Vicious cycle of austerity and unemployment

Updated 05 June 2013

Vicious cycle of austerity and unemployment

Weak growth and rising unemployment in the euro zone is prompting a change in policy direction away from budget austerity, according to QNB Group. The euro zone economy has now been in recession for the last six quarters, contracting by 1.5 percent in real terms over this period. The contracting economy is providing fewer opportunities for job creation and pushing up unemployment, which reached 12.1 percent of the labour force in March 2013. Amongst under-25s, joblessness is even higher at 24 percent. Both measures of unemployment are now the highest on record.
A primary policy response to the 2008 financial crisis and the European sovereign debt crisis (which reached peak intensity in summer 2012) was to implement budget austerity measures across the euro zone. This involved a sharp drop in public expenditure growth, which fell from an annual average of 4.5 percent in 2007-09 to 1.2 percent in 2010-12. This meant that only 170 billion euros was added to euro zone budgets in 2010-12 compared with 570 billion euros in 2007-09, an overall slowdown of 400 billion euros.
The main areas targeted by governments to slow expenditure growth have been social benefits, public sector jobs and wages, and capital investment. Cutting government jobs and investment has a direct impact on growth and unemployment. Meanwhile, reducing social benefits at a time of hardship is leading to widespread dissatisfaction and protests. The high levels of sovereign debt in Europe have discouraged the counter-cyclical spending that government usually uses to rebalance their economies during recessions. Debt interest and capital repayments, which are not supportive of growth, were the only areas with higher growth in 2010-12 than in 2007-09.
Therefore, euro zone countries policy response has done little to tackle the unprecedented level of unemployment and weak growth, according to QNB Group. Officials increasingly appear to be considering a policy reversal. The target dates for reducing budget deficits below certain thresholds have already been pushed back in France, Spain and the Netherlands. In April, the president of the European Commission, José Barroso, said that Europe might have reached the politically acceptable limits of austerity, although he said he still believed cuts in budget deficits were needed. His comments were more in line with the view of the IMF, which has warned euro zone policy makers against adhering too strictly to budget deficit targets as this risks deepening Europe’s recession.
Budget deficits have fallen from 6.4 percent of GDP in 2009 to 3.7 percent in 2012. Government debt in the Eurozone has now risen from 80 percent of GDP in 2009 to 91 percent in 2012. Although debt levels are rising, there may still be room for manoeuvre. Increased debt-funded spending in growth-supportive areas, such as investment or intermediate consumption could potentially increase revenue and trigger further investment, helping to reduce debt in the longer term.

Heavily-indebted countries have, in the past, increased spending and exhibited strong growth as a means to repaying debt. The US and the UK in the 1950s both had debt in excess of 100 percent but high spending drove strong growth and enabled them to reduce debt to sustainable levels.
Reduced austerity in some of the larger countries could also help tackle unemployment across the region, especially if coupled with reforms to increase labour force mobility around the EU.
However, the overall debt levels in the Eurozone cloud a more nuanced picture among individual countries as both unemployment and debt vary considerably. Unemployment in non-core euro zone countries (Italy, Spain, Greece, Ireland, Portugal Cyprus, Estonia, Slovakia and Slovenia) is 17.7 percent while unemployment in core countries (Germany, France, Austria, Belgium, Finland, Luxembourg, Malta and Netherlands) is 7.6 percent.
Greece, Italy, Portugal and Ireland, each have debt levels of around 120 percent of GDP or greater, leaving them with little room to ease back on austerity. Greece is in the worst position with unemployment at 27 percent and 66 percent for under-25s while debt is 157 percent of GDP (although it is falling). Conversely, Spain, the other country with particularly chronic unemployment (27 percent and 56 percent among under-25s), may have room to borrow more to provide additional government support to the economy.
In addition to more growth focused policies, QNB Group argues that structural labour market reforms are still required. Investment in programs to get people back to work, adjustments in labor costs and greater labor market flexibility should all help. These policies are most needed in countries with high unemployment, such as Greece and Spain.

