Politics

9, October 2017

“Trump’s policy on North Korea could lead US to accidental war” ⁰

Democratic Senator Brian Schatz from Hawaii has said US President Donald Trump’s policy of brinkmanship against North Korea could lead the United States toward an accidental war, as tensions rise between Washington and Pyongyang.

Schatz urged Americans in a series of tweets on Sunday night to heed Republican Senator Bob Corker’s comment that Trump could lead the United States toward “World War III.” “There’s a tendency to wonder about the politics of Corker’s interview. Ignore that, and listen to his warnings about an accidental war,” Schatz stated.

The senator went on to point out why the people should be concerned about the possibility of a war between the US and North Korea. “War on Korean Peninsula could shut down trade to and from Asia for months or years,” Schatz said. “War on the Korean Peninsula would cause millions of lives to be lost,” he added. “There are nearly 200,000 Americans living in South Korea and Japan.”

Schatz’s tweets came after Corker, the Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview with The New York Times on Sunday that Trump’s measures could put the US “on the path to World War III.”

A former US Senate foreign policy adviser says there’s a “real worry of a war between the United States and North Korea.” The senator complained that the president treats the country like “a reality show” and acts “like he’s doing ‘The Apprentice’ or something.”

Trump meanwhile continues his aggressive rhetoric against the North Korean leadership. On Saturday, he claimed that a diplomatic approach over the past 25 years “hasn’t worked” and that Pyongyang has made “fools of US negotiators.”

“Sorry, but only one thing will work!” Trump said in his tweet. In a speech to the UN General Assembly last month, Trump warned North Korean leader Kim Jong-un that the United States, if threatened, would “totally destroy” his country of 26 million people.

In response, Kim said Trump will “pay dearly” for threatening to destroy North Korea. He added that Trump is “a rogue and a gangster fond of playing with fire,” who is “unfit to hold the prerogative of supreme command of a country.” Kim described the US president as “mentally deranged” and warning he would “pay dearly” for threatening to destroy his country.

A North Korean parliamentary committee has called recent remarks by US President Donald Trump at the UN a declaration of war against Pyongyang. North Korea has conducted several nuclear tests and missile test-launches in response to US threats against the country.

The North Korean leader ordered the production of more rocket warheads and engines in September, shortly after the United States suggested that its threats of military action and sanctions were having an impact on Pyongyang’s behavior.

Source: Presstv

8, October 2017

La Republique Elections: Akere Muna Announces Presidential Bid ⁰

Barrister Akere Muna has made public his intention to contest the 2018 presidential elections in La Republique du Cameroun. In an exclusive interview granted to Jeune Afrique, the son of the late S. T. Muna an emblematic figure of the reunification of French and British Cameroons reportedly observed that “Yes, I am a candidate, because the state of my country makes me want to be part of the solution.”

The renowned lawyer also believes that the departure of the current President of the Republic who has already spent 35 years in power remains one of the important ways out of the Southern Cameroons crisis. Akere pointed out that at this troubled moment in the history of the two Cameroons, it is important for President Biya to hand over the baton of command.

Akere Muna in the Jeune Afrique interview also spoke of the structure the new Cameroon under him shall be constituted. Muna said he is for a return to Federalism. “There is no better solution than federalism” adding that if he were elected, “I would choose the form of the State that respects our different cultures. I would bring power closer to the citizens, which corresponds to federalism ”

By Chi Prudence Asong will files from CIN

8, October 2017

UK prime minister signals she might demote her foreign secretary ⁰

British Prime Minister Theresa May has signaled she might demote Boris Johnson amid pressure to sack the foreign secretary, a report says.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, May hinted at her plans for Johnson, who is accused by some of her allies of undercutting her by taking a different position on Brexit.

“It has never been my style to hide from a challenge and I’m not going to start now,” the paper quoted May as saying.

“I’m the PM, and part of my job is to make sure I always have the best people in my cabinet, to make the most of the wealth of talent available to me in the party.”

May delivered a speech in Florence last month, proposing a two-year transitional period to be started after the UK leaves the European Union in 2019.

