Moroccan Migration in the Netherlands: Facts, Myths and Moral Panic

Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the 2022

Johannes Van Tilburg Lecture in Dutch Studies.

It's wonderful to be back with you, even if

virtually, after the gap in 2021 that was caused by

the pandemic. In fact, it was just two weeks before

the lock-down began in early March 2020 that we

were last together to celebrate a Van Tilburg lecture with

Saskia Pieterse from the University of Utrecht.

So welcome back to everyone! My name is

Laurie Kain Hart and I'm professor of

anthropology and global studies and Director

of the Center for European and Russian Studies.

On behalf of UCLA and the Center, I'm delighted

to welcome members of the Dutch community in LA,

consular representatives from the Netherlands

and Belgium, the Netherlands-America Foundation

of Southern California, and other friends of

Dutch Studies. I'm also very delighted to welcome

members of the Moroccan and Dutch-Moroccan

communities here in Los Angeles and elsewhere,

who are joining us for this special lecture.

And as always, welcome to all members of the

academic and broader community here at

UCLA and in Los Angeles. I'd like to begin

by thanking all those on the ground here

who contributed to this afternoon's program,

including our Center's Executive Director Liana

Grancea, and Outreach Director Lenka Unge. I'm

grateful to Marike Splint of our Faculty

Advisory Council, and associate professor in

the Department of Theater at UCLA, for bringing

our speaker for today's event to our attention.

Thanks also to our co-sponsors, the Center for

Near Eastern Studies, and the Center for the Study

of International Migration. As is our custom here

at UCLA, I want to acknowledge that we're here on

the territory of the Gabrielino/Tongva peoples

who are the traditional land caretakers

of Tovaangar (the Los Angeles basin and the South

Channel Islands). As a land-grant institution, we

pay our respects to the Ancestors, Elders, Relatives

and Relations past, present, and emerging. As many of

you know, the Los Angeles Dutch community had its

origins and migrations from Holland beginning in

the 1920s, reaching a peak in the period following

World War II, as well as some post-colonial

operations from Dutch Indonesia. This community

remains one of the largest concentrations

of Dutch immigrants in the US and it's still

vibrant and visible in its activities. Some

of those initial movements of people were labor

migrations that share, in fact, significant features:

the pressure of need, the search for opportunity,

with the migrants at the heart of our speaker's

talk today. We at the Center are the fortunate

beneficiaries of diverse local and international

efforts that connect Southern California to the

Netherlands and Belgium. Dutch Studies at UCLA

is a vibrant program engaged with the study of

the low countries to a strongly global academic

program comprising Dutch, Spanish, and Indonesian

history, art, and literature, and Dutch language,

and formerly Afrikaans, as well. The program

was initiated in 1999 under the direction and

inspiration of Dr. Margaret Jacob, now Professor

Emeritus of History. It expanded to include, among

other initiatives, the founding of the Anton

Van Dyck Chair for the history and culture of

the low countries, and the faculty/student

exchange program at the University of Leuven.

Most important for us today was the establishment,

through these efforts, of the Johannes Van Tilburg

Lecture in Dutch Studies in 2005. So we owe this

lecture to the generosity of Johannes and Jo Anne

Van Tilburg, who not only support this annual

lecture showcasing innovative scholarship in

the Netherlands, but who also provide

support for UCLA students participating

in the Utrecht and Leuven exchange programs.

Mr. Van Tilburg himself came to the US from

the Netherlands in 1965 and in 1971 became the

Founding Principal of Van Tilburg, Banvard & Soderbergh -

a planning and architectural design

firm with important projects in LA and beyond.

He's also been an adjunct professor at USC, and

Honorary Consul of the Netherlands in LA.

Dr. Jo Anne Van Tilburg is an archaeologist and

member of our academic community, a specialist

on the statues of Easter Island (Rapa Nui), and

Director of the Rock Art Archive

at the UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology. We

are very grateful for their support, but also for

their leadership and conceptualizing new forms of

exchange and scholarly cooperation between UCLA

and the Netherlands. If Mr. Van Tilburg

is here, available on the screen, we will turn

the screen over to Mr. Van Tilburg for a remark.

Please join me in welcoming Mr. Johannes Van Tilburg.

I believe we can hear you now. Laurie, would you

like me to say a few words? Please! Okay! Thank you,

professor Laurie Hart, and welcome from Jo Anne and

myself to the Johannes Van Tilburg Dutch history

lecture here at UCLA in Los Angeles. And a special

welcome for the Netherlanders here in California.

The Netherlands-America Foundation

has been a steady supporter for

all these 16 years and I want to thank them for

that. Yes, it was in 2006 that Dr. Margaret Jacob

contacted Jo Anne to see if I might be interested

in sponsoring the Dutch history lecture at UCLA.

That year we introduced Dr. Wiljan Van Den Akker

from Utrecht University to give the first lecture.

The lecture has since had a variety of topics,

from "Rembrandt's Last Painting" by Gary Schwartz,

"Immigration and Dutch Identity" by Dr. Paul Schnabel,

and "Dutch Jewry in 1945" by Dr. Ido de Haan, and

of course, Margaret Jacob herself on freemasonry. So

thank you all for attending. Maybe next year Jo Anne

and I will see you in person. Thank you and welcome

to Dr. Nadia Bouras, this year's lecturer. Thank you!

Thank you so much, Mr. Van Tilburg. Now it's

time to turn to the main event of the afternoon.

Like the US, Europe in the 2000s and most

intensely since 2015 has been challenged by

and challenged on policies and ideologies

concerning the reception and integration,

or repulsion and exclusion of global migrants.

This is arguably a time not only for immediate

measures of humanitarian and political response,

but also for a deep reckoning with and exploration

of the record, scrutiny of the past, and frank

engagement with our prospects for a global future.

The Netherlands has been at the forefront of

highly important innovations, and research, and

policy for major social issues

in the 20th and 21st century.

So I'm particularly delighted to introduce this afternoon's

speaker, Dr. Nadia Bouras. Dr. Bouras is a historian

and expert on Dutch-Moroccan migration history.

She was born and raised in Amsterdam, and earned

her PhD in history at Leiden University, where

she's currently assistant professor in social

and migration history. She's the author of three

books, including in 2012 "The Country of Origin,

Perspectives on Alliance with Morocco, 1960-2010".

She's one of four Moroccan-Dutch members of

the Council of the Overseas Moroccan Community.

