyle
they could not have achieved at home, but which is not extraordinary for US
Americans. Since the relation of average hour earnings in Mexico and USA is
1:6, whereas the relation of cost of living numbers to 1:1.35 (7), this kind
of American Dream is realized by Mexican immigrants who find a job in the US
were they are paid even just half the average salary. The US economy is thus
provided with masses of willed workers from abroad who “perform all the
badly paid jobs beyond the legal minimum wage of 5.15 $ an hour for which no
US workers are to be found” (8). For this reason, apprehensions that the
immigrants take away the Americans’ jobs are arbitrary. Instead, the US
economy is long dependant on the workers from the south. This became clear
when on 2006’s Labour Day the immigrants went on strike galore. “Tyson Foods
Inc., the globally biggest meat producer, had to shut a dozen of its more
than 100 fabrics due to the absence of workers” (9), and lots of other
corporations experienced something near it, demonstrating that without
illegal immigrants, economy would collapse. The cause of the boycotts was
not economic, but the extensive lack of rights for the illegal Mexicans. In
light of the enormous aid they give to the country, there is very good
reason for abandoning all schizophrenic “we need you here, but go back there
because you are illegal” politics and improve the legal status of the
illegals. Hopefully, this American Dream is more realistic than the
original.

(1)	by T.C. Boyle, 1995; review in this newsletter and the youth
newsletter of November 6.
(2)	Telepolis, „Tellerwäscher bleibt Tellerwäscher“, heise.de, 29. 04.
2006
(3)	by Tom Hertz, American University, Washington DC, 26. 04. 2006,
available for download at (4)
(4)	T. Hertz, American University, “Understanding Mobility in America”,
americanprogress.org, 26. 04. 2006; also following figures and quotations
are, if not stated differently, taken from this source
(5)	The Library of Congress Country Studies and the CIA World Factbook,
as re-published in extracts in “Mexico Income Distribution”, photius.com
(6)	Pew Hispanic Center, “Estimates for the Unauthorized Migrant
Population by States based on the March 2005 CPS”, pewhispanic.org, 26. 04.
2006
(7)	for the wages in both countries: Lateinamerikanachrichten, “Wettlauf
um die Bohne”, lateinamerikanachrichten.de, 05. 2007, for cost of living in
Mexico: solutionsabroad.com, in USA: cityrating.com
(8)	Tagesschau, “Ein Tag ohne Einwanderer”, tagesschau.de, 25. 08. 2007
 
(TG)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

VOM TELLERWASCHER ZUM STAATSBURGER?

Das Buch América beschreibt die hoffnungslosen Bemühungen von Mexikanern,
den amerikanischen Traum wahr werden zu lassen. Sind die Chancen für
illegale mexikanische Einwanderer wirklich so schlecht, im „Land der
unbegrenzten Möglichkeiten“ „vom Tellerwäscher zum Millionär“ aufzusteigen?

