Tag: sovereignty

  • Abiodun lock downs Ogun as Osinbajo, Osoba campaign for APC

    Prince Dapo Abiodun, the All Progressives Congress(APC) governorship candidate locked down Abeokuta, the Ogun state capital on Wednesday as Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, former Governor and leader of the party in the state, Chief Segun Osoba, and Senator Solomon Olamilekan Adeola joined him in a final push to ensure his victory on Saturday.

    Osinbajo, Osoba, Abiodun, Adeola and enthusiastic thousands of party members and supporters marched on Ake area of Abeokuta, in unison, chorusing repeatedly they will vote for Abiodun and other APC candidates.

    They also expressed confidence the APC governorship candidate and others going to the state House of Assembly will win landslide.

    Osinbajo, who addressed the mammoth crowd, said just as they voted for him and President Muhammadu Buhari and other APC candidates to emerge winners during the Presidential and National Assembly elections, they should also come out en masse  to cast their votes in bloc for Dapo Abiodun and APC state House of Assembly candidates.

    Read Also: Ogun forum canvasses support for Isiaka

    The Vice – President assured them the Saturday’s election will be peaceful as the Federal Government had made adequate arrangement for security agents to provide effective security to lives and properties during and after the poll in the state.

    The APC leaders also used the occasion to receive a chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) in the state, Hon. Kayode Amusan and former Speaker of the state House of Assembly and Senatorial candidate of the African Democratic Congress(ADC) for Ogun Central, Titi Oseni – Gomez into the fold of APC.

    The duo had just defected to APC with thousands if their supporters to help push for the victory of Dapo Abiodun.

  • Leadership,  sovereignty and corruption

    World  leaders  jostled   this week  on the world scene for attention and positions more loudly, and  I dare  say more rancorously than at any other  time this year. And it is not only because of the passion involved in the issues at stake  or  the expectations of their audience or followers. I think  the stark  fact is that diplomatic language is taking a back  seat  as world  leaders deal with the issues  at stake and square  up to each other in plain language.  Which  means that the world is in an  exciting season  of calling a spade a spade and it is becoming unpopular  even in diplomacy  to talk to friends  and  foes alike   by   mincing words. This is the language  of our time at least this week and I  ask  you  to enjoy  this  unique development in international  relations  and global  diplomacy with  me today.

    At  the UN   this week,  I  think it was US  President  Donald  Trump, outside that august body  who  started  the ball  rolling   last    week  by recognizing Jerusalem  as the capital  of Israel  and setting the Middle East on fire literally  by injuring Arab  and Palestinian sentiments, passion  and emotions  with that  pronouncement.  Then Nikki  Haley  former   South  Carolina   governor    and    now    vibrant US Ambassador  at the UN took  over  the baton,  vetoed  a Security Council condemnation of  the American  Jerusalem  position and lambasted  as an insult,   the rejection of that position by those  who  she   protested  have no respect  for the sovereignty of the US  on that score.  Haley  like  an Amazon  she has become  at  the UN,  promised  to take down  the names of all    nations   which  vote against the US  on  the Jerusalem  issue and  ostensibly   take retaliatory  action  sometime later.  Her  boss  the American President  Donald  Trump  followed  suit  later on global  media warning that those who take American  aid should expect  a  freeze on such free  rides  as there is no free  lunch  anymore on any form of  anti – Americanism at  the UN    or  any where else  for that matter.

    In    S Africa  the ruling African  National Congress, ANC  had  a smooth transition in terms of a change  of leadership  as millionaire   Cyril  Ramaphosa    was voted in as   leader  of the party  to replace President Jacob  Zuma.  But  that   was a transition  with  a lot of rumble  in the jungle  of  S African   politics.  This  is because   outgoing President  Zuma  was awash  with the opprobrium of corruption  such  that the party  wanted him to go   even  if   he is   not  probed.  But  his wife was the opponent  to the eventual  winner  and it was obvious  that Zuma was using his incumbency to obtain a succession by his wife to ensure his immunity or soft landing against the massive  corruption charges that have plagued his  presidency  rather  notoriously  and  so  disgracefully. At  the end,  his nepotic    survivalist  and protective strategy  failed,  and his wife lost.  Now  the winner  has pledged  to  fight  corruption  and  it needs no  soothsayer in S African  politics to know that is Zuma’s other surname and his  days of walking free  are over once as expected  the ANC  under the leadership  of  Ramaphosa wins  the next  presidential elections   in   2019.

    To  allay  the fears of the teeming  masses of  S Africans  on persistent  poverty  and corruption under the Zuma  presidency, the new leader  of ANC has  promised to follow the decision of the ANC  at  the Congress to make land appropriation with compensation  a  policy in the next  ANC  presidency.  This   is obviously  aimed  at  copying what Robert  Mugabe did in Zimbabwe. But  the new leader  has warned  that the ANC  must  ensure  that it protects  the economy  and its vast  agricultural  skills and resources.  This  is obviously  a check  on the possibility of South Africa  following the destructive footsteps of  Mugabe  who  destroyed his nation’s  economy  by appropriating land without compensation  from white  farmers  and giving such  farms and lands to party members and cronies who  mismanaged such  lands and ruined the Zimbabwean  economy.  In  addition  the ANC  has  already  shown that it was not ready  for any of Mugabe’s   shameful  wife  succession  scheme  in the way it has carefully led the Zuma bull  out of the china shop,   by  rejecting his wife  as the ANC new leader  at the party convention this week. Obviously  the path of honor  for the ANC   leadership  hierarchy  is  to prosecute Zuma  for his corrupt  practices  and  actions which  gave him immense   wealth.  I  caution    however  that   for  now till  after the 2019  elections the party  must  not  show its hand till  the election is won  and   Ramaphosa  is sworn  in as Zuma’s    successor.   This  is to pay  heed  to the African  proverb  that says until  a man has  seized   the hilt  of his sword,  he does  not inquire  who  killed  his father.   That  to me is the safe way  to show outgoing  President Jacob  Zuma   that even  in African  politics,   social    control  and    deterrence  are  alive  and well    even   though  it is    easy     for    every dog    to have its   day.

