Posted on http://mindtheglo.be on Tuesday 3rd June, 2008
President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe must have miscalculated the general feeling of the international community towards him by daring to go to Rome for the World Food Summit (WFS), which opens today.
He must have taken the patience that world leaders have had for his autocratic rule of 28 years - that has left his country in a comatose state and driven inflation to the highest in recent history - as a sign of endorsement of his atrocities.
But the reality must have dawned on him by now. While the British Prime Minister u-turned on hearing that Mugabe was already in Rome for the WFS, the Australian Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, described the Zimbabwean head of state's presence in Rome as "obscene".
But make no mistake about his antics back home: he is a king that is being worshipped as a god and his word is supreme. Even as he is being taunted and treated as a leper by world leaders, his forces are fast-moving against Morgan Tsvangirai and his party in the run up to the June 27 presidential rerun.
On Monday, no fewer than two opposition law makers and 70 other supporters had been arrested and detained by Mugabe forces on trumped-up charges of inciting violence.
Mugabe is also threatening to deal ruthlessly with the American Ambassador to Zimbabwe, Mr. James McGee, for daring to insist democracy must take roots in Harare.
The unfortunate thing is that while the world expects a change of government in Zimbabwe, they have not done enough to encourage the forces of change to consolidate themselves in the country.
As it turned out, the UN and many of the world powers did not pile enough pressure on Harare to get the results of the May 29 election out on time thereby allowing Mugabe's sympathisers to come up with a 'result' on their own terms and at their own time, thus getting away with the true wish of the people.
Having recovered from Tsvangirai's pyrrhic victory, Mugabe now barks like a wounded lion eager to devour anyone on his way as the date for the rerun draws closer, his humiliation in Rome notwithstanding.
Thursday 25 September 2008
The beauty of UK's free speech
Posted on http:mindtheglo.be on Friday 30th May, 2008
The footage of the encounter between Home Secretary Ms Jacqui Smith and Police Federation Chairman Jan Berry at a police conference in Bournemouth demonstrates Britain's undiluted respect for freedom of speech.
At the conference, Mrs. Berry accused Ms Smith of betrayal for insisting on backdating the payment of the 2.5 percent pay rise for police officers, which amounts to £30 million when the government had no difficulty in raising £2.7 billion to bail itself out of the 10p tax debacle.
Mrs. Berry's affront might have somehow excited many others to query Smith and forced her to depart the venue of the meeting rather too early.
Berry and her compatriots are lucky to be British. I can swear that such audacity would never be welcome in Nigeria and most African nations, where the rule seems to be: the government is always right and above reproach.
In Nigeria, Mrs. Berry and all the police officers who confronted Smith at Bournemouth would have been arrested and detained before the end of the event. If that was not done, the police affairs commission would have dismissed Berry before the end of the conference.
In Zimbabwe for instance, two labour leaders have been arrested and detained for daring to say anything against the government of Robert Mugabe. They were arrested for their speeches at the May Day celebration on May 1.
Yes, that is it. While in Britain it is counted as a right for workers to speak against official injustice as a means of fixing a problem, it is a serious crime in African nations for an employee to criticise the government in any form.
That is the difference between a free government and the ones under bondage, hunger and starvation, where freedom of expression and respect for the rule of law rights remain conceptual variables.
But, that's the beauty of UK's free speech.
The footage of the encounter between Home Secretary Ms Jacqui Smith and Police Federation Chairman Jan Berry at a police conference in Bournemouth demonstrates Britain's undiluted respect for freedom of speech.
At the conference, Mrs. Berry accused Ms Smith of betrayal for insisting on backdating the payment of the 2.5 percent pay rise for police officers, which amounts to £30 million when the government had no difficulty in raising £2.7 billion to bail itself out of the 10p tax debacle.
Mrs. Berry's affront might have somehow excited many others to query Smith and forced her to depart the venue of the meeting rather too early.
Berry and her compatriots are lucky to be British. I can swear that such audacity would never be welcome in Nigeria and most African nations, where the rule seems to be: the government is always right and above reproach.
In Nigeria, Mrs. Berry and all the police officers who confronted Smith at Bournemouth would have been arrested and detained before the end of the event. If that was not done, the police affairs commission would have dismissed Berry before the end of the conference.
In Zimbabwe for instance, two labour leaders have been arrested and detained for daring to say anything against the government of Robert Mugabe. They were arrested for their speeches at the May Day celebration on May 1.
Yes, that is it. While in Britain it is counted as a right for workers to speak against official injustice as a means of fixing a problem, it is a serious crime in African nations for an employee to criticise the government in any form.
That is the difference between a free government and the ones under bondage, hunger and starvation, where freedom of expression and respect for the rule of law rights remain conceptual variables.
But, that's the beauty of UK's free speech.
The problem with urbanisation in Africa and Asia
Posted on http:mindtheglo.be on Sunday 1st June, 2008
Slum outside Nairobi, ©Angela7dreams at Flickr If one were to take the latest statistics from the United Nations seriously, the growth of urban population in Asia and Africa raises concern about their ability to get out of the woods. The two continents could be said to be heading towards the discomfort zone unless an urgent action is taken to salvage them.
The student network People and Planet quotes the UN as saying that while urban areas are gaining an estimated 60 million people per year -over 1 million every week- many cities in developing countries' are growing two or three times faster than the overall population. As a consequence, about 5 billion people are expected to live in cities by 2030 - about 61 per cent of the global population of 8.1 billion.
Now comes the headache.
The UN estimates that within the next 30 years, virtually all population growth will take place in the urban areas of developing countries- from 2.3 billion in 2007 to nearly 4 billion by 2030 - while that of the developed countries is projected to rise marginally from 900 million in 2000 to 1 billion in 2030.
The urban population of Africa is projected to increase to 53 per cent by 2030, while that of Asia will be 54 per cent.
Worried by this emerging trend, the Executive Director of United Nations Fund for Population Activities, Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, warns: "We cannot confront the massive challenges of poverty, hunger, diseases and environmental destruction unless we address issues of population and reproductive health."
However, there is hope that if the urban explosion is well managed, it would trigger some benefits for the nations. Chief of the UN Population Fund's Resource Mobilization Branch, Jean-Noel Wetterwald, acknowledges that urban explosion can be managed if governments prepare for it. "But if they put their heads in the sand", he says, the future prospects will be frightening.
"Urbanization is unavoidable," he says. "You cannot stop it. So, it is better to prepare for it and, rather than concentrating on measures to avoid or to exclude people from cities, make sure that they have access to services such as health and schools".
The UN warns: "Humanity will have to undergo a "revolution in thinking". The world body estimates that within the next 30 years, the population of African and Asian cities will double, adding 1.7 billion people or more than the present populations of China and the United States. With the rising urbanization has come an attendant problem of housing, Medicare, water, sanitation and food shortages. Add that to the looming food crisis, which according to experts is going to bite harder in both Asia and Africa and see what comes out.
Again, add the unending atrocities that are raging in Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Somalia and the protracted oil theft war being waged by Niger Delta militias against the Nigerian government in Africa and see what becomes of Africa. Think of the impact of the Burma cyclone and the Chinese earthquake on the land of Asia and begin to imagine where the continents are heading: harm's way. Can they come out of it and how soon?
Slum outside Nairobi, ©Angela7dreams at Flickr If one were to take the latest statistics from the United Nations seriously, the growth of urban population in Asia and Africa raises concern about their ability to get out of the woods. The two continents could be said to be heading towards the discomfort zone unless an urgent action is taken to salvage them.
The student network People and Planet quotes the UN as saying that while urban areas are gaining an estimated 60 million people per year -over 1 million every week- many cities in developing countries' are growing two or three times faster than the overall population. As a consequence, about 5 billion people are expected to live in cities by 2030 - about 61 per cent of the global population of 8.1 billion.
Now comes the headache.
The UN estimates that within the next 30 years, virtually all population growth will take place in the urban areas of developing countries- from 2.3 billion in 2007 to nearly 4 billion by 2030 - while that of the developed countries is projected to rise marginally from 900 million in 2000 to 1 billion in 2030.
The urban population of Africa is projected to increase to 53 per cent by 2030, while that of Asia will be 54 per cent.
Worried by this emerging trend, the Executive Director of United Nations Fund for Population Activities, Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, warns: "We cannot confront the massive challenges of poverty, hunger, diseases and environmental destruction unless we address issues of population and reproductive health."
However, there is hope that if the urban explosion is well managed, it would trigger some benefits for the nations. Chief of the UN Population Fund's Resource Mobilization Branch, Jean-Noel Wetterwald, acknowledges that urban explosion can be managed if governments prepare for it. "But if they put their heads in the sand", he says, the future prospects will be frightening.
"Urbanization is unavoidable," he says. "You cannot stop it. So, it is better to prepare for it and, rather than concentrating on measures to avoid or to exclude people from cities, make sure that they have access to services such as health and schools".
The UN warns: "Humanity will have to undergo a "revolution in thinking". The world body estimates that within the next 30 years, the population of African and Asian cities will double, adding 1.7 billion people or more than the present populations of China and the United States. With the rising urbanization has come an attendant problem of housing, Medicare, water, sanitation and food shortages. Add that to the looming food crisis, which according to experts is going to bite harder in both Asia and Africa and see what comes out.
Again, add the unending atrocities that are raging in Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Somalia and the protracted oil theft war being waged by Niger Delta militias against the Nigerian government in Africa and see what becomes of Africa. Think of the impact of the Burma cyclone and the Chinese earthquake on the land of Asia and begin to imagine where the continents are heading: harm's way. Can they come out of it and how soon?
UK: No longer at ease with asylum-seekers
They are ruled by fear. They sleep and wake up with frustrations. Their daily life is enmeshed in uncertainty. These are men, women and children who are in search of a place to put their heads in the United Kingdom and they are known as asylum-seekers.
Though driven by various factors they are bonded by one goal-the issuance of a piece of paper by the British Home Office that would enable them to live, work and settle down in the country.
But, like a ship that is being tossed by tidal waves, most of them are still drifting, not knowing what fate has in stock for them. Some of them may be in detention the next moment; others may be deported while a few may be lucky to get refugee status and stay. But in all, their fate hangs in the balance while their papers are being processed by immigration officials.
