Greece crisis could be a Sarajevo moment for the Eurozone

Larry Elliott Economics editor Monday 29 June 2015

Any government that runs into difficulties in the future will have the Greek option of devaluation as an alternative to endless austerity

Franz Ferdinand Archduke of Austria and his wife Sophie, Duchess of Hohenberg moments before they were assassinated in Sarajevo on 28 June 1914. Photograph: Design Pics Inc/Rex/Design Pics Inc/Rex

A hundred and one years ago on Sunday, gun shots rang out in a city in southern Europe. Few at the time paid much heed to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife as they drove through the streets of Sarajevo. Within six weeks, however, Europe was at war.

Make no mistake, the decision by Alexis Tsipras to hold a referendum on the bailout terms being demanded of his country has the potential to be a Sarajevo moment. The crisis is not just about whether there is soon to be a bank run in Greece, although there is certainly the threat of one. It is not just about whether the creditors overplayed their hand in the negotiations, although they did. It is about the future of the euro itself.

Greek banks to stay closed on Monday

A meeting of the Greek financial stability council makes decision on day ECB freezes its funding for the banking sector

Read more

There will be much talk in the next few days about how Greece can be quarantined. The three people who have been leading the negotiations for the troika - Christine Lagarde of the International Monetary Fund, Jean-Claude Juncker of the European commission and Mario Draghi of the European Central Bank - can still cling to the hope that Tsipras will lose the referendum next Sunday.

In those circumstances, the Syriza-led coalition would have little choice but to hold an election. The return of a government headed by, for example, the centre-right New Democracy, would open up the possibility that Athens would sue for peace on the terms demanded by the troika.

There is, however, no guarantee of this. The troika was certain last week that Tsipras would fold when presented with a final take-it-or-leave-it offer. They were wrong. The Fund, the ECB and the European commission made a fatal misjudgement and have now lost control of events.

The immediate decision for the ECB was whether to cut off emergency funding before the country’s bailout programme formally ends on Tuesday. Wisely, it has chosen not to make matters worse.

In recent weeks, the Greek banks have only been able to stay open because Draghi has provided funds to compensate for capital flight. Sunday night’s announcement of an emergency bank holiday and capital controls demonstrates just how critical the situation has become.

Germany strongly supports the immediate end to emergency liquidity assistance (ELA), arguing that taxpayers in the rest of Europe should not be further exposed to the risk of a Greek exit from the single currency. The ECB, however, has always been reluctant to take what would clearly be a political decision to escalate the pressure on the Greek banks, and has announced that it will continue providing funding at last week’s level.

Greece crisis: a disaster for Athens and a colossal failure for the EU

After three crises in as many days, the collective performance of the Eurozone's governments inspires little hope or confidence in their crisis management

Read more

Even so, Greece now faces a week of turmoil. Tsipras bowed what seemed to be inevitable on Sunday by announcing controls to try to prevent Northern Rock-style queues outside the banks and - just as importantly - money leaving the country.

The Greek government will also be making contingency plans for exit from the single currency. Tsipras and Yannis Varoufakis, his finance minister, say that is not their wish or intention, but if the result of the referendum backs the government’s stance it is hard to see any alternative. Cyprus stayed in the euro after introducing capital controls, but it was done with the approval of other single currency members and involved knuckling down under an austerity programme.

In the meantime, the blame game has begun. The creditors say they offered Greece a deal that would have secured future financing in return for reforms and budget savings which would have hastened the country’s economic recovery. Lagarde has said there is now nothing on the table and that Greece should not expect the same terms to be available after the referendum.

Tsipras said the troika was proposing an “extortionate ultimatum” of “strict and humiliating austerity without end”. A spokesman for Varoufakis said the referendum meant the end to five years of “waterboarding”.

The stance taken by the troika has been wrong-headed but inevitable. Greece has seen its economy shrink by 25% in the past five years. A quarter of its population is unemployed. It has suffered a slump of Great Depression proportions, yet the troika has been demanding fresh tax increases that will suck demand from the economy, stifle growth and add to Greece’s debt burden.

If Greece were outside the euro, IMF advice would be different. The fund would be telling Greece to devalue its currency. It would be telling the country’s creditors that they would have to take a “haircut” in order to make Greece’s debts sustainable. It would then justify domestic austerity on the grounds that the benefits of the devaluation should not be frittered away in higher inflation.

The Greeks for whom all the talk means nothing – because they have nothing

For Georgios Karvouniaris, his sister Barbara, and many thousands like them, whether Greece stays in the Eurozone or not is unlikely to have any effect

Read more

This option, though, has not been made available to Greece. It is unable to devalue and European governments are resistant to the idea of a debt write-down. So the only way Greece can make itself more competitive is to cut costs, by reducing wages and pensions.

A fully fledged monetary union has the means to transfer resources from one region to another. This is what happens in the US or the UK, for example, with higher taxes in areas that are doing well being redistributed to areas with slower growth and higher unemployment.

The euro, however, was constructed along different lines. Countries were allowed to join even though it was clear they would struggle to compete with the better performing nations such as Germany. A stability and growth pact designed to ensure a common set of budget controls was a poor substitute for fiscal union. From the start, it was obvious that the only mechanism for a country that ran into severe difficulties would be harsh austerity. Greece is the result of what happens when politics is allowed to override economics.

If Greece leaves, the idea that the euro is irrevocable is broken. Any government that runs into difficulties in the future will have the Greek option of devaluation as an alternative to endless austerity. Just as importantly, the financial markets will know that, and will pile pressure on countries that look vulnerable. That’s why Greece represents an existential crisis for the Eurozone.

It will be said in response that Greece is a small, insignificant country and that the single currency has much better defences than it had at the last moment of acute trouble in the summer of 2012. Diplomats in Europe’s capitals took very much the same view in late June 1914.

Greece crisis could be a Sarajevo moment for the Eurozone | Business | The Guardian

Tsipras gambles political future on Greek bailout referendum

Kerin Hope in Athens Monday, 29 June 2015

©Reuters

Alexis Tsipras is gambling his political future as Greece’s prime minister on a hastily called referendum that could all too easily backfire.

Next Sunday’s vote on a failed Greek bailout proposal has divided constitutional experts over its legitimacy and left bureaucrats scrambling to arrange the logistics of holding the country’s first plebiscite in more than 40 years.

It is also puzzling and confusing voters.

“Greece is holding a referendum on a proposal that no longer exists for a bad programme that by then will have expired,” said Yannos, a business consultant who declined to give his second name. “It doesn’t make sense.”

Mr Tsipras has urged a “no” vote to endorse his left-wing government’s rejection of “blackmail” by the country’s creditors to apply further harsh austerity measures in return for a €15.3bn bailout. At the same time he has said he would respect a “yes” result.

One opinion poll conducted before the referendum was announced and published at the weekend suggested 57 per cent of Greeks were prepared to put up with more economic pain as the price of rescuing the economy and staying in the euro.

With default looming on a loan payment to the International Monetary Fund and capital controls imposed this week, patience with the left-wing Syriza government is starting to run out.

“There’s a sense even among its supporters that the government has lost control of the situation,” said Angeliki, an importer of hotel equipment.

A mood of rising fear and anger swept the country over the weekend as bank cash machines ran empty and long lines of vehicles formed outside petrol stations.