    It   is necessary to look  at the American  threat  on aid cancellation on the Jerusalem  recognition matter in the light of the pedigree of US foreign policy  and pedigree on such threats  or perceived insults. Similarly  we  need to look at Nigeria’s  anti  corruption  war  and the personality   and   leadership  of the Nigerian  president leading the crusade  to    appreciate   how  unacceptable and repugnant   were   the leadership  styles that both Zimbabwe  and S Africa  have endured under  both  former President  Robert  Mugabe  and now Jacob  Zuma. Indeed   President Muhammadu Buhari  emerges like  a saint  compared to the corruption, abuse of  office and misuse of power  that have tainted both Southern African  leaders. Even  if you take  the charge against  the Nigerian president that he  was  a Muslim  fundamentalist, that  charge falls off  in the way  he has pursued  Boko  Haram and encouraged  the military with funds to preserve the security of life and property  of  Nigerians  in the face  of terrorism  in the North East. The  latest  is the withdrawal  of $1bn  from the Excess  Crude Acount   by  the Federal  Government  to fight  the bloody  Boko  Haram  insurgency.   This  is  aside the huge funds made available  in the   proposed  2018 budget for the military  to  fight this crippling insurgency. Even  if  you  are a Buhari sceptic  and you ask  why  part  of the   withdrawal  from the ECA  cannot  be used  to contain the Fulani herdsmen  now shooting at NAF  aircraft  in some  parts  of the nation, you  will  even   then   albeit   grudgingly agree  that President Muhammadu    Buhari   is  very    committed to fighting both terrorism  and  corruption  and his integrity on that  score is intact  and unassailable. You    may even   ask   that  part  of the money be used to accommodate   those    Nigerian  youths  misled   into   Libya  ending up in dehumanizing slavery and you will   have   my   full    support.   Really  then   I  see no sense in the brouhaha on whether  the National  Assembly  has the authority  or not on the ECA disbursement,  as security  is always  a priority  in terms  of  government   expenditure  and cannot  wait most  times. Especially  now that Boko  Haram  has  resurrected with    deadly   girl  bombers  in recent  times  in  our  Far  North  East.

    Again  on   the  Trump retaliatory threat on Jerusalem   voting   at  the UN,  I state   clearly   that   surely   it has a precedent. This  is  because  the   Obama Administration  had a similar intimidating  policy  against  African  nations that had anti  gay  and  anti  homosexual  laws and even  threatened  Nigeria which  has such laws. I  leave  it to you to decide which is more repugnant  between  Trump’s  threat on Jerusalem  and Obama’s  on gay  recognition and aid withdrawal. Once again  long live the  federal  Republic  of  Nigeria.

  • ‘Sovereignty, security and prosperity’

    The  topic  today was taken  out of Donald Trump’s  unique, first 40 minute  speech  to the United nations this week.  He  took  them  from  the Marshall  Plan which  the US   used  to build  Europe after  the massive destruction of the Second  World War and they were called ‘the pillars  of peace’. In    this period  characterized  by terrorism, migration, insurgency, violence  both man- made and natural,  it may sound far fetched to be referring to pillars  of peace  especially  in a speech in which  the same Trump  went on to threaten  the annihilation of a member nation of the UN, namely  North Korea, if it goes on provoking America  and its allies. But  really  while selling  the above concepts   as  pillars  of  peace  the boisterous  and mouthy  US  president simply  used the occasion  and speech to highlight that the  US under  his presidency is at  daggers  drawn with its  enemies. And like the old cowboys  of  the Wild  Wild West  the  US    has  its  hands on the gun ready  to shoot down real  and imagined  enemies both within  and without the UN  General  Assembly. Which in terms of ringing an alarm bell  on peace in our time, simply beggars description.

    Donald  Trump’s   main grouse in that speech  was that authoritarian, rogue   regimes  in the world  are trying  to spoil the values of freedom  and liberty  created  and prevalent  in a world put in place by the victors  of the second  world war,  and the US in his time will put  a stop  to that.  To  ensure  this he asked for strong, sovereign nations    and a coalition  of strong nations to ensure global  security  as a prerequisite  for  global  prosperity. That  means that  the speech   is  a  mere  ratification  and rationalization of  his America First campaign, even  as he asserted that    he   expected all  the world leaders to adopt  this   for  their   individual  nations  because  that is what  their  people in their various nations expect  them  to do. This  to the US president is crucial  because  according to him  –  To  put  it simply we meet  in a time of  both  immense    promise  and great  peril.  In   effect  Donald  Trump  has booted  diplomacy and internationalism  aside  and  has   invested  American  global  policy with a toga  of  Isolationism   and  Nationalism   marching  along  in a coalition of strong  sovereign  nations he has not identified.

    Anyway, one of the US allies, France through its president  has criticized Trump  on his cold shoulder  on Climate  Change Deal  and Concensus  and went further in an interview  with Amanpour   on  CNN  to say that  Nationalism always invariably  leads  to war.  But  the nations of the EU  or  western civilization, reconstructed   and   rebuilt    on the pillars  of   peace  speech in Trump’s reference to the Marshal  Plan,   are  leaderless  in taking issues with the US  under Trump.  According to experts on diplomacy, even  if  Trump  has  been bullish and incoherent, France  has  an untested leader, Britain  has  gone isolationist with Brexit  so  that  leaves the leadership of the EU  to  Germany led  by Chancellor Angela Merkel   and  critics  have been quick  to point out that in a fighting, violent  world now created by Trumpism, historical  German allergy  to war  stemming from the horror  of Nazi Germany makes German leadership  of the EU an improbable  and unlikely prospect.  That  possibility  and prospect  are  what we shall  appraise today  in the light of the three  pillars of peace identified by Donald Trump. Especially  now  that   the German  general elections takes place on 24th  September   tomorrow and  from  all  indications  Angela Merkel,  widely regarded  as the most  powerful woman  in the world  is likely  to win and her party the Christian  Democrats are expected  to be  in government alone or in a coalition with one or two  parties. It  is time therefore  to look  at  the Angela Merkel   leadership  and its grip  on the German electorate  which  is widely   expected to   see  her get  an amazing   fourth term  as Chancellor  of  Germany.