While many anxious persons are fleeing their countries to seek refuge in the UK, the country is actively employing measures aimed at reducing the number.
In a letter to the Home Affairs Committee, the Head of the Border and Immigration Agency, Lin Homer, confessed that asylum applications had dropped to the lowest level in the UK and was proud about the discovery.
Homer said, “Between January and September 2007, there were 16,520 principal asylum applications lodged, which represents a seven percent fall in applications compared to the same period in 2006. It is also the lowest number of applications since 1992.”
The Home Office Secretary, Jacqui Smith, in another report also boasted: “Unfounded asylum applications are down from 70,200 in 2003/4 to 17,200 in 2006/7. In 2006, only 17 out of 100 who applied for asylum were recognised as refugees and granted asylum.”
However, while the country’s immigration agencies are happy with the downward trend, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees is unhappy with the decline in the number of refugees being admitted by the UK.
In a letter written by the UNHCR Representative to the MPs, the commission complained that the country was dropping in its rating of asylum-taking nations.
The letter, signed by Anne Dawson-Shepherd, pointed out that asylum applications to the UK had plummeted by 61 percent, far behind France.
The UNHCR further said that the UK hosted about 2 percent of the world’s asylum population, which was less than the 2 million that Pakistan and Iran hold.
But in an apparent response, Labour Immigration Minister, Liam Byrne, said in a major policy statement that the administration was set implement a new set of rules that would make the asylum and immigration system symbiotically beneficial to the country and asylum seekers and eliminate those who have no legal basis to come to the UK.
“Our asylum system must command public confidence, protect the security of the UK, prevent abuse of our laws, and be fair to both the British public and those genuinely in need of asylum”, Byrne stated.
The National Audit Office estimates that there are between 155,000 and 283,500 refused asylum seekers in the UK, including children, being detained in different locations in the country.
Medical Foundation, a London-based non-governmental body that renders medical services to asylum seekers, complained about the ordeal of applicants in the hands of immigrations officials.
“Our main worry is that people are being tortured in the course of seeking asylum in the UK. Immigrations officials are too suspicious of asylum seekers to the point that they do not believe even people with genuine cases, thereby defeating the purpose of asylum. They need to be properly trained to understand the whole process to reduce what the applicants go through and make the system work”, Aliya Mughall, the Media Officer for Medical Foundation said.
Under the Immigration Act of 1999, those who fail to get asylum, must leave the country or be removed by the Home Office. However, those who are refused asylum have the right to appeal and may remain on government support until the appeal is determined by the Asylum Immigration Tribunal, AIT.
The Border and Immigrations Agency, an organ of the Home Office, has been deporting and detaining asylum seekers in consonance with the dictates of the law. In the last quarter of 2007, a total of 3120 failed asylum applicants including their dependants were deported.
Amnesty International deplores the detention of asylum seekers. “We are concerned that asylum seekers are being detained at various stages in the UK. Detention should be the last resort in a fair and just situation. Besides, it takes quite a long time to process an asylum’s application, leaving them to remain in agony and suspense”, says David Edwards, an AI Researcher on EU based in London.
A Home Office report confirms that 2325 persons were being detained in the UK under the Immigration Act of 1999. The breakdown shows that 175 Europeans were in detention, followed by 265 Americans and 965 Africans. Detainees from the Middle East were 235, Asian were 680 while five were from unknown locations. Of the number of detainees, 120 were European asylum seekers, 125, Americans, 655 Africans, 195 from the Middle East, 530 from Asia.
A further breakdown reveals that of the 1625 asylum seekers being detained, 270 are women, 1975 are men while 55 are children.
Rights groups are however worried about the detention of child asylum seekers by the UK immigration agencies. “It is absolutely wrong to detain children who are seeking asylum. It is our hope that this country will begin to treat children well and stop infringing on their rights,” says Hannah Ward, Media Officer for Refugee Council, a London group that campaigns for migrants’ rights.
But a spokesman for the Home Office, Gayle Douglas, denies the allegations of torture of asylum seekers. He said however that only persons who commit criminal activities are arrested, detained or deported. “It is our policy not to do anything that could infringe on the rights of asylum seekers”, Douglas said.
But the MP for Oxford and Abington, Evans Harris, wants the Home Office to take tougher actions to weed out unwanted elements in Britain. Evans says: “If they don't act tough, then other people will deliberately develop fatal kidney failure in order to evade immigration control”, Harris said.
Worried by the plight of failed asylum seekers in the UK, the Hackney Migrant Centre has begun rendering humanitarian services for those denied refuge by the Home Office.
“The HMC will raise money to help people who are denied asylum; feed, train and provide medical and legal services for them”, HMC explained.
Wanted: A humane asylum system for the UK
Wanted: A humane asylum system for the UK
by Sunday Daniel
One of the most topical issues in the UK has to do with immigration and the treatment of asylum seekers. The United Kingdom, which is a signatory to the United Nations Convention of 1951, which authorises nations to grant asylum to people fleeing from repressions and wars, harbours a large population of asylum seekers and refugees. It is also a signatory to the UN Convention on Human Rights of 1974, which guarantees individuals freedom.
However, concerns are being raised by international bodies, human rights groups and individuals that those seeking sanctuary in the UK are not fairly treated by immigration officials. The contention is that asylum seekers, including children, are detained at various stages, deported or maltreated, a charge which Home Office denies but promises to review the detention of child asylum seekers.
It has also emerged that the UK remains the only EU nation still detaining asylum-seeking children.
Besides that, rights groups complain that the UK immigration officials torture asylum seekers, while the process of appeals and entitlement is generally very frustrating. Article 3 of the European Union Convention on Human Rights prohibits the torture of persons. It states: “No person shall be subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment.”
The UK displayed an inhuman action in the recent deportation of a cancer patient and widow, Ama Sumani, from her hospital bed in Wales to Ghana. Although the Head of the Border and Immigration Agency, Lin Homer, tried to justify the action before the House of Commons on January 15, 2008, it is doubtful if such action could be justified under the EU or the UN law. Assuming that Sumani breached any law, her health condition should have prompted the BIA officials to show a little compassion and restrain. Where has the milk of human kindness suddenly gone in the UK that such a precarious person should be driven away with impunity just as her five-year visa expired?
While the UK continues to assure that it is committed to a just and fair asylum system, its actions in some instances, portray the exact opposite. Between 2006 and 2007, no fewer than 2000 asylum seekers have been evicted from the UK, amongst them, three Darfuris and 32 Iraqis who should have been protected here because of the wars in their countries, thus defeating the aim of asylum.
We wish to appeal to the UK to take urgent steps to reform its asylum system and give it a human face so as to restore the needed confidence. Britain has contributed immensely to the enthronement of democracy and good governance across the globe and has emerged as a role model for other countries. It should be mindful that any negative action on its part could send a wrong signal to despotic regimes that it is trying to transform. It must therefore address the issues raised and make its asylum system more humane and people-oriented. The time to do it is now.
Though driven by various factors they are bonded by one goal-the issuance of a piece of paper by the British Home Office that would enable them to live, work and settle down in the country.
But, like a ship that is being tossed by tidal waves, most of them are still drifting, not knowing what fate has in stock for them. Some of them may be in detention the next moment; others may be deported while a few may be lucky to get refugee status and stay. But in all, their fate hangs in the balance while their papers are being processed by immigration officials.
While many anxious persons are fleeing their countries to seek refuge in the UK, the country is actively employing measures aimed at reducing the number.
In a letter to the Home Affairs Committee, the Head of the Border and Immigration Agency, Lin Homer, confessed that asylum applications had dropped to the lowest level in the UK and was proud about the discovery.
Homer said, “Between January and September 2007, there were 16,520 principal asylum applications lodged, which represents a seven percent fall in applications compared to the same period in 2006. It is also the lowest number of applications since 1992.”
The Home Office Secretary, Jacqui Smith, in another report also boasted: “Unfounded asylum applications are down from 70,200 in 2003/4 to 17,200 in 2006/7. In 2006, only 17 out of 100 who applied for asylum were recognised as refugees and granted asylum.”
However, while the country’s immigration agencies are happy with the downward trend, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees is unhappy with the decline in the number of refugees being admitted by the UK.
In a letter written by the UNHCR Representative to the MPs, the commission complained that the country was dropping in its rating of asylum-taking nations.
The letter, signed by Anne Dawson-Shepherd, pointed out that asylum applications to the UK had plummeted by 61 percent, far behind France.
The UNHCR further said that the UK hosted about 2 percent of the world’s asylum population, which was less than the 2 million that Pakistan and Iran hold.
But in an apparent response, Labour Immigration Minister, Liam Byrne, said in a major policy statement that the administration was set implement a new set of rules that would make the asylum and immigration system symbiotically beneficial to the country and asylum seekers and eliminate those who have no legal basis to come to the UK.
“Our asylum system must command public confidence, protect the security of the UK, prevent abuse of our laws, and be fair to both the British public and those genuinely in need of asylum”, Byrne stated.
The National Audit Office estimates that there are between 155,000 and 283,500 refused asylum seekers in the UK, including children, being detained in different locations in the country.
Medical Foundation, a London-based non-governmental body that renders medical services to asylum seekers, complained about the ordeal of applicants in the hands of immigrations officials.
“Our main worry is that people are being tortured in the course of seeking asylum in the UK. Immigrations officials are too suspicious of asylum seekers to the point that they do not believe even people with genuine cases, thereby defeating the purpose of asylum. They need to be properly trained to understand the whole process to reduce what the applicants go through and make the system work”, Aliya Mughall, the Media Officer for Medical Foundation said.
Under the Immigration Act of 1999, those who fail to get asylum, must leave the country or be removed by the Home Office. However, those who are refused asylum have the right to appeal and may remain on government support until the appeal is determined by the Asylum Immigration Tribunal, AIT.
The Border and Immigrations Agency, an organ of the Home Office, has been deporting and detaining asylum seekers in consonance with the dictates of the law. In the last quarter of 2007, a total of 3120 failed asylum applicants including their dependants were deported.
Amnesty International deplores the detention of asylum seekers. “We are concerned that asylum seekers are being detained at various stages in the UK. Detention should be the last resort in a fair and just situation. Besides, it takes quite a long time to process an asylum’s application, leaving them to remain in agony and suspense”, says David Edwards, an AI Researcher on EU based in London.