Dr. Bouras is also affiliated

to the Dutch Scientific Institute in Rabat, Morocco.

In celebration of the 40th anniversary of the treaty allowing

mass recruitment of Moroccans for Dutch

industries, she together with Annemarie Cottaar

and Fatiha Laouikili published a book on history

of the integration of Moroccans in Dutch society

titled "Moroccans in the Netherlands:

The Pioneers Tell". As a public historian with an active

presence on Twitter, Dr. Bouras is engaged in

a wide variety of scholarly and social topics

from racism to Islamophobia, and feminism, and

inclusion. One technicality before we begin:

We encourage you to write your questions at any

time during and after the talk in the Q&A section

at the bottom of your screen. We'll try to convey

as many of them as we can to the speaker in the

question time we have, and promise to conserve

for her any and unanswered questions that remain.

The talk is broadcast on YouTube, and

recorded, and available on our website at the

Center for viewing later, as well. Please join

me finally then in welcoming Dr. Nadia Bouras

for the 2022 Van Tilburg Lecture: "Moroccan

Migration in the Netherlands: Facts, Myths, and Moral Panic".

Thank you very much, professor Laurie

Hart. Thank you for having me. I'm delighted

to be speaking to you on a topic which is, I

believe, very important and also shows how the

US, the Moroccan communities, and also the Dutch,

and the Dutch-Moroccan community is connected

on the international scale. I'm very honored to

give this Johannes Van Tilburg Lecture in Dutch

Studies. This is a part of Dutch

history, as well. Speaking about migration

is speaking about Dutch history. The topic of

my lecture this afternoon - this evening, because

I'm happy to join you from my home in

Amsterdam where it is 9:15pm at the moment -

is "Moroccan Migration in the Netherlands: Facts, Myths

and Moral Panic". I would like to talk to

you about the key developments of Moroccan

migration to the Netherlands, but also highlight

some of the socio-demographics,

socio-economic, and socio-cultural

characteristics of the Moroccan-Dutch community. I

plan to give this lecture on this topic, but also

delve into my personal migration history.

Even though Moroccan migration

is my core business, I also have a personal

attachment to this particular history.

I never migrated myself. As Laurie mentioned,

I was born in the Netherlands, in Amsterdam.

Both of my parents migrated from Morocco to

the Netherlands. If you allow me, I will

also speak about my personal history to

highlight some of the developments in this history.

On May 14, 1969 the Moroccan and the

Dutch government signed the Recruitment

Agreement. This treaty marked the beginning

of official migration to the Netherlands.

Today, over half a century later, Moroccans in the

Netherlands are the second largest immigrant group.

Just for your understanding, the largest

immigrant group is composed of the Turkish-Dutch

community. Speaking about Moroccan

migration to the Netherlands, we can divide

that history into three phases.

During the first period from 1960

to 1973, thousands of guest workers arrived in the

Netherlands in search of a better economic future.

A small number, around 3,000 workers, were recruited

through official channels. That's the

official migrants. But the vast majority

came to the Netherlands independently. We call

those migrants "spontaneous migrants", because they

didn't come to the Netherlands through official

channels, but decided themselves to come to Europe,

quite often passed through different countries,

and eventually settled in the Netherlands.

These spontaneous migrants were very much

welcomed, because non-recruited workers were

cheaper. The employer didn't have

to organize any housing. In addition,

long and very expensive procedures could

be avoided, so they were very much welcomed.

Arriving in the Netherlands, looking for a job -

we're talking about the early 1960s -

it was very easy to find a job back then. The

need for cheap laborers or unskilled workers

was very high. As a result of

that, the number of Moroccan workers

from Morocco grew extensively in the 1960s

and 1970s. When discussing these decades,

dominated migration. Most workers were men.

In 1972, the year in which the Dutch Bureau of

Statistics (CBS) registered immigrants, over 20,000

Moroccan men lived in the Netherlands. This

is a graph for you, where you can see how the

total Moroccan population developed over

five decades. The second phase of Moroccan

migration is characterized by family unification.

That started in 1975 and

finished in 1985. It is during this

period of mass immigration that women and children

joined their husbands and fathers in the

Netherlands. While only 864 Moroccan women lived

in the Netherlands in 1972, there were almost 25,000

women in the Netherlands during the peak years

of family unification in the 1980s. Today,

Moroccan women - first and second generation -

make up for 49% of the total Moroccan

population in the Netherlands.

During the last period of Moroccan migration, a period

which started in 1985, Moroccans settled permanently

in the Netherlands. This is very interesting,

because Moroccan migration to the Netherlands,

and other types of guest worker migration to

Europe in general, and this one in particular, was

assumed to be temporary. So something happened

and we'll discuss the reasons why this migration

shifted from temporary migration to

permanent settlement in Dutch cities.

So of over 414,000 people, more than 58% is of the

second generation. The Moroccan community is

currently the second largest immigrant group in

the Netherlands. Moroccans in the Netherlands

account for about 2.4% of the total Dutch

population, which is around 17 million. I've

listed here the first generation and the second

generation, because Moroccan communities in the Netherlands

are composed of these two generations. First

generation obviously applies to the guest workers -

men and women, the second generation, which

I'm a member of, are the children of

those first generation immigrants. Obviously, the

second generation is much larger than the first

generation as a result of the natural increase.

The first generation - most of them grew older, some

of them returned to their home countries, but sadly,

a large portion of those immigrants passed away.

I also included in this slide the number which

consists of the third generation. I have to

say that the third generation are

considered Dutch residents, Dutch people, or

Netherlanders, but the CBS, the Bureau of

Statistics, includes those number, as well. If we

add that number to the total population of

Moroccans in the Netherlands, we get a much larger

number. I have two daughters, aged nine and six.

They are considered third generation,

but because they have both parents born in

the Netherlands, they are just considered

Dutch. Both my parents were born in Morocco,

so that means I'm considered a Dutch-Moroccan.

The photos I included are partly from my

family photo collection. I will be talking

about that, as well in a little bit. I wanted

to move on to the country they came from. It's

fascinating to see where they are from and

where they settled in the Netherlands. I'm gonna

focus on the regions of origin for the moment.

A part of the title of this lecture is

"myths". One of the biggest misconceptions,

or myths, about Moroccan migration to the

Netherlands is that the Dutch government

actively recruited workers in the Rif, which is

the Northern region I encircled here in red.