A few days earlier, Johnson said in a newspaper article that the two-year post-Brexit transition deal should be “done as fast as possible,” and that the period should last “not a second more” than two years for the UK.

His interventions were seen by many lawmakers as undermining May and causing unnecessary unrest prior to the party’s conference last week that culminated in a disastrous speech by May, spoiled by a coughing fit, a comedian handing her a bogus employment termination notice, and by letters falling off the slogans on the set behind her.

Referring to her conference speech, May told the newspaper, “I am a very determined person. I am not someone who gives up.”

Meanwhile, former Conservative Party chairman Grant Shapps said Friday that 30 Conservative members of parliament supported a plot to topple the prime minister.

Shapps, who chaired the party between 2012 and 2015, said the premier’s leadership should now be challenged.

“I think she should call a leadership election,” Shapps told BBC Radio.

The news, however, caused senior figures, including Johnson himself, to rally around May and call for unity.

“We have just had an election and people are fed up with this malarkey,” Johnson said in a message to Conservative lawmakers.

May’s authority was already diminished by her decision to call a snap election in June that lost her party its majority in parliament just days before the opening of Brexit talks with the European Union.

To trigger a formal leadership challenge, 48 Conservative lawmakers need to write to the chairman of the party’s so-called 1922 Committee.

Source: Presstv

6, October 2017

Southern Cameroons Crisis: The debate on federalism is increasing ⁰

According to a poll conducted by the Nkafu Policy Institute, a think-tank based in Yaounde, majority of Cameroonians prefer federalism instead of the current unitary system of government. The findings revealed that of the 60.2% interviewed at the national level, federalism is advocated in the following proportions:

47.7% in the Central, South / East regions;

42.9% for the Grand North (Adamaoua / North / Far-North).

68.3% for Littoral and West;

And, 96.1% for the Southern Cameroons regions.

In the same vein, 44% of respondents claiming to be the militants of ruling CPDM crime syndicate prefer a federal system. Finally, the majority of Cameroonians (93.5%) are advocates of regional budgetary autonomy.

52% are recommending a full autonomy while 41% suggest that the budget be placed under the supervision of the central government in Yaoundé.

The majority of respondents, (91.8%) are against the appointment of regional governors. These Cameroonians prefer that they be elected. 75.2% of people claiming to be members of the ruling party also share the idea of elected governors.

669 Cameroonians aged 20 or more were interviewed during the research taken into account the 2013 population estimates by age, sex, region of origin and socio-economic status.

By Chi Prucence Asong, CCN

6, October 2017

Putin, Salman hold talks behind closed doors in Moscow ⁰

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi King Salman have held talks behind closed doors in the Russian capital of Moscow, reportedly discussing bilateral and regional issues.

The talks were held on Thursday with the participation of other Russian and Saudi officials. “We have held detailed talks behind closed doors to talk about bilateral relations and the situation in the region,” Putin said after the meeting. “That was a very meaningful, substantive and confidential conversation.”

The Russian president also said he was confident the visit by Salman would give a fresh impetus to the development of bilateral ties with Riyadh. Putin also accepted an invitation by the Saudi king to Saudi Arabia.

Salman and his delegation arrived in the Russian capital for a four-day visit on Wednesday. The Saudis have reportedly signed more than 15 cooperation agreements — with multi-billion-dollar energy and military contracts — with the Russian side. Moscow has also agreed to sell its advanced S-400 missile defense system to Riyadh.

Members of the Russian delegation, led by President Vladimir Putin, meet with members of the Saudi delegation, led by King Salman, at the Kremlin in Moscow, October 5, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

Putin and Salman also discussed the conflict in Syria, where they support opposing sides. The Saudis have been backing the wide range of militants fighting the elected Syrian government, while Russia backs the legitimate Damascus government.

Saudi Arabia has officially been calling for an ouster of Assad, while Russia says the future of Syria and the political future of Assad should only be determined by the Syrian people.

Nevertheless, Salman claimed that Riyadh favors a political solution to the conflict in Syria, according to a report by TASS.

“A political solution must be achieved that would guarantee security, stability, unity and territorial integrity of Syria,” he was quoted as saying. The two leaders also discussed the oil market and how to stabilize prices.