    In  a brilliant internet  article   Angela Merkel  was portrayed  as  ethical  rather  than ideological; reactive  not  pragmatic  and  detached rather than engaged  on issues.  That  can really  explain  why  she has   survived  many  dicey  political  and social  issues in recent times. The  two  that come to mind  are  the decision to let in about one  million migrants to  Germany  which  strained nerves in Germany  and earned the criticism and contempt  of Donald Trump.  The second  was her  U- turn  on gay  marriage  after asserting that marriage was between  a  man  and a woman  and the  human family  flows  from that.  To  those accusing her of  inconsistences  she has replied  that  –  Merkel  is Merkel, with all  the risks  and  side effects.   Her  critics have gone on to accuse her of being politically  rudderless  and  conveniently  shifting left  or right depending on  circumstances. To  her  prosperity  must  be earned  and  fairly distributed;  the state   must not boss  people around and must  support them;  refugees  must integrate; and  diversity  is strength. Merkelism, her  political  strategy  or manner  of leadership  has been described as the absence  of political anchors. This  then  is the leader the  Germans are expected  to return  to power tomorrow,  ceteris  paribus as the economists say  even though  we all  know that things are not always  equal. Let  us now see the type of opponent or leadership that the German leader faces in the new world of  Trumpism  under the threat  of nuclear  annihilation.

    Let  me note that I have  found  the verbal  artillery unleashed in defiance of sleek  diplomacy at the UN this  last  week  quite  fascinating and interesting. Trump called the N Korean leader Rocket  Man on a suicide mission. The  NK  leader Kim  branded Trump  deranged  and thinks that makes his nation’s  quest  for nuclear power plausible. To  me both leaders  have mutually underrated each  other. If  Kim  is suicidal, it is the US  that should  be careful  because a suicidal  leader is ready  to die and those opposing him should  avoid him, unless they want to go  to oblivion with him. Israel  has great experience on how  the arrival of the suicide bomber  changed  the balance of terror in favor of the Palestinians  in the power game  of Middle  East  politics. Secondly  if Trump  is really deranged as Kim  claims  then the world as we know it is no longer  safe  and Kim  should prepare his will and  sing O Lord  I am coming home, even in his native atheistic, Communist  Korea   because no  one can survive the fury  of the most powerful leader in the world whose  sanity  has been questioned stridently  both at home and abroad.

    Some  analysts have said that the NK leader is simply  asking for a suitable balance  of deterrence or terror in  seeking nuclear   power  and the US  should  accept  this but  the US   is not ready  for this. That  is the problem  that the world waits on  with  abated  breath  in a world of  dangerous balance  of deterrence  or terror characterized  by  boasts, intimidation  and  threats  -BIT.  Which  sadly  is  the new  verbal  artillery  world of both the Korean leader  and the US president. I call  it the new BIT  balance  of terror and pray it does not  consume us  all  as it  has consumed global  peace and  diplomacy  right before  our eyes in recent times. Once again  long live the Federal  Republic  of  Nigeria.

  • Sovereignty, insurgency and security

    It is difficult  to ignore a visit  this  week  by   Christine   Lagarde , the boss of the IMF  to Nigeria,  as I earlier  intended,   but for the reported  remarks of the departing visitor on the state of our economy . Indeed it is  my   contention  here     and  now,   that the remarks of the IMF  boss on the parlous state of our economy provoked    the topic of today. Just as it is my candid opinion that the IMF boss  Christine  Lagarde was weeping crocodile  tears over our non   performing economy –  as the  IMF,  like Pontius  Pilate, cannot  wash its  hands off  the comatose condition of our oil soaked but highly  debilitated economy of today.  Again  I  say  clearly  that it is  with that mood of indignation, patriotic or righteous as  you  like, but definitely  incensed by Christine Lagarde’s utterances on her four day  visit  – that  I look  at the issues  I will  treat under today’s broad  topic.

    The  first  is the Sunni – Shiite spat  between Saudi Arabia, the world Sunni Islam champion  and Iran, the leading Shiite  Islam nation of the world over the execution of a Shiite cleric in Saudi  Arabia at the beginning of the year and  the obvious implication of that for world peace. Especially after protesters burnt the Saudi  embassy in Teheran on that score and Saudi  Arabia cut diplomatic relations with Iran in retaliation. The  second is the assertion by US President  Barak  Obama that the most influential  gun lobby in the US,   the National  Rifles Association – NRA –  is misleading Americans over his  proposed amendments  to  get more information of gun owners.  In  return     the NRA called Obama’s  proposals mere public relations stunts and the Speaker of the US House  of Representatives dismissed them as a distraction.

    How a  sitting US president, already tagged a security risk by Donald Trump, the front runner presidential  candidate of the GOP, can  be treated with such disdain, scorn or levity by stakeholders in the fight against global terrorism and insurgency in his own domain; and by serious stakeholders  too  in the security  apparatus of his own nation,  speaks volumes of how much  of a lame duck president he has  become on the last hurdle  of his controversial presidency in 2016.

    I  go back  to my hard  comments on IMF and Nigeria’s  economic woes for which  I hold   the IMF  responsible. This  is because  Lagarde  was reported  to have said that poverty, unemployment, inequality  were  too high in Nigeria. Who  should know but her and her infamous and hated institution that imposed anti social and inhuman IMF  conditionalities on,  not only Nigeria but the entire developing world.  This  in  turn   led to increase in inequalities, poverty  and  massive unemployment. IMF conditionalities  were imposed on developing nations to cut deficits, raise taxes  and  interest  rates  and retrench their  workers all  of which led to  economic  recession,  stagnation,   political unrest  and   social  turmoil. Especially  during military regimes which had  feet of clay in terms of legitimacy and were fair play for IMF officials who literally put a  gun to their heads to accept IMF conditionalities hook, line and  sinker  to get much  needed loans for their  nations  and to  pay endless debts to US and Western corporate institutions .Unfortunately even the loans never got used for purposes they were given but ended up in the pockets  of  Nigerian leaders. A  situation which reached a crescendo in the last  administration whose mess the host to the IMF boss is now clearing up at  great risk  to his personal  security  and that  of the nation.  So  who  needs an IMF boss on a visit to Nigeria especially at the beginning of a new year   when we  say  happy  new year?. Definitely  nobody as undertakers  cannot be welcome where  people  have  hope that a better day is in sight. As we see in the new Buhari Administration grappling with the fall out of the IMF Conditionalities which bred poverty and inequalities and even a debilitating insurgency that has strained  our resources and resolve as a  nation  maximally. Surely Lagarde’s  visit  was one too many and a repeat  should not be encouraged.