So why is that a misconception? Why do a

lot of people, even Moroccans themselves, believe

that Dutch recruitment policies were directed to

the Rif? Because it was assumed that workers from

underdeveloped areas, such as the Rif,

were less demanding. It was

also assumed that the Moroccan state preferred

recruitment from the Rif, because the Rif

was known for its rebellious attitude

towards the central powers in Rabat.

Professor Laurie Hart mentioned the first

book I co-wrote with Annemarie Cottaar.

We try to get a better view of the

recruitment policies by the Dutch in Morocco. And

we found that none of this is true. The recruitment

was not directed to the Rif. In fact, the official

migration, meaning the recruitment

policies, played a very minor role in

Moroccan migration to the Netherlands.

During the official recruitment period, which

started in 1969 and ended in 1973, the date 1973

is very important - I will come back to that later,

hardly any workers were recruited from the Rif.

Most Dutch companies that were interested

in recruiting workers in Morocco favored

workers from the larger inner cities in Morocco.

For example the textile industry was

looking for workers in Tetouan, in Fes - two

cities known for their very rich textile

tradition. The mining industry -

mine workers were attracted to

Europe, as well. You could find

workers of the mining industry - not in the Rif,

but for example in the area of Agadir, which is in

the South and encircled in red, as well. So you

have two areas in Morocco in the Northern region

and in the Southern region, where they are known

for their rich migration tradition. At the same

time, it is true that 75% of all Dutch-Moroccans

are from this Northern province of the Rif.

How come most Moroccans in the Netherlands

are from the Rif if workers were not recruited

actively in this particular region? That

is because, both the Rif and the Sous region,

are predominantly rural areas, agricultural areas,

with a very long tradition of migration, which

started during the colonial

period. In the Rif, there was and still is,

a high population density and as a result

of the unemployment caused by a long period

of drought and crop failure, many men

in this period migrated to the other side

of the Mediterranean. But their migration was

first focused on the neighboring

country of Algeria, where they did seasonal work.

They traveled back and forth between the Rif

and Algeria, but after 1960, as a result of

the French-Algerian

Independence War, that was no longer an option.

From that period onward, workers from the Rif, who

had to look elsewhere to find a better economic

future, decided to move up North and migrate to

France, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Moroccans from

the Southern region in Morocco, the Sous region,

migrated to France, for example to join the army,

or to work in the mining and heavy industry.

So we're talking about a period during

World War II and right after that.

During the colonization of Algeria, there was

plenty of work, as I mentioned, for

migrants from the Northern region. The Southern

region - they had to look outside of Morocco to find

better job opportunities. Another explanation

why Moroccans from the Rif outnumber

other Moroccans in the Netherlands, lies in

the German, French and the Belgian recruitment

for the German, Belgian and French mining

industry. A lot of Moroccans found their way to

the Netherlands, because the Netherlands was known

for its better working conditions and better wages.

In all the years I've been working with

Moroccan immigrants and interviewing hundreds

and hundreds of Moroccan men and women,

none of them mentioned to me that they

from the get-go decided to come to

the Netherlands. For Moroccans, migrating to Europe

meant mostly migrating to France

because of the colonial ties, and the familiarity

with France and French culture. The

Netherlands was out of the picture for

most Moroccan immigrants. When

I will speak about my father's migration

history, I will talk about that, as well. So

they migrated to France, and then decided

to go to Belgium, for example, and then

follow for example cousins or neighbors,

and then settle eventually in the

Netherlands. The Netherlands was never

a primal destination for a lot of Moroccan workers.

So this is where they were coming from. This

is the region of origin. Let's look at the

settlements of Moroccans in the

Netherlands. This is a map of the Netherlands

and that mis-shaped triangle is the

Randstad and the Randstad is composed of

Amsterdam, the Hague, Rotterdam, and Utrecht. Forty-five

percent of all Moroccans live in the Randstad

and we see that the population of Moroccan

origin in the Netherlands is still

unequally distributed.

So the Randstad is very important. It is followed

by the Southern region of North Brabant,

where almost 16 percent of Moroccans live.

The Moroccan presence in the Northern region -

Friesland, Groningen, and Drenthe - is tiny with less than

almost 85% of the population of Moroccan origin

is found in four provinces.

Three of the four provinces are in

the West - North Holland, South Holland, and Utrecht -

and then followed by the province of North

Brabant in the Southern region with almost 11%.

The preference of Moroccans for the West region

is also reflected by their high concentration

in the four major cities in houses, accounting

for 45% of the population of Moroccan

origin. Amsterdam leads with more than

nearly one-fifth of the population

of Moroccan origin in the Netherlands.

Rotterdam comes in second place

with over 45,000 Moroccans.

The Hague and Utrecht are almost equal, sheltering

almost 33,000 and 31,000 Moroccans.

The concentration of Moroccans in the Randstad

is related to social networks and the favorable

employment prospects in these cities. We've

done research in the past and we found that

migrants from Nador, which is a city in

the Rif in the Northern region of Morocco,

settled mostly in Utrecht and Rotterdam. What

is fascinating, or interesting, and not a coincidence,

is that the mayor of Rotterdam, Mr. Ahmed

Aboutaleb was also born in Nador, so his

Moroccan community in Rotterdam is also from

Nador. Migrants from Al Hoceima, which is also a

large city in the Rif, were

more focused on the Hague,

whereas most migrants from Tetouan

chose Amsterdam as their final destination.

The pattern of Moroccan migration

to the Netherlands can be described as

chain migration, in which relatives helped new

immigrants and friends, who had already settled in

the Netherlands. And the pioneer migrants

guaranteed first shelter, helped in finding

housing, and finding a job. As a result, new

Moroccan immigrants settled in the proximity

of Moroccans from the same region of origin.

That makes sense. Moroccans from North

Brabant, which is in the Southern region of the

Netherlands, are mostly from Fes. Again, that is

because most workers came to work in the factories

of North Brabant, and they were later joined

by other members of their families, or

other members of the region around Fes.

Moroccan migration was supposed to be temporary, hence the term "guest workers". They were guests in

the Netherlands and this was believed to be true

from the perspective of the Dutch government

looking for temporary guest workers. It

was true for the Moroccan government, as well.

They also believed that their emigrants would

eventually return to their home country.