Wer hart arbeitet, mit Fleiß und Geduld ausgestattet ist und im besten Fall
auch ein moralisch makelloses kann – und wird, wenn er diese Begabungen
nutzen will – eines Tages Erfolg erlangen, ungeachtet des sozialen und
wirtschaftlichen Milieus, aus dem er stammt. Dies ist, in Kurzfassung, der
amerikanische Traum, eine der mächtigsten Mythen der jüngeren Vergangenheit.
Millionen von Auswanderern sind seinem Ruf gefolgt und in die „neue Welt“
gereist, um das Beste aus ihrem Leben zu machen. Und auch heute ist die
Aussicht auf Wohlstand einer der, wenn nicht der eine, Hauptgründe für
illegale Einwanderung von Mexiko in die Vereinigten Staaten.
Der Traum verfügt über große Anziehungskraft. Dabei erschallt sein Ruf
heutzutage aus dem Grab. Denn wenngleich 80 Prozent der Amerikaner noch an
diesen Teil ihrer nationalen Identität glauben, ist außerordentliche
vertikale soziale Mobilität nicht (mehr?) Realität in den Vereinigten
Staaten. „Wer arm ist, bleibt normalerweise arm, wer in der unteren
gesellschaftlichen Schicht geboren wurde, hat kaum eine Chance,
aufzusteigen“, ergab die Studie „Understanding Mobility in America“, die
sowohl „generationsübergreifende“ als auch „kurzfristige Mobilität“
einbezog. Demnach sind die Chancen für ein Kind, das zur wohlhabenden
gesellschaftlichen Klasse gehört, zweiundzwanzig mal so groß wie die eines
Unterschichtenkindes, in die „oberen fünf Prozent der Einkommensverteilung“
vorzustoßen. Berücksichtigt man zudem, dass Mittelklassenkinder eine
40-Prozent-Chance haben, reicher zu werden, aber nur eine 1,8-prozentige
Chance, den Wohlstandsgipfel zu erklimmen, sehen wir uns einer sozialen
Situation vergleichbar derjenigen der römischen Republik gegenüber, wo ein
kleiner Teil der Gesellschaft sich von den Plebejern abgeschottet hat und
finanziellen Wohlstand ebenso wie wirtschaftliche und politische Macht in
seinen Händen hält. Zahlreiche plutokratische Züge, die das politische
System der USA heute aufweist – siehe bspw. die Bedeutung des Geldes in den
gegenwärtigen Vorwahl-Wahlkämpfen, die den reichen Geldgebern der Kandidaten
enormen Einfluss zuspielt – zerstören den amerikanischen Traum auch auf
einem anderen Feld, nämlich, dass auch Kinder mit armem, bildungsfernem
Hintergrund wenn sie begabt sind die Chance haben sollten, Präsident zu
werden. Der amerikanische Traum in seiner klassischen Bedeutung, vom
Bodensatz zur Spitze der Gesellschaft aufzusteigen, ist daher sowohl aus
finanzieller als auch aus politischer Sicht illusorisch. 
Natürlich trifft dies auf illegale mexikanische Einwanderer in weit größerem
Umfang zu. Hertz’ Studie benennt „Bildung, Rasse, Gesundheit und den Staat,
in dem man wohnt, [als] vier Schlüsselwege, auf denen wirtschaftlicher
Status von den Eltern auf die Kinder übertragen wird.“  Diese
„Schlüsselwege“ unter die Lupe zu nehmen, bringt zum Vorschein, dass die
Rahmenbedingungen, die die Chancen eines durchschnittlichen Amerikaners
verschlechtern, sich den Traum zu erfüllen, besonders stark im Milieu der
Illegalen zum Tragen kommen, das natürlich Teil der unteren Klasse ist. Der
Faktor Bildung wird von den unzureichenden Englischkenntnissen vieler
Illegaler beeinträchtigt, was eventuelle Bildung daran hindert, außerhalb
spanischsprachiger Gemeinschaften angewendet zu werden. Da auch in Mexiko
eine Beziehung zwischen sozialer Klassenzugehörigkeit und Bildung besteht,
würde der Bildungsnachteil auch im Falle hinreichender Sprachkenntnisse
bestehen bleiben. Hinsichtlich der Rasse enthüllt die Studie eine
Benachteiligung für Afroamerikaner, die „sogar besteht, nachdem auf eine
Menge elterlicher Hintergrundfaktoren, die Bildung der Kinder und die
Gesundheit ebenso wie darauf untersucht worden war, ob der Haushalt von
einer allein erziehenden Frau geführt wurde oder Sozialhilfe empfing.“ Diese
Rassendiskriminierung erstreckt sich jedoch nicht auf illegale mexikanische
Immigranten, denn „[d]ie Einbeziehung der familiären Hintergrundverhältnisse
den Anglo-Latino-Abstand auf statistische Bedeutungslosigkeit reduziert.“
Bezüglich der Gesundheitsbelange reicht es aus, zu sagen, dass illegale
Einwanderer nicht ins amerikanische Gesundheitssystem eingegliedert sind und
sich daher oft keine angemessene Behandlung für Krankheiten leisten können,
die sich andererseits eher ausbreiten, wenn man unter Bedingungen wie
Illegale lebt, die insbesondere in der Zeit nach ihrer Ankunft obdachlos und
ohne hygienische Fürsorge sind. Was die Staaten angeht, lassen sich illegale
Mexikaner für gewöhnlich in Kalifornien, Texas, Florida, New York und
Arizona nieder. Die Regionen mit der schlechtesten Aufwärtsmobilität sind
abgesehen von Arizona nicht unter den bevorzugten Aufenthaltsorten; jedoch
liefert die Studie nicht die notwendigen Informationen zu den einzelnen
Staaten, um weitere Einflüsse des Verbleibs der Immigranten auf ihre Chancen
zu untersuchen.   
Wir gelangen zu tiefergehender Erkenntnis, wenn wir unsere Betrachtungsweise
von Wohlstand von absolutem Wohlstand oder relativem Wohlstand zum Wohlstand
des Umfelds hin zu relativem Wohlstand zur eigenen früheren finanziellen
Situation ändern. Dadurch wird es möglich, dass eine Person, die zu den
objektiv ärmeren Klassen der Gesellschaft zählt, subjektiv reich ist, da sie
zuvor viel ärmer gewesen ist. Ich halte es für notwendig, im Kontext dieses
Artikels diese neue Perspektive zu eröffnen, denn die Motivation eines
Mexikaners, in die USA zu gehen, ist wahrscheinlich weniger, ein Mitglied
der „High Society“ um Gates, Murdoch etc. zu werden, was sie wäre, wenn sie
dem amerikanischen Traum, den die Amerikaner träumen, nachgingen. Vielmehr
ist es die Motivation, reicher zu werden, als sie in Mexiko waren, einen
Lebensstil zu erreichen, den sie daheim nicht hätten erreichen können, der
aber für US-Amerikaner nicht außergewöhnlich ist. Da das Verhältnis der
Stundenlöhne in Mexiko und den USA 1:6 ist, wohingegen das Verhältnis der
Lebenshaltungskosten sich auf 1:1,35 beziffert, ist diese Art des
amerikanischen Traums schon von mexikanischen Einwanderern verwirklicht, die
in den USA einen Job finden, wo ihnen nur der halbe Durchschnittslohn
gezahlt wird. Der US-Wirtschaft werden daher Massen williger ausländischer
Arbeiter zur Verfügung gestellt, die „all die schlechtbezahlten Jobs
jenseits des gesetzlichen Mindestlohns von 5,15 $ die Stunde erledigen, für
die sich keine amerikanischen Arbeiter finden.“ Aus diesem Grund sind
Befürchtungen, die Immigranten nähmen den Amerikanern die Arbeitsplätze weg,
unbegründet. Stattdessen ist die US-Wirtschaft längst von den Arbeitern aus
dem Süden abhängig. Dies wurde deutlich, als die Immigranten am Tag der
Arbeit 2006 massenweise in den Streik traten. „Tyson Foods Inc., der
weltweit größte Fleischproduzent, musste ein Dutzend seiner mehr als 100
Fabriken wegen der Abwesenheit von Arbeitern dichtmachen“, und viele andere
Firmen erlebten Ähnliches, was zeigt, dass ohne illegale Immigranten die
Wirtschaft zusammenbräche. Der Grund der Boykotte war nicht wirtschaftlich,
sondern die weitgehende Rechtlosigkeit der illegalen Mexikaner. Angesichts
der enormen Hilfe, die sie dem Land geben, gibt es sehr gute Gründe, jede
schizophrene „Wir brauchen euch hier, aber geht dorthin zurück, weil ihr
illegal seid“-Politik aufzugeben und die rechtliche Stellung der Illegalen
zu verbessern. Hoffentlich ist dieser amerikanische Traum realistischer als
das Original.
 