    On  Shiite / Sunni rancour  I see sovereignty being  treated  without respect and it is even  more interesting  that what happened in Zaria  when Shiite Muslims ambushed  and almost killed the Nigerian  Chief of Army staff is a good analogy in this regard. The  much loved cleric killed in Saudi  Arabia was a Saudi  citizen  who had  been sentenced for terrorism sometime  ago and the sentence was carried out by the Saudi  authorities on new year’s day. Iran condemned the execution and the Supreme  Ayatollah in Teheran invoked that Divine Vengeance  would  be visited on the Saudi  authorities . But  that cannot be an excuse for Iran to close its eyes as it were for unruly Iranians to burn the Saudi embassy  which  is a sovereign territory  in Teheran,  Iran’s  capital. That is a  violation  of international law and that is why the Wiki Leaks editor was able to stay in a foreign  embassy in London till today while the British authorities are waiting outside the embassy without going in, in respect  of international  law.  Iran must respect international  law  and cannot be allowed  to get away with a repeat of the US  Embassy  hostage crisis in Teheran in 1979 when Ayatollah  Ruhollah  Khomeini came to power in Iran  and the embassy  crisis resulted  in making incumbent US President   Jimmy  Carter to  lose his reelection bid  to  Republican   Ronald  Reagan.

    Unfortunately and rather ominously the 2016   US  Presidential   Election is about to be influenced in the way and manner that it made  incumbent  President Jimmy  Carter lose  his reelection  bid. Carter lost because  he mishandled  theTeheran crisis and bungled a rescue operation to free the hostages. At  the presidential debate Ronald  Reagan had  been briefed to  tease the normally smiling Billy  Carter  known famously then for his wide toothy smiles. Carter  had campaigned  that Reagan  was a war monger and would take the US to the third  world war. But when Carter raised that point at the presidential debate Reagan just smiled and retorted with  the phrase  –  there you  go again –  making Carter  look like the aggressor on stage. Carter’s  famous smile dissolved  into a frown and a rage and the rest is history.

     Again I see an  ominous   connection in the skirmish between those who condemn Donald  Trump’s ban on Muslims entering the US and the retort of the US president that the NRA is  misleading Americans on  gun laws. I  see   an  answer  to  their   concern   in  the famous Ronald Reagan phrase – there you  go again.  It  is my belief  that that phrase  answers  their fears  adequately  and  in their context   of  perception.

    Donald  Trump  has said the issue of the ban rested on the grounds of security and it is difficult  to fault that no matter how you hate the man.  ISIS   or IS,  is an Islamic  insurgency and militancy rattling the security of the civilized world including the US and even  majority  moderate Muslims who hate the organization admit as much.  The  NRA‘s  seeming arrogance in dismissing the claim of a US president as  too  much sound and fury signifying nothing as Shakespeare would have said,  is  steeped in the common American perspective   and   belief  that the right to bear  arms is a constitutional one and no one can take that or their guns away. It  is their way of life and no crying president can be allowed to take that away and really I think President Obama  should understand that.  All  he needs to do is to find out how most   Africans feel when high sounding US diplomats lecture them on gay rights by comparing such  rights   to  civil  rights, for which the likes of Martin Luther King Jr fought for so   bravely  and hazardously  in their time and left   indelible  footprints in the sands of time in so doing.

    Once  again, long live the Federal  Republic  of  Nigeria.

  • A Greek tragedy revisited: The slaying of sovereignty and democracy

    A Greek tragedy revisited: The slaying of sovereignty and democracy

    Truth is as a rare wine. More talk about than taste it on their lips.

    Western democracy was born in ancient Greece. There is where it also first died. It seems many among the rich and powerful of that time did not cotton to the democratic notion although that form of society had enabled them to become wealthy. They concluded that their accumulation of money gave them a greater stake in society than that of the common man. They came to use their money and influence to subvert democracy, steadily turning it into a plutocracy, a dictatorship of money where possession of currency would matter more than possession of merit. This was a tragedy indeed. But it was more than a Greek one. It is universal and not banished to olden times. This tendency respects no time barriers. It lives with us today. It is interwoven in human history because it represents the darker strand in the fabric of human nature.

    Within the seeds of freedom democracy plants lay the spores of weeds that seek to choke that very freedom. Those who prosper greatly come to see democracy as a shackle chaining them to lesser humans through false equality. They think their greater riches bequeath to them greater wisdom in all things.  They use the money gained through democracy to buy democracy then eagerly bury what they bought. This is how democracy lost its first life in Greece. Due to similar forces, modern Grecian democracy is in danger of being brought underfoot once again.

    This time the ravaging comes not from within but from external forces. Greece now suffers a brutal yet subtle invasion. It is an invasion of money into a nation made supine by economic depression and looming bankruptcy. The invaders are European Union bankers and technocrats directed by the government in Berlin. German Chancellor Merkel is set to do what Hitler dared but did not accomplish. She may well succeed in bring an entire nation to heel.  By imposing her will on this smaller, weaker nation she will also intimidate other weaker, smaller Eurozone nations to hew her path.  What Hitler could not do with rifle, jackboot and swastika, Merkel may do with pants suit, loafers and an accountant’s ledger.

    Money is the ultimate weapon for it can purchase almost any mortal or material thing, even the soul of man or of a nation. But what can purchase money except more of it?

