Category: Editorial

IN HIS first trip as secretary of state, John F. Kerry has been raising expectations that the Obama administration will soon take new action to help the Syrian opposition. President Obama, he said Monday in London, “is currently evaluating precisely what steps we will take in order to . . . lead on this important issue.” He added: “We are determined that the Syrian opposition is not going to be dangling in the wind, wondering where the support is or if it’s coming.”

Mr. Kerry spoke those words because he had to. Rebel leaders, fed up with America’s refusal to supply the weapons, money and training they need to accomplish the stated U.S. goal of ending the regime of Bashar al-Assad, were threatening to skip a “Friends of Syria” meeting in Rome on Thursday. But Mr. Kerry’s promises also set up an important test of credibility for him, and for the president. If the administration now fails to move decisively to break Syria’s bloody stalemate, it could lose what may be a last chance to partner with the more moderate forces challenging Mr. Assad and to steer the country toward a new regime that the West could support.

What could those steps be? A State Department adviser on Syria during Mr. Obama’s first term, Frederick C. Hof, offered a good outline in a recent paper for the Atlantic Council. The United States, he said, should build “close working relationships” with “carefully vetted elements of the Free Syrian Army.” That means, at the least, providing training, tactical intelligence and nonlethal equipment; we believe that heavy weapons are also essential. So far U.S. policy has been to refuse all aid to such groups — a practice that, as Mr. Hof puts it, ignores the reality that “men with weapons will be very influential in charting Syria’s future.”

U.S. policy must also aim at helping the rebels establish a full-fledged alternative government on Syrian territory and recognizing it as the legal government of Syria. That would legitimize the supply of arms and allow the U.S. military to protect the Syrian population with airstrikes or Patriot anti-missile batteries, if that were necessary to stop the regime’s unconscionable targeting of civilian neighborhoods with missiles and artillery. It could also help to marginalize the growing al-Qaeda presence in rebel forces.

The Post reported Wednesday that the administration is considering the supply of nonlethal equipment to rebel forces, a measure Britain and France have already decided on. But in public, Mr. Kerry has spoken only of increased aid to the opposition Syrian National Coalition — which also has yet to receive direct U.S. aid. The Post has reported that new supplies of weapons are reaching rebels in southern Syria, probably with financing from Saudi Arabia and coordination by the United States. This is the extension of an operation that has been underway for some time, but it is too small to quickly decide the war.

Mr. Kerry still speaks of seeking “a political solution,” though the hope of brokering a deal between the regime and the rebels proved illusory long ago. He says that he aims to “change the calculation on the ground for President Assad,” as if it were still conceivable that this blood-drenched butcher could be induced to quietly step down. And Mr. Kerry is still seeking the cooperation of Russia in ending the war, though Vladi­mir Putin has made it clear that his first purpose in Syria is preventing a U.S.-engineered regime change.

Such tactics are doomed to failure. They will serve only to prolong and intensify the bloodshed, to the ultimate benefit of al-Qaeda and those, such as Iran’s leaders, who would prefer endless civil war to any change of government. If the Obama administration is to lead on Syria, it must commit itself to steps that can bring about the early collapse of the regime and its replacement by a representative and responsible alternative. Only direct political and military intervention on the side of the opposition can make that happen.

– Washington Post

President Jonathan is waxing into a tyrant 

Responding publicly last year to critics who perceived and condemned his presidency as weak and vacillating, President Goodluck Jonathan famously declared that on no account would he behave like a Pharaoh or Nebuchadnezzar. That he would rather be seen as weak than toe the path of tyranny, dictatorship and lawlessness was clearly the impression he sought to create. We are thus alarmed at the increasing dictatorial posture, high-handedness and even paranoia of the President. It is indeed becoming so difficult to distinguish between President Jonathan and the all-powerful Pharaoh of the Bible fame he tried to distance himself from not too long ago.