(TG)

***********************************************
8. THE TORTILLA CURTAIN - A REVIEW
***********************************************

The Tortilla Curtain, a novel written by Thomas Coraghessan Boyle and first
published in 1995, deals with the life of illegal Mexican immigrants in the
USA and society’s reactions on them.

The two different parties, illegal immigrants and natives, are each
exemplified by one couple, Cándido Ricon and his pregnant wife América on
the one and Delaney and Kyra Mossbacher on the other side. Though not having
anything in common and for most of the time not even knowing each other, the
two couples’ lives influence each other throughout the story.

Having been hit by Delaney’s car, Cándido is unable to work for several
days. Thus instead of him, América goes to the labour exchange to look for
peon jobs. Soon after Cándido has recovered, they are however forced to
leave the canyon they inhabited because the exchange has been closed. The
inhabitants of Arroyo Blanco, where the Mossbachers live amongst other
privileged persons, further transform their village in a walled-in community
to mark off illegal immigrants. After the Mexicans have to return to the
canyon, their attempts to survive and the American’s attempts to save their
lifestyle continue to collide, which makes both sides enter a vicious
circle. 

The novel handles its topic, illegal immigration, in a complex way
presenting various different points of view and also containing implicit
criticism of certain parts of society.
Boyle renounces to divide his characters into protagonists and antagonists,
with the exception of América who has the role of the innocent sufferer who
does no harm to others. Cándido, certainly without a clean slate, is a
victim of his awkwardness or driven by circumstances into things he wouldn’t
do if he didn’t think he really had to, like thievery. He certainly would
like to be a better man, if he could, be he can’t be as he wants. Even
Delaney, in the end clearly the story’s “bad guy”, appears to the reader
more as an involuntary xenophobic, since we first get to know the “real”
Delaney and then his – alas failing – ruffling against the prejudicial
thinking he discovers within himself. The negation of a good and an evil
side performed in such way strongly contributes to the novel’s credibility.
My main point of criticism concerning the characters is the phantom-like
role of those Mexicans who “made it”, who emigrated with success to the US.
There is serious evidence of their existence, we read about the money they
send home, visit streets populated by them where they own restaurants – but
none of those more fortunate illegal immigrants plays a role which is more
than an extra’s, so that they appear like shadows from an unamendable realm
of dreams. In the end, there stands the question: Wouldn’t it have been
better for everyone if Cándido and América would have stayed at home?
So is The Tortilla Curtain a right-wing novel condemning immigration (or at
least its illegal sub-species) for being collectively harmful?
No. Already the final scene contradicts to this assumption, in which a
development culminates which an author who is adverse to immigration would
most certainly not have presented like this: While Delaney mutates to an
egoist due to certain disturbances of his privileged milieu (if we apprehend
not the own person, but the own social group as ego), Cándido and América
have even in greatest trouble the altruism to save the life of a man who is
obviously hostile to them.