    This past week, the newly elected Syriza government has engaged in futile negotiations with the EU to restructure the “debt bailout” program for Greece. The talks have been deadlocked. The Greeks want some form of debt reduction added to the program. The program as now structured is not a bailout for Greece. It is a bailout for select German and French banks holding Greek public and private-sector debt. It alleviates the risk to these favored banks of getting wet due to their improvident lending by literally having them stand atop Greece. While the banks remain dry, Greece is swallowed and drowned by the tide of unbearable debt. For the privilege of keeping the foreign banks sound and dry, the Grecian economy will be condemned to economic recession if not depression for as far as the eye can see.

    Despite the dire economy conditions of the Grecian populace, the EU presently will not budge. The stern austerity deal agreed to by the former conservative government in Athens must be honored, says Brussels. Brussels holds to the merciless stance because Berlin instructs it to do so. The bottom line is brutal. All the talk of pan-European integration and harmony that transcends national boundaries has been claptrap.  When asked to select between maximizing the profits of a few large German banks or diminishing the misery of an entire nation and millions of innocent, hard-working Greeks who had no hand in the errant financial dealings, Chancellor Merkel swiftly made her choice: She told mercy and pan-European brotherhood to take a long hike into Hell’s shadows. She picked her banks over the Greek people.

    The deadline for decision is February 28. While Merkel may soften a bit around the edges, she clearly plans to impose the brunt of the extant plan on the new government in Athens. It is Merkel versus the Greek people. Because she controls the money, she will likely win this confrontation.

    During the 2008-2009 financial crisis, Greece waded into double-barreled trouble. Because yields on Greek government bonds were higher than in most of the Eurozone daring investors and abject speculators invested in these bonds. The Greek government at the time borrowed too much. It was the time of cheap and abundant money globally. A similar excessive leveraging occurred in the private sector. When the global financial collapse came, the Greek economy was overly indebted and in no shape to withstand what would come next. Banks and investors called their loans. Greece had not the money to pay.

    If the nation had maintained its own currency, it could have printed more money to repay. This would have had its costs. It would have caused inflation and made imports dearer. However, it would have also made Greek industry more price competitive while insulating domestic employment levels from the freefall they would experience.

    This monetary sovereignty would also have allowed Greece better leverage in negotiating with its creditors. It would have negotiated directly with the private banks themselves and not having to go through the EU or other, more powerful governments with interests adverse to Greece’s. The Greeks made a fateful mistake by joining the Eurozone. It relinquished its monetary sovereignty to Brussels which takes its marching orders from Berlin. The membership also opened its borders without being able to impose capital or import controls to the flood of German manufactured goods and financial instruments. Now Greeks were being asked to pay for the debt accrued if not in blood then by mortgaging the soul and future of the nation.

    With Greece prostrated by heavy debt, the EU and IMF invaded to perform their neo-classical economic handiwork. The tragedy begins in earnest, developing a cascading momentum the discerning observer soon recognizes will lead to one place: utter calamity. The EU forces the debt-ridden Greek government to assume Greek private-sector debt. This was done to obligate the government to make German and French banks whole for the risky loan the banks had made to individuals. When it comes to their financial institutions, the German and French governments decided the vagaries of the free market were inapplicable. They imposed a transfer of limited Greek public funds to satisfy these purely private-sector obligations. This foreign imposition of corporate socialism and favoritism for non-Greek creditors would add another layer of debt to a government suffocating under the weight of the public debt it had contracted.

    The EU and IMF then devised a plan to loan Greek money to pay these banks. The loan would be conditioned on Greece implementing a severe austerity program. These conservative economists claimed that cutting the government budget would generate more economic activity and growth. They never explained the mechanics of how this would work.  They merrily said the market would take care of everything as if by magic.  They called their happy elixir “fiscal consolidation.” They imposed austerity and then waited for the Greek economy to expand as their textbooks said it would whenever government deficit spending is reduced. The opposite happened.

    Austerity turned a serious financial problem into wholesale economic disaster. The past six years plunged Greece into a downturn comparable to the Great Depression of the 1930s in terms of severity and duration. Making a mockery of conservative economics, GDP has been clipped by 25 percent. Unemployment multiplied to roughly 30 percent. By cutting government revenues, austerity was intended to lower the debt/GDP ratio that hovered over 120 percent at austerity’s inception. Today, that ratio is over 173 percent.

    Austerity has aggravated not fixed the debt crisis. By lessening government expenditure, austerity contracted the overall economy because it removed the buttress government spending provided the private sector. A shrinking private sector pays less tax; diminished revenues inhibit government’s ability to service the debt. This is worse than a vicious economic cycle. It is terrible enchainment, a prison from which the only release is to pardon a significant portion of the debt owed. In other words, Greece needs debt relief or it will suffer depression the rest of the decade and perhaps longer. (Its GDP growth rate the last quarter of 2014 was -0.2 percent.)

    Joining the Eurozone was a terrible bungle for Greece. The nation forfeited its monetary sovereignty to a regional institution and the powerful nations controlling that institution. Because of this forfeiture, Greece must beg the EU for money to pay its debts. He who holds the money is known as the master. He who needs money held by other is known as the slave. The Eurozone was intended to spread freedom and economic prosperity among its members. Sadly, it was not constructed in a way so that it would realize this benign intent. It has gone the opposite way. The Eurozone has opened the door to a financial imperialism in Europe that historically has been reserved for Western manhandling of former colonies.

    What Greece has suffered is a compound lesson to all developing nations.  First, never, ever relinquish your currency sovereignty, especially to a financial arrangement vulnerable to manipulation by a stronger economy.  The short-term gains will be quickly erased when crisis comes; in the long term, crisis always comes. When it does, the stronger economy will squeeze the weaker.  Resolution of the crisis will be conducted in a way that increases the influence and power of the rich over the poor. Second, if anyone tries to sell you a bottle of austerity elixir, return it to the mountebank vendor and demand your refund. By all accounts, austerity is as sure a path to poverty as poverty itself. Those who mistake these lessons as false alarms will discover that this economic genre of the Greek tragedy is not limited to Greece alone.

  • Surrendering sovereignty to terrorists

    SIR: If you are a Nigerian living abroad like me, chances are that you have been inundated by many of your friends and neighbours with questions asking about Nigeria. The lead story on the local news in my neck of the woods for the past two weeks have all been about the kidnap of the Chibok girls. While at an event yesterday, I was accosted by the Mayor of my city, and the city attorney with the following questions: “What is wrong with the Nigerian president? How could he be that clueless? How can a nation with distinguished Nobel laureate and reputable scholars from all fields of science and humanities succumb to buffoonish leadership? And by the way, what is wrong with asking for help when you are lost and in over your head?”