Also the immigrants themselves believed that their

stay in Europe in general, and in the Netherlands in

particular, was temporary. They would find

a job, work for a couple of years, save up money,

and then return to their home country. Obviously,

that didn't happen. And that's why I'm talking to

you and giving this lecture today. I'm

a child of Moroccan immigrants, who decided to

settle permanently in the Netherlands.

What happened? I mentioned the date of 1973

earlier. It is very important because in 1973,

the international oil crisis happened and that

crisis changed the political and economic

context, in which migration took place.

Morocco suffered from the oil crisis and the high prices

more than European countries. In the same period -

we're talking about the mid-1970s - Morocco was

confronted with economic instability. There were

hardly any job opportunities, high unemployment

rate, and also political instability. In the

beginning of the 1970s, there were two failed coup

attempts and as a result of that, there was severe

oppression going on in Morocco. The unfavorable

political and economic situation in Morocco made

Moroccan immigrants in the Netherlands reconsider

their plan to return to their homeland. Also,

migrating back to Morocco was very risky,

because many Moroccans feared that returning

to the Netherlands after a failed immigration

was no longer an option. And that was true.

In 1973, the Dutch government and other

Northwestern European countries called for a

recruitment stop, so migrant workers

were no longer allowed to enter Europe.

The recruitment stop, which was initiated by

European countries and the economic crisis, made

Moroccans realize that their future was probably

in the Netherlands, but they still believed

that their stay in the Netherlands would be just

a little bit longer. Nobody considered they would be

staying in the Netherlands forever.

Also, returning to Morocco in the 1970s

was not a very smart idea, because they

have been working in the Netherlands since

the early 1960s, they have been paying taxes, and

so they had all these social rights and benefits

guaranteed by the Dutch welfare states.

So leaving that all behind was

not very realistic, especially because there

were limited job opportunities in Morocco.

What happened from 1973 onwards, is that

we see a paradox. It is because there was a recruitment

stop, there were restrictive immigration policies,

and all of these measures and regulation did

not result in a smaller number of Moroccans

in the Netherlands. On the contrary,

it stimulated a more permanent stay in

the Netherlands. As we've seen

before, it marked the beginning of the

second phase of Moroccan immigration to the

Netherlands, the phase of family reunification.

Another incentive for family unification -

a lot of men that migrated to Europe

in general, and the Netherlands in

particular, left their families behind.

Especially those who were from the Rif,

which is a traditional, a bit conservative

region. Most migrants that left that region

already had a family. Migrants from other parts of

Morocco, mostly the larger inner cities, migrated as

single men, so they did not leave a family behind.

Another incentive for family unification,

apart from the changing migration

possibilities, was the pressure from spouses

that stayed behind. The practice was that

the male worker migrated to Europe and worked.

His family, his wife and children, stayed

with the extended family, the in-laws. That

caused a lot of tension between nuclear

family and the extended family, because

women had little mobility. They couldn't go

out that much, the husband who was working in the

Netherlands would send money home, but that was

organized and distributed

by the head of the family, which was his father

and her father-in-law. So living with your

in-laws, as you can imagine, caused a lot of

tension nobody actually wanted. Especially

because women were responsible for the upbringing,

they were responsible for the household. Little

social mobility... All those aspects caused a lot

of tensions between the nuclear family and the

extended family. As a result of that women

pressured their husbands, who were living

single life in the Netherlands,

and put out an ultimatum:

Either you come back to Morocco and we live

independently as a family, a nuclear family

apart from the extended family, or I will

you with the kids in the Netherlands. And again,

because returning to Morocco was not an option

economically or politically, the second option was more realistic.

Women and children joined their

fathers and husbands in the Netherlands.

Another important factor that explains

why Moroccan migration shifted from

temporal migration to more and more

permanent settlements in the Netherlands

is mass unemployment in the 1980s. In 1983, one

third of all Moroccan men lost their jobs.

A year later, in 1984, half of them became jobless, so

we're talking about mass unemployment happening in

the Netherlands and other Western European

countries, because of relocation of factories to

low wages countries. For example the typical

sectors, where Moroccan guest workers worked, no

longer existed in the Netherlands, which meant

that because of their low education and their

minimal skills, they couldn't

find another job. As a result of that,

mass unemployment happened. This is

very unfortunate because family reunification

coincided with mass unemployment.

That caused a lot of challenges for

Moroccan families in the Netherlands.

This is very fascinating, because

when Moroccan immigrants migrated in the early 60s,

they were considered winners. They were young men

looking for a better economic future,

found a job in Europe, in the Netherlands,

worked for a couple of years. They were very successful. Then

their families joined them, and at that same moment

they lost their jobs. That unfortunate

coincidence further shaped the socio-economic

status of Moroccan immigrants and their families

in the Netherlands. Just imagine: You were

first a winner, and then all of a sudden, in

the 1980s, you lost your job and you had to

take care of your family. In many cases,

these were relatively large

families that lived in inner cities, sometimes in

underdeveloped neighborhoods, in lousy housing,

and that caused a lot of challenges.

Children had to integrate into schools.

Dutch proficiency was a problem, as well. All

that caused a lot of socio-economic problems.

I will come to that later. So I thought it would perhaps

be interesting to talk about my own family's migration

for a moment, and a different perspective

on Moroccan immigrants. My father,

Brahim Bouras, was not recruited. He didn't

come to the Netherlands through the official channels,

but migrated independently to Europe. He was born

in Sidi Ifni. I will show you a map. Sidi Ifni

is here in the South.

I encircled Sidi Ifni.

His story is a bit different from

the average Dutch-Moroccan immigrant,

because the average Dutch-Moroccan immigrant

is from Al Hoceima and other cities.

So my dad's story is a bit different. He

was born in 1947 in Sidi Ifni, which was still

under Spanish rule at that moment. My father

tried to obtain a passport at Las Palmas,

because a passport granted entrance to Europe.

Without a passport you couldn't travel

to Europe. Obtaining a Moroccan passport back

then was very difficult. I'm talking about

the late 1960s. The Moroccan government

pretty much determined who was allowed to have

a passport, and as a result of that was allowed to

leave the country. My father tried to obtain a

Spanish passport, because he was born in Sidi Ifni,

which was under Spanish rule. Just before

he got his passport, the Spanish military left

his hometown and his dream to come to Europe

ended there. He then wrote a letter to his

brother, who lived in Amsterdam. He wrote the

letter stating that he was the only man in the

village. There were only females and a lot of sheep.

He was the only man left in the village

and he felt a bit emasculated and embarrassed.

