Academic Issue I COMMITTEE TOPIC ARTICLES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4
AFCO I
7
AFCO II
11
EMPL
AFET I
13
AFET II
15
9
CLIM
17
ENVI I
19
ENVI II
AFCO I
4
The economics of populism: zooming into the financial roots of ultra-nationalism
Marilena Zzigka
In the past decade, Europe has been experienc-
ing a rapid increase in Eurosceptic movements. From Brexit to the Greek Referendum, this trend transgresses individual Member States’ borders, constituting the issue a “universal” European conundrum. Andrzej Duda in Poland, Janos Ader in Hungary and Sebastian Kurz in Austria pose as archetypal ultra nationalist politicians in the EU, who bolster country models funded upon scapegoating of minorities and contempt towards liberal approaches. The common denominator of these governments is traced into them developing xenophobic, racist and even homophobic legislation. Essentially, populism’s escalation threatens human rights of religious or ethnic minorities, as well as groups of distinct sexual orientations. Of course, this absurd hatred would not be achieved if it was not also conveyed to a greater support base. Thus, populism largely depends upon the generation of a dichotomy between the elite and the common masses; this division of society into to antipodal factions enables such parties to claim that they’re solely championing the prosperity and best interest of the people. This myth of projecting themselves as saviours of pedestrian individuals, urge their followers to mould a new version of the world in which all institutions, other than the populist party, are functioning against them. This is why the European Union, along with its values of endorsing multiculturalism, tolerance and respect for
a plethora of religions and ethnicities is despised by ultra- nationalists. Jeopardising Europe’s pronounced appreciation towards diversity is certainly a problem of paramount importance. Nevertheless, in a world dictated by financial institutions, ultra nationalism hinders economic growth. Despite party claims, their measures and attitudes largely diverge from the path that would lead to national prosperity. Imposing severely strict immigration policies fearing that domestic workers are undermined from refugee labour, and skyrocketing expenditure on military purposes, are the chief parameters contributing to this financial decline. This report will analyse how their rhetoric around these is developed, what problems it ignites and potential solutions will ultimately be suggested. Significantly restricting or even banning the entrance of migrants in a country is harmful towards the economy. Many EU countries are categorised as developed countries with aging populations and so the influx of immigrants would allow potential labour to usher national resources, offering benefits to the entirety of the society. In financial terms, more refugees into the such an economy results in placing less strain into a debilitated system, which otherwise would be struggling to financially provide for all its citizens, due to the shrinking number of employable individuals who would be
fighting to sustain an ever-increasing number of pensioners. Ultra-nationalist rhetoric however overlooks this immense prospective gain. On the contrary, they construct their case around the fact that a portion of incoming refugees are not holders of higher education degrees, either due to war or economic hardship, but rather they are capable of engaging in physical unskilled labour; this means that they are essentially competing with the domestic lower classes for employment opportunities. The fear of financial instability and adversity is thus imprinted in people’s minds, who then proceed to develop irrational hatred towards refugees. The complete neglecting of the aforementioned financial benefits of immigration is reinforced due to the advancement of nationalist slogans such as “immigrants are stealing our jobs”. On the other hand, since these governments are also based upon coercion and pride, as well as promoting the public sector over private enterprises, they often unsustainably spend on sectors which will not facilitate into the advancement of the economy, but would rather result into the country plunging into debt. Excessive loans are taken to accommodate each government’s respective needs on the public sector. One oughts to draw the line at this point between where this money is directed towards. Populists usually tend to spend more on social welfare for the poor, while ultranationalist governments tend to spend more on the military. In either case, merely pouring money to the lower classes, without ensuring their long-term prosperity, or showcasing national strength through army schemes, does not render an economy potent in the long run. The need for a solution is eminent, as the EU desires to maintain unity among Member States, and since this solidarity is impinged upon by euroscepticism measures ought to be adopted against the root of this phenomenon:
ultra-nationalism and populism. When it comes to countering draconian immigration policies and their negative economic impact, a potential answer the EU could look into, is to impose refugee quotas. More specifically, in order to both sustain diversity in spite of nationalism, while reaping financial benefits multiple variables, from each state’s economic capability to cater for refugees, to their infrastructure and population size should be taken into consideration. In other words, it shouldn’t be a uniform number of people in all countries; individualised schemes considering each countries needs and abilities should be created. Ultimately, through such a mechanism, the advantages of accepting refugees, range from a decrease in the aging of the population to a reduction of deficit in low skilled, low paid jobs. The second financial complication of populism and nationalism, namely the arbitrary and superfluous squandering of tax money, is also important as it influences the country collectively. Since the issue emanates from the national government itself, then European agencies are crucial into mitigating the problem. For instance, in tackling the over-spending on welfare directed towards the lower social castes, in an attempt to gain popularity, local branches of specialised European agencies can be established, so that welfare money is redistributed. Securing the existence of a civil society which provides for all citizens will not be tied to government affiliated organisations, but rather to EU bodies. An apt example would be for single mothers to collect their subsidies through a the local EU office and not through governmental mechanisms. What this scheme could potentially grant is for populist governments to lose their leverage over people, since they will be deprived of the capability of being the sole providers of citizens’ pensions and benefits. Simultaneously, a second impact is generated. Exactly because now, the economic domination over the masses
5
6
as well as the subsequent influence are diminished, populist parties do not possess a tangible incentive to recklessly spend on the army. In this way, through financial legislation alterations populist and nationalist movements through which euroscepticism stems are attenuated if not eliminated.