    Many have said that Nigeria is a cursed nation. I beg to differ. Nigeria is a blessed nation saddled with crazed leaders who has made greed and avarice their directive principle in life. The urge to loot by our leaders is what brought us to a situation where a military once renowned all over the world for its bravery is now the joke of the whole world. Nigeria military has never been underfunded; the problem is not with budget of the ministry of defense, but the misappropriation of those funds by successive regimes since the 1980s. The rot in our government has now affected the military just as it is rearing its ugly head in other institutions like judiciary and even our sports ministry!

    We may not get back the Chibok girls but can we at least have honest conversations about the state of leadership in our dear country. A nation where the so called First Lady of Nigeria-a position unknown to our constitution and any extant law-will order the arrest of protesters is a nation in peril. Let’s call a spade a spade: the Jonathan regime is lost and unraveling before our very eyes. It is time to move on and start planning on how we as citizens could take our destiny in our hand and save our floundering ship. We need to start making a demand on the future leaders of our country and abhor imposition of leaders by political godfathers.

    • Francis Adewale

    Spokane, WA , USA

  • On Sovereignty

    On Sovereignty

    Modern sovereignty derives its power and authority from the withdrawal and substitution of the “divine” and absolute right of kings and monarchs to preside over the affairs of humankind for the legal right of the people to choose who will rule them. In effect, although sovereignty belongs to the people, they are deemed not “sovereign” enough to preside over their own affairs. As it has been famously noted, if men were angels, there would be no need for government. Nowhere in the modern history of mankind have the people actually come to power. Power is often held in permanent trusteeship for them: either delegated by them or collected on their behalf by those with the will to power.

    This contradiction between the legal power of the people to determine the sovereignty of their rulers and its political limitations in the face of rulers ready to assert their sovereignty and authority often leads to a democratic conundrum: the pious myth of liberal democracy as peoples’ power in motion, or as government of the people by the people and for the people collides with the harsh reality that this is nothing but a gigantic swindle. It is the government of the organized few by the organized few and for the organized few in most cases.

    The battle for the soul of Nigeria has shifted in focus in the past month since the advent of President Jonathan’s advisory committee for the convocation of a National Conference. Sovereignty itself has become a site of fierce intellectual struggle. There are those who insist that in order to pass muster, and since it is a gathering  the Nigerian people, the sovereignty of the proposed confab is non-negotiable and should be guaranteed ab initio by Jonathan. There are also those who insist that since sovereignty has already been ceded by the Nigerian people, there can be no two sovereign authorities co-existing in the same polity except as an anarchic anomaly. For Jonathan to surrender his authority without a formal seizure of such in organized elections amounts to sovereign suicide.

    If everybody sticks to their guns on this sticky matter, particularly organised labour and the influential South West, it can be assumed that the conference is dead on arrival. The widespread clamour for the sovereignty of the conference is a direct indictment of past efforts and a reflection of grave concerns about the viability of Nigeria in its current incarnation. If Nigeria were to be running well, there would have been no need for such a historic dialogue. In fact never in the history of Nigeria has there been so much contempt among the educated classes for both the sovereign and the notion of sovereignty itself within the backdrop of a politically and economically traumatized citizenry. When then and where then lies the sovereignty of a state that has virtually unraveled?

    It must not be forgotten that no ruler in post-colonial Africa has willingly surrendered his sovereignty.  Not even with imminent death and the dissolution of empire. African rulers can be a hardy and recalcitrant lot. In 1996, and in a cruel twist of ironic fate, snooper  watched Mobutu, his body already ravaged by cancer, being helped to his feet by a frail Nelson Mandela on a frigate moored off the coast of Angola. Kabila’s forces were already closing in on the capital. But Mobutu was too far gone in his delusions to have any truck with reality. A few days later, Mobutu was chased away from his country to die in ignominious exile. Even as he fled, his official griot was singing on the radio that the president reigns but does not rule.

    It must be conceded that that was a situation of war and anarchy. But it was war and anarchy arising from a political stalemate engineered by Mobutu and arising from a deliberately deadlocked National Conference in which a dithering France paid with the life of its ambassador to Zaire. Jonathan still has some residual good luck.  The widespread loss of authority and legitimacy as we are witnessing in Nigeria does not equate to a loss of the power of coercion and forcible compliance. Based on that alone, the Nigerian state still has substantial sovereignty. Whether that balance of force can be maintained or sustained in the coming months particularly if anarchy spreads and anomie deepens will determine how much sovereignty is left for the Jonathan administration.

    This morning, in continuation of our policy of letting a thousand flowers bloom, we publish an article that offers a fresh and interesting  perspective on the issue of confab and leadership.

  • Confab: Civil Societies  insist on sovereignty

    Confab: Civil Societies insist on sovereignty

    PRO-DEMOCRACY activists and organisations have called on Nigerians to insist on nothing short of a sovereign national conference as the Senator Femi Okurounmu-led Conference Advisory Committee prepares to fashion out modalities for the national conference proposed by President Goodluck Jonathan.

    The president had recently inaugurated the 13-man Advisory Committee to establish modalities for a national conference aimed at resolving issues that currently cause friction in the polity.

    The committee, according to the president, is charged with the responsibility of consulting widely and developing the framework that will guide the proceedings of the proposed national dialogue.

    It would be recalled that Jonathan had, in a nationwide broadcast to mark the nation’s 53rd independence anniversary, announced the committee headed Dr. Femi Okurounmu and Dr. Akilu Indabawa as its secretary.

    But Mazi Okwu Okwu, Secretary, Board of Trustees of the Ohaneze Youth Council (OYC), dismissed the proposed conference as an attempt by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) led government to give Nigeria another unacceptable constitution.

    “The colonial masters gave Nigeria one hundred-year trial period as a nation. This expires next January. This proposed constitution by President Jonathan is nothing but an attempt to once again give Nigeria another unacceptable constitution.