A Home Office report confirms that 2325 persons were being detained in the UK under the Immigration Act of 1999. The breakdown shows that 175 Europeans were in detention, followed by 265 Americans and 965 Africans. Detainees from the Middle East were 235, Asian were 680 while five were from unknown locations. Of the number of detainees, 120 were European asylum seekers, 125, Americans, 655 Africans, 195 from the Middle East, 530 from Asia.
A further breakdown reveals that of the 1625 asylum seekers being detained, 270 are women, 1975 are men while 55 are children.
Rights groups are however worried about the detention of child asylum seekers by the UK immigration agencies. “It is absolutely wrong to detain children who are seeking asylum. It is our hope that this country will begin to treat children well and stop infringing on their rights,” says Hannah Ward, Media Officer for Refugee Council, a London group that campaigns for migrants’ rights.
But a spokesman for the Home Office, Gayle Douglas, denies the allegations of torture of asylum seekers. He said however that only persons who commit criminal activities are arrested, detained or deported. “It is our policy not to do anything that could infringe on the rights of asylum seekers”, Douglas said.
But the MP for Oxford and Abington, Evans Harris, wants the Home Office to take tougher actions to weed out unwanted elements in Britain. Evans says: “If they don't act tough, then other people will deliberately develop fatal kidney failure in order to evade immigration control”, Harris said.
Worried by the plight of failed asylum seekers in the UK, the Hackney Migrant Centre has begun rendering humanitarian services for those denied refuge by the Home Office.
“The HMC will raise money to help people who are denied asylum; feed, train and provide medical and legal services for them”, HMC explained.
Wanted: A humane asylum system for the UK
Wanted: A humane asylum system for the UK
by Sunday Daniel
One of the most topical issues in the UK has to do with immigration and the treatment of asylum seekers. The United Kingdom, which is a signatory to the United Nations Convention of 1951, which authorises nations to grant asylum to people fleeing from repressions and wars, harbours a large population of asylum seekers and refugees. It is also a signatory to the UN Convention on Human Rights of 1974, which guarantees individuals freedom.
However, concerns are being raised by international bodies, human rights groups and individuals that those seeking sanctuary in the UK are not fairly treated by immigration officials. The contention is that asylum seekers, including children, are detained at various stages, deported or maltreated, a charge which Home Office denies but promises to review the detention of child asylum seekers.
It has also emerged that the UK remains the only EU nation still detaining asylum-seeking children.
Besides that, rights groups complain that the UK immigration officials torture asylum seekers, while the process of appeals and entitlement is generally very frustrating. Article 3 of the European Union Convention on Human Rights prohibits the torture of persons. It states: “No person shall be subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment.”
The UK displayed an inhuman action in the recent deportation of a cancer patient and widow, Ama Sumani, from her hospital bed in Wales to Ghana. Although the Head of the Border and Immigration Agency, Lin Homer, tried to justify the action before the House of Commons on January 15, 2008, it is doubtful if such action could be justified under the EU or the UN law. Assuming that Sumani breached any law, her health condition should have prompted the BIA officials to show a little compassion and restrain. Where has the milk of human kindness suddenly gone in the UK that such a precarious person should be driven away with impunity just as her five-year visa expired?
While the UK continues to assure that it is committed to a just and fair asylum system, its actions in some instances, portray the exact opposite. Between 2006 and 2007, no fewer than 2000 asylum seekers have been evicted from the UK, amongst them, three Darfuris and 32 Iraqis who should have been protected here because of the wars in their countries, thus defeating the aim of asylum.
We wish to appeal to the UK to take urgent steps to reform its asylum system and give it a human face so as to restore the needed confidence. Britain has contributed immensely to the enthronement of democracy and good governance across the globe and has emerged as a role model for other countries. It should be mindful that any negative action on its part could send a wrong signal to despotic regimes that it is trying to transform. It must therefore address the issues raised and make its asylum system more humane and people-oriented. The time to do it is now.
Hunger buffets Democratic Republic of Congo
Posted on http://mindtheglo.be on Thursday 29th May, 2008
Up to 100 persons die daily due to hunger and related causes in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), says The Crisis Group.
But by its very nature, the DRC should not have a food shortage. It is one of the largest African nations richly-endowed by nature which should have ensured its prosperity and food security.
But what nature has generously given them on a platter; DRC's combatants have selfishly sliced with greed. The list of minerals evokes hope: diamond, copper, cobalt, crude oil, gold and cassiterite, to name a few, while agricultural produce is equally vast with coffee, sugar, rubber, cassava, banana, rubber and fruits topping the list.
DRC is however plagued by years of war and power struggle that have paralysed its productive capability, plunging its natives into hunger, malnutrition, poverty and preventable diseases.
Since its independence from Belgium in 1960, DRC has hardly seen peace or stability but wars and conflicts that have tended to decimate the agricultural workforce that accounts for 55 percent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
Emerging statistics from the DRC show that there is not enough food for the population of 56 million. Life expectancy has shortened. most men die at 42 while women are lucky to reach 44.
Despite the reduction in conflict following the emergence of Joseph Kabila, as president in 2002, the army and other security agencies have not been able to establish a firm control in the country to guarantee the needed security and stability for natives to return to their homes and engage in productive ventures and farming.
While many people have been displaced from their homes and are refugees in neighbouring Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda, others hide in the bush to avoid confrontation with militias.
Secretary-General of the DRC's Ministry of Agriculture, Dr. Hubert Ali Ramazani, confesses that his country has a big problem with food production.
"DRC does not have a water or soil problem. We have a good country but lack money to boost the agriculture sector. People need the seeds, meat beef, fish, milk, potatoes, wheat.... Now the price is more expensive for the common people. That is the problem. In DRC, the markets are full of foods, but the people don't have the power to buy what they need..."
The Crisis Group says up to 100 persons die daily due to hunger and related causes.
The World Food Programme plans to get some $4-$5 million food aid for returnee-Congolese and another $4 million to stabilise the country's rail system in Oriental Province.
On the other hand, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is providing $21.8 million through the Catholic Relief Services, a U. S.-based charity, to provide aid to small farmers in DRC and others in combating farm diseases and increase their yield so as to avert food crisis there.
DRC's Minister for Industry, Simon Kiamputu, says the government is trying to restore a system of rule of law necessary for business to thrive.
Mr. Kiamputu says with the country's huge water resources it will be possible for the people to survive the food crisis once the right climate is put in place to ensure stability and food production .
Up to 100 persons die daily due to hunger and related causes in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), says The Crisis Group.
But by its very nature, the DRC should not have a food shortage. It is one of the largest African nations richly-endowed by nature which should have ensured its prosperity and food security.
But what nature has generously given them on a platter; DRC's combatants have selfishly sliced with greed. The list of minerals evokes hope: diamond, copper, cobalt, crude oil, gold and cassiterite, to name a few, while agricultural produce is equally vast with coffee, sugar, rubber, cassava, banana, rubber and fruits topping the list.
DRC is however plagued by years of war and power struggle that have paralysed its productive capability, plunging its natives into hunger, malnutrition, poverty and preventable diseases.
Since its independence from Belgium in 1960, DRC has hardly seen peace or stability but wars and conflicts that have tended to decimate the agricultural workforce that accounts for 55 percent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
Emerging statistics from the DRC show that there is not enough food for the population of 56 million. Life expectancy has shortened. most men die at 42 while women are lucky to reach 44.
Despite the reduction in conflict following the emergence of Joseph Kabila, as president in 2002, the army and other security agencies have not been able to establish a firm control in the country to guarantee the needed security and stability for natives to return to their homes and engage in productive ventures and farming.
While many people have been displaced from their homes and are refugees in neighbouring Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda, others hide in the bush to avoid confrontation with militias.
Secretary-General of the DRC's Ministry of Agriculture, Dr. Hubert Ali Ramazani, confesses that his country has a big problem with food production.
"DRC does not have a water or soil problem. We have a good country but lack money to boost the agriculture sector. People need the seeds, meat beef, fish, milk, potatoes, wheat.... Now the price is more expensive for the common people. That is the problem. In DRC, the markets are full of foods, but the people don't have the power to buy what they need..."
The Crisis Group says up to 100 persons die daily due to hunger and related causes.
The World Food Programme plans to get some $4-$5 million food aid for returnee-Congolese and another $4 million to stabilise the country's rail system in Oriental Province.
On the other hand, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is providing $21.8 million through the Catholic Relief Services, a U. S.-based charity, to provide aid to small farmers in DRC and others in combating farm diseases and increase their yield so as to avert food crisis there.
DRC's Minister for Industry, Simon Kiamputu, says the government is trying to restore a system of rule of law necessary for business to thrive.
Mr. Kiamputu says with the country's huge water resources it will be possible for the people to survive the food crisis once the right climate is put in place to ensure stability and food production .
Burundi: landlocked by poverty
Thursday 5th June, 2008
It should be producing enormous food for consumption and export given its advantage as a landlocked country in Africa. But, Burundi, like its neighbours, is embroiled in internal conflicts that have incapacitated its food production efforts, leading to starvation and hunger in the process.
The nemesis of the assassination of the country's first elected president in 1993 has refused to go away and allow for real planning and development of Burundi. The unending plot by the Hutus and the Tutsis to control the seat of government and the vital organs of state establishments has prolonged the instability for over a decade. Today, Burundi has over 48,000 refugees in Tanzania and other nations while no fewer than 140,000 are known to have been displaced internally as a result of the decade of war, which killed at least 200, 000.
The country, made up of a famished population of 8.6 million, is now confronted with poverty, hunger and threat of diseases. That in itself is worsening the subsistence agricultural sector, which employs 93 percent of the country's labour force, slashing its Gross Domestic Product, GDP to $6.3 million in 2007.
Most of the population [68percent] live below poverty line while life expectancy for men stands at 50.86 while that of women stays at 52.6.
According the CIA World Factbook, food, medicine and electricity are in short supply in the country.
However, Burundi is also a beneficiary of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's $21.8 million for the improvement of farm crops and it is also getting some World Food Programme food aid for its natives, mostly returnees from Tanzania and Rwanda.