So his reason to migrate to Europe was not so much

looking for a better economic future or looking for a

job. Obviously, that was important, as well. Economic

motives are always important. I believe

it is important to look at broader motives on why

people migrate. Economic motives are

important, but are not the only reasons Moroccans

migrated to Europe. His brother in Amsterdam

arranged a meeting for him with someone in

Casablanca, who arranged the Moroccan passport.

So they had the network. He traveled to

Paris first. He found him a job in Paris with

other friends. My father worked for a couple

of months in Paris in construction. He didn't like

that and a couple of months later he moved up North

to Amsterdam, where he settled in 1970.

As I mentioned before, in 1973 the borders were

closed for migrant workers. My dad was

an irregular migrant. Spontaneous

migrants did not have a residence permit at first.

My dad was granted a residence permit

in 1975 and decided to stay in the Netherlands,

because he always believed that his future was

in Europe. My father was one of the

men, who from the get-go believed that

he would always stay in the Netherlands, even

though my mom had different beliefs about that.

In 1978, my grandfather, my father's father,

passed away, so my dad traveled to Morocco for

the burial and that is when he met my mom.

My mom was born in 1959 in Casablanca,

which is a large city. My parents met

and in 1978 my mother joined my father in the

Netherlands. My dad had been living in the

Netherlands for almost eight years, when my mother

joined him there. With no children. Again,

this is different from the majority of Moroccan

immigrants, who migrated as married and family men.

This picture was taken on my mom's first day

in Amsterdam. For the occasion, she

wore her wedding dress. As you can see,

she didn't look very happy. That's because

she never planned to migrate to the Netherlands.

She saw her future in Morocco. She

just graduated from high school and planned to go to

university, but that didn't happen. She had

to leave her ambitions, her future plans, her friends,

her family, and her sisters behind and join my father

in Amsterdam. Obviously, it all ended well and

they had a very happy marriage, but the story of

my mother is very typical for a lot of Moroccan

women, who migrated to the Netherlands.

Especially in the early years of their

arrival in the Netherlands, they felt lonely.

Obviously, they missed their

families, because their husbands

have been working all day. They were guest

workers, but Moroccan women didn't come

as migrant workers. They came as family unifiers.

They came within the framework family unification.

My dad found a job as a concierge in an

elderly home, where he worked for over 40 years.

When he celebrated his 12th anniversary,

my mom and us joined him at the celebration.

The supervisor of my dad asked

my mom whether she wanted to work in

the elderly home as well. My mom was very ambitious

and left all her dreams behind. She took this

opportunity and said yes.

My mom worked as a chef, as a cook, for over

Moving on to the last phase of Moroccan

migration, which is still ongoing - it's the phase

of permanent settlement. The question is:

Is the integration of Moroccans completed?

The picture I put here is in Dutch, so

hopefully some of you can read Dutch. It says:

"Weet Dat De Doorsnee Amsterdamse een Marrokaanse Van 40 Iss."

Unfortunately, "Marrokkaanse" was misspelled, but anyway.

This was a campaign of the Amsterdam Television Network.

They stated this massive message, which says that

the average Amsterdammer is a Moroccan woman

of 40 years old. This is the daughters of

the Moroccan pioneers, those Moroccan immigrants

who arrived in the early 1960s in the Netherlands.

They were the pioneers and they were new,

but their children, especially their daughters,

were now average Amsterdammers. They became

the mainstream. This is very

fascinating, because I just turned 40

this year. So this is about me. This is me -

an Amsterdammer with Moroccan background,

means that Amsterdam, which is a home to most

Dutch-Moroccans, is a super diverse

city. This means that there is no majority,

no community that forms a majority in the city.

Amsterdam is home to over 150 nationalities

and within a time span of 50 years, or five

decades, we have seen significant developments, and

differences between the first and the second

generation. The first generation were those men

and women, who came to the Netherlands to look for

a better economic future. They were the pioneers.

And who could imagine that in 50 years, half a

century, their children would become the average

residents of their city? Become the

mainstream? This is a significant development

that is quite often overlooked in

Dutch political and public discourse on

immigration - especially those with the Moroccan

and Turkish background. This is where the moral

panic comes in, because there is a huge gap

between the political discourse and reality.

Moroccans being the second largest immigrant group

is a fact. Another fact is that Dutch-Moroccans are

the most problematized group in Dutch society.

It is assumed that Dutch-Moroccans are poorly

integrated into Dutch society. I talked

to you earlier about the socio-economic

characteristics of Dutch community. As a result of

mass unemployment in the 1980s, difficulties with

education, ethnic profiling, racism - all of that

is happening. But in the Netherlands, we tend to

explain socio-economic problems and label them

as religious and cultural problems.

And again, it is true that Dutch-Moroccans

hold, in some cases, a weak socio-economic

position in Dutch society. Their problems are not

religious or cultural problems. They have socio-

economic problems, because of the very specific

course the Dutch-Moroccan immigration took.

This ethnic labeling of Moroccans is very

problematic, because if we look at the differences

between the first and the second generation, we see

very significant differences. The first generation

were mostly unskilled workers, who had

very little or no education whatsoever.

Now, if we look at the second generation, I'm

a member of that group and it's already

outnumbered the first generation, we see that Dutch-

Moroccans hold very high positions in several

domains in Dutch society. I'm not a big fan of

mentioning all the very successful Dutch-Moroccans,

because that only perpetuates the idea of good

immigrants and bad immigrants. As if you were only

allowed to be a part of the Dutch community

if you were very successful. How do we define

success? That is an interesting question talking

about migration and integration issues. So this

moral panic, that surrounds Dutch-Moroccans,

has nothing to do with reality. Yes, some

members of the Dutch-Moroccan community

hold a weak socio-economic position,

but overall, the Dutch-Moroccan community is considered

a community that is very well adapted to

Dutch culture and Dutch society.

Thank you very much for your attention. I hope that

you have questions. I'm happy to answer them.

Thank you so much, professor Bouras, for

this wonderful landscape that you've drawn

over such a long period of time and up

until the present. I think there will be

many questions concerning both

the history and the current status of

Moroccans. Let me open up first and

ask professor Aomar Boum, who's joined us

today, professor of anthropology

at UCLA, to ask the first question.

Thanks, Laurie! Hi, Nadia! Thank you so much for

this really excellent talk. I learned so much.

