Conclusion
· Conclusion:
In a time when states gather into groupings to face economic
and financial hazards, partnerships and alliances are crucial especially for
developing states. However, the dilemma over partnership is always subject to
skepticism when the partnership is held with an ex-colonizer or a former enemy.
The Maghreb region seems to be in this situation. Indeed, this tendency got
increasingly important when the European Union became the dominant power in the
northern shore of the Mediterranean. Therefore, the European block's position
of force cannot prevent people in the Maghreb to ruminate the colonial past.
Consequently, the European initiative (i.e. UfM) is spontaneously depicted by
some Maghreb leaders as a neocolonial attitude to keep the European dominion
over the Maghreb region. Therefore, Maghreb states will get enrolled in a
vicious circle of economic dependency in stead of with Europe and furthermore
in an alliance which is supposed to overwhelm equal benefits over both
entities.
It is true that Europe is for much in consolidating
South-Mediterranean economies through up-grading and sustaining programs.
However, certain measures, such as, the rapid integration of South
Mediterranean economies in the European Market and the nullification of customs
barriers, cannot be totally safe as a way to achieve economic development. In
fact, each state should adopt its own way to develop.
Economically speaking, there are currently great pressures
on developing countries to adopt a set of «good policies» and
«good institutions» such as liberalization of trade and investment to
foster their economic development. However, according to historical facts, the
rich countries did not develop on the basis of the policies and the
institutions that they now recommend to developing countries. Indeed, almost
all of today's rich countries used tariff protection and subsidies to develop
their industries. For instance, Britain and the USA, the two countries that are
supposed to have reached the summit of the world economy through their
free-market, free-trade policy, are actually (i.e. in crisis conjuncture) the
ones that had most aggressively used protection and subsidies.
Personally I believe that each state should choose its own
path towards improvement. So, either economically or politically, decisions
should be sovereign. But, In the case of the Euro-Maghreb partnership
disparities between the two entities are wide. This feature cannot be neglected
since both entities aspire to instate an equitable partnership. If there will
be no respect for disparities, the partnership could turn into a dominion of
the stronger over the weaker. Therefore, instead to develop, Maghreb states
would be enclosed in vicious circle of dependency, where the only respected
voice is that of the stronger. Thus, the «win-win»
partnership retorted by the French president would be translated into a
neocolonial initiative that would make out of the Maghreb region an eternal
dependent to the old continent.
| 