Food and Agriculture Organisation, FAO, has begun the rehabilitation of the livestock sector, which also suffered as a result of many years of wars. Under the Programme, 8000 Burundian farmers have received 24,000 goats for rearing under the supervision of some 50 local experts trained in animal husbandry by the FAO. The fund for the project is jointly provided by the United Kingdom, Sweden and Spain.
The United Nations website, Reliefweb, says The United States Agency for International Development, USAID, has also made available the sum of $640,000 to the International Institute of Agriculture to provide farmers in Burundi with high-yielding and disease-resistant cassava seedlings to increase their production.
The main problem facing Burundi now is that its economy seems to stagnate at $1 billion GDP while continued insecurity, subsistent farming and overpopulation may aggravate its food crisis and make it to continue to depend on food aid from the WFP. The only way out is for the country to embark on mechanised food production.
It should be producing enormous food for consumption and export given its advantage as a landlocked country in Africa. But, Burundi, like its neighbours, is embroiled in internal conflicts that have incapacitated its food production efforts, leading to starvation and hunger in the process.
The nemesis of the assassination of the country's first elected president in 1993 has refused to go away and allow for real planning and development of Burundi. The unending plot by the Hutus and the Tutsis to control the seat of government and the vital organs of state establishments has prolonged the instability for over a decade. Today, Burundi has over 48,000 refugees in Tanzania and other nations while no fewer than 140,000 are known to have been displaced internally as a result of the decade of war, which killed at least 200, 000.
The country, made up of a famished population of 8.6 million, is now confronted with poverty, hunger and threat of diseases. That in itself is worsening the subsistence agricultural sector, which employs 93 percent of the country's labour force, slashing its Gross Domestic Product, GDP to $6.3 million in 2007.
Most of the population [68percent] live below poverty line while life expectancy for men stands at 50.86 while that of women stays at 52.6.
According the CIA World Factbook, food, medicine and electricity are in short supply in the country.
However, Burundi is also a beneficiary of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's $21.8 million for the improvement of farm crops and it is also getting some World Food Programme food aid for its natives, mostly returnees from Tanzania and Rwanda.
Food and Agriculture Organisation, FAO, has begun the rehabilitation of the livestock sector, which also suffered as a result of many years of wars. Under the Programme, 8000 Burundian farmers have received 24,000 goats for rearing under the supervision of some 50 local experts trained in animal husbandry by the FAO. The fund for the project is jointly provided by the United Kingdom, Sweden and Spain.
The United Nations website, Reliefweb, says The United States Agency for International Development, USAID, has also made available the sum of $640,000 to the International Institute of Agriculture to provide farmers in Burundi with high-yielding and disease-resistant cassava seedlings to increase their production.
The main problem facing Burundi now is that its economy seems to stagnate at $1 billion GDP while continued insecurity, subsistent farming and overpopulation may aggravate its food crisis and make it to continue to depend on food aid from the WFP. The only way out is for the country to embark on mechanised food production.
The graduation the UK must attain
Sunday 1st June, 2008
If there is anything that excites the duo of Borders and Immigration Minister, Liam Byrne, and the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, it is the drastic reduction in the number of migrants to the UK in the last 15 years.
There is an irony that plays out here.
Immigration authorities are also tightening the rope against illegal entrants especially in the wake the July 7, 2005 terrorists' attacks on London, which have necessitated stricter security measures to safe the over 60 million people in England.
Liam Byrne, Immigration Minister has vowed that there is no going back on measures to flush out those who have no legal basis to stay in the country, a threat that has resulted in at least one illegal immigrant being deported every eight minutes.
Smith points out that asylum applications went down from 70,200 in 2003/4 to 17,200 in 2006/7 while 17 out of 100 who applied for asylum were recognised as refugees and granted asylum in 2006.
According to Lin Homer, Head of the Border and Immigrations Agency, BIA, the 16,520 principal asylum applications lodged between January and September 2007, represents a seven percent fall in applications compared to the same period in 2006 and is also the lowest number of applications since 1992.
Discordant tunes
Some vocal UK-based tabloids have been producing statistics to show that migrants have taken over 85 percent of all new jobs created by the Labour administration, thus prompting Tory Leader, David Cameron, to vilify Gordon Brown for not keeping to his promise to preserve ‘British jobs for British people'.
It was Employment Minister, Stephen Timms, the Employment Minister, who doused the furore with a confirmation that 677,400 vacancies meant for British workers were yet to be taken up, an admission that British jobs might not have been usurped by migrants. In other words, those who want to work could easily avail themselves of the vacancies.
Brown clears the air
The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee on April 1, asked the government to place a cap on immigrants into the country, as such persons did not make any significant contribution to the economy. But in a swift response, British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, argued that migrants contribute as much as £6 billion annually to the UK's economy.
Looking back, it now appears as if the importance of immigrants in the UK has been overlooked due to the discordant tunes on the subject matter.
Trevor Phillips cautions
But, as Trevor Phillips, Head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, has advised, the UK must not 'cower in fear and fret about admitting ‘clever foreigners' while 'the public must not confuse immigration and terrorism'.
The UK must also take steps to end the detention of children seeking asylum, a practice, which the United Nations High Commission on Refugees, UNHCR, is unequivocally opposed.
It must also address the concerns of the Independent Immigration Commission, which decried the inhuman treatment of people under the asylum system in a major report in April.
Whether the UK gives more room to migrants or not, it must urgently remove itself from the list of nations, which continue to detain asylum-seeking children, and become a provider of safe haven for children and genuine refugees. This change has been long overdue.
If there is anything that excites the duo of Borders and Immigration Minister, Liam Byrne, and the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, it is the drastic reduction in the number of migrants to the UK in the last 15 years.
There is an irony that plays out here.
Immigration authorities are also tightening the rope against illegal entrants especially in the wake the July 7, 2005 terrorists' attacks on London, which have necessitated stricter security measures to safe the over 60 million people in England.
Liam Byrne, Immigration Minister has vowed that there is no going back on measures to flush out those who have no legal basis to stay in the country, a threat that has resulted in at least one illegal immigrant being deported every eight minutes.
Smith points out that asylum applications went down from 70,200 in 2003/4 to 17,200 in 2006/7 while 17 out of 100 who applied for asylum were recognised as refugees and granted asylum in 2006.
According to Lin Homer, Head of the Border and Immigrations Agency, BIA, the 16,520 principal asylum applications lodged between January and September 2007, represents a seven percent fall in applications compared to the same period in 2006 and is also the lowest number of applications since 1992.
Discordant tunes
Some vocal UK-based tabloids have been producing statistics to show that migrants have taken over 85 percent of all new jobs created by the Labour administration, thus prompting Tory Leader, David Cameron, to vilify Gordon Brown for not keeping to his promise to preserve ‘British jobs for British people'.
It was Employment Minister, Stephen Timms, the Employment Minister, who doused the furore with a confirmation that 677,400 vacancies meant for British workers were yet to be taken up, an admission that British jobs might not have been usurped by migrants. In other words, those who want to work could easily avail themselves of the vacancies.
Brown clears the air
The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee on April 1, asked the government to place a cap on immigrants into the country, as such persons did not make any significant contribution to the economy. But in a swift response, British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, argued that migrants contribute as much as £6 billion annually to the UK's economy.
Looking back, it now appears as if the importance of immigrants in the UK has been overlooked due to the discordant tunes on the subject matter.
Trevor Phillips cautions
But, as Trevor Phillips, Head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, has advised, the UK must not 'cower in fear and fret about admitting ‘clever foreigners' while 'the public must not confuse immigration and terrorism'.
The UK must also take steps to end the detention of children seeking asylum, a practice, which the United Nations High Commission on Refugees, UNHCR, is unequivocally opposed.
It must also address the concerns of the Independent Immigration Commission, which decried the inhuman treatment of people under the asylum system in a major report in April.
Whether the UK gives more room to migrants or not, it must urgently remove itself from the list of nations, which continue to detain asylum-seeking children, and become a provider of safe haven for children and genuine refugees. This change has been long overdue.
Between Brown's coronation and crucifixion
Posted on Thursday 29th May, 2008
by Soni Daniel
I still have a June 30, 2007 edition of The Economist, whose cover welcomed the new government under the headline of "Brown's Coronation." The magazine predicted: "Gordon Brown has the makings of a disappointing prime minister-and also of a fine one." It did not end there. It predicted that the PM was going to lead his party to a defeat.
I cannot say if Brown’s media aides read that edition of the magazine or if they gave him any advice on how to prove the prophecies wrong.
As it stands, it doesn't seem like Brown has done much to avert the disaster that is about to sweep him and his party off the comfort zone of 10 Downing Street.
With two straight electoral losses in a month, and a barrage of unresolved issues over taxes, Northern Rock, and the police threatening a protest over 2.5% pay, it appears as if the curtain is slowly but finally being drawn on Labour by the same people who set the stage for the party to mount the leadership stage last year.
The loss of the London mayoral post by Labour's Ken Livingstone on May 1 to the Conservative candidate Boris Johnson and the defeat of Labour's Tamsin Dunwoody by Tory Edward Timpson in Crewe and Nantwich on May 23 prompted one of the broadsheets to call it ‘Labour's wipeout'. Maybe. Or maybe not.
No doubt, Brown did well as Chancellor of the Exchequer to have kept the British economy in a healthy state for several years. But managing the treasury under someone else’s premiership is a completely different ballgame from leading the country yourself. Brown's previous successes have been blighted by his current blunders, one of which, is his waffling on the 10p tax that has alienated voters.
As a leader, Brown handled the electoral defeat with equanimity, while insisting that he remains the best hand to move Britain forward. That is how a good statesman should act, although it is clear that Tory leader David Cameron may be very close to defeating him, if it came to a general vote.
It is not the impending defeat of Labour by the Conservatives in general election that might haunt Brown for some to come, but the backstage furore by close associates would also hurt him.
Like someone on a hangman's noose, Brown's fate now hangs on how far he can appease voters and reduce the popularity of David Cameron in a short time. If he fails and the jeremiads against his performance continue, then the inevitable end could come faster than expected.
