Africa

By Amina Mohamed
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 28 2020 (IPS)

Increasingly, the ability of multilateralism to address contemporary global issues such as climate change and international trade is being questioned. In the case of international trade, WTO Members have thus far not been able to conclude the Doha Round, which was launched in November 2001. The Round was supposed to have been concluded on 1 January 2005, but it has been beset by persistent differences among the WTO Members. Whereas most developing countries believe that the Round is still active and have called for the fulfilment of all Doha mandates, several developed countries are of the view that the Round has run its full course and overtaken by developments in the global economy. They note that three out of the ten top economies in the world are developing countries – Brazil, China and India – and that several developing economies are also competitive in certain sectors of the global economy and that by granting significant flexibilities in the negotiations to these competitive developing economies, the Round’s mandates are no longer valid and that differentiation among developing countries should be part of the broader on-going discussion on WTO reform.

The stalemate in the Doha negotiations has prompted countries to look at alternative ways to liberalize trade and investment for the benefit of their businesses and consumers, including negotiating plurilateral agreements at the WTO among a subset of WTO Members and negotiating bilateral and regional trade agreements. In the last five years, concluded bilateral and regional trade agreements include the United States-Mexico and Canada Free Trade Agreement, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between the European Union and Canada, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership between eleven Pacific-rim countries, including Australia, Canada and Japan, the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic RelationsPlus between Australia, New Zealand and the fourteen Pacific Island Countries and European Union and MERCOSUR Free Trade Agreement. The scope of these agreements goes beyond the current WTO Agreement and addresses issues of importance to businesses such as electronic commerce, competition policy and investment as well as labour rights and the protection of the environment.

African countries have also not been idle and have recently concluded the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), which is expected to create a market of 1.2 billion people with a gross domestic product of USD2.5 trillion. The United Nations Economic Commission for Africa estimates that trade among African countries, which is currently around 15 per cent, can easily be doubled if the current overall average tariffs of 6.1 per cent are eliminated. The figure is projected to be even higher if the removal of tariffs is accompanied by the elimination of non-tariff barriers on intra-African trade. With Africa’s population expected to exceed 2 billion by 2050, it is envisaged that it would be a magnet for foreign direct investment by leading multinational companies. The World Economic Forum estimates that the AfCFTA will generate USD4 trillion for investments and commercial transactions of goods and services on the continent.

Dr Amina Mohamed. Photo: Ministry Files

Notwithstanding the immense opportunities the AfCFTA will bring to the African continent, African countries should not turn their backs on the rules-based multilateral trading system, which has contributed significantly to the expansion of the global economy and in the process lifted several millions of people out of absolute poverty. Between 1948 and 2019, world trade grew from USD58.5 billion to almost USD20 trillion and it is estimated that more than 700 million people have been lifted out of absolute poverty with much of that happening in China and India. African countries should show determination and work closely with the leading WTOMembers, including the United States, the European Union, China, Brazil and India to strengthen the organization for the benefit of all countries, particularly African and least developed countries which have been operating at theperiphery of the multilateral trading system.

There is agreement among all WTO Members that the WTO Agreement needs updating considering that the current Agreement entered into force in January 1995. So much has happened in the intervening period and WTO rules need to reflect contemporary trends in the global economy if it is to remain relevant. The task of reforming the WTO should not be left to a few countries. All countries have a stake in a well-functioning multilateral trading system and collective engagement will ensure that all spectrums of views are considered in the design and implementation of new and effective multilateral trade rules. The benefits from the AfCFTA would be far greater if alongside regional liberalization, there is also multilateral liberalization, especially considering that Africa’s largest trading partners are the European Union, China and the United States. The two approaches to liberalization are not mutually exclusive and can complement each other as various studies have shown. African countries need not make a choice between the two approaches and should pursue both doggedly to achieve robust economic growth and sustainable development.

The world needs a reinforced rules-based multilateral trading system more than ever to confront the challenges of the 21stcentury. Bilateral and regional trade agreements cannot be a perfect substitute for the rules-based multilateral trading system, as issues such as trade distorting domestic support to the agriculture sector can only be effectively addressed at the multilateral level. These agreements, including the AfCFTA also tend to rely heavily on the WTO framework in many areas, including health and food safety and trade remedies. All WTO Members should work together to preserve and strengthen this public good. Compromises will have to be made and the overarching reason why countries join the WTO in the first place should not be lost on them. Every country that is a WTO Member acknowledges the role trade can play in their national economies in creating jobs, attracting foreign direct investment and lifting standards of living. Protectionism imposes significant costs and countries should avoid going down that path. African countries have a role to play in breaking the impasse at the WTO and they should work intensively with other WTO Members to reform and strengthen the institution and the rules-based multilateral trading system, while they commence implementing the AfCFTA to boost trade and investment on the continent.

The writer is a Cabinet Secretary, Government of Kenya. She served until recently as Kenya’s Foreign Affairs Minister in charge also of international trade. She has occupied several top positions at the World Trade Organization, including as Chairperson of the General Council and the Nairobi Ministerial Conference in 2015.

The post Multilateralism Versus Regionalism: Which Path Should African Countries Pursue to Expand Trade and Investment Opportunities? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

People’s Friendship University of Russia

By Somar Wijayadasa
NEW YORK, Jan 28 2020 (IPS)

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia – popularly known as RUDN (acronym from its Russian name Rossiysky Universitet Druzhby Narodov) – is a renowned, world-class educational and research institution in Moscow.

It celebrates its 60th Anniversary from 5-7 February culminating in a grand concert at the Kremlin Palace of Congress presided by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.