Judging from the devolution of the plot, it probably would actually have
been better if Cándido and América would have stayed at home, but Boyle’s
criticism isn’t directed towards that the two persons who have the most
conspicuous potential to become popular figures while reading have
immigrated. He doesn’t let them fail to punish them, he doesn’t let the
Americans sacrifice their freedom to ostensive safety to let them appear as
vicitims. On the contrary, the immigrants have to fail so that it can be
analysed why they have failed and what is responsible on both sides for the
miscarriage of co-existence.
On the very top of this list I see the flagrant maladjustment between what
America is and what it still seems to be for many who regard it from
outside, which is the land of unlimited opportunities. This is the main
reason for Américas extraordinary suffering, for her personal American dream
bursts. Also Delaney is in some way a victim of that America not
incorporating its own ideal, which would include openness towards motivated
arrivals who want to achieve something in life. The stockade of the
community – precursory to Delaney’s change – is antithetic to this. However,
his fatal fault is that he pushes all the responsibility for America being
how it is to the immigrants.

Boyle himself doesn’t do this. He does not make angels out of the immigrants
– e.g., the broker Kyra is evilly insulted after relegating two other
Mexicans from a garden of a house she wants to sell – but he also doesn’t
retain to ascribe a not so small part of the responsibility for the story’s
tragic progression to the natives. For instance, the forest fire traces back
to Cándido receiving a turkey as gift, because its owners don’t know what to
do with it. This typifies a wrongly interpreted charity in which the needy
don’t get what they’re in need of, but what the wealthy don’t want, and in
which – depicted in the scene in which América works with acid as charwoman
– the poor are cared for just as much as needed to fulfil the task scheduled
for them.
The continuous leitmotif is yet the dehumanization which befalls the
immigrants in the minds of the residents. It begins before the first chapter
with a Steinbeck quotation from Grapes of Wrath: “They ain’t human.” And it
is the thread running through the story. Step by step, the treatment of the
immigrants approaches to the way coyotes streaking through the country are
treated. If Delaney declares that who feeds coyotes decoys them, the work
exchange becomes closed. If the Mossbachers build a fence around their
garden to keep off the bestial invaders, the community builds a wall to
resist to the human invaders. This dehumanization doesn’t remain without
consequences, and so there are towards the book’s end several scenes
explicitely putting the immigrant couple’s lifestyle in relation to an
animal’s.

The formal way in which this happens seems on the other side inkhorn. It’s
just too striking that it was Boyle’s attempt to create a parallelism
between the immigrants and the coyotes and the ways they’re responded to in
Arroyo Blanco. The idea is by far not the worst, yet should have received
and had deserved a better integration, making it a part of and no decorative
padding to the plot, which it is even more unfortunately since it’s these
scenes containing almost the whole characterization of Kyra, giving her the
very strange role of a planned-to-be main character almost without
prominence for the main plot. The same holds valid for the connection
between the lives of his to main protagonist groups; rather than feeling
that these various links have their source in the process of the story
itself, the hand of the author shows through the pages of the book. For the
hazards which make the story be like it is are too big to be accepted as
realistically possible. 

The quality of the book depends thus on the reader’s interest in immigration
and opens up completely only to those ready to mentally grabble with what
stands behind the plot. Those whose criteria whether they like a book or not
are first at all a nice plot and whether they have fun reading it might
probably be disappointed by the plotline’s construed structure and the
absence of any what-so-ever mannered happy ending. To the readers of this
newsletter, who I regard with certain sureness as interested in migration
topics,  I unequivocally recommend to, if not done yet, read The Tortilla
Curtain.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

AMERICA - EINE REZENSION 

América, im Original The Tortilla Curtain, ein von Thomas Coraghessan Boyle
geschriebener und erstmals 1995 veröffentlichter Roman, beschreibt das Leben

illegaler mexikanischer Einwanderer in den USA und die Reaktionen der
Gesellschaft auf sie.

Die zwei verschiedenen Parteien, illegale Einwanderer und Einheimische,
werden je am Beispiel eines Paares dargestellt, Cándido Ricon und seiner
schwangeren Frau América auf der einen und Delaney und Kyra Mossbacher auf
der anderen Seite. Obwohl sie nichts miteinander gemein haben und sich über
die meiste Zeit hinweg nicht einmal kennen, beeinflussen sich die Lebenswege
beider Paare die gesamte Geschichte hindurch.