“These are extreme conditions that are likely to make anxious voters rally behind the opposition pro-Europe parties urging a “yes”, said a pollster who declined to be named.

Aris Hatzis, an Athens University professor and political commentator, said Mr Tsipras had miscalculated. By rejecting the latest bailout offer on Friday at a critical stage of the negotiations Mr Hatzis argues creditors were poised to make concessions that could have swung Mr Tsipras’s ruling Syriza party behind the deal.

“After weeks of intense pressure from both the creditors and his own party, he suddenly went over the edge . . . He followed his left-wing instincts. He acted impetuously,” Mr Hatzis said.

The consequences could be disastrous for the 40-year-old prime minister. If the government loses the vote even by a small margin Mr Tsipras would be obliged to resign as premier and call a general election. The alternative would be for the premier to lead negotiations on forming a coalition government with pro-reform parties with a mandate to rebuild relations with European partners and ensure that Greece can remain in the euro.

In that case Mr Tsipras would run the risk of being replaced as prime minister by a prominent non-political figure from Greek public life.

Some observers believe the government has a chance of pulling off a narrow victory, based on support from young voters, public sector workers and retirees grateful for Mr Tsipras’s fierce opposition during the bailout talks to cutting pensions and special benefits.

The far-left faction in Syriza was gearing up on Sunday to campaign for a “no” vote by promoting their vision of leaving the Eurozone, readopting the drachma and seeking special relationships with Russia and China.

“This is the moment of we’ve been waiting for, a chance to let the people decide,” said Alekos, a member of the Communist Tendency, an extreme faction in Syriza.” The problem is that there’s so little time to take the message to the countryside.”

Syriza’s power base is concentrated in Athens and Thessaloniki, the two biggest cities where the effects of a six-year recession are most keenly felt. A low turnout would favour a “no” vote, the pollster said.

Mr Hatzis said that if the vote is properly organised, a high turnout should be expected.

“A ‘no’ vote would effectively give Mr Tsipras a mandate to begin the process of leaving the Eurozone,” he said. “That’s not something voters will take lightly.”

British lorry driver in Calais: 'I question whether it is worth doing this job'

By Henry Samuel, Calais 24 June 2015

Rob Henderson, 34, a truck driver who has been waiting six hours to reach the Channel tunnel, says migrants are getting more aggressive, carrying knives and "smashing their bloody hands on the window"

Hundreds of migrants continued to roam around slow-moving lorries who had been queuing for as long as eight hours to board Eurotunnel trains to Britain on Wednesday.
For Rob Henderson, 34, a truck driver from Oakham near Rutland working for the haulage firm Knights of Old, the pressure to stop migrants entering vehicles and increasing delays has become a terrible burden.
“It’s getting to a stage where personally I question whether it is worthwhile doing this job because we’re in a Catch 22 situation,” he said as a dozen or so migrants hovered around his vehicle seeking a way in.
“If I get out here, I might face confrontation, if I don’t do anything I might get fined back in the UK if they find migrants on board.”
But he said he had no intention of getting out of his cab.
“It’s got to a stage where, given that these guys carry knives on them, and are slashing curtains and stuff like that, nine times out of ten you’re better staying in your cab - it’s just not worth the effort,” he said.
“The migrants are definitely getting more aggressive. If you clap your horn to warn the driver in front, they start smashing their bloody hands on the window, making insulting signs with their hands, smack your wing mirror.”
Mr Henderson had been waiting six hours to reach the Channel tunnel when he spoke to the Telegraph.
He has been trucking for the past three years. He said it was commonplace to see migrants climbing under the axles of lorry trailers and the driver “having to get out and drag them out", but the situation over the past 24 hours had been particularly dire.

• Calais crisis: Fears Isil may use migrant chaos to slip jihadists in to UK - live

“What we’re seeing is the backlog from yesterday,” he told the Telegraph. “Normally you can get in virtually straight away, but given the strike issue the day before with trains cancelled, we’ve got this build up.”
Rob Henderson in his cab (Laurent Villeret/The Telegraph)
“This is not normal. The tailback is at least 12 or 13 miles. I’ve got another two or three hours to go. With a bit of luck I’ll be home for dinner.”

• Calais chaos: Migrants and strikers disrupt Channel crossings, in pictures

“At the end of the day, we’re just trying to make a living and shouldn’t have to deal with all this.”
He said drivers tried to help each other by driving bumper to bumper in slow traffic. “We try to get up really close to the vehicle in front to stop migrants opening the back door, and you hope and pray that the guy behind you will do the same,” he said.
Migrants sit and wait near Mr Henderson's lorry (bottom left)
Mr Henderson said he and colleagues were angry and frustrated that more was not being done on both sides of the Channel to keep migrants away from the lorries.
A man attempts to open the back doors of a lorry (Laurent Villeret/The Telegraph)
My concern is that I pay my taxes, the government gives up the money or passes it to the French government, and nothing is really happening. We’re like sitting ducks here. They are quite able to freely walk around, have a look at the vehicles, where are the police, where is this money being given across?”
Climbing over boxes in the back of a lorry (Laurent Villeret/The Telegraph)
He said he was not optimistic about the future. “I think it’s a vicious circle now and can’t see any easy win or solution going forward.”

British lorry driver in Calais: 'I question whether it is worth doing this job' - Telegraph
© Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2015

Scotland decides to stop funding Queen via Scottish crown estate

Caroline Davies Wednesday 24 June 2015

Scottish parliament intends to use profits from crown estate in Scotland for use in Scotland, but says country will still contribute via taxes to Treasury

The Queen’s accounts show a 6.7% increase in funding last year to £37.9m, of which she spent £35.7m, setting the rest aside in a reserve account. Photograph: Kay Nietfeld/EPA

The Queen is set to no longer receive funding via Scotland’s crown estate, a decision that means that the income of the monarch and the rest of the royal family could reduce by more than £2m a year. It is understood that the Scottish parliament intends to retain the profits from the crown estate in Scotland for use in Scotland, which could have the consequence of reducing the sovereign grant, which funds the monarchy.

Buckingham Palace intends to raise the consequences for the Queen with David Cameron and George Osborne.

It had been understood that Scotland would still agree to contribute to the Queen’s costs after taking over management of the crown estate assets north of the border, worth £26m, but it appears that under Nicola Sturgeon this will not occur. “Originally, Alex Salmond did imply that might happen. But the new leadership said no,” one senior aide said.

The sovereign grant – which this year was £39.9m – funds the royal household. It is calculated on a formula that sees the Queen handed 15% of the annual surplus of the crown estate, one of the largest property owners in the UK. This year, revenue from the crown estate in Scotland stood at £14.5m, which represents a £2.2m contribution to the sovereign grant.

Palace officials raised the issue as they presented the Queen’s annual accounts. Sir Alan Reid, keeper of the privy purse, said the Scottish plans created a complication over future funding. “The transfer of the Scottish assets of the crown estate to the Scottish government does confuse the issue of renegotiating the percentage in due course because the total assets under the crown estate management will fall, and therefore 15% will be less than it would be if the transfer of the Scottish assets had taken place,” he said.