termine our domestic affairs. This is why I think that we can’t talk about a Union when some members are not allowed to freely navigate their options, but are dictated by measures.
In retrospect, the main causes of Euroscepticism can be tackled through economics. It goes without saying however that merely the implementation of such measures will not suffice to combat ultra-nationalism and populism, and so this legislation should be complemented with measures on promoting diversity and tolerance within the union. To conclude this article, two individuals, of disparate ages were interviewed with regards to their stance on the EU, and whether or not they would be voting in the May 2019 EU General Elections. Both come from Greece, a country with a growing Eurosceptic movement, which however is not ruled by a populist or ultra nationalist party. The questions and answers are as follows:
17 year-old high school student: Yes, because I think that if I don’t vote, someone else will be taking decisions for me, and perhaps this was less significant when I was younger and didn’t have the right to vote, but currently I think that not voting is criminal, especially when the young people say that they want to change the world. 56 year-old carpenter: Even though, I’m disappointed at the current state of the Union I will not neglect my duties and I will vote. This is because my grandfather fought in two world wars and from the stories he told me when I was young, I know what animosity between EU states can result in. So, I’m hoping that the representatives that we elect this time will place more emphasis on promoting national interests, while advocating for the collective benefit.
What do you believe about the EU? 17 year-old high school student: I think that the EU has allowed me to meet different cultures and civilisations. Traveling freely among the various countries, I was introduced to the distinct music and visual art identity of many countries, which then inspired me to cultivate my own work. 56 year-old carpenter: I believe that since 2008, the EU has not been beneficial for our country, and in extension my family and I. The imposition of severe austerity measures, as well as not allowing economic sovereignty to us, has convinced me that everything is run by Brussels and we don’t get a lot of freedom to de-
Will you be voting in the May elections?
7
AFCO II The depths of Swiss democracy
Sophie Waller
Brexit, rising populism and growing nationalism in the EU are products of Euroscepticism. The cause of this seems to lie in the depths of democracy. Democracy has been around since the Greeks of ancient Athens deemed it as the best way to rule, but if the Greeks were to take a look at the European Union today, they would not think it democratic in the least. Though democracy means voice of the people, the democracy in the EU is run by representatives. Citizens vote for people to make decisions for them instead of making the decisions themselves.This could be a reason why people often feel alienated from their government. What can be done to give citizens more trust in their government and improve transparency? In Switzerland, democracy is executed in a different way. Instead of voting with ballots some areas of Switzerland vote by a show of hands. A democracy in which people directly vote on laws instead of voting for representatives is called direct democracy.
Whenever the government wants to change the constitution a mandatory referendum is required. A majority is needed not only within the government but also by the people. Referenda on laws are also required if more than 1.2% of the electorate demand for it. In fact citizens are allowed to put every law decided by their representatives to a general vote. This way of functioning gives citizens a greater say in legislation within their country. It helps citizens to feel more in touch with the ruling of their country and helps them to trust that the government is listening to each and every citizen. It has also been suggested that minorities would be better represented in a direct democracy. The government has to work with the knowledge that the citizens can intervene at any moment. This results in a greater transparency between the citizens and their government. Not only does direct democracy help with transparency, it also increases the likelihood of the citizens complying with laws. People are more likely to follow laws which they voted on themselves.