Culled from Presstv

6, October 2017

UN justifies why hundreds of protesters are being shot dead in Southern Cameroons ⁰

Over the course of the past year, Cameroon has been experiencing internal turmoil and instability related to grievances pitting an Anglophone minority against a majority Francophone establishment. The Anglophone grievances, initially driven primarily by professionals – lawyers, school teachers, bureaucrats – have increasingly taken hold in a population that’s experienced a three-month Internet shut-down, several general strikes, school boycotts, escalating violence and the imprisonment of journalists and activists over the last 12 months.

During national holiday celebrations this past weekend, protesters were shot dead on the streets of several towns in Anglophone regions by Cameroonian security forces, and excessive violence has been widely reported. Amnesty International estimates that at least 17 protesters were killed. (Death toll now stands at a hundred) Cameroon has been led by the same long-standing president for over 30 years, Paul Biya, who has called for calm and “peaceful dialogue“, but hasn’t yet yielded an inch on the demand for reforms. Meanwhile, some Anglophone Cameroonians have a leader, a flag and a national anthem – and are demanding to secede from Cameroon, to form their own country of Ambazonia.

Deep Historical Roots

On October 1, Cameroonians celebrate Unification Day to mark not only the anniversary of when British Cameroon became independent from the British in 1961, but also their unification with French Cameroon to form a two-state federation, the Federal Republic of Cameroon. Over the years, the two-state solution gave way to a single state, the United Republic of Cameroon, in which the balance of power was centered around the Francophone majority. Over the years, the marginalization of Anglophone Cameroonians has become increasingly entrenched. Whether it be the lack of recognition for English education, services or applicable legal system, over the years the corrosive effects of this marginalization have been slowly eating away at the status quo. The central government operates only in French, and, in the last 35 years of Paul Biya’s rule, there has been no movement signaling interest in protecting, upholding – let alone promoting – minority interests in his country.

From Demands for Reform to Cries for Independence

Lawyers protest in Cameroon – via Africanews

Last year, protesters started taking to the streets to demand greater autonomy and recognition of the English language in institutions, systems and services. The central government responded by cracking down on activists and shutting down the Internet. While gradual progress has been made, with new government initiatives to be more inclusive of Anglophones, the International Crisis Group notes that this progress is seen as “too little too late.” As the crisis continues to fester, a secessionist trend within the broader reform movement has been gaining strength. Their vocal demands have prompted an even stronger crack down – further arrests, military deployment in the region – from the central government, leading up to last weekend’s deadly violence. In this violent political climate, secessionists have been emboldened and gaining in popularity, though the exact extent of popular support for full independence from the rest of Cameroon, under the banner of Ambazonia, is difficult to gauge. A rally for Ambazonia even took place in front of the UN during the General Assembly in September, with similar events in Cameroon where tensions escalated between protesters and security forces.

Local blogger Reuben Abati summarizes the current situation:

“On Sunday, October 1, 2017, Sisiku AyukTabe, Chairman of the Southern Cameroons Governing Council, formally declared the independence of Southern Cameroons or the Federal Republic of Ambazonia: “We, the people of Southern Cameroons are slaves to no one”, he said, “Not now, not ever again! Today we reaffirm autonomy over our heritage and over our territory…It is time to tell Yaounde that enough is enough!” The response from Yaounde has been characteristic. Weeks before the protests and the declaration of independence in Southern Cameroons, soldiers were sent to the region to shoot in the air, prevent rallies, and intimidate the people.”

Flag of Ambazonia – By Washiucho [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

A Path Forward

While Anglophone Cameroon has legitimate grievances that need to be addressed by the government, a resolution that would include secession or independence for Ambazonia is highly unlikely. Few nations in modern history have accessed fully independent status as a nation, and this only after hard-fought battles that were dearly paid for. The international community long ago established – in law and in practice – that it is preferable for borders to remain stable (The African Union’s own constitution spells out the defense of members’ territorial integrity.) The youngest nation in the world, South Sudan, and its sister nation, Sudan, have never really stopped fighting since South Sudan became independent in 2011. The United Nations – or other regional organizations such as the AU or ECOWAS – are therefore likely to continue to encourage dialogue between the government and representatives from Anglophone Cameroon, without “siding” with secessionist demands.

