Lessons Nigerians must learn from Chilean mine rescue

By Paul Arhewe
Just like in the movies, 32 Chileans and a Bolivian, trapped miles beneath the rocks of a Chile’s mine for 68 days, were all rescued in a task that was achieved through coordinated state- might and a determined commitment that spared no cost to see that they were reconnected to their loved ones and the rest of the world. Millions of dollars were committed to bring specialists from NASA and some drilling experts within the shortest time, just to rescue the miners. The successful rescue of the 33 is peculiar as this would be the first time in human history that miners trapped for over two months beneath the earth, came out alive.
As it will be recalled, on August 5, 2010, the 33 miners were literarily cut-off from the rest of the world as 700,000 tonnes of rock collapsed and caved in on them. They only had a glimpse of hope of surviving this nightmare 17 days later. This mine rescue was the second event which brought the country into world focus this year. The first was in February, when a devastating 8.8-magnitude earthquake that left about 500 people dead and more people missing, hit the country. The country’s resolute and spirited show of oneness in the face of disaster, has given credence to the general assertion that South American people have strong sense of national identity and commitment to the welfare of one another.
The Chileans have successfully taught the rest of the world, especially Nigeria, how to turn a miserable and hopeless situation into glory. As a matter of fact, many observers have expressed fear that if this event had taken place in Nigeria, the rescued mine workers would have perished without any assistance. Authorities in Nigeria should note that, while Copiapo would have gone into history as a mine site of mass grave, it is now a place where patriotic valour is celebrated.
The country has even begun to reap from this brandished exhibition of commitment to national goal of protecting life and properties of her citizens. To many analysts and observers of international politics, Chilean President, Sabastian Pinera, posing in front of Number 10 Downing Street with Prime Minister David Cameron, is a great diplomatic mileage achieved by Chile. Ipso facto, the country has continued to enjoy universal appreciation of the historic rescue of the trapped miners.
Although the country had a bad record of human rights abuse, especially during the dictatorship rule of Augusto Pinochet from 1974 to 1990, what entire world has learnt from Chileans is that, there is no limit to the level of success to be achieved when a nation directs her energies towards genuine goal of making the difference. Nigeria must learn from this fact and begins to redirect her energies towards developmental activities capable of making her true giant of Africa before the end of the first quarter of this century.
Nigeria has much to learn from President Pinera’s assertion that, “Chileans are facing more challenges with the same enthusiasm and commitment, especially on how to improve and strengthen their economic relations; how to work together in terms of education and many other issues”. One big lesson to be learnt from this globally celebrated event is that no problem is insurmountable for any country as long as there is genuine will and commitment from both the people and their government for that purpose.
The pertinent question here is whether or not Nigeria, the self-acclaimed Africa giant, would have attained same feat, given the same scenario; would our government have got the same zeal and commitment to put a stop to its business and go the whole length to commit vast resources in rescuing 33 ‘ordinary’ miners, especially when victims are not directly or ‘indirectly’ related to those in the corridors of power?
Like many people have expressed, it is quite evident that this sort of rescue mission would have been a complete flop in Nigeria as tribalism and other centrifugal considerations would have had a visible role to play in scuttling the rescue effort. The question many would have asked is whether or not the victims are Yorubas, Hausas or Ibos? Many ethnocentric arguments would have sprung up. If the government had demonstrated the will to commit its time and resources to the rescue mission, opposition would have delayed and eventually scuttled it. The commitment of government would have worn out with many selfish demands which have no relevance to the timely intervention required by rescue of the miners.
Recently, Nigerian government put up a similar show of commitment to rescue the abducted journalists in Abia state. However, the exhibited commitment of the government was more of a function of the personality of those kidnapped. Before their abduction, several people had been kidnapped in many parts of the federation without any serious rescue effort either by the government or its security agencies.
President Pinera might have used the rescue mission to score some political points at home and on the internationally stage, but this does not diminish the fact that the Chileans have a strong sense of national identity, an attribute Nigeria with an ethnocentric and divisive cleavages, should adopt.