I have a few questions. I have a lot of questions,

but I'm going to start with two questions

and then see if I can give the

floor for people to ask questions.

I can always come back and ask you more.

The first question has to do with:

What can you say about the difference

between the Netherlands and France,

Belgium, and other European countries when

it comes to the recruitment strategies in

the early phases of this migration? I can

see similar patterns but I want to know if there

were different patterns as far as

the recruitment was taking place.

The second point I want to add: I want to see

if you can complicate the story a little bit

and add a layer of ethnicity. I assume

that you're talking here mostly about

the recruitment of Muslim migrants, guest workers.

But the relationship between the Netherlands in

Morocco historically is, I think, one

of the most fascinating stories that go back to

the 17th century, or probably even earlier than

that - in relation between different sultans and

leaders of the Netherlands. If you

can point out the number of Jewish migration

and how many Moroccan

Jews ended up in the Netherlands,

especially during the

late 1950s and early 1960s.

If that was a route that they ended up going

to, and if it is where you situate them

in this really interesting graph that you put - the

difference between all these different Moroccan

migrants from the North, as well as the South. So

those are the two questions I want to start with.

You talked a little bit about

the educational background of

these migrants. What level are you talking about,

especially regarding the second phase? Are you talking about

high school? Are you talking about people with

just primary education? I would

say that's also another variable that

plays a key role as far as what kind of jobs

these guest workers had later on. Thank you!

You want me to answer the questions

right away, Laurie? Yes, please!

Your first question on the recruitment policies

and the differences between the Netherlands,

Belgium, and France. Well, the Moroccan government

signed recruitment agreements with

Belgium and France very early on - in the early 1960s.

With the Dutch, not so much. The Dutch had the signing

of the recruitment in 1969, which is very late.

Looking from the Dutch perspective, that

means that the Moroccans were late-

comers in the official migration,

which implied that those, who were recruited for

example for the Dutch mining industry, came at a

moment when it was already clear

that the mining industry was going to be closed down.

They were late-comers and it was believed that

they only had a chance to work for a limited

time and then return back to their home countries.

Compared with the Turkish immigrants,

they were recruited by the Dutch government in

the early 1960s, so a larger number of Turkish men

came to the Netherlands through the official

channels. A very limited number, only 3,000,

came through official channels to

the Netherlands. That is because

the agreement was signed very late, at the end of

the 1960s. So the window of opportunity between

stop was very small and limited. Having said that,

during the phase of official migration,

look at the graph I put out first, we see that

in 1972, in the middle of the recruitment

practices, there were over 20,000

Moroccans in the Netherlands, which

implies that most Moroccan workers

came spontaneously, independently. They

came in the early 1960s, so the official migration

between Morocco and the Netherlands played a very

minimal role in the total migration. That

was different for Belgium and France, because

both countries recruited Moroccan workers

very early on - in the late 1950s and early 1960s.

This is connected to your second question,

the historic relation between

the Netherlands and Morocco. It is true that

the relations started in 1605, in the early 17th

century. In fact, the Netherlands, being a Christian

nation, was the first Christian nation to sign

a trade treaty with a Muslim country, being

Morocco. That happened in 1605 and the Moroccan

ambassador, who did all the negotiations in the

Dutch republic, was Samuel Pallache.

Samuel Pallache

was the Moroccan ambassador

to the Moroccan sultan in the Netherlands.

Here we see that Jewish-Moroccans

in this period played a very important role in

sustaining the relations between both nations.

In fact, the Pallache family played a significant

role. Brothers of Samuel and his son as well

acted as intermediaries, as ambassadors to

the Moroccan state in the Dutch republic.

In fact, Samuel Pallache and other members of the

Pallache family are buried in Ouderkerk aan de Amstel,

which is not far from Amsterdam. The

migration waves of the 1950s and 1960s

were mostly composed of Moroccan Muslims. So the

Moroccan-Jewish community, which obviously migrated

from Morocco to different parts of the world,

did not come to the Netherlands. I believe it's

because they did not have any familiarity with

Dutch culture. In general, most of them

were high-skilled, especially those who migrated

later on in the 60s and 70s. Apart

from Israel, they went to France, to the US,

to Canada, and now to the Netherlands. I've done

some research on the Moroccan-Jewish community in

the Netherlands and found that the total number

of that community is around 50-60 members, so it's very

small, which is fascinating, as well.

When we talk about the guest

workers, we're talking about

unskilled workers from an agricultural

region in Morocco. Growing up in Morocco,

they had no opportunity to go to school, so

these men were in most cases illiterate,

or only had a couple of years of

Qur'anic school, for example.

So talking about myths, the Dutch

government was not interested in unskilled workers,

as I mentioned, but in skilled workers, which is

another myth, because the average Moroccan, the

profile of the Moroccan immigrant, is a man from

the Rif with little to no schooling, unskilled,

worked in the heavy industry, has done

dirty jobs in the Netherlands,

and then became unemployed in the 1980s. That

is the average profile of the Moroccan guest worker.

No education whatsoever. And that is why the

developments, I saw just within one generation, are

significant. Because their sons and daughters

excel in education in the Netherlands,

in general. They go to university, they go to

colleges, they graduate, and they're actually doing

a great job. To be able to achieve

that within just one generation, coming

from parents who could not assist with homework,

with help whatsoever, or didn't even understand

the educational system in the Netherlands, that is,

I think, very significant and worth mentioning.

We have a number of

other great questions. Let me

turn to a question from a guest. Here is

the question. Are there parallels that can be drawn

between Turkish worker migration to Germany

and that of the Moroccans to the Netherlands?

Professor Bouras, would you like to

unshare your screen? Sorry, of course!

The Turkish guest workers were

very similar to Moroccan guest workers. Most

Turkish guest workers migrated to

the Netherlands and Germany.

Those were the main countries of destination

for Turkish workers. For Moroccans, there's

a small number of Moroccans in Germany.

Most of them, obviously, settled in France

where there is a French-Moroccan community of

over a million people, and Belgium and the Netherlands.

As there are similarities between the

two groups, even if you look

at the Netherlands, the Turkish community and

the Moroccan community, are very similar in terms

of level of education, in terms of jobs they've

done, in terms of their religious backgrounds, so

a lot of similarities. The main difference is that

the Dutch and the German governments, early on

in the beginning of the 1960s, recruited workers,

whereas Moroccan immigrants that came to Germany

and the Netherlands, were not recruited but came as

independent immigrants. That is the main difference.