    “This is not the conference we have been clamouring for. A sovereign national conference remains the ideal and best platform for us to discuss as a people. It is the only avenue through which the ethnic nationalities whose sovereignty was forcefully stolen hundred years ago can add their own voice to the debate,” Okwu argued.

    General Secretary of the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO), Chief Ayo Opadokun, faulted the conference proposed by the president, saying it will still give birth to something similar to the 1999 constitution, which he said is a “unitarist instrument with a hierarchical and over centralised power structure in which the masses of an otherwise rich and bountifully endowed country wallow in abject poverty amidst the obscene opulence of office holders.”

    The NADECO boss lamented that Nigeria is in distress today largely because of the failure of the country to convene a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) in 1994 and the haste in which the country returned to civil rule, declaring that NADECO’s unwavering commitment to the convening of SNC.

    “NADECO unequivocally states that the answer to Nigeria’s myriads of problems lie in the immediate peaceful dismantling of the constitutional structures, which were erected and operated in negation of the sovereignty of the people. The process for that peaceful dismantling is by a convocation of Sovereign National Conference (SNC) the same way South Africa did via CODESA.”

    Former President of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA), Mr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), in his own submission, disagreed with suggestions that the proposed national conference should leave some national issues un-discussed.

    According to him, “Civil Society in Nigeria has noted with mixed reaction your statement to distinguished Senators, on the floor of the senate chamber, that a national conference is a vital requirement for a peoples’ constitution for this country. Although, many within the civil society disagree or have expressed reservations about the so called

    “NO-GO” issues highlighted in your statement, it is commonly agreed that your declaration forms an important new development in the quest for a legitimate peoples’ Constitution,” he said.

    Also the pan-Yoruba organisation, Afenifere, speaking through its Secretary, Chief Seinde Arogbofa, said anything short of a sovereign national conference is unacceptable to the people of the Southwest.

    According to the Afenifere scribe it was necessary that the conference was designated as sovereign so that the outcome could be taken seriously.

    “The sovereignty we are talking about is to ensure that the discussions are taken seriously. It is to make sure that what the people arrive at is taken seriously by the government,” he explained.

    “There should be nothing like ‘no-go-areas.’ Nigerians should be free to discuss all the issues of contention so that they can find ways of living together as one people. Also, ethnic and social- cultural associations as well as other pressure groups should take part in the conference, but government appointees should not participate in the discussion,” he added.

  • Sovereignty, authority and  global justice

    I  read  some  where that colonialism    ‘with its across   borders  and across  seas‘  nature was indeed the forerunner of globalization  and I  sneered then that someone was trying to glamorize colonialism  in contemporary  terms  to make it relevant perhaps     to accommodate it in modern history . Events in the last week   however have shown that my skepticism  on the issue was misplaced.

     Just  look  at the foray  of US special  forces into Somalia and Libya this   week   and the reactions of the bona fide governments in both  nations and you see all the imprints of a new form of colonialism  actually mocking globalization as we know it today . When  you also hear  that former Liberian strong man Charles Taylor  who has been jailed for various crimes including rape, terrorism and the use of child soldiers in Sierra  Leone’s war is to serve his 50  years sentence in a British prison because Britain requested for this,  then you  see how colonialism  is very akin to globalization. Furthermore the  news that Cameroun’s  military chasing Boko  Haram   terrorists  off their  territory   informed their Nigerian colleagues  across  the border to make sure that the  terrorists  did   not escape really showed that ECOWAS’ cooperation   in fighting Boko Haram  can take shape in spite of colonial heritage,  its differences,  and history. Again,   the decision of the US  to cut military aid to Egypt  and the Egyptian government’s retort  that it will not yield to US pressure but   that Egypt will pursue its own path  to democracy say a lot about the topic of the day.

    Starting with the overnight strike  of US special  forces   in Somalia    and Libya, the reaction   of   the two  governments was markedly different. The  Somali  PM  welcomed the development and praised the Americans .He  told his interviewer   that Somalia  welcomes the intervention of its   foreign partners in fighting Al Shabab anywhere including  Somali territory. Ostensibly the Americans had come to attack or kidnap terrorists who had bombed the Westgate Mall in Nairobi  Kenya killing over 65 people. But  the raid in Somalia this time was not successful because the Americans had a new rule of engagement which did not allow them   to attack  where civilians are engaged. To the Somali PM then, sovereignty was a not an issue, and he had no qualms in the Americans usurping , as it were,  the authority of the de facto and de jure government of Somalia, as  long as the objective is to flatten the nose of Al Shabab  operatives which Somali leaders regard as a form of international justice being meted out to Al  Shabab.

    In  Libya, the Americans  carted away an Al Qada  operative who took part in the bombing of the US embassy  in Dar Es Salaam sometime ago. They kidnapped him in Tripoli and took him for questioning on a ship in the Mediterranean. The  Libyan government was livid with rage and summoned the US Ambassador in Libya  for explanation. Worse still,  over 100  gunmen were reported to have  captured  the Libyan PM Ali  Zeidane  only to release him  after 8 hours . Before his kidnap  and arrest,  the Libyan PM  had appealed to the International Community to help his government because it could not control the volume of arms flowing in and out of Libya,  which he feared would destabilize the entire region. After his  bizarre  kidnap and release, the Libyan PM  thanked those who worked for his release and noted that the issue was a distinct Libyan   problem that would be resolved in- house.

    What  is clear is  that the Libyan PM  has scant authority ,if any,  and his tenure is at the mercy of those    who brazenly arrested and later released him, as there was nothing stopping them from a repetition of the drama. Zerdane  lost power albeit momentarily and was lucky that he did not or has not lost his life yet. In  effect then the militia that detained Libya’s PM  took umbrage  at  the capture  of the Al Qada  operative   on Libya’s soil  and used the PM’s arrest to protest American violation of the territorial integrity   and sovereignty of Libya. Yet  the minlitia knew it had no authority for what it did   and returned the PM to his impotent office while it took cover in the oblivion from which it emerged to kidnap Libya’s PM.