Many Nigerians would certainly be right to wonder if a most humble President who once plaintively told them about his shoeless boyhood is not fast becoming a dictator before their very eyes. In one of his nationally televised presidential media chats last year, for instance, President Jonathan, in response to a question, said he would not publicly declare his assets and did not ‘give a damn’ what anybody thought about that. There has definitely been a disturbing change in the President’s attitude, carriage, disposition and body language. Perhaps, the man did not change. Like the autumnal foliage, he is only now showing his true colours, or the people are only now seeing it.

Jonathan is no more hiding his determination to wield the full and imperial powers of the presidency to crush any perceived opposition in his path. We recall, for instance, how he, for inexplicable reasons, declared virtual war on the former Governor of Bayelsa State, Mr. Timipre Sylva, and vowed that the latter would not have a second term in office. A President who was helpless to respond effectively to waves of Boko Haram insurgency in the North was quick to deploy massive force – the police, army, navy and air force – to impose the victory of his anointed candidate, Seriake Dickson, in the highly militarised Bayelsa State governorship election.

Right now, the target of President Jonathan’s anger is the Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF) and particularly its chairman, Chief Rotimi Amaechi. Some of President Jonathan’s close associates, including the Ijaw elder and statesman, Chief Edwin Clark, have launched vitriolic attacks against the NGF, arguing that the governors constitute an opposition bloc to the President. This is obviously because the forum has been very resolute in resisting arbitrary deductions from the Federation Account or such extra-constitutional contraptions as the Excess Crude Account or the Sovereign Wealth Fund. In the case of Governor Amaechi, his ‘sins’ include his fierce opposition to the payment of proceeds from certain disputed oil wells within Rivers State to the Bayelsa State government, as well as the belief that he is being positioned to be the running mate to a northern presidential candidate in 2015.

So far, the presidency has not denied widespread media reports that President Jonathan actually threatened PDP governors at a meeting at the Presidential Villa last Monday, insisting that Amaechi must be removed as chairman of the governor’s forum. The PDP governors were reportedly treated to video clips of Amaechi’s alleged verbal attacks against the President, with Jonathan hinting darkly that the machinery of government would be deployed against any governor who failed to cooperate in the bid to oust Amaechi from the chairmanship of the NGF. Such ‘recalcitrant’ governors were allegedly threatened with withdrawal of their security aides as well as being denied access to funds from the excess crude account. Despite these subtle threats, however, Amaechi still enjoys the support of the majority of his colleagues. Faced with this scenario, the presidency instigated the formation of a new PDP Governor’s Forum with Governor Godswill Akpabio as its chairman. This move is clearly aimed at weakening the NGF and breaking its ranks. Meanwhile, the governors have decided that Amaechi will continue as Chairman of the NGF till a new election is held in May.

This newspaper commends the governors for standing their ground and refusing to be browbeaten by a desperate presidency and its primitive antics. In the same vein, we vehemently condemn President Jonathan’s blatant attempt to intimidate the governors and his needless meddling in the affairs of the NGF. By his acts of arm-twisting blackmail of the governors, Jonathan reduced his presidency from its lofty and cathedral dignity to a pedestrian low. The NGF is a voluntary association of governors rather than a body created by the constitution. By trying to dictate who their leader should be, the President was not only abridging their constitutionally guaranteed right of association, he acted contrary to the spirit of federalism, which recognises the centre and the states as being ‘equal and coordinate’ in their respective spheres of influence.

In spite of the cries to pursue an inviolate federal system, the Jonathan administration still operates with a unitary mindset, a tragic throwback to the discredited sensibility of our military past.

Despite his protestations to the contrary, it is obvious that the President is so preoccupied with his 2015 ambition that meaningful governance has taken a back seat. He is right at the centre of the raging battle for the soul of his party, the PDP and this intra-party conflict is fuelled largely by the 2015 polls. It is thus no surprise that with a distracted President preoccupied with political warfare, the much touted ‘Transformation Agenda’ remains an empty slogan.