In keeping with Russia’s socialist tradition of helping developing countries, Premier Nikita Khrushchev opened this University in 1960 – just less than half a century after the 1917 Russian revolution, and less than two decades after the World War II that ravaged the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) with a loss of over 27 million of its people.

Events of historical significance

By 1960, Russia was a thriving economy with marvels of industrialization, advances in science, technology and medicine, escapades into outer space, and basking in the glory of a Super Power.

Simultaneously, a mass decolonization was taking place liberating hundreds of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America – that desperately required qualified cadres to develop their countries. Russia stepped up to assist them – giving birth to the Peoples’ Friendship University.

Exponential growth

As a frequent visitor to the RUDN University since 1960’s, I have had the rare privilege of witnessing its radical transformation – the exponential growth of buildings, faculties, programs and Institutes, and its number of students.

In 1960, RUDN had 539 students from 59 countries in six faculties in different locations in Moscow. By 1964, it began to build a new campus to accommodate all faculties and students in one location – that has now grown into a mega-university.

When I defended my thesis in 1967, the dissertation committee consisted of seven eminent international jurists, chaired by Feodor Kozhevnikov, a former judge of the International Court of Justice. Even then – a high standard indeed.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) was the first to recognize the high level of Degrees conferred by the Friendship University. With its well-recognized global rankings, Friendship University graduates with a Master’s Degree in any discipline could gain direct admission into PhD programs in Western Universities.

For example, I was admitted to the Hague Academy of International Law, and to PhD programs at the Vienna University, and the School of Law at the New York University purely on the grades of my Master’s Degree program but my workload and travel schedules at the UN disrupted my doctoral studies.

A mega-university

Today, the training of specialists at the RUDN University is carried out according to 472 programs of various levels of education, including 74 programs in foreign languages (English and Spanish) at the various faculties, institutes and academies of the University.

Among the phenomenal changes from my days in the 1960’s is that today you can follow many courses in the English medium. Regardless, all foreign students, after a year in Russia, speak fluent Russian.

RUDN has the best Russian language school in the world to teach Russian to foreigners. To date, its professors continue to teach Russian language to almost all foreign astronauts at the Cosmonaut Training Center named after Yuri Gagarin.

Another distinct improvement is the change in 1989 from a single all-inclusive 5-year Master’s Degree Program into a multi-tiered system of higher education.

Today, RUDN offers a variety of Bachelors, Masters, and Ph.D degrees in 76 disciplines. It has more than 30 Master’s programs in English and Spanish languages, and has over 113 joint Master’s and double diploma programs with famous universities of the world.

RUDN University has about 480 cooperation agreements with universities in more than 90 countries.

Somar Wijayadasa in Moscow, in 2014, with Prof Aslan Abashidze, Dean of the Law Faculty of the People’s Friendship University of Russia

Rector of RUDN University

At the helm of this astounding university is its dynamic Rector, Prof. Vladimir Mikhailovich Filippov, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, and an Academician of the Russian Academy of Education. It is a great honor to have Dr. Fillippov as the Rector as he is an alumni (1973) of the Friendship University – for the last 15 years.

He was the Minister of Education of the Russian Republic (1998–2004), and has won many academic awards. Active in educational matters in Russia and abroad, he Chairs several educational Committees of UNESCO in Paris.

Moscow Campus: A city within the City of Moscow

The RUDN campus is located in the South-West of Moscow – about 20 minutes from the Kremlin and Red Square. It occupies 50 hectares (125 acres) and consists of 27 academic and hostel buildings, sport facilities and stadiums, a clinic and a diagnostic center, hundreds of scientific laboratories, a library, an International Club, a shopping center and 32 multinational cafés – all resembling a cosmopolitan city within the city of Moscow.

According to RUDN, the current “enrollment of students at the Moscow campus and at its Sochi Institute are about 33.5 thousand internal and external students, post-graduate students, residents and interns from 157 countries of the world”.

On average, about 9000 students live in the Moscow campus. The approximate distribution of students by country and region are: Asia – 2324; Latin America – 565; Africa – 1289; Middle East – 861; CIS and Baltic countries – 3510; and Western Europe – 349 students.

Referring to the vast multicultural composition of its student body, Rector Filippov says “our students not only obtain a university degree to fulfill their professional ambitions, but also gain invaluable experience in dealing with different cultures, and broaden their social and cultural horizons”.

Today, the University employs 2,800 highly qualified faculty members, including more than 600 doctors of sciences and 1,400 candidates of science, and about 150 foreign teachers. One noteworthy tradition that continues to date is the assiduous dedication of its professors who strive to ensure that all students excel in their studies, and graduate as well qualified professionals.

Let Knowledge Unite Us

In keeping with its motto “scientia unescamus”, the University unites people of different nationalities by means of knowledge. In that spirit, every year, the University admits nearly 2000 students from over 150 countries. Currently, over 150,000 of its graduates, including over 6000 doctors of science (PhD’s) work in 180 countries around the world.

Among its prominent graduates are: Mahmoud Abbas, Chairman of the PLO; Michel Djotodia, President of Central African Republic; Daniel Ortega, President of Nicaragua: Hifikepunye Pohamba, Former President of Namibia; Bharrat Jagdeo, former President of Guyana; Porfirio Lobo Sosa, former President of Honduras; Yousuf Saleh Abbas, former Prime Minister of Chad; Karim Masimov, former Prime Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan, to name a few.