So far, the international community and media have shown little interest in the situation in Cameroon, though one clear option available would be to begin brokering a dialogue. The table has yet to be even set for any discussions to occur, and the international community has an opportunity to make a difference by creating the conditions for negotiations to begin in earnest. With this approach, the central government can avoid the worst – a full blow rebellion – and Anglophone Cameroonians have an opportunity to have their grievances addressed. A political, negotiated solution is still within reach – for now.

Culled from UN Dispatch

5, October 2017

Southern Cameroons mourns Mayor Martin Fon Yembe ⁰

I am greatly saddened with the death of my dear friend Martin Yembe. Martin was a passionate defender of human and peoples’ rights. He was a fallen general in the defence of our people. The Southern Cameroons and Lebialem in particular have lost an irreplaceable hero.

Martin took the risk to undertake a detailed investigation of the perennial damage and carnage carried out by land grabbers across our international boundary with the criminal intent of altering the said international boundary protected by a binding international treaty.

The unimpeachable report which was commissioned by the SCNC documented the criminal acts of provocation and unprovoked aggression perpetrated against our peace-loving people of Lebialem. That report forms part of an increasing body of evidence that supports the preplanned nature of the ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity against our people.

Martin, you have gone so soon. But your contributions to the improvement of our dire human condition will live on. Your premature death follows the predictable visit of the angel of death. But the future of the cause you lived and died for will not be determined by the angel of death and apologists of genocide. It will be determined by the sovereign will of the righteous oppressed.

With history our witness, the sovereign will of the righteous oppressed will, as it has done with absolute precision, prevail. But history has already retained that you and most us opted for dialogue but it was rejected and criminalized.

The irrepressible mirror of history captured every moment of the unfolding preplanned genocide that claimed your life and that of hundreds of victims with absolute accuracy. It could not have been otherwise. Indeed, the last images that transposed your transition with that of hundreds of other victims vividly show some of the principal ideologues and actors mobilizing people from the divide with messages portraying the victims as terrorists, thus by conduct and words encouraging soldiers deployed for the purpose to massacre unarmed civilians protected as such by the Geneva Conventions 1949 which Cameroon ratified since 1963.

But for God, the ultimate Judge, how come that with the arrogance of absolute power, and justice of the barrel of the gun at their beg and command, they came out every so often to record their crimes in the soul of time? Martin, God will administer Justice at a time of His choice.

May God bless your gentle soul dear friend and brother.

Chief Charles A.Taku

4, October 2017

Trump expels 15 Cuban diplomats from US over mysterious health attacks ⁰

US President Donald Trump has ordered the expulsion of 15 Cuban diplomats from the country, escalating his response to a series of mysterious health “attacks.” A State Department official told reporters on Tuesday that the employees had seven days to leave Havana’s embassy in Washington.

The official said a list of the personnel the US wants out of the country was given to the Cuban embassy, although he added that they were not declared “persona non grata.” “The decision was made due to Cuba’s failure to take appropriate steps to protect our diplomats in accordance with its obligations under the Vienna Convention,” Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in a statement. “This order will ensure equity in our respective diplomatic operations.”

So far, 22 US embassy staff have fallen ill due to the mysterious sonic attack. Those affected have exhibited physical symptoms including dizziness, headache, fatigue, hearing loss, difficulty sleeping and cognitive issues. According to US officials, the move was in no way a punishment for Havana and that the Trump administration only wanted to ensure both countries have a similar number of diplomats in their capitals.

“We continue to maintain diplomatic relations with Cuba,” Tillerson said, adding the US “will continue to cooperate with Cuba as we pursue the investigation into these attacks.” The decision, however, would further undermine a short-lived thaw between the two sides which was achieved under former US President Barack Obama in 2015 ending a half-century of hostility.

Washington is said to be preparing to send back a large number of Cuban diplomats as a row over alleged “health attacks” intensifies.