Sept 11: New events fan flame of mayhem

By Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor


Before 2001, September 11 was like any other date for the Americans and the rest of the world.

But this was not so again after the terrorists’ attack on New York Twin Towers, and the Pentagon where about 3,000 lives were sniffed out within intervals of minutes. Two fuel loaded planes were crashed straight into World Trade Centre- housing the two tallest buildings in U.S. within interval of17 minutes, third plane after about one hour plunged into Pentagon in Virginia (destroying a wing of government’s military headquarters) and a fourth one heading to Washington D.C. about 30 minutes later crashed half way in Pennsylvania, following the interventions of passengers that rushed the terrorists after hearing of previous attack through their cell phones.

This development did not only immediately shattered U.S. security, but threw it into a state of emergency.

Though the U.S. intelligence were quick in pointing fingers to Osama bin Laden al-Qaeda group in Afghanistan, and the Bush administration spared nothing in retaliating against the Islamic Taliban regime that had protected the al-Qaeda in the mid-east country’ one wonders if the Taliban actually owns up to the 9/11 attacks? However, new argument last week by the Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad casts doubts on if actually U.S. is telling the world the truth or knows who the real actors behind these attacks were. According to him, "Something happened in New York and still nobody knows who the main perpetrators of that act were." He further charged that "No independent people were allowed to try and identify the perpetrators". Does Ahmadinejad knows what the rest of the world do not know about the true happenings or untold story of the 9/11 attacks?

No sooner than the twin towers were grounded that prophesy was linked to establish background of the event. This emerged from a script dated many centuries from a foremost astrologer of all times Nostradamus. The prophesy in his book The Centuries written in 1654 was In the City of God there will be a great thunder, Two brothers torn apart by Chaos, while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb",

The third big war will begin when the big city is burning.



Interpreting this -the ‘City of God’ is New York City, the “two brothers torn apart by Chaos” was surely the fallen towers of the World Trade Centre. The fortress is the U.S Pentagon, and the ‘great leader’ succumbing to chaos surely is United States of America, and the third big war is a pointer to World War III.



Has the US successfully fought this war since 2001 by its military futility in Iraq and Afghanistan where over 110,000 lives have been lost? Or maybe the ‘third big war’ is imminent following recent events that are fuelling the ambient of religious bedlam.

First was the purported building of a mosque close to Ground Zero; the spot where the fallen towers in 9/11 attacks took place. This development attracted conflicting debates and threatened President Barack Obama, following his initial statement that the American Muslim community has right like any other religious group to build their mosque in any part non-restricted area in U.S. in his words: "This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are”. Many are of the view that Obama next bid to return to the Oval office would be tested on debates stemming from the aforementioned posture he exhibited.



Feisal Abdul Rauf, the Imam behind the proposed move to build the mosque two block next to Ground Zero stated in an interview recently that: “The status of Muslims in America and how America engages with its Muslim community has global ramifications”. The 13-story building is also to have compartment for community canter and a memorial to victims of the September 11 attacks.



The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq the US troops fought were not explicitly religiously inclined but one waged against terror. Thus, they were restricted and limited to the mid-east region. But the proposed move to burn Koran publicly by a U.S pastor and intention of an Imam to build a mosque near Ground Zero would spark a colossal war that could culminate into war with factions aligned under religious basis. This is surely a good parting for WW3.

Rauf, even admitted this when he said, "If we don't do this right, anger will explode in the Muslim world ... If we don't handle this crisis correctly, it could become something very dangerous indeed."



Another event that is like a time bomb ready to blow off, sparking religious war between Christian and their Islamic brotherhood is the planned move to set hundreds of Korans on fire by a U.S. pastor controlling a small congregation of fifty people in Florida. Rev. Terry Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center has marked out the 9/11, in commemoration of the terror attack anniversary to burn Muslim holy book for 3hours (6pm-9pm), an spinout of his last year declaration where he posted signs in front of his church with inscription stating "Islam is of the Devil."

Jones’ recent plan to burn Koran has attracted many reactions and condemnation to this action that is not only insanity, but one presumed is aimed at making him and his 50-member congregation famous. Not only would U.S. troops in places like Afghanistan, Iraq and other embassies across the world to placed as easy targets, fanatics among the Islamic faith would joyfully see this as an avenue to quickly attack Christians with the slightest of provocation. We remember the reactions the caricatured cartoon of Prophet Mohammed spurred in part of Northern Nigerians despite the fact the event took place in millions of miles from Nigeria.

Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Kabul Afghanistan, first raised his voice condemning the pastor’s plan; saying it would undermine the U.S. effort in Afghanistan and jeopardize the safety of American troops and civilians.

According to U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton this plan is “disrespectful, and disgraceful”. She also explicitly condemned the plan. Already effigy of Pastor Jones and U.S. flags have already been burnt in open protests against his move in Afghanistan and Indonesia among other Muslim states. The pastor knows he is not safe, as he made known to public last Wednesday that he had already received 100 death threats, and that he has armed himself with a .40-caliber pistol to safeguard himself wherever he goes.





Obama also lent his voice last Thursday on the issue, imploring the minister to have a change of heart on the despicable act. According to him the intended act of the pastor is “a bonanza to mass recruitments for the Taliban”. He implored him during an interview with ABC’s ‘Good Morning America’ saying "If he's listening, I hope he understands that what he's proposing to do is completely contrary to our values as Americans," Obama said. "That this country has been built on the notion of freedom and religious tolerance."

One would be wondering why no arrest is made on the pastor to stop him from carrying out his threat. U.S. is a country that guide jealously his constitution and are ready to abide by it even when situation are not too pleasing to the eyes of other people across the world. According to constitution analysts, Rev. Jones has not violated any constitutional right. In fact, he is exhibiting his freedom of speech through his action, and cannot be held since his action has not caused any direct bodily harm to anybody. Hence, other suave moves to placate him out of his insanity planned act should be employed.



Though acknowledging the grave negative consequence the stationing of mosque close to Ground Zero would attract Rauf is still resolute like Rev. Jones saying that nothing is off the table, the move is still on to build it at the proposed spot. He said moving the project to another location would strengthen Islamist radicals' ability to recruit followers and would increase violence against Americans.



This year’s commemoration of 9/11 attacks is no doubts one that has attracted proceedings that are ready to tear apart America war against terror and jeopardise the security of Americas across the world.

Hence, The U.S. government under Obama need to carefully handled situations like these current religious outbursts that could easily spark mayhem leading to bloodletting from already high tempers of the people from either side of faith - be it Christian or Muslim.

Death penalty cases: U.S. double standard condemned

Paul Arhewe, Online/ Foreign Editor


The accusation of double standard against United States has trailed its execution of Teresa Lewis last Thursday at the Greensville Correctional Centre in Virginia despite the fact that American led other western states in condemning Iran’s purported plan to stone an accused woman for adultery and her having a role in her husband’s death.

Several entreaties, over 7,300 appeals, from European countries coupled with those from right activists’ and open staged protest for Virginian government to halt the execution of Lewis by lethal injection, all were ignored and the execution was conducted.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad earlier last week before the execution condemned western media and the western world of double standard in death penalty cases. Ahmadinejad during a speech to Islamic clerics and other figures in New York noted that "millions of Internet pages" have been devoted to Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, whose stoning sentence was suspended in July and her case put under review.



"Meanwhile, nobody objects to the case of an American woman who is going to be executed."

"Today Western media are propaganda agents who continuously speak about democracy and human rights though their slogans are sheer lies," he added.

His condemnation would be staring the America on the face as practising internally those same acts that it condemns in other countries, especially those considered as its foes.



Her case and that of the Iranian woman’s have drawn international sympathy mainly because of their feminine status which normally is seen as docile to criminal tendencies. The proportion of male to female execution in U.S. is very wide, especially since the country’s Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976. Out of over 1,200 people executed only 11 were women.



The cases of both condemned women bear semblance. For Lewis, who her attorneys say she is mentally imbalance, confessed she was guilty for the killings of her late husband and step son, and pled for forgiveness before her execution. Ashtiani, the condemned Iranian woman still maintains her innocence and retracted her earlier statement. She claimed she was forced under duress to give false confession which led to her conviction in the adultery case.



Ashtiani was convicted in 2006 of having an ''illicit relationship'' with two men after the murder of her husband the year before and was sentenced at that time to 99 lashes. Later that year, she was also convicted of adultery and sentenced to be stoned.

After putting the stoning sentence on hold, Iran suddenly announced that the woman had also been brought to trial and convicted of playing a role in her husband's 2005 murder. Her lawyer disputes that, saying no charges against her in the killing have ever been part of her case file. In early August, Iranian authorities broadcast a purported confession from Ashtiani on state-run television. In it, a woman identified as Ashtiani admits to being an unwitting accomplice in her husband's killing. The Iranian authorities are said to have flogged her for the publication of a photo of a woman without her hair covered in the Times of London newspaper.



Lewis in 2002 contracted two men whom she had sex with and gave them cash to kill her husband and step son for her to claim a $250,000 insurance policy. Both men would have to die for her to receive the insurance payout. She married Julian in 2000 and two years later, his son Charles entered the U.S. Army Reserve. When he was called for active duty he obtained a $250,000 life insurance policy, naming his father the beneficiary and providing temptation for Teresa Lewis.

She met at a Walmart with the two men who ultimately killed Julian Lewis and his son. Lewis began an affair with Matthew Shallenberger and later had sex with the other triggerman, Rodney Fuller. She also arranged sex with Fuller and her daughter, who was 16, in a parking lot.

On the night before Halloween in 2002, after she prayed with her husband, Lewis got out of bed, unlocked the door to their mobile home and put the couple's pit bull in a bedroom so the animal wouldn't interfere. Shallenberger and Fuller came in and shot both men several times with the shotguns Lewis had bought for them.

She was testified by her attorney, many other prisoners and warders as a changed woman before she was put to death. She had openly confessed her wrong and begged for forgiveness to the only surviving daughter of her late husband. In her words: "I was doing drugs, stealing, lying and having several affairs during my marriages," Lewis wrote in a statement that was read at a prison religious service in August. "I went to church every Sunday, Friday and revivals but guess what? I didn't open my Bible at home, only when I was at church." Moments before her execution, Lewis asked if her stepdaughter was near. She was. Kathy Clifton was in an adjacent witness room blocked from the inmate's view by a two-way mirror. "I want Kathy to know that I love her and I'm very sorry," Lewis said.

The act of Lewis is one that called for capital punishment, just like many people have condemned her that she desired what she got. Nevertheless, Iranian government was painted a monster in Ashtiani case, and well trumpeted by western media. But the American government and the western media, who were leading the cry against her stoning, went mum when Lewis’ case gained international attention, amid several entireties for stay of her execution. Is this not a case of double standard?

Iranian government would have the upper hand in the barbaric death sentence of Ashtiani by stoning, even as it is undergoing review. A mark which can be interpreted as the painted devil sometimes listen to entireties while the acclaimed saint turns deaf ears to clemencies and pleas. The two cases and their endings portray huge irony, where only bias less elucidation would only make one to decipher the boundary that separates both.

Uganda Suicide Bombing: Why Nigeria Should Be Vigilant

By Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor




THE HAVOC from the Somali al-Qaeda linked group al-Shabaab is not only growing; the invoking fright from the devilish group’s expansion outside the Mogadishu borders calls for concern to all African governments especially in the area of security fortification and alertness.

In its deadly fashion, this group known for possessing the penchant for killing innocent people for the sake of propagating an extreme Islamic faith, the insurgents turned a joyous ending for viewers of the last football World Cup to a lugubrious one. In twin suicide bombings last Sunday, 74 football lovers in Kampala were dispatched to the great beyond, for having a crime to be in a country that sent 3,000 troops to join the African Union mission in Somalia (AMISOM) to help in quelling the rising level of insurgency in the North African country. The world in unison has condemned this dastardly and wanton killing over a cause to propagate a faith that is paradoxically a religion of peace. The group claimed it carried out the terror attack due to Uganda government’s snub to its request to stop sending its troop to Somalia. In its words: “We warned Uganda not to deploy troops to Somalia; they ignored us,” said Sheik Ali Mohamud Rage, al-Shabaab’s spokesman. “We warned them to stop massacring our people, and they ignored that. The explosions in Kampala were only a minor message to them. ... We will target them everywhere if Uganda does not withdraw from our land.”

What is African governments doing securitywise to counter threats of more onslaughts from such group? As Ugandan government has vowed to crush their uprising by sending more troops, al-Shabaab is threatening that what happened last week is a tip of the iceberg of what the Ugandan people stand to receive if its government persisted.

Al-Qaeda group in the Middle East has strongholds in Iraq, Pakistan, Iran, Yemen, and Afghanistan. Their deadly suicide bombings of decades are no more weighty news or front-page banner due to their daily occurrences. In that part of the world, suicide bombings from this extremist group is now in fact a way of life and the people there have come to terms with them.

Back home, is Nigeria government stepping up security to prevent or quell any surprise move of such ‘servants of death.’ Report has it last week that the remaining fashion of the notorious Boko Haram sect group in Northern part of the country posted an Arabic message in al-Qaeda website. When translated, it was a message of solidarity and support for the cause of Iraqi al-Qaeda and commiseration with the group over the demise of its leaders Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi who allegedly were killed during the U.S.-led troop attacks in the country. Imam Abubakar Skekau, a deputy of the Boko Haram, the sect group that killed and maimed scores during last July mayhem, has called for more attack on the Americans and hailing the dead al-Qaeda leaders as Hero of Islam.

The same sect group would definitely be in support with al-Shabaab, especially in lieu of its recent achievement in the Kampala bloodletting.

If this group should infiltrate our borders or pass the act of suicide bombing to their supposedly brotherhood in Nigeria, then the carnage of destruction to lives and property would remain unimaginable; given the poor security network we have and population mass. This indeed, is a call to plan ahead even before any fanatical group would even nurse the idea of suicide bombing in the country. Some may say at present we are not in the red alert or in danger zone, but the Uganda people were caught napping, and couldn’t tell what hit them, not until after the act.

Policing in Nigeria, without mincing word, has become an open disgrace to our society and a bane to economic growth. Checkpoints in every nook and cranny of the country have been converted to ‘toll gate’ where the bounties are not remitted to government coffers. Police stations are now houses for loot collections; after every day’s work you see members of the force go home with a fraction of what they were able to collect from hapless citizenry. In fact, the force men have coined the nomenclature ‘tapping’ for their shameful act. Kidnapping in South East and South-South parts of the country is on the increase simply because the police has lost every sense of professionalism and see their uniform as a means of milking the people they are meant to protect. They are known to abet men of the underworld in their act of criminality. How would such security force be a pillar of hope to the Nigerian society? Surely, a suicide bomber with a vast will elude our security personnel as most times they are preoccupied and distracted with the tapping toll they collect in streets and checkpoints, and lose focus over their primary area of assignment.

Nigerian government and security officers should wake up and brace up for the challenge ahead, and desist from treating with kid gloves the threats from the remnant of the Boko Haram group, especially as it commemorates one year of their leader’s death. It is no news that Boko Haram sect abhors western civilisation, what should be news is their alignment and camaraderie with al-Qaeda. The signal is clear, this group is subscribing to the devilish act of terrorism, even if it has not yet graduated to suicide bombing.