Its influential alumni include hundreds of ministers, judges, ambassadors, academicians, senior United Nations officials, and thousands of doctors and engineers and other professionals in hundreds of countries from Angola to Zimbabwe.

University graduates return to their countries – that have suffered for centuries under foreign rule and exploitation – to contribute not only for the scientific advancement of their countries but also to embark on their arduous struggle to win economic independence, develop their national economies, raise their cultural levels and identities, and achieve social progress.

That exemplifies Abraham Lincoln’s words “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next”.

A mini United Nations in Moscow

Having worked for 25 years in several organizations of the United Nations system – IAEA, FAO, UNESCO, WHO/UNAIDS – and most of my career representing these organizations at the UN Headquarters in New York, I can unhesitatingly vouch that the atmosphere in the Friendship University campus bears a resemblance to the United Nations in New York.

In 2014, my wife and I casually visited the University (as we always do when we are in Moscow) not realizing that the graduation ceremonies were in progress. The massive lobby of the main building was full of beaming graduating foreign students, their families, and Ambassadors of various countries.

That multi-national gathering – some dressed in their national costumes – and the jubilant atmosphere truly resembled a mini United Nations. As we were introduced to the gathering, many thronged around us asking questions about future employment prospects in UN Agencies.

The university has a cooperative and friendly attitude – one of respect and mutual assistance. Here everyone can make a «world tour» without leaving the campus. Traditions and customs, cuisines and garments, dancing and music – the whole world is in one Moscow street.

A beacon of hope for the world

Since 1960, RUDN has offered thousands of fully paid graduate scholarships in medicine, engineering, jurisprudence, and other sciences to provide vitally needed qualified cadres to develop those newly liberated nations. That is a magnanimous contribution – unprecedented in history.

As I pointed out earlier, over 150,000 RUDN graduates work all over the world, and in various organizations of the United Nations system. Each one of them – in their professions – prove the high standard of education they received, thereby, bringing enormous credit to Russia’s People’s Friendship University.

The golden axiom “education is the ultimate gift one can give a child” may have inspired Nelson Mandela to say “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world”.

*Somar Wijayadasa, a Law graduate of the Friendship University was a Faculty Member of the University of Sri Lanka (1967-1972); worked for IAEA and FAO (1973-1985): delegate of UNESCO to the UN General Assembly (1985-1995); and was the Representative of UNAIDS at the United Nations from 1995-2000.

The post Russia’s Prodigious Gift of Higher Education to the Developing World appeared first on Inter Press Service.

The world's fastest land animal was hunted into extinction in the country more than 70 years ago.

Former Chelsea striker Didier Drogba will join other former players in a charity football match to raise money for the Australian bushfire appeal.

A key player for Leicester and statistically one of the best defensive midfielders in Europe, has Wilfred Ndidi surpassed comparisons with N'Golo Kante?

Some cultures exchange money before a marriage, but should we continue the Bride Price tradition?

A plan by Nigeria's south-western states to start a new security unit divides the country.

Djibouti’s Minister of Higher Eduction and Scientific Research Nabil Mohamed Ahmed (right) speaks at the International Summit on Balanced and Integrated Education, which his country is hosting. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

By Stella Paul
DJIBOUTI CITY, Jan 27 2020 (IPS)

Djibouti’s President Ismail Omar Guelleh knows that his country is in need of an education system that is, “innovative, based on universal principles and values and adaptive of the local realities”.

With a population of  less than a million, Djibouti is one of the smallest countries in Africa. However, the number of challenges blocking its way to implementing inclusive education are massive: flood, droughts, landslides and political conflicts.

“In the past two months, we have been hit by a huge flood. Before that, we had repeated droughts. And now we have an invasion of crickets in Djibouti. So, beside the social problems, we have been also facing climatic challenges,”  Djibouti’s Minister of Higher Eduction and Scientific Research Nabil Mohamed Ahmed told IPS.

And each of these disasters takes toll on the education system.

Perhaps it is one of the reasons why his country is hosting the third edition of the International Summit on Balanced and Integrated Education, which started Monday, Jan. 27, in the country’s capital Djibouti City. Inaugurating the summit, President Guelleh telling said: “This summit is a step closer to the future we want.”

Djibouti has been making steady progress with regards to its education system, Ahmed said.

It’s been confirmed by the United Nation’s Children’s Fund (UNICEF), which found that the number of students accessing high school education increased from less than 10 percent in 2011 to over 80 percent currently.

There has also been a new focus on providing an education that can boost the employability of this Horn of Africa nation’s youth.

“When they can’t find jobs, they are pushed to terrorism,” Ahmed pointed out.

• Djibouti is on high security alert, especially since Al-Shabaab — the Somali-based terror organisation — called for attacks on the country.  Though no major attack has taken place since 2014, security concerns still remain very high across the nation, especially the regions bordering Eritrea and Somalia.

Most of Djibouti’s conflict-ridden neighbours in the region — Eritrea, Sudan and South Sudan — are not participating in summit.

But Hassan Ali Khayre, the Prime Minister of Somalia — arguably one of the most conflict-ridden nations in Africa today — said that the country has been making a conscious effort to make universal education available to all Somalis, especially girls and women.

According to UNICEF, fewer than 50 percent of Somali girls attend primary school. Low availability of sanitation facilities such as separate toilets for girls, a lack of female teachers, safety concerns and social norms that favour boys’ education are cited as factors inhibiting parents from enrolling their daughters in school.

However, at the summit, Somalia’s government claimed to have taken several measures to improve girls’ education.