Nachdem er von Delaney angefahren worden ist, kann Cándido einige Tage nicht
arbeiten. Daher geht statt seiner América zur Arbeitsvermittlung, um nach
Tagelöhnerarbeiten zu suchen. Bald nachdem Cándido genesen ist, sind die
beiden jedoch gezwungen, die von ihnen bewohnte Schlucht zu verlassen, weil
die Vermittlung geschlossen wurde. Die Bewohner von Arroyo Blanco, wo die
Mossbachers nebst anderen privilegierten Personen leben, verwandeln ihr Dorf
zudem in eine eingemauerte Gemeinde, um illegale Einwanderer auszusperren.
Nachdem die Mexikaner in den Canyon zurückkehren müssen, kollidieren ihre
Bemühungen, zu überleben, und die Bemühungen der Amerikaner, ihren
Lebensstil zu sichern, weiterhin, was beide Seiten in einen Teufelskreis
führt.

Der Roman behandelt sein Thema, illegale Einwanderung, auf vielschichtige
Weise, stellt zahlreiche verschiedene Ansichten vor und beinhaltet auch
implizite Kritik an gewissen Teilen der Gesellschaft.
Boyle verzichtet darauf, seine Charaktere in Protagonisten und Antagonisten
einzuteilen, mit Ausnahme Américas, die die Rolle der unschuldig Leidenden
hat, die niemand anderem schadet. Cándido, sicherlich ohne weiße Weste, ist
Opfer seines Ungeschicks oder wird von den Umständen zu Taten getrieben, die
er nicht tun würde, wenn er nicht denken würde, er müsste, wie etwa
Diebstahl. Er wäre sicherlich gerne ein besserer Mensch, wenn er könnte,
aber er kann nicht, wie er will. Selbst Delaney, gegen Ende klar der „Böse“
der Geschichte, erscheint dem Leser eher als unfreiwilliger Fremdenfeind, da
wir zuerst den „wahren“ Delaney und dann sein – leider fehlschlagendes –
sich Sträuben gegen das vorurteilsbehaftete Denken erleben, das er in sich
entdeckt. Die Leugnung einer guten und einer bösen Seite, die derart
vorgenommen wird, trägt stark zur Glaubwürdigkeit des Romans bei. Mein
Hauptkritikpunkt betreffend die Charaktere ist die phantomartige Rolle der
Mexikaner, die „es geschafft haben“, die erfolgreich in die USA ausgewandert
sind. Es gibt ernsthafte Belege ihres Daseins, wir lesen übers Geld, das sie
nach Hause schicken, besuchen Strassen, die sie bewohnen, wo sie Restaurants
führen – aber keiner dieser glücklicheren illegalen Einwanderer spielt eine
Rolle, die über die eines Statisten hinausgeht, sodass sie wie Schatten aus
einem unerreichbaren Reich der Träume erscheinen. Am Ende steht die Frage:
Wäre es nicht besser für jeden gewesen, wenn Cándido und América daheim
geblieben wären?

Ist América ein politisch rechter Roman, der Einwanderung (oder zumindest
ihre illegale Unterart) als kollektiv schädlich verurteilt?
Nein. Schon die Schlussszene widerspricht dieser Annahme, in der eine
Entwicklung kulminiert, die ein einwanderungsfeindlicher Autor so ganz
sicher nicht präsentiert hätte: Während Delaney sich wegen bestimmter
Störungen seines privilegierten Milieus in einen Egoisten verwandelt (wenn
wir nicht die eigene Person, sondern die eigene soziale Gruppe als Ego
verstehen), haben Cándido und América selbst in ärgster Not noch den
Altruismus, einem ihnen offensichtlich feindlich gesinnten Mann das Leben zu
retten.

Nach dem Verlauf der Handlung zu urteilen, wäre es wohl tatsächlich besser
gewesen, wenn Cándido und América daheim geblieben wären, aber Boyles Kritik
richtet sich nicht daran, dass die beiden Personen, die das deutlichste
Potential haben, während des Lesens zu Sympathieträgern zu werden,
eingewandert sind. Er lässt sie nicht scheitern, um sie zu bestrafen, er
lässt die Amerikaner ihre Freiheit nicht scheinbarer Sicherheit opfern, um
sie als Opfer erscheinen zu lassen. Vielmehr müssen die Einwanderer
scheitern, damit analysiert werden kann, warum sie gescheitert sind, und was
auf beiden Seiten für das Misslingen der Koexistenz verantwortlich ist.
Ganz oben auf dieser Liste steht meiner Ansicht nach das eklatante
Missverhältnis zwischen dem, was Amerika ist, und dem, was es für viele, die
es von außen betrachten, immer noch zu sein scheint, nämlich das Land der
unbegrenzten Möglichkeiten. Dies ist der Hauptgrund für Américas
außergewöhnliches Leiden, denn ihr persönlicher amerikanischer Traum
zerbirst. Auch Delaney ist in gewisser Weise ein Opfer dessen, dass Amerika
nicht das Idealbild seiner selbst verkörpert, was Offenheit gegenüber
leistungsbereiten Neuankömmlingen, die etwas im Leben erreichen wollen,
gehören würde. Die Umfriedung des Dorfes – die Delaneys Wandel vorhergeht –
ist eine Antithese dazu. Sein fataler Fehler ist jedoch, dass er die gesamte
Verantwortung dafür, dass Amerika so ist, wie es ist, den Einwanderern
zuschiebt.