Under Alex Salmond, the SNP last year pledged that Scotland would retain the Queen as head of state, if the country had voted for independence from the rest of the UK last September. But the monarch faced criticism in Scotland after she was asked to make a rare public intervention in the final days of the Scottish independence referendum, speaking publicly to a well-wisher outside church near Balmoral saying: “I hope people will think very carefully about the future.”

Buckingham Palace stressed that the funding issue would not affect the royal family’s relationship with Scotland. The Queen will “continue to go to Balmoral, and to Holyrood, and she’ll continue to be Queen of Scotland”, said one source.

There appears to be no other mechanism in place for Scotland to contribute to the monarchy. Scottish ministers are thought to be considering transferring the management of the crown estate assets in Scotland on to the local authorities, with the intention of using the surplus for more social purposes.

A Buckingham Palace spokesman said it was wrong to infer that Scotland would no longer contribute to the monarchy based on the change to the operation of the crown estate and its impact on the grant received by the Queen.

The spokesman said it was an “entirely hypothetical” situation, and that though the sovereign grant was calculated on a percentage of the crown estate income, “there is a formulaic connection between the two, but there is no financial connection between the two”.

Scots would effectively still contribute to the costs of the monarchy because they pay taxes to the Treasury, which in turn supplies the money for the sovereign grant, he said.

A Scottish government spokeswoman added: “Scotland will continue to make the same financial contribution to the monarchy as at present – there will be no reduction in the sovereign grant as a result of devolution of the crown estate.”

The Scottish government said that the level of funding the Queen receives from the Treasury under the sovereign grant is set by reference to 15% of the crown estate’s profits and does not come directly from crown estate profits themselves. With most taxes paid in Scotland continuing to be controlled by the Treasury, Scotland will continue to make the same contribution to the monarchy through general taxation.

The sovereign grant – which apart from security costs represents the main public funding of the monarchy – was introduced in 2011 to replace the annual civil list and property and travel grants. It is based on 15% of crown estate profits from two years previously, but its amount cannot drop below the previous year and the exact percentage is renegotiated every five years. It is due for review from April 2016.

The crown estate income was surrendered to the Treasury in return for an annual civil list by George III.

The Queen’s accounts show a 6.7% increase in funding last year to £37.9m, of which she spent £35.7m, setting the rest aside in a reserve account.

Defending the increase, at a time of austerity, aides said money had to be found for major repairs on property, including at Buckingham Palace. As part of a 10-year plan, aides have looked at re-servicing Buckingham Palace, with an initial estimate of £150m to bring it up to date. One option would involve the Queen and royal household moving out for the duration of repairs.

The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall notched up the largest travel bill – a £446,159 tour of Mexico and Colombia, a £239,710 tour of the United States and Charles’s visit to the Middle East, which cost £262,212 – all of them using charter flights.

Royal travel costs rose to £5.1m, up 21% on 2013-4. The Duke of York spent £62,856 on a charter flight to Kuwait and £43,343 on a charter to Saudi Arabia. Prince Harry’s tour of Brazil and Chile cost £43,872 on scheduled flights and £41,754 on charter flights.

Prince Charles saw his income from the Duchy of Cornwall rise by 1.7% to £19.8m. His tax bill, after the deduction of business expenditure, was £4.5m.

Presenting the accounts, which will be laid before parliament, Reid said: “The Queen, the royal family and the household continue to provide excellent value for money: at 56p per person annually.”

He added: “Over the coming years, the maintenance of the estate and in particular Buckingham Palace will present a significant financial challenge. We will continue to work closely with the royal trustees to ensure that the funding for the royal household reflects that challenge.”

Scotland decides to stop funding Queen via Scottish crown estate | UK news | The Guardian

Greece is a sideshow. The Eurozone has failed, and Germans are its victims too

Aditya Chakrabortty Tuesday 23 June 2015

The single currency has driven down wages across the continent and hit workers in its leading economy the hardest

'This is what the noble European project is turning into: a grim march to the bottom. This isn’t about creating a deeper democracy, but deeper markets.' Photograph: Matt Kenyon

Nearly every discussion of the Greek fiasco is based on a morality play. Call it Naughty Greece versus Noble Europe. Those troublesome Greeks never belonged in the euro, runs this story. Once inside, they got themselves into a big fat mess – and now it’s up to Europe to sort it all out.

Eurozone creditors raise hopes of Greek bailout deal

Euro group agrees to develop first “detailed and credible” plan from Athens in five months of wrangling to help avert bankruptcy

Read more

Those are the basics all Wise Folk agree on. Then those on the right go on to say feckless Greece must either accept Europe’s deal or get out of the single currency. Or if more liberal, they hem and haw, cough and splutter, before calling for Europe to show a little more charity to its southern basket case. Whatever their solution, the Wise Folk agree on the problem: it’s not Brussels that’s at fault, it’s Athens. Oh, those turbulent Greeks! That’s the attitude you smell when the IMF’s Christine Lagarde decries the Syriza government for not being “adult” enough. That’s what licenses the German press to portray Greece’s finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, as needing “psychiatric help”.

There’s just one problem with this story: like most morality tales, it shatters upon contact with hard reality. Athens is merely the worst outbreak of a much bigger disease within the euro project. Because the single currency isn’t working for ordinary Europeans, from the Ruhr valley to Rome.

On saying this, I don’t close my eyes to the endemic corruption and tax-dodging in Greece (nor indeed, does the outsiders’ movement Syriza, which came to power campaigning against just these vices). Nor am I about to don Farage-ist chalk stripes. My charge is much simpler: the euro project is not only failing to deliver on the promises of its originators, it’s doing the exact opposite – by eroding the living standards of ordinary Europeans. And as we’ll see, that’s true even for those living in the continent’s number one economy, Germany.

First, let’s remind ourselves of the noble pledges made for the euro project. Let’s play the grainy footage of Germany’s Helmut Schmidt and France’s Giscard d’Estaing, as they lay the foundations for Europe’s grand unifier. Most of all, let’s remind ourselves of what the true believers felt. Take this from Oskar Lafontaine, Germany’s minister of finance, on the very eve of the launch of the euro. He talked of “the vision of a united Europe, to be reached through the gradual convergence of living standards, the deepening of democracy, and the flowering of a truly European culture”.

This isn’t about creating a deeper democracy, but deeper markets – and the two are increasingly incompatible

We could quote a thousand other such stanzas of euro-poetry, but that single line from Lafontaine shows how far the single-currency project has fallen. Instead of raising living standards across Europe, monetary union is pushing them downwards. Rather than deepening democracy, it is undermining it. As for “a truly European culture”, when German journalists accuse Greek ministers of “psychosis”, that mythic agora of nations is a long way off.

Of all these three charges, the first is most important – because it explains how the entire union is being undermined. To see what’s happened to the living standards of ordinary Europeans, turn to some extraordinary research published this year by Heiner Flassbeck, former chief economist at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, and Costas Lapavitsas, an economics professor at Soas University of London turned Syriza MP.

In Against the Troika, the German and the Greek publish one chart that explodes the idea that the euro has raised living standards. What they look at is unit labour costs – how much you need to pay staff to make one unit of output: a widget, say, or a bit of software. And they map labour costs across the Eurozone from 1999 to 2013. What they find is that German workers have barely seen wages rise for the 14-year stretch. In the short life of the euro, working Germans have fared worse than the French, Austrians, Italians and many across southern Europe.