“In 2017, we developed a national education policy to provide free universal education from Kindergarten 1. We have also ratified the convention on child rights, so that no child is left out,” Somalia’s Minister of Education Mahdi Mohamed Gulaid said.

Oludoun Mary Omolara, the assistant Director at the Nigerian federal ministry of education, attended the International Summit on Balanced and Integrated Education in Djibouti. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

Innovative models

Oludoun Mary Omolara is an assistant Director at the federal ministry of education in Nigeria. The West African nation has been hardest hit by the terrorism unleashed by Islamic extremist group Boko Haram, which is vehemently opposed to school education.

The country’s northern provinces have faced several violent attacks, including the kidnapping of 276 girls from their boarding school in 2014 — who are now known as the Chibok girls.

The region is reported to have the world’s highest rate of schoolgirl dropouts and the country itself has over 13 million out-of-school children — the largest in the world.

Though Nigeria has a universal education system, Omolara said that the national policy in border areas could be more inclusive, making it capable of addressing additional, crucial, life skills needed by people in conflict and border regions.

“The borders are porous (in northern Nigeria) there is constant cross-border migration  and frequent terror attacks. In such situations, we need to provide an education that can enable both teachers and students the knowledge to tackle these issues. For example, the locals need to know safety skills, which should be infused into the education policy so that teachers know how to safeguard their students in the face of an attack,” Omolara told IPS.

This week UNICEF issued an emergency alert stating that nearly 5 million children in central Sahel, particularly Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, will need humanitarian assistance this year. Violence in the region has surged, including “attacks against children and civilians, abductions and recruitment of children into armed groups”.

“When we look at the situation in the Central Sahel, we cannot help but be struck by the scale of violence children are facing. They are being killed, mutilated and sexually abused, and hundreds of thousands of them have had traumatic experiences,” Marie-Pierre Poirier, UNICEF Regional Director for West and Central Africa, said in a statement.

Nigeria, according to Omolara, has drafted a document to introduce this training in all the schools. So far, 400 people have been trained, and they in turn will train others. However, it is yet to be integrated into the national education policy, she said.

The country is also considering introducing multiple languages in its schools, especially in the border areas that continue to receive refugee students who speak different languages.

“We are an English-speaking country, but our neighbours speak French. A lot of migrants and refugees are Arabic speaking. So, we need a multi-lingual education environment.

“Also, if people are not able to understand the language of the terrorists or conflicts, they are also unlikely to deal with them. So, while we need a lot of sensitisation of people living at the conflict areas on peace education, we also must help them understand the situation and reject the terror ideologies,” Omolara told IPS.

However, there are still areas where private investment could be of help. This includes rural electricity and support for the disabled.

“Our government is doing all it can, but there are areas where we need help. For example, lack of electricity in the conflict region is a huge challenge. Some people are buying generators, but it could help to have more  private investment,” she concluded.

The 3-day summit, organised by the Education Relief Foundation (ERF), will conclude on Jan. 29 with signing of a Universal Declaration on universal inclusive education by state leaders.

** This story contains an update including information on the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) alert about millions of children in the Sahel in need of emergency humanitarian assistance this year.

Related Articles

• Balanced and Gender-Inclusive Education is a Smart Investment

The post **UPDATE** African Nations Caught in Conflict Re-commit to Inclusive Education appeared first on Inter Press Service.

The post Balanced and Gender-Inclusive Education is a Smart Investment appeared first on Inter Press Service.

England surge to a 191-run win in the fourth Test against South Africa to complete a 3-1 series victory - only their second overseas success in four years.

By Martha Katsi
HARARE, Zimbabwe, Jan 27 2020 (IPS)

Steven Seremwe, who is 57 years old, was retrenched from his job as an administrator at Lake Shore Missions in 2012. He decided to focus on farming, and he started growing various crops—white maize, sugar beans, and sweet potatoes, among others—for consumption and sale.

“I have always loved agriculture but because of work pressures, I was not practicing. But when I got retrenched from work, I decided to follow my heart and started farming,” he said.

The problem was that every farming season, even with a bumper harvest, Seremwe`s income was falling short. Profits were never enough to feed and care for his wife and two children. He had to do odd jobs in the community to help make ends meet.

Seremwe lives in Zvimba District of Mashonaland West Province in Zimbabwe. According to a National Nutrition Survey conducted in 2010, Zvimba was among 27 districts in Zimbabwe that were identified as having a high prevalence of malnutrition.

The irony is that in Seremwe’s district, many types of crops and vegetables are grown, but most are grown for sale rather than for consumption.

In 2016, under the Zimbabwe Livelihoods and Food Security Programme (LFSP), HarvestPlus introduced biofortification in Zvimba district.

The programme, which is funded by the Government of the United Kingdom through the Department for International Development (DfID), aims to reduce poverty through increased agricultural productivity, increased incomes, and improved food and nutrition security for smallholder farmers.

To improve nutrition and health, the LFSP aims to increase the production and consumption of a wide variety of nutritious foods by target households, including biofortified crops.

Encouraged by staff from HarvestPlus and the Agricultural Technical and Extension Services (part of the Zimbabwe Ministry of Lands, Agriculture, Water, Climate and Rural Resettlement), Seremwe joined in the LFSP, hoping that the new crops would help boost his family’s income and secure better and healthy living conditions.

After attending several biofortification trainings organized by the project, Seremwe applied the techniques that he had learned, such as mulching, weeding, and application of manure in his field.

During the 2017/18 agricultural season, 3,300 farming households in Zvimba district were supported with vitamin A orange maize and iron bean seeds and some agricultural inputs. Seed test packs were given to farmers. Seremwe received a two-kilogram pack containing both iron bean and vitamin A orange maize seeds.