Direct democracy also makes the government more accountable. The government can no longer claim to have been unaware of the will of the people because the people can intervene at any moment. This results in greater representation of citizens in the government. Citizens are therefore also less likely to simply blame the government for decisions they don’t agree with and are more likely to take action. Taking action as a citizen is another important aspect of Switzerland’s direct democracy. Citizens may demand for a change in the constitution at any time with signatures from more than 2.5% of the electorate. The government is then obliged to discuss the initiative making it impossible for them to ignore what the citizens want. Since being introduced 22 initiatives have passed about a variety topics from wages to asylum seekers.
Longer-term studies from the Swiss Electoral Study Selects project show that over 90 percent of voters had cast their ballot at least once in the previous 20 votes. Many people pick and choose when they will vote in referendums depending on their level of interest in a particular issue or how relevant it is to them personally. Direct democracy could be a great tool to prevent Euroscepticism and help citizens feel less alienated from their government.
In 2017, Swiss voters were called to vote in referendums on three occasions. The average overall turnout out was around 45 percent. Over the last decade, the figure has been above 40 percent. Individual issues can attract greater turnout, however. Nearly 55 percent of voters took part in a March referendum calling for compulsory television licenses to be scrapped, with the majority rejecting the move that would have cut funds to the national broadcaster.
8
9
AFET I Foreign relations in the matter of AZOV: The EU’s next steps in the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Medina Mursagulova
On the 25th of November 2018, confron-
tation between Russian and Ukrainian ships in the Sea of Azov occurred. However, there has been on-going conflict between the Russian and Ukrainian governments since 2014, which has yet to be resolved. It all started with the conflict on the Crimea matter. The Crimea has a long and complicated history that begins approximately from 8th century BCE. Crimea became part of the Soviet Union in 1922. However, in 1954, USSR issued a decree to transfer the Crimean region to the Ukrainian SSR. It was still a part of Ukraine after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, until 2014, when the Ukrainian revolution began. After the revolution, in March, the Russian annexation of Crimea took place. Later, a treaty was signed annexing the region of Crimea to the Russian Federation, although, United Nations General Assembly adopted a non-binding resolution calling upon states not to recognise changes to the integrity of Ukraine. An NBC news report states that “Russia and Ukraine share the Sea of Azov as part of a 2003 agreement. But after annexing
Crimea in 2014, Moscow now controls the Kerch Strait, and with it access to Ukraine’s own ports”. This marine area is now controlled by both countries, therefore, it is apparent how this could lead to a dispute between them. Relying on the agreement, whenever one of the Russian or Ukrainian ships enter the mentioned area, the other side must be well informed about that. Based on Russian and Ukrainian news reports, these are their positions: the Russian government claims that they were not informed beforehand about the Ukrainian ships crossing the Sea of Azov, resulting in the Russian armed forces to act in a certain way. By contrast, the Ukrainian government vows that the Russian government was well informed about their 3 ships crossing the divided area, so their reaction was aggressive and unnecessary. Both sides have their own stance on this matter and the most important thing is the EU trying to help resolve this situation in order to prevent any further damages. The tension between these two countries needs to be relieved, especially considering the fact that Ukraine is a potential EU and NATO member.
After this incident, the UN convened an urgent meeting to discuss the situation. Deputies of EU meeting decided that if the Sea of Azov situation persists, then they will have no choice but to impose certain sanctions. All of this will damage the foreign trade and macroeconomics of both countries. Some experts suggest that financial support would be a great solution to help rebuilding what was damaged. For example as the US State Department pledged $10 million in military financing for Ukraine to compensate for its loss and to strengthen its navy. Surely, more can be done in order to solve this problem in a peaceful way. The EU’s willingness to get involved in this discussion is understandable as the top priority is building a peaceful and secure environment for all.
10
11
AFET II An outlook on the reasons why the plight of the economic immigrant is an one worth hearing. While the reasons for leaving might be different, it does not mean the situation at home is one worth living for.
Armin Adzovic
Nowadays we are used to hearing from
stories in the media of refugees migrating from conflict zones such as Syria and some African nations and embarking on dangerous journeys across the Mediterranean toward Europe and the EU in search of asylum. However, there is also another type of migrant we rarely hear about, whose situation can be as dire as a refugee’s. Both flee due to similar reasons such as war, its aftermath, stagnant and corrupt government, and a lack of employment opportunities. The difference lies in the fact that while one emigrates to escape death, persecution, or environmental disaster, the other flees to escape a harsh life, where they live close to poverty. Both of them however share a dream, a dream of a better life. So who is this mystery immigrant? They are called “economic migrants”, and just as the refugees from poverty and conflict stricken nations, they are leaving their countries in order to make a better life for themselves, and while the story of
refugees fleeing their homes to avoid death and persecution is an important issue in today’s world, the story of these immigrants is also one worth hearing. 25 years ago, there was war in the Balkans which greatly affected the countries caught by it, and some of which, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, are still recovering. The country’s unemployment rate sits just about at 35%, however, this figure skyrockets to about 60% for the youth unemployment rate. A direct result of the war, as well as due to economic stagnation the country has been experiencing, few new industries are developing in the country to offer significant numbers of new jobs. Much of the youth are unable to get jobs even with an university degree. This results in them leaving the country in search of better job opportunities elsewhere. Such is the story of Nizama Koldžo and
Renata Mostarac, Nermana Koldžo.