In pursuit of his personal ambition, he acquits himself like a lame-duck president barely two years in his term. He has fractured the NGF, thereby interfering with a cardinal constitutional principle: freedom of association. He has also problematised the practice of federalism. More importantly, governance is now a weary priority: infrastructure, education, agriculture, power and other high flyers in the needs of the Nigerian people now suffer miserable neglect. This is the president as egoist, a self-serving exercise of executive authority. This is no monarchy or dictatorship. Executive power should only be exercised within the limits of the law, decency and popular interest. This he has not done.

If he claimed not to be a pharaoh, then what we see today is a pharaoh denying himself.

Governments should take the agency’s warning seriously

The seasonal rainfall prediction by the Nigerian Meteorological Agency that heavier rains should be expected in 12 of the 36 states of the federation this year is scary. In recent years, heavy rains in parts of the country have left behind deaths, sorrow, tears and devastation. Many have had their homes and means of livelihood destroyed. Last year, floods sacked whole villages and left hundreds dead in about 27 states, leading to empanelling of a presidential committee to combat the after-effects.

Early warning that NIMET’s prediction should not be dismissed came with the first rains in Ibadan and Owo in the South West. On February 18, an all-night rain in Ibadan, the capital of Oyo State, made the people panicky and called the attention of the state and local governments to the immediate task at hand. The storm that accompanied the downpour fell only a little short of that which trailed the 2012 ceaseless downpour.

The sad tales have now become familiar to the people of the ancient city. In the Second Republic, the angry flood and storms that accompanied a similar heavy rain pushed River Ogunpa beyond its shores and washed away homes and took whole families. Both the federal and state governments immediately promised to re-channel the river and save the people a repeat occurrence. Successive governments failed to keep the promise. Thus, in 2010, 2011 and 2012, it was the lot of the people to be left at the mercy of natural elements whenever heavy rains caused floods to sweep through Ibadan city.

Indeed, the 2011 flood was an eye-opener that things could go worse. The University of Ibadan was jolted as property worth more than 10 billion Naira were said to have been destroyed or swept away. In 2012, the community around The Polytechnic, Ibadan, and Apete village where majority of the students of the institution reside had an experience they may not forget in many years. The village linking the ever-expanding Apete to Ibadan main city was washed away. Economic activities in many parts of the city were disrupted for days.

The Governor Ajimobi administration’s methodical efforts wll hopefully, when mature, ease the burdens.

In Owo, a major town in Ondo State, the first rain of the year on January 26 left many with sad tales to tell. About 200 homes were reported to have been badly damaged with occupants turned to refugees. Landmark institutions like Imade College, the General Hospital and stadium also succumbed to the fury of the flood.

While both the Oyo and Ondo states’ governments have swung into action to check any recurrence, it is obvious that token attention may be inadequate to combat the perennial menace. It is an indication that agencies of government saddled with the task of ensuring that houses conform to standards, rules and laws have failed in their responsibilities over the years. Moreover, climate change is real and all governments in the world have realised that it could no longer be business as usual. Town planning rules are laid down for the benefit of the people and those who fail to conform to standards must not be allowed to endanger the lives of others.

The NIMET prediction that there could be a repeat of the flood disaster of recent years in 12 states in the North West, North Central and South West is therefore a call to duty. While the governments at all levels should take the blame for the devastation and must take the lead in arresting the trend, corporate institutions, research institutes, foundations and wealthy individuals do not have to wait for disaster before they team up to prevent further tragedies arising from heavy rains.

In years past, rains were regarded as soothing and harbingers of good harvest. Today, because of the gross irresponsibility of man, what nature provided to guarantee food security has compounded the insecurity of Nigerians.

Lifting US constraints on Cuba will speed regime’s demise

Never underestimate Havana’s ability to delay change. Raúl Castro became de facto president of Cuba in 2006, and has long said the government needed to renew itself. As he even admitted on Sunday: “It’s really embarrassing that we have not solved this problem.” Now it has. Sort of.

