2 ms·

The difference is that Morocco has a lot to win by joining europe, whereas Canada doesn't.

skissane 2y ago
Canadian GDP per capita is 15 times that of Morocco. The EU would much rather admit a wealthy country than a relatively poor one. So there are clear economic reasons to treat the two differently. Canada is a longstanding liberal democracy with a distant and purely symbolic constitutional monarchy. Morocco is a constitutional monarchy in which (until recently at least) the monarch played an active political role, there is still a widespread expectation among the population that he ought to do so, multiparty democracy is young and weak, and security agencies engage in repressive behaviour. [0] So there's political reasons too. If Canada really wanted the EU and the EU really wanted Canada, they'd fudge the whole geography issue–probably won't happen but not completely impossible. But no way the EU is going to want Morocco any time this century, so they won't do it for them. [0] https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/2023/07/morocco-a-brewing-crisis-of-governance?lang=en https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/2023/07/morocco-a-brewing...
- mardifoufs 2y ago
  Yes, but why would Canada want the EU? it's just a complete fantasy from the economist, I don't see why a country that's already wealthy would want to join the EU, especially when it's a country that basically is completely dependent to the US. It makes as much sense as Norway wanting to join NAFTA when most of its trade is in Europe.
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    > I don't see why a country that's already wealthy would want to join the EU, especially when it's a country that basically is completely dependent to the US. Reducing the degree of dependency on the US would be one obvious reason.
  - senko 2y ago
    > it's just a complete fantasy from the economist It's par for the course for Charlemagne (the column in The Economist). It's not meant to be an actual realistic analysis and reporting (the way their non-columnist articles are, even if they all have an editorial streak). Mostly it comments on the topic of the week/month in some irreverent way[0], or entertains a modest proposal[1] like this one, in a "ha ha wait a minute" sort of way. [0] https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/12/19/we-need-to-talk-about-europes-kevins https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/12/19/we-need-to-talk-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

Canadian GDP per capita is 15 times that of Morocco. The EU would much rather admit a wealthy country than a relatively poor one. So there are clear economic reasons to treat the two differently. Canada is a longstanding liberal democracy with a distant and purely symbolic constitutional monarchy. Morocco is a constitutional monarchy in which (until recently at least) the monarch played an active political role, there is still a widespread expectation among the population that he ought to do so, multiparty democracy is young and weak, and security agencies engage in repressive behaviour. [0] So there's political reasons too. If Canada really wanted the EU and the EU really wanted Canada, they'd fudge the whole geography issue–probably won't happen but not completely impossible. But no way the EU is going to want Morocco any time this century, so they won't do it for them. [0] https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/2023/07/morocco-a-brewing-crisis-of-governance?lang=en https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/2023/07/morocco-a-brewing...

mardifoufs 2y ago
Yes, but why would Canada want the EU? it's just a complete fantasy from the economist, I don't see why a country that's already wealthy would want to join the EU, especially when it's a country that basically is completely dependent to the US. It makes as much sense as Norway wanting to join NAFTA when most of its trade is in Europe.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  > I don't see why a country that's already wealthy would want to join the EU, especially when it's a country that basically is completely dependent to the US. Reducing the degree of dependency on the US would be one obvious reason.
- senko 2y ago
  > it's just a complete fantasy from the economist It's par for the course for Charlemagne (the column in The Economist). It's not meant to be an actual realistic analysis and reporting (the way their non-columnist articles are, even if they all have an editorial streak). Mostly it comments on the topic of the week/month in some irreverent way[0], or entertains a modest proposal[1] like this one, in a "ha ha wait a minute" sort of way. [0] https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/12/19/we-need-to-talk-about-europes-kevins https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/12/19/we-need-to-talk-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal