.....and as the agreement is not binding?

The week-long Copenhagen Summit is coming to an end and the whole brouhaha about securing commitments from nations of the world on reducing Green House Gases (GHG) has been reduced to sheer ‘mutual sharing of information about mitigation efforts.’

We are witnessing a situation where there is no common goal to secure our common good.

Prior to the Summit, there have being mixed feelings on the possible outcome of the meeting and to some; If Kyoto could not do it, why should Copenhagen make it happen?

The initial foot-dragging and side-stepping witnessed in the first few days of the conference should have made the handwriting on the wall clear that the nexus between reducing GHG by 2oC and maintaining economic buoyancy is not an easy task. Investment in alternative energies is ‘not child’s play.’ It requires mammoth funds in research and development, the budget for which, most nations particularly the developed ones, are not ready to churn out.

To some of the world leaders, their arguments would obviously toll the line that the world is just coming out of the meltdowns and it might not be a popular decision to stale economies especially when the implications of doing this might be higher than those of increasing GHG.

Well, having acted out some diplomatic roles at different Model United Nations Conferences in the last two years, I can relate with how agreements might not translate into commitments. The intricacies of negotiating and securing compromises at such top levels as seen in Copenhagen call for a lot of caution. You can’t just make promises that you will not fulfil. You don’t want to please attendees at the conference and loose your position as the President, Prime Minister or Head of Government of your country when you get back home.

As a matter of fact, it needed even an eloquent and articulate Obama to intermittently look down on the podium on which he was standing; an evidence that he was reading out his comments.

To nations that were expecting this summit to mark the beginning of their reaping in hard currencies from Emission Trading, there is huge disappointment in their faces. Unfortunately they now have to look elsewhere.

The point is now that, every nation should do what it can to cut down GHG and there shall be no legal implication for any nation that is slow at doing this. The US has spoken, China has spoken.

And as the Copenhagen agreement is not legally binding, we can only hope that life on this side of the planet takes a little longer before it all comes to an end.

Maybe there is a lesson from the Niger Delta

Niger Delta Region is an international household name. It is one of the most popular appellations with which the country, Nigeria is readily remembered world-over.

Abduction, gas flaring, oil spillage, struggle for resource control etc are words that accentuate the description of the unfortunate situation in this region.

Militants, of different factions and with different allegiances to ‘local’ as well as ‘expatriate’ god-fathers have shown themselves as agitating for the development of this region. They have blown up pipelines, kidnapped oil-workers, exchanged fire with security operatives and have caused serious unrest in this oil-rich area and across the country.

Well, their song; ‘we want total control of the resources from our region’.

They have engaged in all of these hideous acts basically to get the Nigerian government to have a round-table talk with them. Negotiations, if you like, on how the region will be developed and a large chunk of the revenues being realized from the region will be ploughed back into the region.

The Nigerian government has been dragging its foot and using all manners of side-stepping strategies to avoid proactively engaging these agitators. Recently it became evident that the ‘boys’ meant more than business and will stop at nothing in making their concerns count.

They caused a record drop in the country's daily oil production, touched the Atlas Cove in Lagos and threatened that Abuja, the Capital City, will also be visited. It really didn’t sound like an empty threat and this I think expedited talks with the militants under the Amnesty arrangement.

The Nigerian government talked with the boys and surprisingly, the boys yielded and down their ammunitions for the amnesty deal. Leaders of the various factions of the militant groups were seen mobilizing the hand-over of ‘machines’ and various high-powered war equipments to the Nigerian Army.

It was a landmark achievement although opinions have differed at different quarters on the veracity of the claims and authenticity of the deal. The arrangement was a charade and the gesture of the militants, a facade many have adduced.

Particularly to the big media institutions of the west (you know them), the talks will not hold water and they are merely a sham.

Well, whatever it looked like, the boys now have an understanding with the Nigerian government and there is relative peace in the region.

Again, much to the dismay of the western ‘prophets and preachers of doom’ who wants to help by daytime and siphon the country’s resources by night, the Nigerian government was able to talk with its own people by itself.

As I reflect on this situation, I am inclined to think that maybe most of the challenges that countries and communities face across the world can be solved by people living in those countries and communities themselves without really receiving lectures from ‘overseas pundits.’ Maybe inhabitants of the so-tagged catching-up countries also have their own brains and minds who have acquired invaluable expertise in their own rights to deal with issues in such countries.