Last weekend Mr Castro, 81, said he would step down in 2018, when his second presidential term finishes. He also appointed Miguel Diaz-Canel as first vice-president, putting the 52-year old former electrical engineer first in line to succeed him. For the first time since bearded rebels swept down from the Sierra Maestra, Cubans can now imagine a day when the government will not be led by someone who fought in the 1959 revolution, but rather grew up within it.

Cubans have long suffered under the stifling weight of a gerontocracy. Just appointing a 52-year-old is therefore an advance. Unlike other young flyers – who were promoted quickly and later fell, Icarus-like, just as quickly from grace – Mr Diaz-Canel is a cautious and reportedly personable figure, who rose slowly through party ranks. So he may last longer. He is also faithful to Mr Castro. Continuity, at least within the island, therefore remains the name of the game – and any internal change remains, for now, on Havana’s terms.

However, outside the island change is potentially proceeding at a faster pace. To the south lies Venezuela, which is undergoing its own transition as Hugo Chávez, its cancer-stricken president, fades from political life. Havana can therefore no longer count on Caracas’s indefinite financial support. To the north lies the US and its outdated, failed embargo. This is often used by Havana as an excuse for its own failings and has unnecessarily poisoned US relations with the rest of Latin America as some senior officials acknowledge.

The point of closer US relations with Cuba is not to give succour to a dictatorship. It is to speed change and the regime’s eventual demise through a peaceful transition, while acknowledging the reality that this may take years. The US has done business with non-democracies before. Take Mexico, its third-largest trade partner. Washington signed a free-trade deal with Mexico in the 1990s when it was still governed by the Institutional Revolutionary party, which, in the famous phrase, was “a perfect dictatorship”.

A new leadership can be won over to change by rapprochement rather than isolation, which only increases Havana’s bunker-like mentality. True, the Helms-Burton Act ties the executive’s hands because lifting the embargo needs congressional approval. But there are areas where the executive can still act. Cuba could be removed from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, an overdue move. Or it could be allowed to seek advice from institutions such as the International Monetary Fund on economic and institutional reform. Finally, the US could loosen travel restrictions to match the gradual easing launched by Mr Castro. The White House has the tools to promote change. It should use them.

– Financial Times

Kerry should push the case for arming rebels

John Kerry, US secretary of state, believes there may be a window of opportunity for a negotiated solution to the bloody civil war in Syria. As a new member of Barack Obama’s cabinet, he is right to explore all the options on his first foreign outing. However the rising death toll, now at more than 70,000, is a grim reminder that time is not on his side.

The US secretary of state may be hoping to take advantage of recent comments by senior members of both opposition and regime forces that they would be open to dialogue. He may also want to exploit growing frustration in Moscow with Syria’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad, who relies on Russian support to stay in power. It is encouraging that the noises out of Moscow are positive about a co-ordinated effort with Mr Kerry despite otherwise tense relations with the US. Nonetheless, this is a road that has been travelled before.

Mr Assad is well versed in the game of appearing to concede in order to gain time. Meanwhile, Russia will resist any effort that smacks of regime change and Mr Assad has said he intends to stay until the next election in 2014. Finally, the political opposition remains disconnected from fighters on the ground, who refuse talks while he is in power. The battle is at a desperate stalemate. Mr Assad has been unable to regain control of Syria, while the disparate rebel forces cannot topple the regime as long as the west refuses to deliver the weapons they need. In the interim, the civil war is being hijacked by jihadist forces positioning themselves for a post-Assad era.

A negotiated settlement would be the ideal solution. But the chances of striking a deal appear remote. In this context, the new secretary of state cannot allow talks to drag on interminably. He should also press President Obama to re-examine his refusal to consider arming rebels.