Yes, we’re talking about the same Germany: the mightiest economy on the continent, the one even David Cameron regards with envy. Yet the people working there and making the country more prosperous have seen barely any reward for their efforts. And this is the model for a continent.

Analysis Tsipras of Athens – a gripping drama entering its final act

Larry Elliott

The scene was set for Greece to default on its debts and perhaps tumble out of the euro. But, like all the best plays, there is more than one possible ending

Read more

Perhaps you have an image of Deutschland as being a nation of highly skilled, highly rewarded workers in gleaming factories. That workforce and its unions still exist – but it’s shrinking fast. What’s replacing it, according to Germany’s leading expert on inequality, Gerhard Bosch, are crap jobs. The low-wage workforce has shot up and is now almost at US levels, he reckons.

Don’t blame this on the euro, but on the slow decline of German unions, and the trend of business towards outsourcing to cheaper eastern Europe. What the single currency has done is make Germany’s low-wage problems the ruin of an entire continent.

Workers in France, Italy, Spain and the rest of the Eurozone are now being undercut by the epic wage freeze going on in the giant country in the middle. Flassbeck and Lapavitsas describe this as Germany’s “beggar thy neighbour” policy – “but only after beggaring its own people”.

In the last century, the other countries in the Eurozone could have become more competitive by devaluing their national currencies – just as the UK has done since the banking meltdown. But now they’re all part of the same club, the only post-crash solution has been to pay workers less.

That is expressly what the European commission, the European Central Bank and the IMF are telling Greece: make workers redundant, pay those still in a job much less, and slash pensions for the elderly. But it’s not just in Greece. Nearly every meeting of the Wise Folk in Brussels and Strasbourg comes up with the same communiqué for “reform” of the labour market and social-security entitlements across the continent: a not-so-coded call for attacking ordinary people’s living standards.

This is what the noble European project is turning into: a grim march to the bottom. This isn’t about creating a deeper democracy, but deeper markets – and the two are increasingly incompatible. Germany’s Angela Merkel has shown no compunction about meddling in the democratic affairs of other European countries – tacitly warning Greeks against voting for Syriza for instance, or forcing the Spanish socialist prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, to rip up the spending commitments that had won him an election.

The diplomatic beatings administered to Syriza since it came to power this year can only be seen as Europe trying to set an example to any Spanish voters who might be tempted to support its sister movement Podemos. Go too far left, runs the message, and you’ll get the same treatment.

Whatever the founding ideals of the Eurozone, they don’t match up to the grim reality in 2015. This is Thatcher’s revolution, or Reagan’s – but now on a continental scale. And as then, it is accompanied by the idea that There Is No Alternative either to running an economy, or even to which kind of government voters get to choose.

The fact that this entire show is being brought in by agreeable-looking Wise Folk often claiming to be social democratic doesn’t render the project any nicer or gentler. It just lends the entire thing a nasty tang of hypocrisy.

Greece is a sideshow. The Eurozone has failed, and Germans are its victims too | Aditya Chakrabortty | Comment is free | The Guardian

Britain needs to get a better deal from Brussels or leave the European Union, major new study argues

By James Kirkup 21 June 2015

A group of business leaders and analysts have published a 1000-page assessment of Britain’s place in the EU and the changes needed

The UK should leave the EU if it cannot get the major changes and reforms it needs, business leaders and economists say Photo: Alamy

David Cameron should lead Britain out of the EU if he is unable to secure a veto for the UK over European laws, win back control over employment rules and permanently protect the City from Eurozone regulations, a group of business leaders and economists has said.

Unless the Prime Minister can achieve a fundamental change in Britain’s relationship with Brussels, the country’s households and businesses will be better off if the UK ops to leave the EU, the report concludes.

The study, entitled Change, or Go, is the most detailed, fact based report produced to date on the UK's membership of the EU, and the alternatives on offer. It sets out ten major reforms that it suggests Mr Cameron must seek from EU leaders before the in-out referendum he has pledged to hold by the end of 2017.

David Cameron is due to meet with European leaders at a summit in Brussels this week

• The true costs and benefits of staying in the EU - or leaving

• Eurozone doomed whether Greece leaves or stays, study shows

•'Eurozone must integrate or disintegrate'

Mr Cameron will this week attend a European summit in Brussels where he will set out his renegotiation strategy.

Many Conservative MPs worry that the changes Mr Cameron has so far suggested, which focus on new welfare rules preventing EU migrants accessing benefits for four years, do not go far enough.

The Telegraph is this week publishing extracts from the 1,000-page document. The editorial board that produced the report was chaired by Jon Moynihan, the former executive chairman at PA Consulting Group. Other members include Andrew Allum of LEK Consulting, Luke Johnson, a leading venture capitalist, and Helena Morrissey, one of the City’s most prominent fund managers.

The report will be seen as a key moment in the intensifying debate on the UK's future in the EU. It questions some of the central arguments made for EU membership, especially the claim that being inside is good for British businesses.

A look at how much Britain contributes to the EU

• The EU commandments: 10 things Cameron must change in Europe

• Boris Johnson: Greek catastrophe shows EU’s promised trade-offs are hot air

“Far from offering every consumer and business the benefits of a wider domestic market, after 40 years of membership, less than 5 per cent of UK companies directly export to the EU yet all are forced to bear the burden of its regulations,” the study says .

“The EU is not a free trade area but a customs union, and one which has spectacularly failed to deliver trade deals with rising economic giants like China.”

The report calls for the reintroduction of a national veto to be a priority in Mr Cameron’s renegotiation.

“Far more effective tools are needed to ensure that the UK could block measures that it fundamentally disagrees with, and these tools must be secured in any renegotiation,” the study concludes.

“Examples of possible changes could be the securing of a genuine ‘red card’ (which would give legal weight to the parliaments’ opposition and would force the European Commission to drop proposals) or an entitlement for national parliaments to revoke EU law in certain circumstances. These would, however, require Treaty change to have legal weight and to be permanent.”

Mr Cameron should also demand that the EU exempts Britain from its commitment to “ever closer union”, it states.

It also says that as part of the renegotiation, Mr Cameron must force Brussels to “introduce mechanisms to reduce the burden of regulation on businesses”.

Substantial safeguards are needed that would protect businesses that do not export to the EU, the study states.

The UK must also be given “control over social and employment laws”, a key demand being made by Eurosceptic MPs.

The report also warns that “EU laws have become extremely expensive and damaging for the UK’s financial sector”.

These “damaging” financial laws “must be reversed” and the UK should have a veto over any new EU legislation in order to protect the City of London and other British financial institutions, the report states.

• Simon Heffer: Britain staying in Europe looks more and more absurd

• Raoul Ruparel: Don’t believe the pessimists. David Cameron has a great chance at EU reform

FAQ

EU referendum

When will it be held?

David Cameron promised to hold it before the end of 2017 but it looks likely to be held sooner, perhaps in May 2016

What will the question be?

The question will ask: 'Should Britain remain a member of the European Union?'

What happens next?

David Cameron's Bill on the EU referendum has passed its second reading in Parliament. Meanwhile, he is trying to secure a better deal from the EU by negotiating with fellow European leaders on issues such as migrants' access to welfare

Elsewhere, the study calls for a “a permanent mechanism for protecting the non-Eurozone states” to ensure the UK government can never simply be out-voted by countries belonging to the single currency.