Boyle selbst tut das nicht. Er macht keine Engel aus den Immigranten – so
wird die Maklerin Kyra übel beleidigt, nachdem sie zwei andere Mexikaner des
Gartens eines Hauses verwiesen hat, das sie verkaufen will – aber er macht
auch nicht davor Halt, einen nicht so geringen Teil der Verantwortung für
den tragischen Ablauf der Geschichte den Einheimischen zuzuschreiben. Der
Waldbrand etwa geht darauf zurück, dass Cándido einen Truthahn geschenkt
bekommt, weil seine Besitzer nichts mit diesem anzufangen wissen. Dies
versinnbildlicht eine falsch verstandene Wohltätigkeit, bei welcher die
Notleidenden nicht das bekommen, dessen sie bedürfen, sondern was die
Reichen nicht wollen, und bei welcher – dargestellt in der Szene, in der
América als Putzfrau mit Säure arbeitet – für die Armen gerade soweit
gesorgt wird, dass sie die Aufgaben erfüllen können, die die Wohlhabenden
ihnen zugedacht haben.

Das durchgängige Leitmotiv ist aber die Entmenschlichung, die den
Einwanderern in den Köpfen der Ansässigen widerfährt. Sie fängt vor dem
ersten Kapitel mit einem Steinbeck-Zitat aus Früchte des Zorns an: „Sie sind
keine Menschen.“ Und sie ist der rote Faden, der sich durch die Geschichte
zieht. Schritt für Schritt nähert sich die Behandlung der Einwanderer dem
an, wie die Gegend durchstreifende Kojoten behandelt werden. Erklärt
Delaney, dass, wer Kojoten füttere, sie anlocke, wird die Arbeitsvermittlung
geschlossen. Bauen die Mossbachers einen Zaun um ihren Garten, um die
tierischen Eindringlinge fernzuhalten, errichtet die Kommune eine Mauer, um
sich der menschlichen Eindringlinge zu erwehren. Diese Entmenschlichung
bleibt nicht ohne Folgen, und so gibt es gegen Ende des Buches zahlreiche
Szenen, in denen der Lebensstil des Einwandererpaares explizit zu dem von
Tieren in Beziehung gesetzt wird.

Wie dies formell geschieht, erscheint andererseits gekünstelt. Es ist
schlicht zu offensichtlich, dass es Boyles Absicht war, einen Parallelismus
zwischen den Einwanderern und den Kojoten und der Art und Weise, wie in
Arroyo Blanco auf sie reagiert wird, zu schaffen. Die Idee ist bei weitem
nicht die schlechteste, hätte aber eine bessere Eingliederung verdient
gehabt und erfahren sollen, die sie zu einem Teil des Plots und nicht seinem
schmückenden Beiwerk gemacht hätte, was sie umso bedauerlichererweise ist,
als dass diese Szenen fast die gesamte Charakterisierung Kyras beinhalten,
was ihr die seltsame Rolle eines als Hauptperson vorgesehenen Charakters
zukommen lässt, der fast ohne Bedeutung für den Hauptplot ist. Gleiches gilt
für die Verbindung zwischen den Lebenswegen der beiden Protagonistengruppen;
anstatt zu empfinden, dass die vielen Anknüpfungsstellen dem Verlauf der
Geschichte selbst entspringen, scheint die Hand des Autors durch die Seiten
des Buches. Denn die Zufälle, die die Geschichte zu der machen, die sie ist,
sind zu groß, um als realistisch möglich angesehen zu werden.

Die Qualität des Buches hängt daher stark vom Interesse des Lesers an
Einwanderung ab und erschließt sich gänzlich nur denen, die sich geistig mit
dem auseinandersetzen, was hinter dem Plot steht. Diejenigen, deren
Kriterien, ob ein Buch ihnen gefällt oder nicht in erster Linie eine schöne
Handlung und ob sie Spaß haben, wenn sie das Buch lesen, sind, werden wohl
vom konstruierten Charakter des Handlungsverlaufs und der Abwesenheit
irgendeines wie auch immer gearteten Happy Ends enttäuscht sein. Den Lesern
dieses Newsletters jedoch, die ich mit gewisser Sicherheit als an
Migrationsthemen interessiert ansehe, empfehle ich eindeutig, so sie es noch
nicht getan haben América zu lesen.