Renata, 23, despite both graduating at the University of Sarajevo and close to obtaining a Masters degree, is still unable to find work in her hometown of Sarajevo. “I think I have applied maybe for 30 to 40 positions
here in Bosnia” she said, adding, “I don’t want anything unreal, I just want a job and a better future. I think all the people here deserve it.” Other people come back after studying abroad, such as twins Nizama and Nermana, who after finishing a masters degree in Brussels decided to come back to their homeland. A year and dozens of job applications later, Nizama is still unemployed.
they will still be forced to leave their homes and families behind, not because they want to, but rather to be able to support themselves and their families back home.
The aftermath of the war fought can still be felt in the country, and these stories are just some of the many in a country which is plagued by economic stagnation, nepotism and corruption. Much of the youth feel compelled to leave the country if they wish to lead a normal life, with employment and stable paycheck being merely dream in their home country. The issue many of these immigrants face is leaving their homeland and not returning, despite never having planned to do so, yet, this is often the sad truth, as in the search of a normal and stable life, they were forced to make hard decisions. While certainly less tragic than the plight of refugees escaping conflict, it is a tragic story nonetheless. This is the plight of the economic immigrant, and unless something can change in their home countries,
12
13
CLIM Blind to the flames: how to douse a fire people pretend isn’t real
Jan Franciszek Adamski
Global climate change is easily human-
ity’s biggest hurdle in the 21st century. An issue scientific in nature, however one that requires political action, it’s an opportunity for different actors to come together, but it also poses a threat of catastrophic consequences if they don’t. Studies indicate that the phenomenon may cause decreased yields of crops, drive occupants of island nations out of their homes and the destruction of whole ecosystems. Although uncomfortable, it remains a painfully important fact that climate change as a global issue has become highly politicised. Studies show that holding certain political views may impact individuals’ likelihood to reject the scientific consensus on the topic. Most of the world is bound by political structures in which the decision makers are held accountable by and answer to the public. Thus, the understanding of this issue by the public, and the biases in reasoning the public might exhibit all play a significant role in pushing for satisfying steps to be taken in combating climate change. The notion that recent climate changes are anthropological in nature is
anthropological in nature is supported by a survey of 11 944 scientific papers, which has estimated the support for the notion within the scientific community to be around the 97% level. Despite that fact, policy makers whose constituencies don’t support the idea often present it as untrue, fabricated, or one in need of a balanced, centrist approach. The President of United States of America has claimed that the scientific community has a “political agenda” in a CBS interview last October, and The President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, has rejected the notion that climate change is caused by humans during an Arctic forum in 2017. Undeniably, lack of trust for the scientific method in political circles is one of the biggest roadblocks on the way to comprehensive legislation aimed at combating the effects of climate change. Outside of politics, media coverage plays a critical role in educating the public on the problem. This is however impeded by the previously outlined biases exhibited by politicians in their views on the issue. It has to be noted that a significant portion of media outlets in the global north exhibit political biases.
A large portion of them are state owned and controlled, others are closely tied to political parties. This means that their coverage of the issue of climate change can be deliberately deceitful, as means to push the agenda of the controlling party or political group. It is important when considering ways of impacting the public’s views, that the best way to reach them is through the platforms they already trust, and that those very platforms might not be interested in presenting the unbiased, scientific consensus on the topic on the account of their pre-existing agendas.