After cultivating these crops for the first time, Seremwe saw their potential and was motivated to expand output. During the 2018/19 farming season, he purchased 10 kilograms (kgs) of vitamin A orange maize seed, which yielded 1 ton of maize grain.

He kept 250 kgs of this for home consumption and sold 750 kgs to the Grain Marketing Board to earn ZWD2076.90 (roughly USD138). Seremwe also planted 2 kgs of iron beans and harvested about 60 kgs, of which he kept 40 kgs for home consumption.

Seremwe has also become an ambassador of biofortification—to date, he has passed on 10 kgs of iron bean seed to other farmers to plant. “My family loves eating vitamin A orange maize, especially porridge, it is really tasty. The iron beans also are fast cooking. Above all, as a family we appreciate the health benefits we are getting from eating these biofortified crops. As you can see, we all look very healthy!” Seremwe said.

Seremwe`s fields now yield produce that brings greater prosperity and opportunity to his family. “Vitamin A orange maize and iron beans are an excellent add to our crops that we grow here. Now we have crops loved by many for sale. This contributes significantly to improving the living conditions of my family and education for my children,” he added.

In the current 2019/20 agricultural season, Seremwe—as a farmer who was taught by the project on preparedness—has already bought his farming inputs, including vitamin A orange maize seed, iron beans, and some fertilizers. He has already done his land preparation and is only waiting for the rains to come.

Seremwe is one of roughly 250 000 farmers who have benefitted from the UK-funded LFSP project to end micronutrient deficiencies in the country. The project also supports farmers with market linkages.

Through the program’s interventions, a cumulative 259 metric tons (MT) of vitamin A maize seed and 400 MT of iron bean seed have been distributed in the country through a combination of direct distribution and market-led inventions.

By 2020, it is expected that 400,000 smallholder farmers will be growing and consuming biofortified crops in the country. Based on the success of biofortification in the country, the government of Zimbabwe has included biofortification in the National Agriculture Policy Framework 2019- 2030.

One of the pillars under the framework will be driving food and nutrition security and resilience.

*HarvestPlus is developing and promoting new, more nutritious varieties of staple food crops with higher amounts of vitamin A, iron or zinc—three of the micronutrients identified by the World Health Organization as most lacking in diets globally. The process is known as biofortification—and regular consumption of these innovative crops is improving nutrition and public health.

The post Biofortified Crops Improve Farmers’ Livelihoods in Zimbabwe appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

HarvestPlus*

The post Biofortified Crops Improve Farmers’ Livelihoods in Zimbabwe appeared first on Inter Press Service.

The 2018 African Women's Player of the Year Chrestinah 'Thembi' Kgatlana signs for Portugal's Benfica Feminino.

Nigeria youth international Orji Okwonkwo says he is looking forward to playing under France and Arsenal legend Thierry Henry at MLS side Montreal Impact

Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf is pictured during the ruling at the International Court of Justice in the Hague, Netherlands on January 23, 2020. PHOTO: REUTERS/EVA PLEVIER

By Tasneem Tayeb
Jan 27 2020 (IPS-Partners)

(The Daily Star) – Two days after the Interna-tional Court of Justice (ICJ) approved emergency “provisional measures” asking Myanmar to stop persecution of the Rohingya in all forms— including killing, raping, and destroying homes and villages—two Rohingya women died in Rakhine State when the Myanmar army shelled a village. One of them was pregnant.

While many celebrated the ICJ’s order of provisional measures, some—especially those who have witnessed the ineffectiveness of the ICJ’s repeated “provisional measures” to protect Bosnian Muslims in 1993—had been cynical about the ultimate outcome of such a measure. Their scepticism is yet to be proven wrong.

Despite the ICJ’s order, Myanmar—it seems—remains defiant with its genocidal intent against the Rohingya. And Myanmar has good reason for its intransigence.

First of all, while the ICJ’s order is binding, it is not enforceable; and in the face of Myanmar’s non-compliance, The Gambia (the country that brought the case against Myanmar at the ICJ) at best can approach the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for it to decide whether it will use its powers to force Myanmar to comply with the ICJ’s order. And here lies the advantage of Myanmar.

China and Russia—two of Myanmar’s major allies—are two of the five permanent members of the UNSC, which also includes the United States, France and the United Kingdom. Both these countries have in the past resisted the United Nations’ attempts to address the Rohingya issue. To refresh the memory: in March 2017, China and Russia blocked a UN Security Council statement that would have “noted with concern renewed fighting in some parts of the country and stressed the importance of humanitarian access to all effected areas”, as reported by news agency Reuters.

With deep economic and military ties with China and Russia, it is no wonder that Myanmar is safe and strong in the knowledge that the UNSC will not be able to induce it to comply with the ICJ’s verdict in the months and years to come.

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Myanmar earlier this month and the signing of 33 memorandums of understanding (MOUs), agreements, exchange letters and protocols send a strong signal to Bangladesh and to the wider world about its strategic ties with the country. According to Myanmar’s Directorate of Investment and Company Administration data, in 2019 China was the second biggest foreign investor in Myanmar, accounting for 25.21 percent of investment in the country; Singapore was the biggest, making up 26.86 percent of the foreign direct investment Myanmar received in the same year.

On the occasion of Xi’s visit, a joint statement in Chinese state media said that China “firmly supports Myanmar’s efforts to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests and national dignity in the international arena” and hopes for it to advance “peace, stability and development in Rakhine State.” Even if one does not read too much into these two lines, it would be difficult to misread China’s stance on the Rohingya issue.