(TG)

*******************************************************************
9. GERMANY: VICE CHANCELLOR RETIRES
*******************************************************************

On November 13, the German vice chancellor and work minister Franz
Müntefering has announced to retire from both of his offices. Müntefering,
former chairman of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), officially decided to
take this step for familial reasons, his wife has contracted cancer for
years.
Müntefering was a determined advocate of the politics of former chancellor
Gerhard Schröder who initiated a big reform of the social state, the Agenda
2010, against the strong resistance of the party. Recently, he suffered a
big defeat when SPD chairman Kurt Beck enforced a prolongation of first
unemployment compensation for senior workers. Many political experts in
Germany interpreted this as the SPD’s farewell to the Agenda. Moreover, in
the night preceding the announcement, the conservative CDU, current
coalition partner of the SPD, refused to establish a minimum wage for
mailmen notwithstanding an agreement to the contrary within the coalition.
Successors of Müntefering will be minister of foreign affairs Frank-Walter
Steinmeier as vice chancellor and Olaf Scholz, parliamentary administrator
of the SPD faction, as work minister. Both are said to be supporters of the
Agenda politics, too.
For the time being until the 2009 elections, the SPD’s move towards the
political left it performed on a recent party congress will probably not
have a big influence on their politics as governing partner. However, the
already strained relation between CDU and SPD might get more problematic.
Before the party congress, there was no other SPD politician opposing Beck’s
idea as strongly as Müntefering did, who was a very principled and
unwavering politician with strong influence and reputation. The party
chairman will and has to continue going the left way he has adopted and will
now do this with less opposition than before, because there are no strong
contras to be expected from Scholz for whom it is the first time as federal
minister. If the three regional elections in early 2008 don’t become
disasters for the SPD, the left wing course will probably become very solid.
Since the economically liberal FDP won’t govern with a left-wing orientated
SPD, the social democrats have two realistic, but problematic options for
governing in 2009: staying the smaller partner in a coalition with the CDU,
which already doesn’t work very well now, or breaking the self-established
taboo and seeking a red-red-green coalition including Lafontaine’s Die Linke
which is situated left to the SPD.
It remains to be seen if the people will accept that the SPD’s new course
will not strongly influence its concrete politics in the coalition for the
next two years. If not, Die Linke will take profit of this and rise to
lasting 10 percent plus x in the polls, while the SPD will then be caught
between the devil and the deep blue sea: moving further left-wards to
re-conquer votes there and risking a preterm end of the coalition with the
CDU or returning to the Agenda politics, bringing party and government
closer to each other, maybe re-enabling the party to seek a coalition with
FDP and the green party, but risking to lose votes on the left. Yet the
latter decision will not be possible soon and it’s more than doubtful if it
will be taken later, because then, federal elections are near.
In the near future, we will face a CDU-SPD coalition whose politics will be
constantly criticized by SPD chairman Beck, speaking for the vast majority
of his party and having no equivalent equipoise in the cabinet. Probably,
both partners will stick together, but more and more yearn for 2009 to come,
for which I anticipate a election campaign “left-wing” (SPD, Grüne, Linke)
against “right-wing” (CDU, FDP). The time of big political projects will be
over in Germany until then.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