What is baffling is the speed with which Brown's coronation has turned into crucifixion, even before he spends a full year at No. 10. Perhaps someone with a political Midas touch could lend a hand to Brown before his party's fortune turns to dust.
by Soni Daniel
I still have a June 30, 2007 edition of The Economist, whose cover welcomed the new government under the headline of "Brown's Coronation." The magazine predicted: "Gordon Brown has the makings of a disappointing prime minister-and also of a fine one." It did not end there. It predicted that the PM was going to lead his party to a defeat.
I cannot say if Brown’s media aides read that edition of the magazine or if they gave him any advice on how to prove the prophecies wrong.
As it stands, it doesn't seem like Brown has done much to avert the disaster that is about to sweep him and his party off the comfort zone of 10 Downing Street.
With two straight electoral losses in a month, and a barrage of unresolved issues over taxes, Northern Rock, and the police threatening a protest over 2.5% pay, it appears as if the curtain is slowly but finally being drawn on Labour by the same people who set the stage for the party to mount the leadership stage last year.
The loss of the London mayoral post by Labour's Ken Livingstone on May 1 to the Conservative candidate Boris Johnson and the defeat of Labour's Tamsin Dunwoody by Tory Edward Timpson in Crewe and Nantwich on May 23 prompted one of the broadsheets to call it ‘Labour's wipeout'. Maybe. Or maybe not.
No doubt, Brown did well as Chancellor of the Exchequer to have kept the British economy in a healthy state for several years. But managing the treasury under someone else’s premiership is a completely different ballgame from leading the country yourself. Brown's previous successes have been blighted by his current blunders, one of which, is his waffling on the 10p tax that has alienated voters.
As a leader, Brown handled the electoral defeat with equanimity, while insisting that he remains the best hand to move Britain forward. That is how a good statesman should act, although it is clear that Tory leader David Cameron may be very close to defeating him, if it came to a general vote.
It is not the impending defeat of Labour by the Conservatives in general election that might haunt Brown for some to come, but the backstage furore by close associates would also hurt him.
Like someone on a hangman's noose, Brown's fate now hangs on how far he can appease voters and reduce the popularity of David Cameron in a short time. If he fails and the jeremiads against his performance continue, then the inevitable end could come faster than expected.
What is baffling is the speed with which Brown's coronation has turned into crucifixion, even before he spends a full year at No. 10. Perhaps someone with a political Midas touch could lend a hand to Brown before his party's fortune turns to dust.
The food gospel according to Ahmadinejad
posted Thursday 5th June, 2008
by Soni Daniel
He seemed serious. His voice rose as he addressed the World Food Summit in Rome on Tuesday. Many didn't think it was necessary for Mahmud Ahmadinejad to show up for obvious reasons: his country is not facing an imminent threat of food shortages.
According the CIA World Fact book, the Iranian agricultural sector, which accounts for 11% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is under threat. The economy is also bolstered by a strong productive sector that generates 45.3% of the GDP and has driven unemployment down to 11% and the percentage of those living below poverty line to about 18%.
Perhaps this bright outlook gave the Iranian strongman the impetus to speak with confidence, as he mounted the podium to address world leaders on the worsening global food situation.
With a tone like that of a man sympathetic to the plight of the poor, Ahmadinejad tried to prick the conscience of the world by asserting that only those with humanistic values, love and care should be saddled with the responsibility of leadership.
Although he did not overtly throw his famous caustic verbal attacks on Israel and the U.S, Ahmadinejad made some insinuations by blaming the food crisis on what he calls "the supplying of expenditures of wars and occupations by big powers at the expense of poor nations".
"It is very clear, that hidden and unhidden hands are at work to control the prices and mendaciously to pursue their political and economic aims," he added without naming the hand behind the manipulations in the world food market.
As a way out, he wants the UN to set up an independent body to regulate the production and consumption of food as well as the issue of tariffs and subsidies on agricultural produce.
Beyond that, the Iranian leader would want to see the UN compel those he refers to as ‘bullying powers" to resort to peace instead of occupation and warmongering, and to spend their military funds on reforming the agricultural sector so as to make food available to the poor around the world.
Ahmadinejad's formula may not strike the right cord in the minds of those who drive the global development agenda at Davos or Washington, but it deserves a trial. Whether he is seen as a rebel or a tyrant because of his defiant stance on building a controversial nuclear plant, the proposal he has put forward for improving world food supply may needs a go.
by Soni Daniel
He seemed serious. His voice rose as he addressed the World Food Summit in Rome on Tuesday. Many didn't think it was necessary for Mahmud Ahmadinejad to show up for obvious reasons: his country is not facing an imminent threat of food shortages.
According the CIA World Fact book, the Iranian agricultural sector, which accounts for 11% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is under threat. The economy is also bolstered by a strong productive sector that generates 45.3% of the GDP and has driven unemployment down to 11% and the percentage of those living below poverty line to about 18%.
Perhaps this bright outlook gave the Iranian strongman the impetus to speak with confidence, as he mounted the podium to address world leaders on the worsening global food situation.
With a tone like that of a man sympathetic to the plight of the poor, Ahmadinejad tried to prick the conscience of the world by asserting that only those with humanistic values, love and care should be saddled with the responsibility of leadership.
Although he did not overtly throw his famous caustic verbal attacks on Israel and the U.S, Ahmadinejad made some insinuations by blaming the food crisis on what he calls "the supplying of expenditures of wars and occupations by big powers at the expense of poor nations".
"It is very clear, that hidden and unhidden hands are at work to control the prices and mendaciously to pursue their political and economic aims," he added without naming the hand behind the manipulations in the world food market.
As a way out, he wants the UN to set up an independent body to regulate the production and consumption of food as well as the issue of tariffs and subsidies on agricultural produce.
Beyond that, the Iranian leader would want to see the UN compel those he refers to as ‘bullying powers" to resort to peace instead of occupation and warmongering, and to spend their military funds on reforming the agricultural sector so as to make food available to the poor around the world.
Ahmadinejad's formula may not strike the right cord in the minds of those who drive the global development agenda at Davos or Washington, but it deserves a trial. Whether he is seen as a rebel or a tyrant because of his defiant stance on building a controversial nuclear plant, the proposal he has put forward for improving world food supply may needs a go.
Tuesday 23 September 2008
Nigeria trudges in reverse gear
Slowly but steadily, Nigeria has once again pitched its tent at the dark alley of lawlessness. I’m sure the incidents of the last few weeks are enough to give men of good conscience sufficient reasons to wonder if Abacha had indeed passed on or whether Nigerians are truly under a democratic regime. There are germane causes for Nigerians to be worried about the reckless way in which those in the corridors of power have unleashed terror on the very people they claim to be serving. It is even more painful to observe that the fascism being visited on the hapless nation is taking place under the watchful eyes of a self-confessed ‘servant-leader’ foisted on us by a grouchy ‘garrison commander’ who paid more attention to himself and his surrogates than national interest.
And, there is something about President Umaru Yar’Adua that should not be forgotten in a hurry. General Olusegun Obasanjo presented him as an angel from Heaven who could not hurt a fly. But, that has long been proved wrong in many ways. It is disheartening to note that although Yar’Adua comes off as an innocuous leader, overwhelmed by the nation’s daunting problems, the vicious elements bequeathed to him by his predecessors still hound and scorch the land like vipers. And, whether this uninspiring administration believes it or not, one of the legacies that would be ascribed to it, is that it had zero tolerance for criticism and free speech.
Or how do we explain the series of events resulting in the arrest and detention of journalists in the country and the closure Channels Television for simply carrying a story that Mr. President ‘might resign’. Thank God the station did not say that he had resigned. But even if it had said so and it turned out that the president had not resigned, all that would have been required of the station was a retraction and nothing more.
For the avoidance of doubt, the ethics of journalism demands that journalists who make mistakes-carrying or publishing inaccurate information, take immediate steps to correct it. That is it! Nothing more, nothing less. There is nothing like Nigerian journalism or European journalism ethics. Journalism thrives on the same or similar set of rules of engagement anywhere. But it would appear as if the Nigerian government wants to re-invent the rules of the game for their own selfish reasons. Sadly, those who might have counselled the government to shut Channels Television, arrest and detain its workers and those of the government-owned News Agency of Nigeria, could not have been journalists and God forbid, they should be. As it turned out, it is clear Yar’Adua’s counsellors know nothing about what constitutes a journalism breach. They, like their master have only found themselves in a place that has overwhelmed them. In a brazen display of their ignorance they have resorted to self deceit as a way of life and abuse of the rights of Nigerians with impunity just to be seen as rendering service to the nation under the guise of security. The result is that Nigerians have suffered all manner of injustice and repression in the hands of security personnel, be they under the military and civilian administrations. It was so bad that at one point in the run up to the 2003 election, sorry- selection, Obasanjo had to stoop from a political soap box and cane a security aide for brutalising people who had gathered to listen to his campaign manifesto.
It seems as if the resort by the security agents to military tactics to suppress the civilian populace at the least provocation while deviously professing the practice of the Rule of Law shows a country at the crossroads or a nation at war with itself. For all that, the Yar’Adua regime will take the flask and it will be very difficult for it to extricate itself from the abuses. The reason is simple. As someone who had only a year ago publicly drummed it to the consciousness of the world that he would rule Nigerians with empathy and strict adherence to the law, it makes a mockery of his vow for his regime to allow ‘mad dogs’ to spike the people with scorpion.
And, come to think of it, the whole episode that culminated in the phantom news of his resignation was triggered directly and indirectly by Yar’Adua and his lieutenants while Nigerians at the receiving end suffered what lawyers call ‘Double Jeopardy’ at the end. The way Yar’Adua went about the news of his disappearance from Nigeria for medical treatment or lesser hajj made nonsense of his avowed openness and transparency. Assuming that Yar’Adua had respect for the people he claims to be their servant, he would have been open enough to declare upfront that he was going to Saudi Arabia to treat himself and then pray to Allah for good health and wisdom to lead them. Of course, the Nigerian Constitution does not prescribe any sanctions for the country’s leader for performing any religious rite provided such does not affect the freedom of other Nigerians.
It is still puzzling why Yar’Adua has kept sealed lips over the contentious trip and what he actually did during the period of his absence. If the man does not know, I plead with those who are close to him to school him on the difference between being a potato and corn grower in one corner of the earth and being the president of a country with 140 million people with 70 percent eating most of the time from the refuse dump and 80 percent roaming the streets for nonexistent jobs.