Maybe, there is enough build up of local knowledge and capacities to address local challenges. Maybe some of the readily doled-out, international hand-outs are the reasons some problems are continuously handed down from generations to generations. Maybe those who have problems in their own countries and communities but who would rather go about portraying themselves as the solver of the world’s problem should desist from doing so.

Maybe there is a lesson from the Niger Delta region of Nigeria that the rest of the world can learn from.

Africa's hair and the UN

“70% of the issues in the United Nations are African issues and an African adage says ‘you don’t shave a man’s hair in his absence.’ Africa’s hair is being shaved in its absence at the UN”.

These were the comments of Ojo Maduekwe, Nigeria’s Foreign Affairs Minister while feeding questions from Isha Sesay of CNN’s Inside Africa.

To me, these were well-chosen and well-crafted words and they succinctly capture Africa’s unfair representation at the different arms of the UN.

In specific terms, the comments were aimed first at applauding Nigeria’s accession as one of two newly-elected Africa’s non-permanent representatives at the UN Security Council and also at canvassing for a permanent seat for Africa at this council – UN’s highest body saddled with the responsibility of taking strategic decisions that would guarantee world peace.

Nigeria, a fifth-timer and Gabon, a fourth-timer will be Africa’s voices in the coming months on this council and working with the P5s (United States, Britain, China, France and Russia) and other eight non-permanent members to manage world peace, Nigeria will obviously be faced with an arduous task.

Mr. Maduekwe stressed briefly what Nigeria’s approach will be when this highly-resourceful nation, with unmatched experience and involvement in peace-keeping activities on the African continent assumes office in a few month times.

Preventive diplomacy, managing flashpoints that triggers conflicts and handling unfairness and injustice across the world will be Nigeria’s strong concern on this council.

What can I say? Congratulations Nigeria, congratulations Africa.

Let’s hope that for once, Africa’s hair will be shaved in its presence and with its permission at the UN.

The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

The last few days have seen opinions differing on the award of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize to United States President, Barack Obama. Some popular opposing opinions were:

· It’s not enough to be rewarded for mere intentions;
· He has not really achieved anything in terms of contributing to world peace;
· It’s just too early for him to be given any kind of ‘laureate’ whatsoever;
· There are other more qualified candidates that merit the award;
· The Nobel committee has watered-down the credibility of the Peace Prize.

Well, whatever these opinions are, the fact is that Barack Obama has joined the league of Nobel Laureates of our time and one thing you can’t take away from him is his ‘new style’ of engaging both friends and ‘enemies’ of the United States. He is unarguably displaying a rare kind of diplomacy which seems to be promoting dialogue and dousing tensions across the world.

He has extended open arms to the Arab and Muslim world and is constructively engaging countries like Russia, North Korea, Pakistan etc.

He is showing commitment towards ridding our continent of nukes and he is continuously sensitising all countries towards the need for collective responsibility and accountability in making our world a better place.

In all, rather than talking tough, he is talking sense.

On my part, I’ll say congratulations Mr. Obama and would sincerely hope the award ‘humbles’ him as he said in his acceptance speech.

The Shoe-thrower is coming home

The house is being dressed, the party being arranged, euphoria is in the air; the shoe-thrower is coming home.

After serving a one-year-turned nine months sentence behind bars for hurling two shoes intermittently at the former US President, George W. Bush during a press conference in Baghdad earlier this year, Muntadhar al-Zeidi, is to be released to once again see his family and friends.

Al-Zeidi, an Iraq Journalist with a local news station, who called the former US President a ‘dog’, while he was throwing his shoes at him, became a celebrity for his effrontery and gallantry in actualizing what most middle easterners would have wanted to happen; for someone to register their displeasure, where it mattered, regarding US invasion of Iraq.

Although Al-Zeidi crossed the line and humiliated President Bush right in front of his Prime Minister and in front of the whole world, the US invasion of Iraq, which held the promise of restoring long-lasting peace to the country, led to more problems than was initially envisaged.

The alleged presence of weapons of mass destruction which was the basis for the American invasion ended up being untrue, and while many lives were lost in the process of looking for the nukes, most Iraqis and Middle Easterners were unhappy with the ‘encroachment’ and would want to pass this message across in a way that would be clear.

Al-Zeidi did pass the message across and was punished for it.