Telegram Russia ban spurs privacy debate

Updated 53 min 28 sec ago

Telegram Russia ban spurs privacy debate

  • Telegram has always attracted a mix of criticism and respect for its use of encryption to ensure its messages between users remain confidential.
  • A Moscow court decided last week to block the app in Russia because it refused to hand over encryption keys to authorities.

LONDON: Telegram, the messaging app that re-located from Russia to Dubai, has again fallen foul of the authorities in its mother country. So what is it about the social media platform that simultaneously has governments worldwide so concerned and freedom of speech advocates so agitated?
Telegram has always attracted a mix of criticism and respect for its use of encryption to ensure its messages between users remain confidential.
A Moscow court decided last week to block the app in Russia because it refused to hand over encryption keys to authorities — sparking fresh controversy around the app, which has previously been banned in countries such as Iran, Afghanistan and Indonesia.
Telegram has been under close scrutiny in Russia since legislation was passed in mid-2016 that required communication companies to hand over encryption keys to the Federal Security Service (FSB), if requested.
There was also a move to place companies on a “register of information distributors,” which requires firms to store user online communications for a set period of time and hand over data to the authorities when needed.


Some of Russia’s large social networks are reportedly on the register and Telegram was pressurized to register in mid-2017. Other Western social media companies such as WhatsApp are not listed. WhatsApp did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Weeks after joining the register, Telegram refused to agree to FSB requests for encryption keys, resulting in the Russian media watchdog Roskomnadzor seeking court approval this month to block the app.
On the day of the court decision, Telegram’s founder Pavel Durov tweeted: “Privacy is not for sale, and human rights should not be compromised out of fear or greed.” The company has also said it is technically impossible to transfer encryption keys.
It was not the Russian entrepreneur Durov’s first run-in with Russian authorities. Telegram — which was launched in 2013 — originally had its development team based in St. Petersburg, but had to leave the country due to local IT regulations. It is currently based in Dubai.
The messaging app prides itself in being the most secure and independent form of instant messaging that respects the need for privacy. Its “secret chats” option makes use of end-to-end encryption that ensures only users can read them. Messages cannot be forwarded and you can order messages to “self-destruct” within a set amount of time. It can also alert users if the recipient of the message takes a screenshot of the correspondence. So-called Telegram “Channels” can be used to broadcast public messages to a large audiences.
While WhatsApp — which is owned by Facebook — also provides end-to-end encryption, Telegram differentiates itself with claims it is faster and more secure.
Damir Gainutdinov is a legal analyst at Russian human rights group Agora, which represented Telegram in court. He has headed up its project on the defense of online freedom in Russia since 2010.
He told Arab News that the block placed on Russia was more of a power-play by the authorities.
“I think that Russian authorities believe that Telegram is a threat because they cannot control it.
“But I wouldn’t say that it is really the biggest threat. The attack on Telegram is more about showing that they can block any global service if they want,” he said.
Russia’s government has argued that the app helps to enable terrorist attacks in the country, saying that access to encrypted messages is a national security issue.
The FSB said a suicide bomber who killed 15 people on a St. Petersburg subway in April last year had used Telegram to plan the attack.
Voices from outside Russia have also criticized Telegram for not doing enough to clamp down on terrorists using the app. “Terrorists and extremist groups such as ISIS (Daesh) use encrypted applications like Telegram because it allows them to recruit new members, fundraise, incite to violence, and even coordinate terrorist activity without the threat of being discovered,” said executive director David Ibsen at the US-based non-government organization Counter-Extremism Project.
“ISIS also created public channels on Telegram to broadcast pro-ISIS news updates and disseminate other propaganda materials,” he told Arab News. Durov has been quoted as saying at a conference in 2015 that the right to privacy is more important to the company than “our fear of bad things happening, like terrorism.” Following the Paris attacks in 2015, Telegram did revise its policy on its public channels, but it has refused to take down private Daesh chats, according to Ibsen.
Social media sites are coming under increasing pressure from authorities worldwide to do more to limit the promotion of extremism online.
In a statement to Arab News, Twitter said it had permanently suspended 274,460 sites in the second half of last year — down more than 8 percent on the previous reporting period.
While Telegram is far from the only social media app to be criticized for its counter-terrorism policies, it is seen by some as the more reluctant player in the battle against online extremism. “Social media companies remove content regularly that violates their stated terms of service, and some of this includes extremist and terrorist videos, images and other propaganda,” said Ibsen. “However, despite the availability of technology that can identify and permanently prevent prohibited materials from being re-uploaded, the biggest social media platforms are not taking this vitally important step,” he said.
“Telegram has become a refuge app from the moment the preferred apps (Twitter in particular) started to clamp down on extremist content,” said Rik Coolsaet, a professor of international relations at Ghent University in Belgium who has written extensively on counter-terrorism efforts. “Its encryption offered a secure environment for terrorist recruiters and groomers, but at the same time limited their propaganda outreach, since it is more difficult to access. For that reason, Twitter remains their preferred app,” he added.
Russia is not the only country clamping down on Telegram. Iran restricted certain channels in December last year during the protests and there have been recent threats that restrictions could be reimposed. A estimated 40 million Iranians use Telegram’s channels and messaging services.
“In the case of Russia and Iran, the Telegram crackdown has much more to do with controlling the lives of its citizens than it does with preventing terrorist activity,” said Ibsen.
Telegram did not respond to Arab News’ request for comment.