Yet, in that same country, some people who call themselves ‘servants of the people’ share sacks of oil revenue every month and talk more on the pages of newspapers and do little or nothing for the benefit of the populace. In the interest of transparency and good governance, it is demanded of Yar’Adua that he summons courage and tell Nigerians where he went and why he left his office for over two weeks despite the hue and cry over the controversial trip. The worst case scenario was the way he sneaked into Nigeria, as the furore over the trip began to threaten his post.
One lesson that Yar’Adua or any Nigerian in leadership position should learn from this ignoble development is that anyone-whether foisted on Nigerians or duly elected as the late MKO Abiola was on June 12, 1993, should be ready to open up their health record and other details for public scrutiny. It would be ridiculous for any leader to mount the public gallery with a view to serving and earning both tangible and intangible benefits while still trying to demand full respect for privacy. The rule seems to be that privacy goes away with the acceptance of public service posts.
Those who do not want to put their private records at the disposal of the public they want to serve should at best keep off such positions and remain at the background.
I reckon with the words of two Jamaican reggae stars O. Riley and S. McKenzie that no man can steal both the fruits and roots of a tree. Yar’Adua and his henchmen can embellish the truth that Nigerians need from him for a short while but the bitter truth will certainly surface to their discomfort and shame. If he is sick and cannot run the government, there is nothing his overzealous security men can do to prevent it. If, it is true that the farmer is ‘hale and hearty’ as some of his sympathisers want us to believe, it will be difficult for even sorcerers in the Niger Delta Commission to enchant him with illness so as to drain his purse. Truth is constant as the morning star. In the United States for instance, both John McCain and Barack Obama have already placed their health records before their voters in the run up to the November election. President Yar’Adua does not need to hide his ailment from Nigerians if he wants to earn their sympathy, support and goodwill. It is natural for men to be afflicted by one ailment or the other as long as they are not God and will never be. It is not a crime to be sick. Right?
If Yar’Adua wants to remain a true servant-leader, let him phone the American Vice President, Dick Cheney for some counselling on how to share information with Nigerians about his life and governance. Reason: Cheney, who has been around in public sphere for sometime in both Halliburton and White House, has a guiding principle about how to share information for the good health of the nation.
He once wrote in a piece quoted by Hacker in 1996: “The best way for a nation to make political decisions about its future is to empower all of its citizens to process the political information relevant to their lives and express their conclusions in free speech designed to persuade others.”
Now, if Yar’Adua and his advisers believe that they can hoodwink Nigerians on what constitutes a snare to his life and get away with it, the outcome could only hurt them the more because information, like oxygen cannot be swept away even by the strongest army in the world.
Yar’Adua’s men may wish to refer to the famous speech, which President Ronald Reagan rendered in honour of Churchill in London in 1989, during which he confessed of the ubiquitous nature of information in nation building.
“More than armies, more than diplomacy, more than the best intentions of democratic nations, the communication revolution will be the greatest force for the advancement of human freedom the world has ever seen… the biggest of big brothers is increasingly helpless against communication technology.
Information is the oxygen of the modern age. The people of the world have increasing access to this knowledge. It seeps through the wall topped with barbed wire. It warps through the electrified booby-trapped borders.”
For those who think that hiding the scars on the president’s back would make him win a beauty contest, they should be reminded that what they consider as security information in Nigeria is of public to other nations. And, long as the Nigerian bigwigs relish in seeking medical attention outside the nation’s shores because the health institutions here don’t qualify as primary health centres even in some poorer African countries, their most guarded health secrets will always be scandalised and placed at public domain.
Journalists in Nigeria and elsewhere who be respected and stay out of trouble with the authorities must strive to always balance their act. They need to heed the advice of Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel who have cautioned in their short but effective Book: The Elements of Journalism, that journalists should promote journalism of verification above that of assertion.
Regardless of that, events of the past few months in Nigeria mainly served as a distraction from the main headache facing Nigerians. While the health of Mr. President stirred up a needless hullabaloo, the noise over his intending resignation threw the nation into a state of confusion as to where the country is heading. In the heat of that uncertainty, ‘Nigeria’s enemies within’ struck with renewed vigour and rattled the oil markets once more.
The latest attacks and destruction of oil facilities in Nigeria and other atrocities, which the militants have wreaked on the nation without a corresponding response from the security agencies, raise a crucial question. Why has it been impossible for the Nigerian security establishment to pinpoint where the attackers are coming from and who their backers are with a view to arresting and detaining them, as was the recent case with journalists? Daily, the militants continue to assault the sensibilities of the Nigerian government and its leaders on the web and such are relayed sometimes live by the international media without any response from the security agencies. Could it be that the secret agents who ‘discovered a plot by some persons to malign the first family by using journalists’, are creek phobic or do not have enough expertise to investigate what goes on in the mangroves?
Nigerians would welcome the extension of the wizardry of the Nigerian security to the creeks. And that is where they should focus their skills and stop raising alarms where none is in the offing. Obviously, if the State Security Service (SSS) has been as quick in unearthing the underhand deals that go on in the oil industry and Nigeria as a country as well as the felons causing mayhem in the oil-bearing communities as it did in the arrest of journalists last week, Nigerians would have been the better for it.
But my fear however is that the so-called investigation of people trying to cause disaffection in the country will end up as a ruse or at best justification for arresting the media workers. Such puerile tactics are not new in this country and in countries where the respect for human rights is very low.
In the days of Abacha, we witnessed how ‘bombs’ allegedly planted by the opposition exploded at airports the leader was intended to pass through just for NADECO chieftains to be clamped into the gulag so that the short man would reign in perpetuity. Till date, the outcome of the security investigation has not been made public and no one set to jail.
The primary purpose of the incessant arrest of journalists and closure of media houses is, as nothing but an old fashioned fascism mode of intimidation to shut out the media from prying into the mess that goes on in public places in Nigeria. Such devious strategy is often deployed by non-performing leaders especially in Africa, to distract the people from the daunting dilemmas facing them and portray the security agents as dynamic and patriotic.
But it should be the priority of all that Nigeria is never again counted among pariah states because of its penchant to knock the media once they goof. The court should be the first place to resort to in determining what went wrong and what sanctions to apply and not secret agents and bullies in the largest party in Africa.
Monday 14 July 2008
What every journalist wished they knew
Kidnap picture by John Owen
Finally, we were kidnapped. The jungle where we were 'ambushed' is located in Hereford somewhere close to Wales. Twenty-five postgraduate students of International Journalism from City University London, led by John Owen who teaches International News at City and a proponent of safety training for journalists in all climes, took us to the ‘lion’s den’ and for two days we were at the 'mercy' of our tough, war-like trainers who themselves have fought in many battles and attended to war victims in many parts of the globe. The 'incident' took place in the afternoon of 19 June 2008 when some serious farmers in the community were tending their farms.
Two masked gun-wielding men in their mid forties and a young woman armed with an AK-47 rifle suddenly emerged from a nearby bush as we made to leave the fringes of the farms in Hereford and released two quick shots into the air. “Stop there”, they ordered as they moved towards one of the female students in our midst. Follow me”, one of them barked as the rest ordered all of us to lie face down under a crushing heat. Could this be a dream or a reality, I began to wonder. It was and were relieved to know it was just a mock kidnap.
Fret not about this and take it not to heart. It was a mere simulation carried out by the firm of AKE Ltd based in Hereford in the United Kingdom, one of the most sought-after safety training institutes in Europe and America.
As part of the one-year MAIJ training, Owen had taken us through many reporting fields around the world and exposed us to the hazards inherent in reporting the world and stressed the need for us to get some training as we prepare to round off the course. That is what took us to the serene atmosphere in Hereford surrounded by farms, shrubs and jungles-a sight we all wanted to embrace for many days or even weeks.
For two days-June 18 and 19, Andrew Kain, Paul Brown and another took us through the rudiments of safety, weather, first aid, food, security issues and working in volatile areas where land mines and other lethal weapons may be on display.
We were also exposed to the different techniques of avoiding becoming an easy prey to adversaries of journalists in conflict zones.
Indeed, it was an eye-opener. It made sense to us, as our teachers made us to be conversant with the different ways of offering first aid to anyone around us and what do in different circumstances where someone has been injured in the course of our work.
Perhaps, the highpoint of the training came when we were split into groups of ‘medics’ and ‘victims’ and made to attend to ourselves in turns. I could see how difficult it was to render medical service to one of my colleagues from Kenya who was assigned as a wounded journalist to me to handle.
Clearly, every journalist who wants to excel in the trade should never hesitate to get a lesson in this area. It is something I believe every journalism institution should incorporate into its curriculum and even make compulsory. I do not think anyone who wants to operate safely can go far without gaining insights into the training course. Andrew Kain and his friends at Ake need to even get their safety training package across to schools and other organisations that train media operatives.
City University, which is noted as the ‘University for Employment’ should consider adding safety training into its MAIJ curriculum and encourage others to join the fray as it is one of the leading journalism institutions in Britain and Europe.
Two masked gun-wielding men in their mid forties and a young woman armed with an AK-47 rifle suddenly emerged from a nearby bush as we made to leave the fringes of the farms in Hereford and released two quick shots into the air. “Stop there”, they ordered as they moved towards one of the female students in our midst. Follow me”, one of them barked as the rest ordered all of us to lie face down under a crushing heat. Could this be a dream or a reality, I began to wonder. It was and were relieved to know it was just a mock kidnap.
Fret not about this and take it not to heart. It was a mere simulation carried out by the firm of AKE Ltd based in Hereford in the United Kingdom, one of the most sought-after safety training institutes in Europe and America.
As part of the one-year MAIJ training, Owen had taken us through many reporting fields around the world and exposed us to the hazards inherent in reporting the world and stressed the need for us to get some training as we prepare to round off the course. That is what took us to the serene atmosphere in Hereford surrounded by farms, shrubs and jungles-a sight we all wanted to embrace for many days or even weeks.
For two days-June 18 and 19, Andrew Kain, Paul Brown and another took us through the rudiments of safety, weather, first aid, food, security issues and working in volatile areas where land mines and other lethal weapons may be on display.
We were also exposed to the different techniques of avoiding becoming an easy prey to adversaries of journalists in conflict zones.