Crucially, it calls for a “permanent, lasting reduction in the EU Budget”. Between 2003 and 2013 the UK’s net contributions to the EU increased from £3billion to £11billion.

And it says that “control over migration policy must be restored to the member states”.

Finally, Britain should only stay in the EU if the bloc does more to strike trade deals with emerging economies like China and emulates Britain by making all of its spending more transparent.

Mr Cameron has already signalled he wants some of the changes on the list, such an end to the symbolic commitment to “ever closer union,” welfare changes for migrants, less regulation, and reform of the EU budget.

The authors say they are confident that other EU leaders would see the merits of those reforms. But if those changes are not made, Britain will be better off leaving.

“Were the EU to be intransigent then, given the fundamental problems that define our membership, we believe that Britain should vote to leave. As our study will show, the UK – as the world’s fifth largest economy – has nothing to fear from such a vote and, indeed, much to gain,” they say.

Mr Moynihan said: "Change, or go sums up the position that Britain takes into the forthcoming EU referendum. Business opinion has been long divided over our relationship with the EU, but as this research makes clear, our current relationship has become unsustainable and must change.

• When is the EU referendum?

• What is the EU and when was it formed?

"David Cameron has a mandate to seek wide ranging reforms of the EU to ensure Britain is part of the looser, economic based trading relationship it voted for forty years again. But if we can’t secure the changes we need, leaving an unreformed EU is the right course to plot for Britain’s prosperity.

Britain needs to get a better deal from Brussels or leave the European Union, major new study argues - Telegraph

#EndAusterityNow: Tens of thousands march against austerity measures in London

Sun 21 June 2015

Photo: The demonstration was billed by organisers as the biggest in years. (AFP: Justin Tallis)

Related Story: Scottish MPs celebrate with anti-austerity pledge

Related Story: Riot erupts in London against re-election of David Cameron

Map: United Kingdom

Tens of thousands of demonstrators have staged an anti-austerity march in London in the first major public protest since Conservative prime minister David Cameron was re-elected.

Opposition politicians, trade union bosses and celebrities, including singer Charlotte Church and comedian Russell Brand, were among the crowds marching through the capital's financial district.

The End Austerity Now demonstration — billed by organisers as the biggest in years — was to finish outside the Houses of Parliament, while a similar march took place in Glasgow.

Organisers claimed as many as 250,000 people had joined the march.

While police would not put a figure on attendance, they said there had been no arrests and no violence, although a series of flares were let off.

Protesters called for the halting and reversal of spending cuts imposed by the previous coalition government and further measures proposed by finance minister George Osborne.

"We have seen a huge impact on our work at primary school," said Sian Bloor, 45, a teacher from Trafford near Manchester.

"I regularly bring clothes and shoes for children and biscuits for their breakfast just so they get something to eat.

"You can see how children are being affected by the cuts."

Green Party leader Sharar Ali said the turnout was "fantastic".

"We're showing solidarity with all the groups, political organisations or those with no political affiliation to say loud and clear, enough is enough," Mr Ali said.

"This government has been implementing programs and policies which have made the poor poorest whilst making the rich richest."

Placard-waving protesters marched from the Bank of England and filed past the nearby Royal Exchange, as the sound of drummers filled the air, creating a festival atmosphere.

A wide variety of campaigners were at the rally, including those opposed to the Trident nuclear program, hunting, tuition fees, fracking, along with various trade unions.

"It will be the start of a campaign of protest, strikes, direct action and civil disobedience up and down the country," said Sam Fairbairn of organisers the People's Assembly.

"We will not rest until austerity is history, our services are back in public hands and the needs of the majority are put first."

Cameron to push ahead for plans of 'brighter future'

Mr Cameron clinched an unexpected election victory on May 7 that gave his centre-right Conservative Party an outright majority in parliament for the first time in nearly 20 years.

The victory was widely seen as an endorsement of the Conservatives' austerity program and was likely to see a continuation of cuts to public spending as they seek to curb a budget deficit of nearly £90 billion ($184 billion).

The Conservatives had already implemented cutbacks in public services and welfare spending during the previous coalition administration with the centrist Liberal Democrats.

Organisers of the protests were seeking to highlight the impact of previous cutbacks on public services, the state-run National Health Service (NHS), welfare and education.

They also warned over the effects of new austerity measures that Mr Osborne was expected to unveil in a new budget on July 8.

The coalition's austerity policies included around £20 billion of cuts to welfare, which would be reduced by another £12 billion over the next five years.

As the march took place, Mr Cameron vowed "not to waste a second in delivering our manifesto commitments" on his Facebook page.

"We will keep working through our plan to create more security and opportunity in our country - and, with your help, we can secure a brighter future for everyone in Britain," he wrote.

Photo: Thousands gathered to protest against UK PM David Cameron's proposed austerity measures. (Reuters: Peter Nicholls)

ABC/AFP

From other news sites:

• The Sydney Morning Herald: Protesters rally against austerity in London, Glasgow
• The Independent (UK): Anti-austerity protest: 'David Cameron is a robot made of ham' and other brilliant banners from the march
• Yahoo!7 News: Thousands join London anti-austerity march
• Al Jazeera: Thousands join anti-austerity march in London
• Sky News (UK): Thousands March In Anti-Austerity Protests

#EndAusterityNow: Tens of thousands march against austerity measures in London - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Want to understand the appeal of Isis? Think like a young Muslim outsider

Sadakat Kadri Friday 19 June 2015

Whether escaping stifling familial expectations or yearning for a macho hierarchy, there are reasoned – if unsettling – reasons for Isis recruits’ haste to join

A recruitment video showing Isis fighters, who claim to be British. Photograph: YouTube/PA

Defections by British citizens to Islamic State typically inspire an entire cycle of reactions. Security-minded commentators demand tougher measures to restrict travel and suppress online propaganda. Others argue that clampdowns are counterproductive, and urge mosques and families to take the lead. The families themselves, while expressing bafflement and grief, turn the spotlight back on to the authorities, attributing their loved ones’ estrangement to either state surveillance or (confusingly) to inadequate attention by the state.

 

Fears grow for friend of Dewsbury boy believed to be latest Isis suicide bomber Concerns raised about fate of Hassan Munshi, who is thought to have joined Islamic State in Syria after leaving Yorkshire town with Talha Asmal Read more

The arguments are divisive but important in view of the lives blighted and threatened. Attempts to fix blame risk blurring a fundamental issue, however: why individuals up sticks and go to a war zone in the first place. The three sisters missing with their children from their Bradford homes, like the 17-year-old Dewsbury boy who reportedly detonated a suicide bomb in Iraq last week, doubtless thought they were fulfilling an Islamic duty, but devoutness alone explains little.

All lived in deeply traditional Muslim communities, and though such places nurture some insular forms of behaviour, the abandonment of husbands and suicidal murder aren’t among them. As with many previous extremists, Isis’s latest British recruits seem to have been maladjusted misfits: estranged from co-religionists rather than bound to them.

That points to a more general observation. Although the number of British Muslims who have travelled to northern Syria and Iraq is substantial (700, according to the most recent official estimate), it isn’t disproportionate. They get noticed because their facility with English makes them effective propagandists – terrifyingly so, in the case of the murderous “Jihadi John” – but Muslims from several other countries have actually been more likely to go there. Norwegians have been twice as enthusiastic, and rates are even higher in Belgium, Ireland, Denmark and (at the top) Finland.