We talk to leading world cyber terrorism expert Chris Sampson, co-author of “Hacking ISIS: How to Destroy the Cyber Jihad” and an analyst with the Terror Asymmetrics Project

Why are governments so worried about Telegram?
Telegram was launched as an encrypted messaging app. This meant that government agencies were less likely to be able to intercept messages passing across the Internet and read private conversations. However, in September 2015, Telegram also created an option for channels, which act like chat groups. This allowed like-minded individuals to essentially host a chat room. Unless the channel was set to public you couldn’t read what was discussed without being given an invitation link. Groups like ISIS began using these channels to share propaganda and information. Other groups use Telegram in much the same manner. Non-violent resistance groups around the world would also use the messaging app and channels to communicate so authorities in the countries they fear would be less likely to intercept their discussions.

Will clamping down on social media apps be effective?
As governments crack down and ban apps, others will rise and replace them with new features and focus on security from outside eyes. They will operate either within the legal construct or outside of it depending on the countries they seek to circumvent. Since laws around the world differ dramatically, what is legal in one country could be illegal in another. We’ve seen this already happen as countries sought to ban use of Telegram, WhatsApp or even Twitter. Inevitably the access to the technology remains the same and users find a way to use both encrypted messaging and social media platforms.

Does Russia’s action set a precedent?
Countries such as Indonesia, Iran, Afghanistan and others have banned Telegram. Brazil banned WhatsApp around the timing of the World Cup only to lift the ban. Such bans are largely ineffective because the majority of users are engaged in lawful communications yet want their privacy, those engaged in illegal and potentially violent activities make up a fraction of the userbase. The better solution is to know where nefarious users are lurking on the web and keep track of them in observable spaces. Banning the public’s access to messaging apps will always fail. Telegram and similar companies should deny government agencies the keys to encryption unless there is a reason given that would justify unlocking communications. If the governments are able to seize a phone and unlock it, they’ll already have access to a suspect’s communication if they haven’t erased the data.



Telegram, founded by Russian entrepreneur Pavel Durov in 2013, is an app that enables encrypted messaging, together with “self-destruct” messages. It is used by 200 million people worldwide. Authorities in a number of countries criticized it for providing secure communications channels for terrorists and criminals.