GERMANIA: VICECANCELLIERE RINUNCIA

Il 13 novembre, il vicecancelliere e ministro del lavoro Tedesco, Franz
Müntefering, ha annunziato di rinunciare ai due suoi uffici. Müntefering, ex
presidente del Partito Socialdemocratico (SPD), ha deciso ufficialmente di
fare questo passo per motivi familiari, sua moglie è ammalata di cancro da
alcuni anni.
Müntefering era un propugnatore determinato della politica del vecchio
cancelliere Gerhard Schröder che ha iniziato una grande riforma dello Stato
sociale, l’Agenda 2010, anche contro la forte resistenza del partito.
Recentemente, ha subito una grande sconfitta quando il presidente della SPD
Kurt Beck ha ottenuto un prolungamento della prima sovvenzione ai
disoccupati per lavoratori adulti. Tanti esperti politici in Germania hanno
interpretato questo come l’abbandono dell’Agenda da parte della SPD.
Inoltre, nella notte precedente l’annuncio del suo ritiro, la CDU
conservativa,  attuale compagno di coalizione della SPD, si è rifiutata di
introdurre un salario minimale per postini nonostante un accordo contrario
nella coalizione. Successori di Müntefering saranno il minstro degli esteri
Frank-Walter Steinmeier come vicecancelliere e Olaf Scholz, amministratore
in parlamento della fazione della SPD, come ministro di lavoro. Entrambi
sono anche sostenitori della politica dell’Agenda.
In vista delle elezioni del 2009, il movimento della SPD si sta muovendo
verso la sinistra,  come deciso nel recente congresso del partito, ma
probabilmente questa scelta non avrà una grande influenza sulla sua politica
di governo. Ma la relazione già esistente tra la CDU e la SPD può diventare
più problematica. Prima del congresso del partito, non c’era un altro uomo
politico del SPD che si opponeva all’idea di Beck come faceva Müntefering,
che era un uomo politico pieno di principi e stabile con forte influenza e
reputazione. Il presidente del partito deve continuare e continuerà a
percorrere la strada verso la sinistra e lo farà senza l’opposizione di
prima perché non è prevista una forte opposizione da parte di Scholz, alla
sua prima volta come ministro federale. Se le tre elezioni regionali del
2008 non saranno un disastro per la SPD, il percorso verso la sinistra si
rafforzerà. Dato che la liberali della  FDP non governeranno con una SPD
orientata verso la sinistra, i socialdemocratici hanno due opzioni
realistiche, ma problematiche per andare al governo nel 2009: restare il
socio più piccolo in una coalizione con la CDU, che non funziona bene già
adesso, o violare il tabù auto-introdotto e aspirare una coalizione
rossa-rossa-verde (SPD, partito dei Verdi e Die Linke) includendo Die Linke
di Lafontaine che è situato alla sinistra della SPD.
Adesso resta da vedere se la gente accetterà che il nuovo corso della SPD
non influenzerà fortemente la sua politica nella coalizione per i prossimi
due anni. Se no, Die Linke profitterà di questo e ascenderà a 10 percento
plus x permanenti nelle inchieste, mentre la SPD sarà in una situazione
senza via d’uscita: muovere più verso la sinistra per riconquistare voti
rischiando una fine precoce della coalizione con la CDU o ritornare alla
politica dell’Agenda, portando partito e governo più vicini insieme, forse
aspirando ad una coalizione con FDP e il partito dei Verdi, ma rischiando di
perdere voti a sinistra. Ma quest’ultima decisione non sarà possibile fra
poco e difficilmente sarà presa piu avanti, perché le elezioni federali sono
vicine.
Nel futuro prossimo, vedremo una coalizione di CDU e SPD, la cui politica
sarà criticata continuamente dal presidente della SPD Beck, che parlerà in
nome della maggioranza del suo partito, senza opponenti. Probabilmente, i
due soci resteranno insieme, aspettando con impazienza il 2009, in cui gia
immagino una campagna elettorale della “sinistra” (SPD, Grüne, Linke) contro
“la destra” (CDU, FDP). Fino a quel momento, il periodo della Germania dei
grandi progetti politici dovrà aspettare.

(TG)

********************************************
10. LOESJE: SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT
********************************************

THE BIGGER THE EU, THE MORE SPACE FOR IMMIGRANTS

DOES THE COUNTRY WHERE YOU LIVE, DECIDE WHICH DREAMS YOU HAVE?

XENOPHOBIA:  YOU SHOULD BE MORE AFRAID OF SOMEONE EXACTLY LIKE YOU

GLOBALISATION:  DOES THAT COUNT FOR REFUGEES TOO?

LET'S STOP INTEGRATING AND START LIVING TOGETHER

WHAT IF FREEDOM OF SPEECH WAS A RELIGION?

I'M RIGHT HERE, BEHIND YOUR PREJUDICES

THE SOURCE OF THE NILE WAS MERELY DISCOVERED BY PEOPLE SWIMMING AGAINST THE
STREAM

ALSO FAR AWAY THE PEOPLE WANT TO RULE THEMSELVES

(JvL)

*************************************************************************

The number 16 of this newsletter has been sent to 10.079 addresses. 

The next newsletter comes out on:
Novembre 27th 2007

For suggestions please contact: 

Circolo Culturale Africa
via San Spiridione, 5/a
60100 Ancona
Italia
Tel. +39/071/2072585
Email: segreteria at circoloafrica.org 

Web site: www.circoloafrica.eu

****************************************************************************

Nel rispetto della Legge 675/96 sulla privacy, a tutela di persone e altri
soggetti rispetto al trattamento di dati personali, questo indirizzo e-mail
proviene da richieste di informazioni o da elenchi (newsgroup). Per
cancellarsi è sufficiente inviare un'e-mail a: segreteria at circoloafrica.org
con la richiesta CANCELLAMI. 

If you do not want to receive any more our newsletter please send an email
requesting DELETE ME. 

*************************************************************************