As that unlikely list implies, forces other than faith are at play. One of them is the dynamic that draws young men elsewhere towards gangs: some reports indicate that foreigners fighting with Isis often come from families where fathers were abusive or absent. Growing up in isolated immigrant communities, they might be more likely to view the group’s macho hierarchy as a force for stability.

The group’s appeal to women – thought to comprise more than one in six of all foreign recruits – reflects similarly contingent factors. Finland hasn’t earned its place in the vanguard because its small Muslim population consists of psychopaths, but because an unusually high number of female Finnish converts have pledged allegiance to Isis – and though their motives can’t be known, they’re probably not entirely pious. Isis blogs and Twitter accounts (which are numerous) are filled with questions from women curious to meet and marry fighters – because an eagerness among good Muslim girls to hook up with bad jihadi boys is a strong part of the group’s appeal.

Although bloggers forewarn potential arrivals of hardships, the promise of personal liberation is ubiquitous

For all Isis’s talk of submission to God, its attractiveness, therefore, owes little to humility or self-denial. Although bloggers forewarn potential arrivals of hardships – squat toilets and a lack of contact-lens solution are two they have flagged up – the promise of personal liberation is ubiquitous. A 26-year-old Malaysian doctor who posts under the name Bird of Paradise happily tells female readers that they’ll live rent-free in a room of their own, pay no bills or taxes, and receive a monthly stipend.

A Londoner calling himself Paladin of Jihad is even more effusive. Ordinarily inclined to post doggerel, slangy hash tags or jokes about rape, his descriptions of Isis-land are lyrical. On arriving, he recalls, a stranger with a smile in his eyes hugged him in the light of a full moon, making him feel that “at long last, I ‘belonged’ to something, to a project, to a cause”. Reflecting on that cause makes Paladin feel even better. “You don’t have to fear the [non-believers], you don’t have to hide yourself nor your beliefs … [instead, you have] the freedom to finally be yourself and be who you’re supposed to be.”

None of that is exactly convincing. Isis punishes a lot more behaviour than it permits, and the happiness it apparently brings some people has been paid for by thousands of refugees, rape victims and corpses. Narcissism can obscure such things, however, and that also helps explain the group’s persistent appeal to outsiders. Whatever precisely turns out to have spurred the most recent departures from Dewsbury and Bradford, the organisation offers a way of escaping stifling familial expectations, the low-level racism of wider society, and communal customs that many British Muslims themselves don’t value.

In exchange, it promises a godly cause – the defence of victimised co-religionists – that draws similarly passionate people from all over the world. Troubled young men thereby imagine a land where they can start anew, commanding respect as upholders of God’s law. Unhappy women dream of attaining happiness for the first time – or the second or third, if husbands they take are lucky enough to achieve martyrdom. The fantasies ignore a very vicious reality, of course – but as long as thwarted personalities imagine that Isis can make them true, people will kill and die in their pursuit.

Want to understand the appeal of Isis? Think like a young Muslim outsider | Sadakat Kadri | Comment is free | The Guardian

If Greece and Russia feel humiliated, that’s something Europe cannot ignore

Natalie Nougayrède Friday 19 June 2015

As Tsipras and Putin ratchet up the rhetoric, Europe should try to offer answers, but not full mea culpas

Alexis Tsipras with Vladimir Putin in Moscow. Photograph: Zuma/Rex Features

Listening to the news these days, you’d assume that the politics of humiliation has taken over in Europe. Coming out of Greece and Russia, there is fiery rhetoric about nations being downtrodden, their pride trampled, their wellbeing attacked by hostile external forces.

Greek prime minister Alexis Tsipras has accused his country’s creditors of attempting to “humiliate our people”, while Vladimir Putin has announced that 40 intercontinental missiles would be added to his country’s arsenal, as a retaliatory measure against what he claims are western attempts to humiliate and intimidate Russia.

The grievances that Putin and Tsipras harbour against Europe are different, and translate into acts of varying degrees of gravity: military aggression on one hand, and the threat to the Eurozone on the other. But they share a notion that national feelings have been severely damaged, and that amends need to be made. That Tsipras felt the need to travel to St Petersburg and seek solace in a meeting with Putin says a lot about this alliance of the aggrieved.

There has never been a deliberate intention to crush national pride in these countries

Of course, their comments need to be seen in a context of heightened diplomatic posturing. Greece’s negotiations with creditors have reached crunch time. Russia’s regime pursues a strategy aimed at rewriting post-cold war rules to its advantage, after having launched a war in Ukraine last year.

But the perception of humiliation is real nonetheless, not least because the Greek and the Russian people seem to share it with their leaders. And in international relations, careless rhetorical flourishes can leave lasting damage. As the language of humiliation is being ratcheted up to hysterical heights, it’s increasingly hard to see how the involved parties can climb down to a more diplomatic level. After so much energy has been spent on claiming victimhood and nursing grievances, talk of a compromise would suddenly sound too much like a retreat.

To deflate the situation, it would be helpful to ask two questions. First: was there ever an intention to actually humiliate? Second, if a conciliatory gesture is really required, should it entail a full-blown mea culpa from the supposed humiliators? My answer to both of these questions would be no.

Saying you are being humiliated supposes that someone is out to humiliate you deliberately. In both cases, that is far from the mark. The economic difficulties that people in Greece and Russia are experiencing are obvious, coming from austerity, falling revenues or the impact of sanctions. But I would argue there has never been a western or European intention to crush national pride in these countries.

If there had really been a long-lasting campaign against Russia, for example, former US president George Bush Snr would have welcomed Ukraine’s drive to independence back in 1991. Instead, he opposed it very publicly, warning the burgeoning Ukrainian independence movement of succumbing to “suicidal nationalism” in his famous “Chicken Kiev” speech that summer.

In fact, in the 1990s just about everything was done not to humiliate Russia. Tens of billions of dollars of aid were poured into the country by the west to prevent a complete breakdown of the state (and to help safeguard Russia’s nuclear stockpile). Russia was invited into many clubs, such as the Council of Europe, the World Trade Organisation and the G7 (from which it was expelled again last year).

A cautious NATO-Russia relationship was established: NATO refrained from conducting military exercises in its new member states, and even from setting up defence plans for Poland and the Baltic states, something that only changed after the war in Georgia and after Russia moved into Ukraine. NATO in 1997 said it wouldn’t deploy military bases or equipment to eastern Europe, under the condition that strategic circumstances would remain unchanged – which is no longer the case. Europe turned a blind eye on wars in Chechnya. The EU launched a “strategic partnership” with Russia.

Yet in the end, humiliation set in nonetheless. It is true that there has been some tactless western patronising along the way. But the main reason misunderstandings started piling up is that the west misread Russia. It believed Russia had been harnessed, more or less, to democratic transition – or at least, that it was ready to abide by a set of agreed post-cold war rules. Because the west became too confident about this, it failed to assess the mindset of Russia’s ruling caste. In the first decade of the 21st century, western policy towards Russia became one of benign neglect. What was desired was taken for reality. But as years passed, and as Russia failed to modernise, the Putin regime resorted to heaping blame on the west as a way of deflecting responsibility for its own inabilities.