During the visit, China and Myanmar also signed an agreement for the Kyaukphyu Special Economic Zone (SEZ) deep seaport project, a major town in the volatile Rakhine State that is at the centre of the Rohingya genocide.

China is not the only actor investing in Rakhine. The World Bank in 2019 came under heavy fire from international human rights bodies and non-government organisations (NGO) for its proposed USD 100 million development project in the conflict-riven Rakhine State titled, “Rakhine Recovery and Development Support Project”.

In a letter to the World Bank dated April 9, 2019, obtained by Reuters, more than a dozen Myanmar-based NGOs said, “It is difficult to imagine how meaningful recovery and development are possible in Rakhine without addressing the underlying human rights issues that currently impact every aspect of life for communities.” Despite World Bank’s assurance that, “The project is being carefully prepared so that it does not reinforce or perpetuate movement restrictions or other forms of segregation, and that it creates new openings for social cohesion and positive exchanges between communities,” how it is going to make sure of this remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, Myanmar’s military ties with Russia have only strengthened over the years. In January 2018, Russia agreed to sell six Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jets to Myanmar costing at least USD 204 million. The deal was announced during the official visit of Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoygu to Myanmar in January 2018.

As late as August 2019, Myanmar military chief Senior General Min Aung Hlaing paid a visit to Russia and during his stay, he visited the Irkutsk Aviation Plant Corporation that is assembling the six Sukhoi Su-30SM multi-role advanced fighter jets for Myanmar. Photos of him sitting in a cockpit next to a test pilot made quite a show of his trip to the plant.

Of course, warplanes are not enough; military personnel require training as well. Here too Russia comes to their aid –more than 600 members of the Tatmadaw (Myanmar’s military) were studying at higher military educational institutions in Russia in January 2018, as suggested by Russia’s Deputy Defence Minister Lieutenant-General Alexander Fomin.

Apart from these economic transactions, around 60 foreign companies from around the world have ties with businesses controlled by the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited and the Myanmar Economic Corporation—two military-governed businesses in Myanmar. It is these two conglomerates that dominate the economic and commercial landscape of the country. To address this, the UN fact-finding mission in 2019 urged imposing targeted financial sanctions on companies linked with Myanmar’s military and suggested that foreign companies doing business with Tatmadaw-controlled corporations could be complicit in international crimes.

During the Rakhine State Investment Fair in 2019, Suu Kyi said, “Myanmar has opened up its economy to the world. We have been constantly adjusting our policies, rules and regulations to be in line with international best practices and to make the investment climate more favourable, predictable, facilitative and friendly. We want to establish a welcoming economic environment for all.” Unfortunately, it seems the welcoming environment is not inclusive of the Rohingya.

Given the scenario, it is not surprising that the world, including international bodies like the UN, has miserably failed to address, let alone stop, the genocide unleashed by Myanmar against the helpless Rohingya. Thousands of adults and children have been killed; millions forced to flee; and an unaccountable number of women and girls have been systemically sexually violated, impregnated and exposed to various sexually transmitted diseases by the Myanmar military. And the world watched the spectre unfold before their very eyes like an audience at a macabre movie screening.

While the world is busy exploring potential economic tie-ups with Myanmar, thanks to its vast untapped resources and strategic geopolitical importance, it is the Rohingya and Bangladesh that are bearing the brunt of Myanmar’s economic possibilities. While the ICJ’s verdict is a welcome move, without political will to hold Myanmar to account it will not yield any positive outcome for the Rohingya. Expecting much from it would be a folly. The 1995 Srebrenica massacre should serve as a reality check.

Tasneem Tayeb is a columnist for The Daily Star.

Her Twitter handle is: @TayebTasneem

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

The post When economics prevails over genocide appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Simi Mehta
NEW DELHI, Jan 27 2020 (IPS)

The unease in the relations between the US and Iran have been in the international news for around a month now. Both sides have not shied away from using outright methods of warfare like the use of ballistic missiles and assassinations, along with attempts at economic and diplomatic sanctions.

There have been voices that have mentioned a possibility of a full-blown war in the Middle-East accentuated by US-Iran tensions. Given this background, this article attempts to connect the dots of the prevailing wariness with the historical antagonism between the two countries. It also reflects on the possible implications this might have on India.

Background
It all began in August 1953, when by the covert actions of the Secret Information Service (SIS) of the United Kingdom (UK) and the Central Investigation Agency (CIA) of the United States (US) connived a military coup- Operation Ajax, to topple the then Iran’s elected Prime Minister (PM) Mohammed Mossadegh, an ardent nationalist- who had plans to nationalize Iran’s oil industry and turn oil profits into investments for the Iranian people. The reasons for this coup d’état was that the US feared disruption in the global oil supply and worried about Iran joining the Soviet sphere of influence and the UK feared the loss of cheap Iranian oil.

In January 1963, the last Shah of Iran-Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi- who had close ties with the West, introduced the ‘White Revolution’ and was the harbinger of a series of reforms- for example: allowing women to vote, urban and rural modernization, reduction of religious estates in the name of land redistribution and free and compulsory education among others.

Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists, Shi’ite clergy and the landlords led by Ayatollah Khomeini, were enraged with Shah’s initiatives based on liberal ideals of western thought. They were successful in toppling the latter’s rule in 1979 after years of protests and bloodshed. This came to be known as the Iranian Revolution.