    In  effect then both  Libya and Somalia showed their vulnerability as failed states last week. The difference is that while Somalia  is reconciled  to its fate, Libya is remonstrating like a  school boy who lost his toy and did not know who to blame but to break into childish tantrums only to calm down and live with his loss.

    In Charles  Taylor’s case one can only have some admiration for British sense of justice no matter how grudgingly. As  far back as 2007  the British had passed an Act of Parliament to  allow Taylor to serve his sentence in the UK  at the cost of government. This is because the Sierra Leonean  and Liberian government did not want the Liberian war lord to serve his sentence in the region for obvious reasons. According to the British,  the conviction of Taylor is a landmark moment for international justice. This is because it shows  that no matter how long the mills of justice  grind slowly  they  will grind exceedingly fine  and catch up  with those   leaders who rule their   people with impunity, any where in the world.

    It  is in this light that I look at the request of Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta’s  that he could face his trial for post election violence on video rather than going to the Hague as his Vice President William Ruto  had  done for charges against them for post election violence in Kenya’s 2007  elections. Kenyatta’s request should be granted as he is a seating  president. His request still shows respect for international law  and the rule of law and is a climbdown from  the resolution passed by Kenya’s parliament not to recognize the ICC. Really  I think Britain’s  willingness to play gaoler to Taylor would have moved the Kenyan leader in the direction of trial by video rather than outright refusal,  given that Britain was the colonial government in Kenya and both  the British  and Kenya and indeed the Kenyattas  know each other so well. Which  again is a positive development  for global justice  brought about  by globalization en route colonialism.

    Similarly,  the  border cooperation between the Camerounian and Nigeria military  over the elimination of terrorists  is a welcome development in the region. This sort of accord should be extended to nations that border Nigeria in the North  East  especially Niger. Before this,  the language of the Colonialist namely French and English  had created mistrust amongst the armed forces of both nations with France encouraging cooperation amongst Francophone states to the exclusion of the armies of former British colonies like Ghana and Nigeria. Such close ties with France have been more pronounced in recent times. That  was why it was not ECOWAS that intervened in Ivory Coast to displace Laurent Gbagbo and install President Ouattara but French  troops that came and fought on the streets  of Abidjan. The  same goes for the French troops intervention in Mali  while ECOWAS  was still vacillating and dithering on getting forces  and  logistics of intervention ready .Cross  border cooperation between sovereign forces should be recognized if ECOWAS is to contain the   fast  and viral rise of terrorism in the Sahel,  especially the Boko Haram threat that is giving the Nigerian government a run for  its  money, by killing students and burning churches and mosques with impunity.

    Lastly,  the way the US  government of Barak  Obama has cut some military aid to Egypt goes further to show the confusion of the US government in the way it is selling democracy to the whole world. US  policy  on military coups with friendly governments is to cut off aid. Everyone in this world knows that the displacement of Egypt’s elected government  of Mohammed Morsi was a military  coup except the Obama government.  The  army in Egypt had asked that people come out to demonstrate against an elected government and that call was heeded  and the army proceeded to form an interim government which is the precursor of military intervention in politics called military coup. Yet the US cannot call a spade  a spade and apply its own policy. Of  course the Egyptian army knows that the US present administration has no stomach for any fight as in Syria and will  dig in like Assad and evolve its democracy on the blood of demonstrating  and defiant Egyptians who think the initial street revolution fuelled by the US has been hijacked by the military in Egypt. Well,  the US president is   is  busy at home fighting for his   economic and social legacy over debt  ceiling with the Republicans in the US and has scant time for Egypt and its tottering democracy or is it diarchy? So  in Egypt  the sovereignty lies  between the army and demonstrators with the army having the upper hand. Even with the suspended military aid the Army is stronger. In terms of global justice however the US president is learning at great cost what his predecessors have known to their  cost. That is that if you abandon foreign policy for too long for domestic policy your diplomacy will be in tatters sooner that you can ever expect   and vice versa.

  • Group demonstrates in Lagos for Biafra’s sovereignty

    Members of a group, the Biafra Zionist Movement (BZM), yesterday organised a peaceful rally in Lagos.

    They said it was in lieu of their planned declaration of the Sovereign State of Biafra next Monday.

    The rally, tagged: Redemption at last, was held at Ladipo Oshodi. It lasted for about three hours.

    Scores of youths, especially Igbo, joined the rally.

    They carried the flag of the defunct Republic of Biafra and the national flags of the United States of America, Israel and France.

    The Biafra Republic agitators said they would also protest “Islamic banking, economic system, marginalisation of Biafra, lack of adequate security of life and property as well as neglect of infrastructure in the area”.

    As early as 9am, the demonstrators were at the venue, chanting songs, such as The Elephant of Biafra; We’re marching to the promise land of Biafra.

    Some of the demonstrators told The Nation that they had the backing of the other countries whose flags they were carrying.

    According to them, they are tired of the neglect of the Oji Power Dam and River Niger Bridge, a lack of an international airport in the East, the neglect of the Enugu-Onitsha Expressway, the Enugu-Abakaliki Expressway and the killings of their people in the North by Boko Haram, among others.

    Speaking with The Nation, leader of the demonstrators, Mr. Kingsley Anyaegbunam, said: “The Biafran journey started since early 1967 by our leader, the late Dim Odumegwu Ojukwu. Though he was unable to actualise his dreams, some other people have taken up the challenge. We have the support of other countries, such as Israel and America.

    “We are tired of this failed country, with countless promises. We are no longer waiting for them. November 5 is the day of the official declaration, because we need to be independent as quickly as possible.”

    Another member of the group, Comrade Emeka Onwane said: “Benjamin Onwunka, our leader, resides in London, but he came to Nigeria because of this Biafran freedom we are talking about. He has participated in various rallies and campaigns.

    “The essence of this rally is to mobilise the Igbo, who are not aware of the Biafran struggle. We want them to know there will be freedom for us soon. We want them to join in the struggle because what we are talking about is not one man’s race. The sky is our starting point.”

    One of the participants, Chidi Obi said: “This dream cannot be actualised without the full support of the people. We need to join hands to make our peaceful state a reality. The state, which has promised to be a state of milk and honey, is the right of every Igbo man, woman and their children.”