Greece was brought into the Eurozone as a logical extension of its joining the European project in 1981 (French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing argued that “one can’t leave Plato at the door”). But this came with serious misjudgement on behalf of Europe’s leaders: the consequences of Greece having fudged its economic statistics to join the single currency are felt to this day.

Greece blames everybody but itself for its economic woes

Harry Theoharis

Austerity has provided a useful scapegoat for the many populists and nationalists who can’t admit that Greece’s problems were largely home-grown

Read more

Almost everyone agrees that the Eurozone crisis has been badly mismanaged by the EU, and there is no denying austerity has taken a huge toll on Greece. But that doesn’t cancel out the fact that the current situation in Greece is also the result of sovereign decisions taken by successive elected governments over the years. As in Russia’s case, the talk of external “diktats” only goes so far. Tsipras regularly omits to mention the tax evasion of large oligarchic structures and the Orthodox church. It’s convenient, politically, to lay all the blame on outside forces.

It’s possible a lot of the humiliation comes mostly from the disconnect between how nations like to perceive themselves and the situation they find themselves in. Russia’s loss of empire is an endless sore. Greece has a tortured, courageous history of which many of its citizens are rightly proud. So beyond the technicalities of ceasefires or of primary surpluses and debt relief, some signal has to be sent out by those who negotiate with the “humiliated”. It could come with the admission that mistakes have been made by the west or by the EU: benign neglect for Russia, and excessive austerity for Greece.

But my guess is that this will only be possible if Russians and Greeks find a way of addressing their own domestic faults. Humiliation is something you can only come out of by reckoning with your own full past, not just a pruned, self-censored version of it.

If Greece and Russia feel humiliated, that’s something Europe cannot ignore | Natalie Nougayrède | Comment is free | The Guardian

Ramadan: a guide to the Islamic holy month

Aisha Gani Wednesday 17 June 2015

The ninth month of the Islamic calendar is when Muslims fast during daylight and when the Qur’an is said to have been revealed to the prophet Muhammad

A girl arranges plates before iftar – the breaking-fast meal– during Ramadan at the Grand Mosque in Delhi, India. Photograph: Ahmad Masood/Reuters

Muslims around the world are preparing for the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. From waking up in the early hours for a quick bite and sip of water, to the waiting – date in hand – for the seconds to tick by until the call to prayer at sunset, why do Muslims fast and what is Ramadan?

What is Ramadan?

Muslims – there are 1.6 billion in the world – believe Ramadan is the holiest month in the year , when the Qur’an, the holy book of Islam, was revealed to the prophet Muhammad.

Ramadan is the ninth month in the Islamic calendar, or the Hijri calendar based on the lunar cycle, which began in AD622 when Muhammad migrated from Mecca to Medina.

When is Ramadan?

Depending on the sighting of the crescent moon, or hilal, the month begins this year on the evening of the Wednesday 17 June, which means Muslims will begin their first day of fasting at sunrise on Thursday 18 June.

The month of fasting will end on either Friday 17 July or Saturday 18 July, as there are either 29 or 30 days in a lunar month.

As Ramadan begins about 11 days earlier each year, it sometimes falls in winter months when the fasts are short, and in summer months when the fasts are long.

Start of Ramadan in Pakistan declared by moon-sighting committee. (Video)

Why do Muslims fast?

During this month, observant Muslims do not eat or drink during daylight hours. This is because fasting is one of the five pillars of Islam. The other acts of worship are the shahadah, which is the declaration of faith; salat, the five daily prayers; zakat, or almsgiving; and the hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca.

Fasting in Ramadan is obligatory for Muslims, and in the Qur’an it states:

O you who believe! Fasting is prescribed for you as it was prescribed for those before you, that you may attain Taqwa [God-consciousness]. – The Qur’an, Al-Baqarah:183

You can hear the recitation of this verse in Arabic (Audio)

Fasting, or sawm in Arabic, literally means “to refrain” – and not only is it abstaining from food, drink and sex, but also actions such as smoking cigarettes, talking about others behind their backs, or using foul language.

Fasting does not mean Muslims retreat from their daily routine, rather they are encouraged to continue as normal in their work and usual activities. In fact, this is where the challenge of patience and endurance comes in. Muslims believe fasting is not merely a physical ritual, but is primarily a time for reflection and spiritual recharging.

During the fast, Muslims believe that their desires are curbed and that they can gain understanding of how those who are less privileged than them feel. It is considered to increase one’s patience, closeness to God and generosity towards others.

The month is also a time of community; it is the custom for Muslims to invite their neighbours and friends to share their evening meal – iftar – and recite special Tarawih prayers in congregation. It is also a time when Muslims try to reconnect with the Qur’an, which they believe is the word of God.

Workers break their fast outside the Imam Turki bin Abdullah mosque in the Saudi capital, Riyadh. Photograph: Fayez Nureldine/AFP/Getty Images

Who fasts?

Healthy Muslim men and women are required to fast during the month according to Islamic teachings.

Who is exempt from fasting?

Children, people who are sick or who have mental illness, elderly people, travellers and women who are menstruating , postnatal , pregnant or breast-feeding do not have to fast.

People exempt from fasting during Ramadan can make up the missed fasts later. But if a person is not able to fast at all – particularly if that is for health reasons – can compensate by feeding a needy person for each day they do not fast.

Is it healthy?

Muslims do not fast continuously throughout the month: they eat before sunrise and break their fast at sunset each day.

Scientists have found that short periods of fasting – if properly controlled – can have a number of health benefits, as well as potentially helping overweight people.

Health advice from the NHS includes keeping hydrated and having the right proportion of carbohydrates, fat and protein in between fasts, and not bingeing on oily feasts – however tempting. This may, in fact, lead to gaining weight.

During fasting, the body uses up glucose and then starts to burn fat, which can lead to weight loss. So with prolonged fasting of many days or weeks, the body starts using protein for energy.

After a few days of the fast, higher levels of endorphins – hormones related to mood – appear in the blood and can make a person more alert and give an overall feeling of general mental wellbeing, according to the NHS website.

Dr Razeen Mahroof, an anaesthetist from Oxford, said in a statement about fasting to the NHS: “A detoxification process also occurs, because any toxins stored in the body’s fat are dissolved and removed from the body.”

The Muslim call to prayer. (Video)

Some traditions

Muslims have varying Ramadan customs across the world, depending on their culture. Islamic traditions include:

• Eating and drinking at sahoor, the pre-fast meal, just before sunrise
• Not delaying breaking the fast at sunset, which is iftar time
• Breaking the fast with an odd number of fresh dates, or dried dates if none are available, or a few sips of water
• Searching for the “Night of Power” or Laylat al-Qadr. According to Islamic tradition, this is when the first verses of the Qur’an were revealed to the prophet Muhammad by God. This falls within the last 10 nights of Ramadan.

Why do Muslims start Ramadan on different days?

Muslims often joke that they start fasting on different days. The most likely reason for differences over the start and end dates of Ramadan, from one country to another, is variations in the sighting of the moon.

In places where it is not possible to see the crescent moon, Muslims may begin fasting according to the closest place where the moon has been sighted, while other scholars rely on the calculations of astronomers.

However, some Islamic scholars have called for Muslims to be united in fasting, and to start the month of fasting based on the sighting of the moon in the holy city of Mecca.

