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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