The Iranian revolutionaries took to hostage 52 staff of the US embassy in Tehran for 444 days, following which the US severed all diplomatic relations with Iran, banned American exports to the country and expelled Iranian diplomats. Iran was added to the list of state sponsors of terrorism after an attack by the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah in Beirut in 1983 that killed 241 US Marines in Beirut.

On July 3, 1988, the American cruiser USS Vincennes fired a surface-to-air missile and shot down an Iran Air Flight 655- a passenger flight scheduled from Tehran to Dubai, over the Persian Gulf and killed all 290 aboard. The cruiser commander displayed an ‘error in identification’ and termed the commercial aircraft as a fighter aircraft.

The 9/11 attacks on the US soil led the then George W. Bush administration to designate Iran as part of the “Axis of Evil” for supporting terrorism and pursuing weapons of mass destruction. This was fueled by a 2002 controversy that erupted over Iran’s clandestine nuclear program, when the National Council of Resistance on Iran (NCRI), an Iranian exile group, revealed information that Iran had built nuclear-related facilities at Natanz and Arak that it had not revealed to the IAEA. The US government then began pushing for UN sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program.

Obama’s election as the US President saw a rise of optimism from the Ahmadinejad’s government for developing understanding with the US. This continued with the election of Hassan Rouhani as the Iranian President in 2013.

Obama-Rouhani administrations witnessed attempts at rapprochements between the US and Iran. The historic Iran nuclear deal between P5+1 (US, China, France, Russia and UK + Germany) and Iran was signed and was known as Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which freed over 100 billion dollars in frozen assets overseas for Iran and increased foreign access to the Iranian economy.

It severely limited Iran’s capacity to enrich uranium and mandated that international inspectors monitor and enforce Iran’s compliance with the agreement. In return, Iran was granted relief from international and US economic sanctions.

Trump and Escalation of Tensions with Iran

Though the inspectors regularly certified that Iran was abiding by the agreement’s terms, in May 2018 President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the agreement and by November all the sanctions against Iran were reinstated. Iran’s economy began to be strangled to pressure it from stopping the ballistic missiles program and to force it to abandon its nuclear ambitions.

Incidentally, this move by the US was regretted by the EU, UK, France, China and Germany. Iran rejected US’ unilateral decision and vowed to defy the sanctions against it. Trump continued with his sanctions-strategy and imposed them on Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, and other top officials of Iran including Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IGRC) of Iran. IGRC was designated as a terrorist organization.

Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah attacked an air base in Iraq on December 27, 2019 where American and Iraqi forces were stationed. It killed a US civilian contractor and wounded several US and Iraqi service members. Airstrikes against the Kataib Hezbollah fighters in Iraq and Syria were ordered within two days.

Revenge and retaliation did not stop as the Iranian-backed militia groups chanting ‘death to America’ stormed the US Embassy in Baghdad on December 31, 2019, and burnt and defaced property.

On January 3, 2020, Iran received a massive jolt of the new decade when on the orders of President Trump, an American drone fired a missile that killed Major General Qassem Soleimani, leader of Iran’s elite Quds Force, as he prepared to leave the Baghdad airport. Soleimani was considered to be second most powerful man in Iran after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

The situation became further heated up when Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles at two Iraqi bases housing American military personnel. While no casualties were reported, Trump announced new harsher economic sanctions on Tehran1 .

As Iran entered a heightened state of alert, preparing for a possible US retaliation, out of “human error”, it accidentally shot down a commercial Ukrainian airliner departing Tehran for Kyiv, killing all 176 people aboard. With the Iranian forces demonstrating “highest level of readiness” at the time, the aircraft was mistaken for a “hostile target”.

Implications for India

India has a veteran diplomat S. Jaishankar as its Minister of External Affairs, and hence the position taken by India amid the US-Iran tussle is likely to avoid taking sides, either of the US or of Iran, in favour or against, since, it shares exceptionally good relations with both. India would continue to expand its economic and cultural ties with Iran and its Global Strategic Partnership with the US.

The US has understood the significance of Iran-India relations, imminent from the waivers provided to India in the recently legislated Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), allowing it to continue importing Iranian oil. Further, Iran’s strategic location provides the route through which India, blockaded by Pakistan, can fulfill its Eurasian ambitions.

The balanced, mature and status-quoist approach of India towards Iran was echoed by the Iranian Deputy Minister for Culture and Guidance of Iran Mohsin Jawadi, when he remarked that India-Iran relations were independent of the ongoing crisis Iran was facing back home. Javad Zarif acknowledged India as a dear friend, which also has good relations with the US. He exhorted the Indian leadership to encourage the US to come back to the negotiating table on the nuclear deal. The Chabahar project provides a route to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Because India and Iran are ‘complementary economies’, Iran has highlighted the need to ‘remove the dollar’ from their bilateral trade and instead concentrate on a ‘rupee-rial’ mechanism, which could ease the difficulties faced by them in bilateral trade due to financial sanctions posed on Iran by the US.

Jaishankar seems to have handled the US-Iran standoff over the last one year quite professionally, and accorded Prime Minister Narendra Modi the diplomatic agility to make calculated and successful visits to oil-rich kingdoms of United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. In fact, Iran has been responsive in negotiating with these countries without any preconditions, and that it ‘would welcome India’s positive role’.

Analysis:

The US has been seeking to contain Iran’s nuclear program, had in the first place, itself helped create in 1957 under the Atoms for Peace Program. It provided Iran its first nuclear reactor and nuclear fuel, and after 1967 by providing Iran with weapons grade enriched uranium and continued it until the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

The downing of the Ukrainian airliner has an eerie similarity with the downing of the Iran Air in 1988 by the US. The reasons cited for both incidents were ‘human error’, and ‘miscalculation’. The fact that Iran used the 1988 incident as an instance for a revenge cannot be overruled.