If Mr Kerry is to have any diplomatic force in discussions he must be able to threaten an alternative. Mr Assad has cynically exploited the west’s reluctance to intervene to stay in power. This bluff has to be called. This applies equally to the EU, which last week rejected a UK call to lift its arms embargo to allow shipments to rebels.

If western powers continue to stand on the sidelines, the war will drag on. The longer it continues, the more likely it is that jihadis will build a bridgehead in the eastern Mediterranean that will contaminate the region and beyond. In that case, the west may have intervention forced upon it.

– Financial Times

• The NJC move to punish errant justices like Naron and Archibong bodes well

Indications are that Nigerians have not heard the last word on the highly contentious judgment given by Justice Abubakar Talba of the FCT High Court, Abuja, in the police pension case involving the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and Mr. John Yusuf and others. The sentence handed down by Justice Talba – a two-year jail term, softened by the option of N250,000 fine for each of the three counts to which Yusuf pleaded guilty – was widely denounced as a slap on the wrist for the convict in the N32.8 billion scam. With the announcement that the National Judicial Council (NJC) has decided to probe the affair by setting up a Fact Finding Committee, the judiciary has sent a reassuring signal on its concern for professional ethics.

Also, the NJC’s move against Justice C. E. Archibong of the Federal High Court, Lagos, and Justice T.D. Naron of the Plateau State High Court, who have been placed on suspension for unprofessional conduct, demonstrates a level of seriousness. The council also recommended the compulsory retirement of both judges. However, what this means is that they will probably enjoy retirement benefits, which is a cushion of sorts. If judges who might have benefited materially by perverting the course of justice get away with mere retirement, rather than dismissal, will this not amount to double profit for them?

The NJC, chaired by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Aloma Mariam Mukhtar, said it found out that “there were constant and regular voice calls and exchange of mms and sms (text) messages between Hon. Justice Naron and one of the lead counsel for one of the parties in the Osun State Gubernatorial Election Tribunal, contrary to the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers.” Justice Naron’s judgment in this case was eventually reversed by the Court of Appeal. Furthermore, NJC’s findings showed that Justice Archibong dismissed the grievous charges against an accused without taking his plea; refused to release the Certified True Copy of his ruling to the lawyers; issued a bench warrant on some officials of the Peoples Democratic Party for contempt even when the counsel who was directed by the court to serve them filed an affidavit that he had not been able to serve the contempt application, and made unfounded and caustic remarks on the professional competence of some Senior Advocates of Nigeria.

Other grounds for his compulsory retirement were that he did not have a full grasp of the Law and procedure of the court; that he granted the leave sought for in the originating summons that had no written address of the parties and without hearing both parties in the originating summons, after he had earlier on overruled the preliminary objection.

These punishments provide a fresh breath for the judiciary which has suffered negative publicity in recent times on account of bizarre judgments delivered by a number of judges, especially in political cases and matters of official corruption. The truth is that the judicial landscape was allowed to be overgrown with weeds, to the detriment of the judiciary’s function as the temple of justice. As a result, public confidence in this important arm of government dwindled.

The society gazed helplessly at the spectacle of “billionaire judges” who allegedly sold justice to the highest bidder. It is however worrying that it took this long to address the petition against Justice Naron, which was lodged as far back as 2007. It is particularly noteworthy that the activities of Justice Naron generated heat in the polity and the PDP government of Osun State under Olagunsoye Oyinlola preened over the disgraceful verdict of his court. Naron’s perverted stewardship kept the legitimate winner of the 2007 governorship election, Rauf Aregbesola, in the trenches of political and judicial warfare for close to a full term before justice rang sonorously. Meanwhile the imposter launched a regime of terror and deprivation.

Naron and Achibong represented the worst of the judicial system. While we applaud the Chief Justice and his NJC team for its courage, the retirement cushion mitigates the severity of the evil the judges inflicted on judicial ethics and political sanity in the land.

The NJC’s decision reminds us that perverted justice disenfranchises the people, who are true bellwether of justice.