As Muslims across the globe have no institutionalised leadership, there is no single edict on which approach should be followed.

A street vendor plugs in decorations for Ramadan in Amman, Jordan. Photograph: Mohammad Hannon/AP

How do Muslims fast in places with no sunset?

It’s a good question. How does a Muslim in Juneau, Alaska, fast? The sun remains visible at midnight in the Arctic Circle, and in northernmost Finland, it does not set at all for 60 days during summer.

As a result, local scholars have said it is permissible to follow more reasonable sunrise and sunset times of another country. The Islamic Centre of Northern Norway, issued a fatwa – a ruling by a scholar of Islamic law or Muslim judicial authority – that gives local Muslims the option of following the fasting hours of Mecca, when the fasting day in Norway exceeds 20 hours.

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America made a similar ruling that Muslims living in the most northerly regions of Alaska can use the sunrise and sunset times of another part of the country where “day is distinguishable from night”.

Where is the longest fast in the world?

In Reykjavik, Iceland, the fast will be about 21 hours 57 minutes long in the beginning of the month, with a fast starting at 2:03am and finishing at midnight.

Where is the shortest fast in the world?

In Sydney, Australia, a fasting day will be about 11 hours 24 minutes long at the start of Ramadan, when a fast starts at 5.29am and finishes at 16:53pm.

What happens at the end?

A family after morning prayers during an Eid celebration in Burgess Park, south London. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

Muslims worldwide celebrate Eid al-Fitr, the festival of breaking of the fast, which marks the end of Ramadan. According to tradition the angels call it the day of prize giving because all those who fasted are rewarded by God on this day, and so it is common to hear Muslims greet each other with Eid Mubārak (Happy Eid). It falls on the first day of the new Islamic month of Shawwal and it is forbidden to fast on this day.

It is Islamic custom to celebrate Eid with a small sweet breakfast, and to give charity before Eid prayers in congregation. Many Muslims celebrate by giving gifts, wearing new or clean clothes, and visiting friends and family.

In Malaysia it is called Hari Raya Aidilfitri, in Urdu it is Choṭī ʿĪd meaning smaller Eid, while in Turkey it is Şeker Bayramı or sugar feast.

Do people of other faiths fast?

Jews fast for about 25 hours on Yom Kippur, or the Day of Atonement, to ask for God’s forgiveness. Orthodox Christians can spend up to half a year in various forms of fasting, which they believe brings them closer to God.

Ramadan: a guide to the Islamic holy month | World news | The Guardian

Egypt court hands Mursi death sentence in blow to Muslim Brotherhood

By Mahmoud Mourad and Omar Fahmy

CAIRO An Egyptian court sentenced deposed President Mohamed Mursi to death on Tuesday over a mass jail break during the country's 2011 uprising and issued sweeping punishments against the leadership of Egypt's oldest Islamic group.

The general guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mohamed Badie, and four other Brotherhood leaders were also handed the death penalty. More than 90 others, including influential cleric Youssef al-Qaradawi, were sentenced to death in absentia.

The Brotherhood described the rulings as "null and void" and called for a popular uprising on Friday.

The sentences were part of a crackdown launched after an army takeover stripped Mursi of power in 2013 following mass protests against his rule. Hundreds of Islamist have been killed and thousands arrested.

The Islamist Mursi became Egypt's first freely elected president after the downfall of long time leader Hosni Mubarak in 2011.

Judge Shaaban el-Shami, said the Grand Mufti, Egypt's top religious authority, had said in his opinion that the death sentence was permissible for the defendants who had been referred to him.

Wearing his blue prison suit, the bespectacled and bearded Mursi listened calmly as Shami read out the verdict in the case relating to the 2011 mass jail break, in which Mursi faced charges of killing, kidnapping and other offences.

Shami had earlier given Mursi a 25-year sentence in a case relating to conspiring with foreign groups.

Mursi appeared unfazed, smiling, and waving to lawyers as other defendants chanted: "Down, down with military rule," after the verdicts, which can be appealed, were read out at the court session in the Police Academy.

The rulings mark yet another setback for leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, and increase the chances of its youth taking up arms against the authorities, breaking what the group says is a long tradition of non-violence.

By contrast, Mubarak is slowly being cleared of charges in cases against him. He will face a second retrial over the killing of protesters in 2011 and has been sentenced to three years in jail over a corruption case.

"NAIL IN THE COFFIN OF DEMOCRACY"

The court last month convicted Mursi and his fellow defendants of killing and kidnapping policemen, attacking police facilities and breaking out of jail during the 2011 uprising.

Shami said elements of Hamas, Lebanon's Hezbollah, Sinai-based militants and Brotherhood leaders had all participated in storming the jails. He said they had committed "acts that lead to infringing on the country's independence and the safety of its lands".

The White House said it was deeply troubled by what it called a politically motivated sentence, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said he was deeply concerned and the EU called it a worrying development.

Cairo, however, remains one of Washington's closest allies in a region beset by turmoil in Libya, Syria and Yemen.

Sisi says the judiciary is independent and has made clear that the death sentences are all preliminary.

A senior Muslim Brotherhood member condemned the trial.

"This verdict is a nail in the coffin of democracy in Egypt," Yahya Hamid, a former minister in Mursi's cabinet and head of international relations for the Brotherhood, told a news conference in Istanbul.

Western diplomats say Egyptian officials have acknowledged that executing Mursi would risk turning him into a martyr. The Brotherhood has survived decades of repression, maintaining popular support through its charities.

Mursi, Badie and 15 others were given 25 year jail sentences for conspiring with Palestinian group Hamas, which rules Gaza. They included senior Brotherhood figures Essam el-Erian and Saad el-Katatni.

"DIABOLICAL AIMS"

The court sentenced Muslim Brotherhood leaders Khairat el-Shater, Mohamed el-Beltagy and Ahmed Abdelaty to death in the same case. A further 13 were sentenced to death in absentia.

In reading his verdict, Shami said that the Brotherhood had a history of "grabbing power with any price" and had "legalised the bloodletting of the sons of this country and conspired and collaborated with foreign entities...to achieve their diabolical aims".

Badie already has a death sentence against him and Mursi has a 20-year sentence in yet another case.

Mursi has said the court is not legitimate, describing legal proceedings against him as part of a coup led by former army chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi in 2013. Mursi's court-appointed defence lawyer said he would appeal the verdict.

Sisi, now president, says the Brotherhood poses a grave threat to national security. The group maintains it is committed to peaceful activism.

Some Egyptians have overlooked the crackdown, which has targeted liberal and secular activists, thankful that Sisi, in toppling Mursi, has delivered a measure of stability after years of turmoil.

"I don't care whether the verdict was fair or not. Mursi deserved it," said a young man at a cafe in Cairo's Abbasiya district.

Islamist militant groups have stepped up attacks against soldiers and police since Mursi's fall, killing hundreds.

(Additional reporting by Ahmed Aboulenein and Mohamed Abdellah, Writing by Yara Bayoumy, Editing by Angus MacSwan)

Former Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi looks on during his appearance in court on the outskirts of Cairo, Egypt, June 2, 2015. Reuters/Amr Abdallah Dalsh

Egypt court hands Mursi death sentence in blow to Muslim Brotherhood | Reuters