In response to the latest move, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez said, “MINREX (Foreign Ministry) strongly protests and denounces this unfounded and unacceptable … eminently political decision.” Washington has responded “in a hasty, inappropriate and unthinking manner and without evidence on the alleged facts in which Cuba has no responsibility,” Rodriguez told reporters on Tuesday.

The US State Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the Cuban government must ensure that the illnesses would not continue before personnel in either embassy could resume their work.

Rodriguez said that their investigation team has not identified “perpetrators, or persons with motivation or means, nor has the presence of suspicious persons.” He also said that Havana is not “familiarized” with equipment that might have caused the attacks and that it immediately tightened the security for US diplomats.

Culled from Presstv

3, October 2017

Southern Cameroons: ECOWAS and the African Union should intervene early to prevent an outbreak of social and humanitarian crisis ⁰

An agitation for independence has been unfolding in Cameroon since November 2016. The people of North West and South West regions under the umbrella of the Southern Cameroons Ambazonia Consortium United Front (SCACUF) finally decided to affirm the independence of the English-speaking sections of Cameroon from the Republic. The Ambazonians as they have called themselves since 1984, are protesting against their alleged marginalization by the dominant Francophone Cameroon and the Paul Biya government in Yaounde. They insist that whereas oil is found in Southern Cameroons, the Biya Francophone has practically neglected the region, and the people have been turned into “slaves” on their own soil. They have their own flag (white and blue) and a national anthem. The Cameroonian Anglophones claim that their struggle is non-violent and peaceful but they will insist on their independence, and the declaration of their own Republic. They further argue that whereas French and English are the official languages of Cameroon, the Francophone government has imposed French as the language to be spoken in Anglophone Cameroon. They insist on their right to speak English.

After World War 1, the League of Nations shared the geographical territory known as Cameroon between the French and the British. The latter administered its own share from Nigeria. On October 1, 1960, Nigeria gained independence from Britain. British Southern Cameroons had a choice between joining Nigeria or Cameroon. In a referendum conducted in 1961, the people of British Southern Cameroons chose to join French Cameroun to form a Federation. But the French backed Ahidjo regime shattered the planned federal system when oil was discovered in Cape Limbo. In 1972, the French Cameroun political elites changed the name to the United Republic of Cameroon. In 1984, the word “United” was removed from the country’s name by the Paul Biya administration, thus adopting the pre-unification name of French Cameroon and effectively raising fears of alienation among English-speaking Cameroonians.

Colonialism and its legacy may have been the foundation of many of the crises in post-colonial African states, but poor governance, ethnicity, competition over power and national resources, religion and sheer leadership incompetence have done worse damage. Post-colonial African leaders have failed to act as statesmen but as new colonialists adopting in West Africa, the twin colonial policies of divide and rule and assimilation. Cameroon has been a long-suffering country, first under former President Ahmadou Ahidjo and especially under 84-year old Paul Biya, who has been President for 35 years. It is ironic that 56 years after the country became a Republic, English-speaking Cameroonians are fighting against the seeming attempt by their French-speaking compatriots to “assimilate” and “marginalize” them.

The two Cameroons are fighting over the language of the colonialists, national resources, and power-relations. On Sunday, October 1, 2017, Sesekou Ayuk Tabe, Chairman of the Southern Cameroons Governing Council, formally declared the independence of Southern Cameroons or the Federal Republic of Ambazonia: “We, the people of Southern Cameroons are slaves to no one”, he said, “Not now, not ever again! Today we reaffirm autonomy over our heritage and over our territory…It is time to tell Yaoundé that enough is enough!” The response from Yaoundé has been characteristic. Weeks before the protests and the declaration of independence in Southern Cameroons, soldiers were sent to the region to shoot in the air, prevent rallies, and intimidate the people. Scores of people have so far been killed. “This division will never happen”, says Cameroon’s Communications minister, Issa Tchiooma Bakary, speaking for the Francophone dominated government. Since the end of the Cold War, there has been a wave of nationalist agitations across the world resulting in self-determination, secession and partitions, and the emergence of new countries. But self-determination or secession is not an automatic process, and it is not in every instance that the protests result in the Nirvana that the separatists seek. In Cameroon, the Biya administration must get off its high horse and engage the leaders of the Southern Cameroons Ambazonia Governing Council in dialogue. The international community must prevail on him to put an end to the abuse of human rights and the killings in Southern Cameroons. It is the refusal of the Francophone dominated government to address the grievances of the people of Southern Cameroons that has brought Cameroon to this moment.