Further, the US may advise Ukraine to file a case for compensation with the ICJ soon, alike the Iranian claims in 1989. While an all-out war between the US and Iran has been averted as of now, the crisis has important consequences for longer-term regional stability.

1 Blake, A. 2020. Transcript of Trump’s Iran speech, annotated, The Washington Post, January 8, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/08/transcript-trumps-iran-speech/

*Simi Mehta also serves as the CEO and Editorial Director of Impact and Policy Research Institute (IMPRI), New Delhi., and can be reached at simi@impriindia.org.

The post US-Iran Confrontation & Implications for India appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Simi Mehta holds a PhD in American Studies from School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. She was a Fulbright Fellow at the Ohio State University

The post US-Iran Confrontation & Implications for India appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Libya's Al Nasr are one of five teams to progress to the last eight of the Confederation Cup as Enugu Rangers end Pyramids winning run.

Man behind football revelations named a Luanda Leaks whistleblower about Africa's richest woman.

Credit: SIPRI

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 27 2020 (IPS)

Donald Trump, the vociferously unpredictable US president, has long chastised China for seeking “unfair” advantage over trade and tariffs, violating intellectual property rights and “manipulating” the country’s currency to its advantage.

But while this blatant political rhetoric has continued ever since Trump assumed office in 2017, the Chinese have steadily built a massive military arsenal — and joined the world’s major players in arms production and arms exports.

In a new report, released January 27, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), said that China is now the world’s second-largest arms producer, ranking behind the United States and ahead of Russia.

And in 2014-18, the five largest arms exporters were the United States, Russia, France, Germany and China—in that order.

At the United Nations, China is a veto-wielding permanent member of the Security Council, along with the US, UK, France and Russia.

According to SIPRI, China has invested considerably in the modernization of its arm industry since the 1960s, and particularly since 1999.

One of its primary aims is to be self-reliant in the production of advanced weapons and technologies for its armed forces.

However, due to lack of transparency, the value of Chinese arms sales has been either unknown or based on unreliable estimates – until now.

Based on estimated arms sales in 2015–17, SIPRI has identified four major Chinese arms companies as the front-runners.

In 2017, of the 20 largest companies in the SIPRI Top 100, 11 were based in the US, six in Western Europe and three in Russia.

If the four Chinese arms companies, investigated in the study, were included in the top 100, they would all rank among the top 20, with combined estimated arms sales totalling $54.1 billion. Three of the companies would be ranked in the top 10, said SIPRI.

The four have been identified as Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), China North Industries Corporation (NORINCO), China Electronics Technology Group Corporation CETC) and China South Industries Group Corporation (CSGC).

These companies are ranked behind the world’s four biggest arms producers: Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon—all based in the US.

Asked whether the quality of Chinese weapons was on par with Western military equipment, Dr Nan Tian, Researcher, Arms and Military Expenditure Programme at SIPRI, told IPS generally there is the opinion that some of the Chinese weapons are still a bit behind in quality as compared to those made by Western countries.

“But we have seen massive improvements in the quality of Chinese weapons,” he added.

“This is also one of the factors why Chinese weapons are considered less expensive than Western alternatives,” he added.

The large buyers of Chinese weapons include Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Algeria. “Most of these countries are considered friendly or are allies of China”, he pointed out.

Asked if these sales were tied to Chinese foreign policy and meant to advance political causes, he said: “Yes, indeed it has foreign policy ties, but so is the case with Russia, US and other countries as well.”

Meanwhile, according to the China Power Project at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), China is also an arms supplier to two other Asian countries, namely Indonesia and Thailand.

In Africa, its arms markets include Algeria, Egypt and Morocco while Chinese weapons have also been used in several military conflicts in the region, including in Sudan, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Dr Nan said that China, like most other arms suppliers, often provides exports through loans or economic partnerships (i.e. 1st access to certain mineral fields).

On loans, it is common that over the course of the repayment, China will write-off the loan as a form of aid, and thus there will be no need for the buyer to pay back the loan, he explained.

According to SIPRI, the largest of the Chinese companies is Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), with arms sales totalling $20.1 billion would be sixth largest in the world.

China North Industries Group Corporation (NORINCO), which would be placed eighth in the Top 100, with sales of $17.2 billion, is in fact the world’s largest producer of land systems.

Contrary to most other major global arms producers, SIPRI said, Chinese arms companies specialize primarily in one arms production sector. For example AVIC produces mostly aircraft and avionics.

And most of the large non-Chinese arms companies produce a wider range of military products across different sectors—covering aerospace, land systems and shipbuilding within one company.

According to SIPRI, these new estimates are most likely still an underestimate. A lack of transparency in the arms sales figures of Chinese arms companies continues to hinder a complete understanding of China’s arms industry. This new research, however, acts as an important scoping study that opens the possibility for further research and prepares the ground for a fuller estimate of Chinese arms sales.

*The authors of the report are Dr Nan Tian, Researcher, Arms and Military Expenditure Programme at SIPRI and Fei Su, a Researcher with SIPRI’s China and Asia Security Programme.

The writer can be contacted at thalifdeen@ips.org

The post China Ranked World’s Second Largest Arms Producer Trailing Behind US appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Angola's President Joao Lourenço is accused of orchestrating a witch-hunt against Isabel dos Santos.

Shaki is an inspiration for dozens of street children, and her home has become a refuge for girls.