Indeed, it was an eye-opener. It made sense to us, as our teachers made us to be conversant with the different ways of offering first aid to anyone around us and what do in different circumstances where someone has been injured in the course of our work.
Perhaps, the highpoint of the training came when we were split into groups of ‘medics’ and ‘victims’ and made to attend to ourselves in turns. I could see how difficult it was to render medical service to one of my colleagues from Kenya who was assigned as a wounded journalist to me to handle.
Clearly, every journalist who wants to excel in the trade should never hesitate to get a lesson in this area. It is something I believe every journalism institution should incorporate into its curriculum and even make compulsory. I do not think anyone who wants to operate safely can go far without gaining insights into the training course. Andrew Kain and his friends at Ake need to even get their safety training package across to schools and other organisations that train media operatives.
City University, which is noted as the ‘University for Employment’ should consider adding safety training into its MAIJ curriculum and encourage others to join the fray as it is one of the leading journalism institutions in Britain and Europe.
Saturday 7 June 2008
The mystery behind London tube names
Tube by pdphoto.org
Some of them evoke excitement. Others simply sound mysterious while many leave you with a feeling of spiritualism but yet none is really what it suggests.
Angel, Seven Sisters, Whitechapel, Blackfriars, Upminster, King's Cross at St. Pancras, Elephant and Castle to name but a few, all sound somehow weird and may make you begin to wonder what they mean and how they came about. But don't be deceived into thinking that Angel Tube station has anything to do with the Heavenly Angels or that Seven Sisters has anything to do with women."Those stations are named after the areas of London they serve", says Nathan Fletcher, Head of Transport for London Press Desk Communities.
I used to feel somehow about the names but my doubts began to fade after going through a book by Cyril M. Harris on the origin of the tube names.
Angel for instance, according to Harris, takes its name from a once famous coaching inn that dates from 1638 and was one of the commonest mediaeval inns on City Road in mid 18th century.
I used to feel somehow about the names but my doubts began to fade after going through a book by Cyril M. Harris on the origin of the tube names.
Angel for instance, according to Harris, takes its name from a once famous coaching inn that dates from 1638 and was one of the commonest mediaeval inns on City Road in mid 18th century.
Think about Seven Sisters: It is said to have emanated from seven elms trees, which stood near Page Green where seven sisters Road built in 1831-1833 joined old Ermine Street in London. Worried about Upminster? It evolved from Upminster in 1602, a church served by several clergy rather than a monastery. The prefix ‘up' means ‘higher ground' although the town does not rise above 60 ft.
Similarly, Whitechapel derives its name from the white stone chapel of St. Mary Malfelon first built in 1329, bombed in 1940 and demolished in 1952. Today, there is no trace of the church that gave rise to the name
Perhaps, King's Cross at St. Pancras is close to what it connotes: It gets its name from Battlebridge-site of one of the battles between Boudicca, The British Queen of Iceni and the Romans about AD 59 or AD 61 at the Bridge near the River Fleet. The district later took its name from the famous King George 1V stature which stood from 1830-1845 at a crossroads. St Pancras was once a solitary village later granted a manor by Ethelbert to St Paul's Cathedral and recorded as Sanctium Pancrutiu and dedicated to a boy martyr named St Pancras.
Perhaps, King's Cross at St. Pancras is close to what it connotes: It gets its name from Battlebridge-site of one of the battles between Boudicca, The British Queen of Iceni and the Romans about AD 59 or AD 61 at the Bridge near the River Fleet. The district later took its name from the famous King George 1V stature which stood from 1830-1845 at a crossroads. St Pancras was once a solitary village later granted a manor by Ethelbert to St Paul's Cathedral and recorded as Sanctium Pancrutiu and dedicated to a boy martyr named St Pancras.
Blackfriars takes its roots from the colour of the habits worn by the friars of a Dominican Domesday monastery known as Blackfriars, established by the Earl of Kent in the 13 century. Arsenal is named after the famous Arsenal Football Club, which relocated from Woolwich in 1913 where it founded its Royal Arsenal Factory in1884, while Elephant and Castle is named after a tavern that became popular in the 16 century and later hosted the Newington Theatre that featured Shakespeare plays in the 18th century.
I came off with the feeling that the more one reads the book, the more curious and awed they become because the small book has not cleared all the mysteries behind the tube station names.
I came off with the feeling that the more one reads the book, the more curious and awed they become because the small book has not cleared all the mysteries behind the tube station names.
Links:
Lifting the veil off skunk to save lives in Britain
London by Dior Man
The current debate over the upgrading of cannabis from class C to B by Gordon Brown does not excite me at all. The crime statistics from the police should guide those who are opposing the jerking of punishment for the abuse of cannabis in changing their mind, if they truly love this country. Tony Blair had downgraded cannabis to its current position on the advice of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs in 2004. But things have since changed along with the dynamics of London. More and more people are known to be taking not only the type of cannabis on which the report was based but are also sniffing the home-grown and more active type known as ‘skunk', thus making a review of the report necessary.
The Metropolitan Police Authority, MPA, recent report on youth crime is a clear pointer to where cannabis is leading many youths to and what it can do if not checked at once.
In a 147-page report last Thursday, the MPA attributed the rise in drug-related crimes from 20 percent in 2006 to 32 percent in 2008 to the use of cannabis by young people. Blair might not have had any reason to disagree with the experts when they voted 20-3 to reduce the ranking of cannabis given the conclusion of the committee that scientific evidence pointed to a "probable, but weak, causal link between psychotic illness, including schizophrenia, and cannabis use". But Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, whose office oversees serious crimes, has made a good point on the issue. She has told the Commons recently: "I have decided to reclassify cannabis to a Class B drug, subject to Parliamentary approval. There is a compelling case for us to act now rather than risk the future health of young people; I make no apology for that - I am not prepared to 'wait and see'."
One can also understand how Brown, a father and others who want a good future for British children feel when the recent statistics on drug-related violence, binge drinking, gun and knife crimes, the number of youths taken off school on account of alcohol-related ailments and are added up. No one who loves this country should applaud the selling of cannabis as sandwiches or chewing gum on the roadside and all men of good will should for once see reasons with the government and take a deterrent action to keep the drug off the menu of young elements by taking the veil off skunk. One problem though, is that the British system abhors corporal punishment in schools and at home and it becomes difficult for parents and teachers to enforce discipline.
Links:
Guardian
MPA
MPA Youth Scrutiny report 2008
Home Office
Sky News
Home Office
BBC
Guardian
The Times
BBC
A menace verbal onslaught can't clear
The lion of Zimbabwe is still barking and biting while the world is unbelievably and inexplicably watching. I make bold to say that the United Nations and other nations that have the political and economic nerves to keep Mugabe in check and bring about a popular government have lost a golden opportunity to effect that change. Let's face it, Mugabe himself knows that Morgan Tsvangirai defeated him on March 29 but he did not know how to take that other than to joggle with the results for over a month and nobody did anything to stall the stealing of that vote.
Neither the United Nations, which has a wide range of powers to call some nations and their leaders to order nor any of the world leading powers took a pragmatic step to get that result out on time and protect the opposition victory.
Now with barely three weeks to the rerun, Mugabe has gone full blast arresting and detaining anyone he perceives wound not support him. His agents have even stopped Tsvangirai from public rallies and prevented aid agencies from supplying food to the poor. As if that is not enough, his men are now arresting and insulting diplomats, a domain always held sacrosanct by world leaders.
In all this, it is as if Mugabe has sealed the lips of his victims' countries and tied their hands as well because only a few dare to speak out against the barbaric acts.
The latest wave of crackdown on the opposition and the international aid agencies in Zimbabwe raises fear about the safety of Tsvangirai.
Would he be alive to take part in the June 27 rerun? If he survives, would his supporters be able to come out and cast their votes for him? If they do and he wins, will Mugabe allow the electoral commission to release the result?
The state of tyranny ochestrated by Mugabe and his thugs demands more of action and less talk by world leaders and international bodies. This is the time to tame Mugabe and his mad dogs or the world should prepare for a bloody situation in the weeks ahead.
Links:
Sunday 25 May 2008
The sign of things to come before Mugabe’s, Tsvangirai’s second clash
To borrow from Rev. Jeremiah Right, the controversial Barack Obama’s pastor, the chickens have come home to roost in Zimbabwe. These are the days of mayhem in the highly famished but repressive South African nation, as the leader of the opposition MDC, Morgan Tsvangirai, returns home to prepare for the rerun of the disputed presidential poll, which many believe he won, but denied victory by Mugabe and his cohorts.
Tsvangirai, who spent six weeks in some African countries apparently to escape the wrath of his adverseries who see him as an agent of the West, returned to Harare on Saturday, thus setting the stage for the June 27 rerun.
However, Mugabe still roaring like a scourged viper, spit fire on Sunday against the U.S. Ambassador, James McGee .McGee incurred Mugabe’s anger for reportedly urging Tsvangirai to return from his six-week exile to prepare for the poll.
Mugabe said of the diplomat: He says he fought in Vietnam, but fighting in Vietnam does not give him the right to interfere in our domestic affairs.
"I am just waiting to see if he makes one more step wrong. He will get out. As tall as he is, if he continues to do that I will kick him out of the country."
Turning to the U.S. top envoy for Africa, Jendayi Frazer, Mugabe said: "You saw this little American girl trotting around like ... celebrating that the MDC had won. A disgraceful act."
Mugabe has bounced back and ready to sting any real or imagined MDC sympathiser. A broadcaster said to be aiding the opposition was sacked last week. Now, what gives the world the hope that Tsvangirai can survive and stand the election?
Links:
Observer
Guardian
U.S. State Department
Allafrica.com
Monday 19 May 2008
Iyabo Obasanjo remanded over $2.5 million
After many weeks of evading the court and the law enforcement agents, Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, daughter of Nigeria’s immediate past president, was today remanded in police custody on the orders of an Abuja Court.
Iyabo, who represents Ogun State, is being wanted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission in connection with allegation that she benefitted from the sharing of $2.5 million unspent health ministry budget over which two minsters -Adenike Grange and Gabriel Aduku, have been forced to quit.
Even with the court order, she declined interview with the EFCC. Although she pleaded not guilty to the charge, the court ruled that she be remanded until her bail application is considered on Wednesday.