Thank you very much. Let me

move on to a question

from Alexander: Is the Moroccan immigration

and the experience of Dutch-Moroccans similar

to Jewish Ashkenazi immigrants to the

Netherlands during earlier centuries?

We've just published a book called "Migration

as DNA of Amsterdam," in which we looked

at the migration of Muslims and Jews

from the 16th century until today.

You can say that the Ashkenazi immigrants,

that came to the Netherlands during those years,

were also low-skilled workers, or

have worked in their specific niches.

They would live in Jewish neighborhoods, compared

to Moroccans living also in very specific

neighborhoods, where there is a large concentration

of Moroccans and other immigrant groups.

The Dutch republic was very

tolerant towards other religions.

Back in the early 17th century, it was in

the Netherlands, where a mosque was established and

a synagogue was established, as well. The only

difference is that the number of the Ashkenazi

community was larger back then than the Moroccan

community was back in the early 1960s. So there are

some similarities. They were considered "the other",

because of their different background,

because of their specific skills, because of their

different culture, their religious backgrounds.

So you could say that in terms of those characteristics

there were similarities, but then again, Muslim

immigration to the Dutch republic from the 17th

century onward is not that similar to the

Jewish migration to the Netherlands in the same

period. I see similarities, but I think

there are more differences. Thanks very much.

Moving on to a question from Phillipe. Thank you,

that was super interesting. Could you please expand

on how the moral panic with respect to Moroccans

in the Netherlands is different or similar to that

of the moral panics around Moroccans specifically,

or Maghrebians more generally, in other European

nations? I was specifically interested in how

the Netherlands' comparatively robust social,

democratic support structures interface, or

not, with moral panics around ethnic minorities, and

racism more broadly, from a comparative perspective

relative to other European nations. Also,

how does the Moroccan experience in the

Netherlands contrast, or not, from the experience

of Caribbean immigrants from former Dutch colonies?

I think there are a lot of similarities in

terms of the moral panic towards the Maghrebi

or the Moroccan communities. The Netherlands and

Belgium are very similar, but France is also

important in this respect, because of the populist

waves that we've seen since the mid-1990s,

especially in the Netherlands. I think the

developments in the Netherlands came

earlier than in other

European countries.

The similarities are mostly racism and

Islamophobia that is directed towards

these communities. The Dutch society is

a bit different at the same time,

because we had very early on, in

the years 2000, very important

international events that had an

impact on all Muslim communities in Europe. Especially

after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, which had an

impact on Muslim communities throughout Europe.

I think that in the Netherlands we had two events, that

played an important role in how Muslims in general,

and Moroccans in particular, were portrayed. And

that is the murder of Pim Fortuym in 2002.

Politician Pim Fortuym. And then two years

later, in 2004, the murder of Theo van Gogh, which

was a filmmaker. He was murdered by a

Dutch-Moroccan man of the second generation.

Those events had a deep impact on the communities

in the Netherlands. If you compare that to Belgium

and France, obviously,

there is a specific history with

the postcolonial communities in France, mostly the

Algerian immigrants and their children. But I think

the Dutch society

was assumed to be a very tolerant society,

in which multiculturalism was

how it should be. Multiculturalism was

celebrated in the Netherlands from the early 1960s

and it was not only in the early

If you compare that to other immigrant groups

in the Netherlands, but especially post-colonial

immigrants, it's only a part of public and political

discourse how slavery, the slave history, and how

the colonial history has an effect on groups

today. That has been a part of the discussion only in

recent years. As you perhaps know,

several Dutch cities, Amsterdam being the

first one, apologized for the slave trade

and acknowledged that that history still has its

impact on today's communities in terms of racism

and in terms of ethnic profiling for example.

The Dutch government acknowledged the existence

of institutional racism only recently.

It's different in France, because France believes that ethnic

organization, or ethnic organizer, is considered

separatist and is considered as undermining

the French ideal of fraternity, liberty,

equality. So it's frowned upon if immigrant

communities have their own organizations,

or are organized in terms of their ethnicity.

And that is something that is very common

in the Netherlands historically, because the Dutch

society is a society of polarization. So it was not

frowned upon when Turkish immigrants and Moroccan

immigrants organized in their own pillar, if you

will. In fact, it was considered a way to achieve

emancipation through polarization. That was the

motto for many years in integration policies. In

France, that was different. In Germany, I see again a

difference with the Netherlands. That's why I started giving you all

these statistics, which is very uncommon in other

European countries. We have this fantastic Bureau

of Statistics (CBS) that gathers all this

information based on ethnicity, based on generation,

based on all sorts of characteristics.

That is something that is very typical Dutch and

typical American, as well. Categorization

in the racial categories and ethnic

categories, but you will not find those statistics

in France, or in Germany. In Germany,

because of the World War II history

and the implication of gathering religious

statistics and ethnic statistics. They don't do

that. The Netherlands is a bit different, because

we have always had a very multi-culturalistic policy,

which respected migrants' religious and ethnic

backgrounds, and celebrated migrants' religious

and ethnic backgrounds, and encourage migrants to

hold on to their cultural beliefs.

Again, emancipation was believed to be

better achieved through polarization.

I hope that answers the question. A great answer,

thank you so much. We have more

questions, but I just want to interpret

on that same sort of, but slightly different,

question around moral panics. It was clear in

US immigration history that there were particular

kinds of moral panics over the immigration of

male workers, who did not come with their spouses.

I'm wondering what you see, in

historical terms, in terms of the reaction of Dutch

society to that first generation coming without

their spouses? Was there a moral panic around

the sexual relations or marriage relations

between immigrants and others? And then

sort of a conversing around family

migration, was the moral panic greater

around the expansion of the community

through family reunification?

Sort of paradoxically. I just wonder what kind

of levels of moral panics you see associated with

these questions of family relationships and sexuality

and so on. That's an excellent question.

The moral panic existed towards the first

generation of immigrants, but mostly it was the

Italian and the Spanish guest workers, that were

surrounded with this moral panic. They had

a lot of similarities with Dutch society

in terms of religious backgrounds, and there were

actually riots happening throughout the 1960s,

and the early 70s because

Italian men and Spanish men were believed

to steal Dutch women, our women. So there wasn't

so much panic with Moroccan

immigrants, because they came at the time that they

were very much needed. They were welcomed.