To quote Sesekou AyukTabe, again: “The union was always intended to be a union of two equals. Unfortunately what our peace-loving people have experienced ever since is oppression, subterfuge, discrimination, violence, intimidation, imprisonment, forced occupation, cultural genocide, and misappropriation of our natural resources by the leaders of the Republic of Cameroun.” It is instructive to note the similarity between the expressed concerns of the Ambazonian movement and similar movements in recent times in other parts of the world, and the attitude of the governments in power. In Spain (the Catalan secessionist move), Nigeria (the Biafra movement) and Iraq (the Iraqi Kurdistan) – the Catalans have held a referendum to leave Spain, but the Spanish government says this is “unconstitutional.” Biafrans want a referendum in Nigeria – the government says this is unconstitutional because Nigeria’s unity is not negotiable. The Kurds also want out of Iraq, but the central government is opposed to it on the grounds that the September 25 referendum is unilateral and unconstitutional! It is not just rhetoric that is involved, the military is deployed, violence is unleashed on separatists or critics of the extant union and the government.

While these may seem to be traditional responses, the assault on the human rights of protesters now includes an increasingly important territory: the internet. The internet is perhaps the most striking phenomenon of the century, in the manner in which it has extended the frontiers of human freedom and expression. It is the most modernist icon of globalization and the borderlessness of space and time. The internet does not know fear. It is an irreverent tool of political mobilization, commerce and social networking. It is the public mind in motion, and the anonymity that it offers in certain forms makes it a strong instrument of revolt. Elections can be won or lost, governments can be pulled down or popularized, through the mind of the internet. Given its power, reach, and impact, dictators are uncomfortable with the democracy of the internet which has proven to be much stronger than dictatorships, tyrants and intolerant governments. The relationship between the internet and authority has therefore been one of unease and distrust.

The result has been the attempt by intolerant governments and political figures to control the internet, shut it down or violate the rights of its users. China has an internet police that filters internet traffic. In 2011, Egypt tried to stop the people’s revolution by shutting down the internet. Tunisia, Italy, North Korea, Syria, Iran, Libya, India, Bangladesh, Burma, Nepal, Maldives, Iraq are other countries where the internet has been censored in one form or the other or completely shut down. The degree of civil society repression varies from one country to the other, but the excuse for abridging internet democracy could be as ridiculous as saying that the internet had to be shut down in order to prevent cheating in students’ examinations as has been the case in Iraq and Ethiopia.

Generally, shutting down the internet has become the new mode of repression and a standard response to dissent. African states and governments have joined the trend. In the last year alone, 11 African governments have shut down the internet in one form or the other. These include the Democratic Republic of Congo (ostensibly to reduce the capacity to transmit “abusive messages,” but actually to stop the people from opposing President Joseph Kabila’s attempt to prolong his tenure); Gambia (a few days to the 2016 elections), Togo (to check protests against President Faure Gnassingbe, and the people’s request for multi-party elections and Presidential term-limits), Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Egypt, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Morocco. In Nigeria, there has also been so much official discomfort with what is termed “hate speech” on social media platforms particularly whatsapp, instagram, blogs, and twitter.

One lawmaker even proposed a Social Media Bill which criminalises internet democracy. The worst anti-internet culprit so far in Africa would be in my view, not Egypt (where the revolution succeeded in spite of the repression) but Paul Biya’s Cameroon where intolerance and unpleasantness have been elevated to the level of state policy. In January, the government of Cameroon shut down the internet in English-speaking parts of the country. This lasted for more than three months. This has again been repeated. It is unacceptable. The cost of internet shutdowns is enormous and disruptive, and the gain for governments is so small. The free flow of information is breached, the targeting of specific regions as in Cameroon is discriminatory; the right to free speech is violated, along with other rights: association, choice, and freedom of thought.