Iyabo is claiming that she did nothing wrong in getting $85,000 for Nigeria’s Senate Committee on Health, which she chairs, to attend a capacity-building workshop in Ghana. She is also claiming that she is being witch hunted by the EFCC, which was set up by her father.
She has been running away from the EFCC for about a month, insisting that she is the object of attack by the anti-graft body. At a point in April, she was declared missing from the senate, as the commission began to trail her for possible arrest.
The 109-member senate has however declared that they will stand by Iyabo despite her trial by the court on the prompting of the EFCC.
Her arrest and detention is likely to send a strong message to the world that Nigeria is perhaps beginning to be serious in prosecuting the corruption war.
Obasanjo set up the anti-graft in his first term in office. Many, particularly, those who were opposed to his actions and policies, have been sent to jail by the commission in the last few years.
BBC
EFCC
Saharareporters.com
Sunnewsonline
BBC
BBC
Iyabo, who represents Ogun State, is being wanted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission in connection with allegation that she benefitted from the sharing of $2.5 million unspent health ministry budget over which two minsters -Adenike Grange and Gabriel Aduku, have been forced to quit.
Even with the court order, she declined interview with the EFCC. Although she pleaded not guilty to the charge, the court ruled that she be remanded until her bail application is considered on Wednesday.
Iyabo is claiming that she did nothing wrong in getting $85,000 for Nigeria’s Senate Committee on Health, which she chairs, to attend a capacity-building workshop in Ghana. She is also claiming that she is being witch hunted by the EFCC, which was set up by her father.
She has been running away from the EFCC for about a month, insisting that she is the object of attack by the anti-graft body. At a point in April, she was declared missing from the senate, as the commission began to trail her for possible arrest.
The 109-member senate has however declared that they will stand by Iyabo despite her trial by the court on the prompting of the EFCC.
Her arrest and detention is likely to send a strong message to the world that Nigeria is perhaps beginning to be serious in prosecuting the corruption war.
Obasanjo set up the anti-graft in his first term in office. Many, particularly, those who were opposed to his actions and policies, have been sent to jail by the commission in the last few years.
BBC
EFCC
Saharareporters.com
Sunnewsonline
BBC
BBC
Muffled applause for a tower of Babel
Burnt victim on the ground
Mob patrolling Jo'bourg streets in search of immigrants
Something very disgusting and disturbing is unfolding in South Africa, the bastion of hope for the continent. It started as a joke some weeks ago but it is actually gaining momentum as the days go by, raising fears that it might grow to take roots soon.
Club-wielding youths are attacking and killing immigrants without any justification. What has emerged as the background for the latest madness is the exhibition of extreme xenophobia by the mob against their brothers and sisters from nearby Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Pakistan and some other communities staying and doing legal business in South Africa.
As at Monday, the death toll had reached 22 but the mob were not yet satisfied as they continued to rampage on the streets of South Africa and hacking their enemies to death with ease.
It is difficult to understand why the police are merely firing rubber bullets into a crowd that it killing and maiming innocent persons in broad daylight. Most annoying is the scene in which a victim set ablaze by the mob is being spread with fire extinguisher by the police minutes after he had been set on fire. Where were the police when the attackers struck?
If it is a joke, let the government and people of South Africa remember that the country emerged from the brink of segregation to arrive at the present state. In those days when the ignoble apartheid kept Mandela and his compatriots in prison, the world rose in unison to condemn the atrocious act and it finally ended. It would be a serious setback for anyone to stoke the fire of apartheid in South Africa when the scars of the previous one are still fresh in our mind.
Thabo Mbeki and Jacob Zuma must rise at once and put an immediate stop to the folly. The world cannot afford another apartheid in that country.
links:
New York Times
Punch
ANC
BBC
Timesonline
Sunday 18 May 2008
World’s lethargy aids Mugabe's recovery
Did anyone watch Robert Mugabe address the leadership of ZANU-PF in Harare on Saturday?
It was a display of arrogance and defiance laden with unprovoked insults on the U.S., the UK and any country that is not in support of the unparalleled authoritarianism that has been going on in Zimbabwe in the past 28 years.
Although in one way, the belated speech portrays Mugabe as regretting the loss of the March 29 polls to his arch rival, MDC’s Morgan Tsvangirai, he is in another breadth, seen rejoicing over the undue delay in releasing the results, thereby keeping him and his party intact.
To corroborate what I mean, read the direct quotes of the president as captured by the country’s mouthpiece –The Herald.
Going through the speech leaves me with no hope for the opposition. Why am I so pessimistic? Mugabe has been allowed to fully recover from his dilemma and is now barking like a wounded lion, ready to devour anyone on his way and the nearest prey is Tsvangirai, whom many believe won the first ballot.
Since the ‘cooked’ Zimbabwe election results were ‘released’ two weeks ago, the world, media and human rights groups have gone to sleep, leaving Tsvangirai to decide whether to confront Mugabe or not. Of note is the sad fact that no serious pressure has been brought to bear on Mugabe by international bodies charged with such duties. The best we have seen is a passive remark by the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, that he is discussing the rerun of the Zimbabwe election with some countries.
Why would the UN and some powerful nations not confront Mugabe now before he creates a bloodbath in the South African nation and forces the UN to send in troops and humanitarian teams?
Learning from the experience of the last election, Mugabe has now mobilised his arsenal and is already doing battle with MDC supporters and anyone opposed to his repressive regime.
If the streets of Harare are no longer safe for people who voted against Mugabe in the previous election, how are we sure they will be allowed to come out and vote in a rerun now fixed for June 27?
I am just afraid that the world must have lost an opportunity to uphold Tsvangirai’s well deserved victory and free Zimbabweans from the claws of death.
Links:
It was a display of arrogance and defiance laden with unprovoked insults on the U.S., the UK and any country that is not in support of the unparalleled authoritarianism that has been going on in Zimbabwe in the past 28 years.
Although in one way, the belated speech portrays Mugabe as regretting the loss of the March 29 polls to his arch rival, MDC’s Morgan Tsvangirai, he is in another breadth, seen rejoicing over the undue delay in releasing the results, thereby keeping him and his party intact.
To corroborate what I mean, read the direct quotes of the president as captured by the country’s mouthpiece –The Herald.
Going through the speech leaves me with no hope for the opposition. Why am I so pessimistic? Mugabe has been allowed to fully recover from his dilemma and is now barking like a wounded lion, ready to devour anyone on his way and the nearest prey is Tsvangirai, whom many believe won the first ballot.
Since the ‘cooked’ Zimbabwe election results were ‘released’ two weeks ago, the world, media and human rights groups have gone to sleep, leaving Tsvangirai to decide whether to confront Mugabe or not. Of note is the sad fact that no serious pressure has been brought to bear on Mugabe by international bodies charged with such duties. The best we have seen is a passive remark by the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, that he is discussing the rerun of the Zimbabwe election with some countries.
Why would the UN and some powerful nations not confront Mugabe now before he creates a bloodbath in the South African nation and forces the UN to send in troops and humanitarian teams?
Learning from the experience of the last election, Mugabe has now mobilised his arsenal and is already doing battle with MDC supporters and anyone opposed to his repressive regime.
If the streets of Harare are no longer safe for people who voted against Mugabe in the previous election, how are we sure they will be allowed to come out and vote in a rerun now fixed for June 27?
I am just afraid that the world must have lost an opportunity to uphold Tsvangirai’s well deserved victory and free Zimbabweans from the claws of death.
Links:
Before we are all consumed by hunger
There are enough reasons for one to be very cynical these days. Food- what gives one the energy to plod on, is drying up, especially in Africa and Asia, raising the stake for people to starve to death, if something urgent is not done to avert the gloom. Most worrisome is the realisation that of the 36 countries listed by the UN as the worst hit by the crisis, 21 are in Africa alone.
As the prices of essential food items soar, pundits are pointing accusing fingers at factors that can hardly bring more food to the menu table. Some are accusing producers of bio fuels of using the land that would have gone for food production for ethanol.
Alex Evans, a researcher with the New York University Centre for International Cooperation, in a new study done for the Royal Institute of International Affairs pins the food crisis on four reasons. Meanwhile, bio fuel, which is something the world was eagerly waiting for since not many are blessed with fossil fuel, is already being vilified as a food predator. Again, Genetically-modified food, GM food, which would have boosted food production in many parts of the world, is being treated with scorn by some countries. It is not a secret that the United Kingdom and many other European Union members still doubt the safety of GM food. If in doubt, read Robin McKie here.
I note the assurance by the WHO that GM foods currently available on the international market pose no risk to anyone and that is what gives me the courage to ask all those still opposed to GM foods to stand down before we all die of malnutrition and diseases.
GM foods are based on laboratory science and empirical data and it is not a sort of voodoism that most paranoid conduct in the forest and groves to mystify their followers, perhaps for pecuniary reasons.
It is time we took whatever measures necessary-scientific and natural, to avert the looming crisis. Everyone must put their mouth where their stomach is.
Links:
Alernet
FAO
Chatham House
Guardian
WHO
As the prices of essential food items soar, pundits are pointing accusing fingers at factors that can hardly bring more food to the menu table. Some are accusing producers of bio fuels of using the land that would have gone for food production for ethanol.
Alex Evans, a researcher with the New York University Centre for International Cooperation, in a new study done for the Royal Institute of International Affairs pins the food crisis on four reasons. Meanwhile, bio fuel, which is something the world was eagerly waiting for since not many are blessed with fossil fuel, is already being vilified as a food predator. Again, Genetically-modified food, GM food, which would have boosted food production in many parts of the world, is being treated with scorn by some countries. It is not a secret that the United Kingdom and many other European Union members still doubt the safety of GM food. If in doubt, read Robin McKie here.
I note the assurance by the WHO that GM foods currently available on the international market pose no risk to anyone and that is what gives me the courage to ask all those still opposed to GM foods to stand down before we all die of malnutrition and diseases.
GM foods are based on laboratory science and empirical data and it is not a sort of voodoism that most paranoid conduct in the forest and groves to mystify their followers, perhaps for pecuniary reasons.
It is time we took whatever measures necessary-scientific and natural, to avert the looming crisis. Everyone must put their mouth where their stomach is.
Links:
Alernet
FAO
Chatham House
Guardian
WHO
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