In all the interviews that we did in the past,

the men also stressed that they were welcomed with

open arms, so there was not so much moral panic

surrounding the first generation of Moroccan

immigrants. I think that moral panic

surrounds the second generation, so the sons and

daughters, but mostly men. Moral panic is quite

often about these Moroccan men, sons of the first

generation, and causing problems, harassing people on

the streets. That is attributed

to their failed integration into Dutch society.

So they were not able to successfully

integrate in Dutch society

and they caused problems. Again, as I mentioned

before, they cause problems, but mostly they

have problems, because of what happened -

specifically with family unification that

coincided with mass unemployment, that caused a lot

of tension within families, and

even harmed the integration process of a lot of

members of the second generation. So the moral

panic is about the younger generations, those

who are trying to find their place in the society

and quite often believe that they deserve to be

here. This is when the integration paradox

is mentioned in a lot of literature.

It's not their parents, who

experience exclusion so much, it's their

children. It's the second generation that is

excluded, that faces racism and discrimination.

That is the integration paradox. The

more successfully integrated you are, the more

exclusion you face, the more experiences of

racism you have. And it is when that is

stressed, that paradox is mentioned

the moral panic comes into play,. They

are considered poorly integrated and causing a

lot of problems, because the first generation

didn't voice their concerns that

much. It's the second generation that is more hurt

and uses its voice more than their parents.

The moral panic is not so much on

the first generation Moroccan men, but on their

children and grandchildren. Thanks very much!

Let me return to a couple more

questions from our guests. In fact,

I'll ask them both at once since we

have four minutes remaining. And you can

answer. Sure! For the first one: Thank you very

much for such an instructive talk.

I was wondering if you could tell us a bit more

about first the photographs you used in your

presentation, their context and how you use them

in your work - a concern of many people these days

in terms of visual technology. And the second question: The

kind of social activities that brought the first

generation Moroccans together in the Netherlands.

And the second question: The Netherlands is quite

unique in destinations for Moroccan migrants in

that it is home to a majority of population.

Is there any tension that comes with that between

different groups of Moroccans in the Netherlands?

Excellent questions. Let me start with the

photographs. Yeah, they can be used as sources,

as well. You can look at what they were

wearing, clothing is very important, how

their haircuts were shaped. The photographs I use throughout

my research, I collect them from family

albums and personal collections. When

Moroccan men came first, guest workers -

the men, were not Muslims.

They were men, young men, babies quite often,

coming in the early 70s. Adventurous men.

In the perception, they've always been

Muslim and that did not happen. They became Muslim

once their stay prolonged and the community

grew in number and composition. I think

those pictures show us also the

factor of age. We tend to forget that

immigrants come at a younger age.

These are men with specific needs, with

specific activities that they organize.

Today we're talking about Muslims, but

Moroccan immigrants did not became Muslims in the

Netherlands. Not until the early 1990s, when all of

a sudden the Dutch society and the Dutch government

realized: Oh, these are Muslims. We never knew.

That is because they were not very

outspoken about their religious identity

when they first arrived in the Netherlands.

I think the pictures and the photographs

can tell us a lot more about how they looked, even

the women - you won't see a lot of headscarves.

Not until the 1980s, when the community

grew larger and had their own organizations

including religious organizations, being mosques,

were established in the Netherlands.

That didn't happen until the late 1970s. We

tend to have a very one-dimensional perception

of who Moroccan immigrants are. Not only the

history - but supported by all these pictures - can

give us a more varied view of that community.

The social activities - the first Moroccan

worker organization was established in 1975 in

Amsterdam - Committee of Moroccan Workers

in the Netherlands. They had two goals.

The first one was to improve the working conditions

and the housing conditions of Moroccan guest workers

in the Netherlands, and the second goal was to

fight oppression of the Moroccan regime. This is

a whole other history, so I'm not going to talk

about that, but they were very much engaged,

especially in the 70s and early 80s, with what was

happening in Morocco. They organized a lot of stuff

around that, the establishment of mosques also

happened in the mid-1970s, the first prayer houses

started in living rooms or old garages that were

rebuilt and were used as mosques. The first real

mosque, if you will, was in Amsterdam in 1974.

It's the Al Kabir Mosque and it still exists.

There were a lot of activities. Again,

these challenges, the dominant assumption

of Moroccan immigrants as one-dimensional

figures - sure, they were guest workers

but they had other needs, as well.

They were active in theater, they were active

in sports, the book you mentioned, Laurie,

the beginning, about the pioneers.

They were very active in

Dutch society. Having

all these different contacts,

sports activities, film and theater, mosques, worker

organizations, labor unions. This challenges

the idea that they only came here to

work and spend their lives between work and sleep.

No, they had plenty of fun and those pictures

and the stories are a recollection of that.

The majority of the Dutch-Moroccan community

is of Riffian descent, speaks Amazigh

and follows the Amazigh culture.

There are a lot of assumptions

about Amazigh. The people with

Amazigh culture are sometimes

considered more traditional than Moroccan

immigrants from other parts of the country, or more

conservative. And in some respects that's true.

I talked about where the

concentrations of people are. So you have

Rotterdam, which has a large concentration of

Amazigh from Nador. That has positive effects.

People help each other, there is support network and

all of that, but the downside is that there is

social control, which also exists

within Moroccan communities.

Women or girls feel that they have

less freedom than for example their brothers,

cousins etc. So that happens, but in

terms of conflicts within the community, I don't

believe that. The Moroccan-Dutch

community is very diverse ethnically and

linguistically. Religiously - not so much.

I don't think there are tensions between

the communities simply because of the fact

that almost 75% is of Amazigh descent, so

it is the majority. We have excellent actors,

and theater makers, who have an Amazigh

background and use their background to showcase

the richness of their culture, which especially in Morocco

was oppressed for a very long time.

So no tensions.

Thank you so much, Dr. Bouras. Thank you, all, today!

And of course most of all to our speaker,

Dr. Bouras. We hope you'll join us again next year

in person for the 2023 Van Tilburg Lecture, which we

anticipate will be on contributions

of the Dutch theater. You'll also find

programming talks on Europe and Russian matters

on Facebook and on our website at the UCLA

Center for European and Russian Studies. So for now

I just want to thank everyone and especially Dr. Bouras

for joining us today and wish you a good rest of your day.

Dr. Bouras, would you stay on for a moment as we conclude?

Thank you to everyone for joining

us today and see you next year!