14
15
EMPL The myth of the meritless refugee: how refugees bring value to their new countries of residence
Olga Bondarenko
The 21 century is a time of human mobility st
and migration. It is utterly impossible to think about our economies, societies or cultures without human mobility coming to mind. Despite the inevitability of migration, given the current world conflicts, there is a worrying rise in discrimination, xenophobia, exclusion, and human rights violations of refugees throughout the European Union. Forced migrants and asylum seekers are faced with negative backlash from the general public as they fear that the governments do not have full control over matters concerning these individuals. Given that this public perception has restricted the ability of politicians to develop more realistic and fact-based legislative frameworks, a more balanced and evidence-based debate about migration, where the real facts are presented and discussed is of a particular need nowadays. In reality, refugees bring huge benefits to the countries which they move to; fueling growth, innovation and entrepreneurship. When governed humanely to promote safety, order and dignity, migration has endless advantages. It provides opportunities, and raises incomes and living standards.
A common misperception is that the EU does not need low-skilled refugees. On the contrary, low-skilled refugees contribute to the functioning of the European economy by taking up jobs which are generally undesirable to natives, which in turns allows them to take up higher-skilled and more remunerative employment. OECD forecasts show that for some countries like Italy, sectors requiring a low-skilled workforce like home care as well as food preparation and services will continue to grow. In other words, low-skilled workers will be needed just as highly skilled ones. Another unfounded belief is that refugees and asylum seekers steal natives’ jobs. This misperception is more common in countries where unemployment is higher, and countries with high unemployment rates most often appear to be the ones with lower, not higher immigration rates: this could be due, among other reasons, to the fact that migrants move where they are more likely to find jobs and away from countries with high unemployment. Furthermore, refugees enhance rather than restrict the innovation capacity of host societies. Patent applications in Europe are higher in countries with policies to support
highly skilled migrants. Their presence in higher education contributes to the creation of knowledge. Networks of diaspora members diffuse the knowledge and the presence of a more diverse workforce makes innovation more likely.
they had trained, studied or worked before, is the motivating factor to assist others in the same situation. In supporting others to enter the labor market, they are creating a new framework for overcoming bureaucratic and legal challenges.
Another positive aspect of migration, which if often overlooked, is that migrants are entrepreneurs and create jobs for migrants and natives alike. Companies such as Google, Intel, PayPal, eBay and Yahoo! have all been co-founded by migrants. In 2 out of 4 of every engineering and technology companies established in the US between 1995 and 2005, there was at least one immigrant key founder. These companies were responsible for generating more than 52 billion dollars’ worth of sales and creating almost half a million jobs as of 2005. Such contributions have only increased in the past decade.
In Denmark, participants in the Refugee Entrepreneurs Denmark program have created an Assyrian catering company and a car washing enterprise which provides job training for other refugees. In Germany, refugee entrepreneurs at ‘Ideas in Motion’ are launching an online education platform to make refugees more employable. These examples highlight that refugee entrepreneurs are celebrating their diverse backgrounds and leveraging knowledge and skills from their home countries as opportunities, rather than treating them as barriers.
Multiple waves of global migration are associated with higher than average rates of entrepreneurship among migrant groups. In the UK for example, migrant entrepreneurs are one of every seven new businesses. In Germany, nearly half of all new business registrations are coming from individuals with foreign passports. Refugees are among these entrepreneurs.
Dispelling the common myths and misconceptions about migration is essential if we are to maximize the benefits of migration for all involved. Better evidence, data and evaluations of the impact of migration policies and programs are essential if we are to counter misconceptions about the real scale and impact of migration, engage both refugees and locals and encourage productive cooperation and mutual respect between them.
The experience of refugees and migrants not being able to find work in fields where
16
17
ENVI I Hiv diagnosis and civil society organisations: a closer look at HIV
Ersagun Ersoy
It is of course demotivating and sad to see
that the rates for HIV transmission have been actively increasing since 2008. Even though the EU and the UN have been working to take the needed actions in order to provide proper treatment for all of their citizens, not much has been achieved. There are more than 2 million affected persons in the European Region of WHO, particularly in the eastern parts of the union, for which HIV/AIDS is still a significant health problem. With the diagnosis of 160,000 new people in 2017, 25,000 being in EEA, it is more than clear that the governments should not only refresh their political commitments to the issue but also work harder to adopt the Action plan on their lands. Apart from the actions taken by the WHO, there are many important organisations which are putting their greatest effort to the problem in order to provide a brighter future for those affected. It is clear that these organisations are doing and achieving more than the governments are, so let’s take a closer look to these organisations and see what they’ve done for HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Aids Action Europe (AAE) AAE was founded in 2004 with the aim of ending -or at least taking control of HIV. It is a regional network active in 47 countries in Europe and Central Asia, gathering a large amount of non-governmental AIDS service organisations under one roof. It aims to achieve a common response to the HIV epidemic by working all together as the civil society. Its vision for the issue has equality as its base and it builds upon the purpose of providing the best lives possible to the people affected by the virus, in a stigma-free, non-discriminatory environment. The network launched a Strategic Framework in 2018, setting goals for 2021. Aids Vaccine Advocacy Coalition (AVAC) AVAC was founded in 1995 by nine HIV treatment activists with the aim of speeding the advancement of the preventive HIV vaccines. One of its fundamental beliefs is that the struggle to end AIDS can only be provided by direct HIV prevention which requires a high amount of scientific research in order to find long-term treatments. It has a structure of multiple approaches to HIV prevention. They can be listed as:
1) Ethical issues, including community involvement in research. 2) Standards of prevention and care in trials. 3) Strategic rollout of prevention strategies for those with the highest risk of infection. 4)Community engagement and research literacy outside the context of a specific clinical trial or intervention.