The UN Human Rights Council in 2012, 2014 and again in July 2016, resolved that “the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online”, and all states must refrain from taking such measures that can violate internet freedom. The African Union Declaration on Internet Governance (Algiers, February 13, 2017) is on all fours with this UN Resolution. The UN should go further and impose sanctions on countries that violate internet freedom. Worse, businesses suffer in the event of an internet shutdown. Internet services are accessed through broadbands provided by mobile telecom companies. When such companies are asked to shut down their services, they easily comply out of fear of being blackmailed by the government. They can be accused of supporting terrorism for example! By co-operating, they incur losses, part of which they may eventually pass to their subscribers. Similarly, with growing internet penetration in Africa, so many other businesses are dependent on the internet. Indeed, the internet is increasingly a shopping mall – for bloggers, advertisers, consultants and the average consumer of services, an internet shutdown in the light of this, undermines economic growth and development. Human dignity and relationships are also affected. The internet is a networking tool, so much so that many families depend on it for contact and interaction, and many individuals on it for survival. Shutting down the internet rolls back the gains of the democratization process in Africa.

African countries seeking growth and investment in the telecommunication sector, and within the economy generally shoot themselves in the foot when they seek to destroy such a significant tool. Internet registries worldwide should sanction errant governments which deny their citizens access to the internet. Men of conscience and thought leaders should speak out against the growing trend of internet shutdown or violation by African governments. In Nigeria, we must continue to discourage the government from ever contemplating any such misadventure. I am not in any way recommending, by this article a “sovereignty of the internet” in the sense in which John Perry Barlow, an internet activist spoke, when he issued “A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace” (1996), rather I urge the protection of the democracy of the internet and this democracy is about rights, obligations and the rule of law. To return to the politics of imperialism and dissidence in Cameroon, Nigeria (for strategic reasons – the proposed Ambazonia being a buffer zone between Nigeria and Cameroon), ECOWAS and the African Union should intervene early to prevent an outbreak of social and humanitarian crisis, if not chaos in North West and South West Cameroon. The feuding parties should be encouraged to go to the negotiating table. What is going on in that country is as much a Cameroonian problem as it is a Nigerian problem.

Culled from Vanguard

2, October 2017

Turkish President says we don’t need EU membership anymore ⁰

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan says Ankara no longer needs to join the European Union, but will not unilaterally quit the stalled talks on accession to the 28-nation bloc.

“We will not be the side, which gives up. To tell the truth, we don’t need EU membership anymore,” President Erdogan told the Turkish parliament on Sunday.

He, however, suggested that the bloc still needed Turkey, saying, “If the EU is going to leap forward, there is only one way to do so and it is to grant Turkey membership and start an action of cultural and economic growth.”

Elsewhere in his remarks, the Turkish president said the EU states had failed to respond to requests to extradite individuals suspected of involvement in the coup attempt in Turkey in 2016, adding, “The EU failed us in a fight against terrorism.”

The 12-year-long accession talks were effectively halted after Turkey began a massive crackdown on the coup suspects. The EU reacted strongly to Ankara’s purging of thousands of people from organizations and institutions over alleged links to the coup attempt.

In recent months, Germany and some other European countries have been involved in diplomatic brawls with Turkey on several issues, including the country’s human rights record.

Germany and Austria have also been outspoken critics of Ankara since the Turkish crackdown began and have said the accession talks must end.

On September 3, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in a TV debate ahead of Germany’s federal elections, agreed with her main rival Social Democrat Martin Schulz that it was “clear that Turkey should not become a member of the European Union,” marking a surprise U-turn from her previous moderate stance.

In November 2016, the European Parliament voted in favor of halting the membership talks with Turkey over Ankara’s heavy-handed crackdown.

EU leaders are expected to discuss the issue of suspension of the accession talks in Brussels later in October.

Turkey has been trying to accede to the EU since the late 1980s and formal accession talks began in 2005. The EU has opened 16 out of the 35 chapters required for Turkey to join the bloc, but only one of them has so far been concluded.

Culled from Presstv