While there are many western commentators who feel that the punishment does not commensurate the gravity of his offense, the news once again is that, the shoe-thrower is coming home.

Deal, no deal

What happens if the ‘enemy’ has what you want? Do you beg, fight, pray or strike a deal to get it?

Interesting!

Libya has being perceived as an ‘enemy’ by many western nations for decades but Libya has Oil and the likes of Italy, Britain, Germany etc. must talk to Libya otherwise they risk talking to some other middle eastern ‘enemies.’

Britain has talked to Libya recently and it has led to the release of Megrahi, a bomber, a killer and call him more names; he is back in Libya and most interestingly, was given a royal welcome perhaps for having murdered two hundred and seventy people in 1988.

You didn’t need a soothsayer to tell you that Megrahi’s release was tied to BP’s oil interest in Libya.

Well, according to Gordon Brown, there was ".... no double dealing, no deal on oil" over his release but Jack Straw is saying there was a deal. Poor Scottish authorities, they would have given in on the need for their economy to be ‘powered’.

The U.S is angry but I believe this anger will be worked out in some diplomatic talks in a few days time and then business will continue as usual. After all, everybody does it. Lives could have being lost, families bereaved but if there is a deal on the line, the ‘necessary’ has to be done or there might be no deal.

What is interesting to me in all of these is how systems are the same everywhere – In Africa, Europe, America, everywhere. Call it first world, second world, developing, least developing or whatever academic jargon that suits you, once they are run by humans, expect similar outputs.

Humans are the same, their position, education or location notwithstanding and they display similar propensities. They are sometimes hypocrites who try to clean up others but they smell themselves. Kettles who call pots black.

They could trade joy, hope and purpose for pounds, euro and dollars and could strike deals with their enemy but have no deal with their creator.


***Originally written in my Facebook note on Sunday, 06 September 2009 at 08:29***

It's September 11!

It’s September 11 or 9/11 if you prefer that. It’s eight years since the World Trade Center was blown up by ‘terrorists.'

We were told they were extremists but we fear they were loyalists. Loyalists of some ‘internal elements' who needed a reason to invade Iraq.

With several unanswered questions ranging from whether the explosion did not look more like a controlled demolition, to why a big flight that drilled through Pentagon could leave such a small hole in the building, to a stern refusal to open up more public enquiries into the issue, there are very strong basis to believe that the event was arranged and some people need to be covered up.

Conspiracy at top level if you like.

Well, condolensce to the families who lost their loved ones and still grapple daily with missing them.

We are living at a time when truth could be classified and access to it denied ‘forever‘. Forever until God brings them to the open.

It's September 11!

Will peace be jeopardized in Darfur?

Following the appointment of Lt.-Gen. Patrick Nyamvumba, a Rwandan junior soldier to take over the commandeering role of the UN-AU Hybrid Force in Darfur (UNAMID) from Gen. Martin Agwai and head contingents that have senior officers as unit heads, concerns are raised if peace would not be jeopardized in Darfur.

Nyamvumba, who was said to have been a cadet while some of these senior officers were already graduates of the Nigerian Defence Academy, has now resumed office as the new Force Commander for UNAMID. It is however yet to be seen if his appointment would not generate internal wrangling that might crumble the peace-keeping operation in Darfur particularly from the angle of the internal organizational structure of the peace-keeping force.

The problems are many. First why would the AU influence the selection process even while Nyamvumba did not come tops during the interview? A Nigerian General was said to have performed most outstandingly and he was not given the job. The issue to me is not with the appointment of a Rwandan but with filling such a high profile vacancy with a junior soldier who now has to give commands to his superiors. Is AU having problems with Nigeria or are some leaders within the AU benefiting from the instability in the region?

Second, I would have thought that the UN Secretary General would have weighed the security and operational implication of appointing a junior soldier to lead an army of better qualified and trained soldiers for such an all-important mission in Darfur.

Lastly, there are growing worries with how certain infamous decisions and actions as well as some eleventh-hour grumblings and passivity are increasingly disrupting the progress and change the African continent is gearing towards.

Well, I cross my fingers and hope the legacies of Gen. Agwai would not be eroded and the ordinary people, mostly helpless children and women would not have to suffer for the ‘dirty politics and inglorious tactics’ that are being seen at work.

http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/news/article03//indexn2_html?pdate=100909&ptitle=Controversy trails appointment of UN-AU troops' commander