4) Improving standard of care throughout
Europe
The European Aids Clinical Society (EACS) The European Aids Clinical Society was founded in 1989 and took an essential part in raising the awareness of HIV/AIDS and the research among the illnesses. It aims to gather scientists from all over Europe in order to provide the exchange of the latest information on the clinical aspects of the disease and hold the European AIDS Conference biennially. EACS has five Working Groups, each working on different but equally important aspects of the topic. These are Education & Training, Guidelines, Standard of Care, Women Against Viruses in Europe, EACS Awards. Their priorities are listed as:
1)Delivering education and training 2)Issuing the EACS Guidelines on HIV Treatment 3) Organising the biennial European AIDS Conference Improving standard of care throughout Europe.
18
19
ENVI II Rise of resistance: How can we bend without breaking in the war against antimicrobial resistance?
Leonoor Wijdeveld
Just under a hundred years ago, we discov-
ered a wondercure against infectious diseases: antibiotics. Yet now, our philosopher’s stone is running dry with more and more bacteria becoming resistant to its powers. In an effort to fight back, the world, specifically the European Union, are looking for a combat strategy against AMR by preventing infection and looking for more effective treatments. The latter especially brings something interesting to the table. Can we find out what specific bacteria we are after and target them with very specific treatments thereby reducing AMR? Are targeted treatments part of the solution? The first step towards targeted treatments is knowing where to aim: diagnostics. According to the strategy of the EU, incorporating microbiology into diagnostics will be a crucial part of limiting AMR; if we can find out what exactly is attacking the body under a microscope or through test, we can tailor our defences. Some extra tests could differentiate between bacterial infections and viral infections as to not use antibiotics in the lather, when they aren’t effective. Besides, they could point out which kind of bacteria is invading the body which narrows in on what antibiotics or which alternative treatments would be most effective.
With a known cause, a physician is now able to explore and use the option of targeted treatments. The first option is to use narrow-spectrum antibiotics, antibiotics only affecting certain groups of bacteria. As narrow-spectrum antibiotics will only deal with the targeted bacteria, it cause less AMR opposed to broad-spectrum antibiotics which would attack multiple groups of bacteria. With less bacteria under attack, less bacteria will develop resistance. Making an informed decision about which antibiotic to use may also prevent using antibiotics to which the attacking bacteria is resistant, like penicillin on gram-negative bacteria. Besides using targeted antibiotics, an informed physician might decide to use an alternative treatment so as to avoid the use of antibiotics entirely. Current alternative treatments include bacteriophage therapy, predatory bacteria, bacteriocins, and competitive exclusion of pathogens. Although working in different ways, these are, although less efficient than narrow-spectrum antibiotics, similar in a way that they only target the attacking bacteria and not the bodies own. Next to being still less efficient than an antibiotic, alternative therapies are still heavily researched and when used in practice, the physician requires knowledge
about
the
exact
bacteria
targeted.
The lack of a full scoop on alternative treatments is mainly due to research into targeted or new antibiotics and alternative treatments being financially unattractive which makes this current crisis even more complicated,. Research into new treatment options almost always requires a huge investment and when brought out on the market, ideally the treatment needs to be used sparingly to avoid resistance, which complicates making a return on the initial investment. Although, the EU does provide, or plans to provide incentives for research, the financial aspect of more extensive diagnostics, new and alternative treatments must be kept in mind. So, are targeted treatments our newest defence? Possibly. As AMR remains a threat to our society, targeted treatments could be fighting it, being more effective and slowing the rate at which bacteria becomes resistant. Yet, targeted treatments also come with disadvantages: they require a extensive
diagnostic process to be used effectively and expensive research to be developed.
20