Hurdles Before Israeli-Palestinian Peace Move

Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor
(With agency reports)

A new phase in the Middle East hostility is beginning to unfold as Israel, with the support of its old ally, The United States, is pushing for peace. Israel has declared its intension through its leader Benjamin Netanyahu that it is set to embark on direct peace talks with Palestinians.
Israel in May drew the irk of many in Middle East and other parts of the world when its forces killed Nine activists in an attempt to stop a flotilla of ships with humanitarian goods meant for the suffering Palestinians whose import and export routs have been cut off by the Israeli blockade in Gaza. This act has not only made Egypt to open its blockade of its own end of the Gaza border, but invokes and heightens the call for the lifting of Gaza blockade by Israel. In another vein, the only Israeli ally in the Middle East, Turkey, threatened to completely call off its relations with Tel-Aviv. In implementing this threat, Ankara has since stopped Israeli military aircraft from flying through its airspace.
Another thorny issue is the call for Israel to freeze constructions in West Bank and East Jerusalem settlements, which the Israelis maintain a stand that it wont secede any portion to its neighbours. This is a major obstacle to establishing a concrete platform for peace in the nearly 60-year conflict since the creation of Israel.
Last Tuesday in the Oval office with President Barack Obama, Prime Minister Netanyahu talked about his country’s readiness to commence direct talk with its warring neighbours.
Obama, like his predecessors is known to have soft spot and an unbreakable relationship with the Israelis. But playing the good world police, Obama seems to welcome this new initiated move of Netanyahu to embrace peace.

Yet, the hard-liners in Netanyahu's coalition government will probably not be won over. They have no interest in answering Palestinian demands for a freeze on settlement building in return for direct peace talks.
And that's still the critical issue between the U.S. and Israel, one neither Netanyahu nor Obama addressed after their fifth meeting since Obama took office 17 months ago.
Netanyuhu sidestepped that question again Wednesday in an interview broadcast on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"The simplest way to advance peace is to put aside all the grievances and all the preconditions," he said, asserting he's "ready to sit down" with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to discuss peace "without preconditions."
Asked what concrete steps he was willing to take to set the framework for new talks, Netanyahu said his government already had relaxed "hundreds of roadblocks and checkpoints" in addition to its decision to ease the Gaza Strip blockade.
But he also told a foreign media that "we have to have very strong security arrangements so that the areas that we vacate do not turn into Iranian strongholds. We have some very clear requirements. ... The Palestinians will have very clear requirements."
Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office last Tuesday, both Netanyahu and Obama had ducked a question about the Israeli leader's plans for extending a limited freeze on West Bank settlements. The moratorium expires in September.
While stark differences remain, the tone was far warmer than it was when Obama and Netanyahu were last together. That was in the spring and Obama was upset over Israeli policies in disputed East Jerusalem. He had Netanyahu to the White House in the evening, out of sight of reporters.
After this meeting, however, the leaders' Oval Office remarks were expansive, but — when carefully studied — held little or nothing new.
Obama praised Israel for easing its Gaza blockade, allowing in consumer goods, after heated international criticism for the deadly interception of a Turkish aid flotilla.
The president said he believed Netanyahu "was willing to take risks for peace," and heatedly rejected the premise of a question about having given the Israeli leader the cold shoulder in recent months.

Netanyahu said he was "committed" to peace with the Palestinians and said it was "high time to begin direct talks." He praised Obama for leading the U.N. Security Council to a new round of sanctions against Iran over its suspected nuclear arms program.
He was fulsome in thanking Obama "for reaffirming to me in private and now in public as you did the long-standing U.S. commitments to Israel on matters of vital strategic importance."
"To paraphrase Mark Twain," the Israeli leader said, "reports about the demise of the special U.S.-Israel ... relationship aren't just premature, they're just flat wrong."
The two leaders had gotten off on the wrong foot right from the start when Netanyahu — in their first White House meeting soon after Obama was sworn in — publicly rebuffed the new president's call for a freeze on settlements.
The Netanyahu government compounded that negative start when it announced, during a fence-mending visit to Israel by Vice President Joe Biden, plans for a large settlement expansion in east Jerusalem.
Regardless of that history, Netanyahu and Obama were emphatic that relations had never gone sour. What's more, they agreed, it was time for the Palestinians to come to the table again for yet another try at face-to-face peace talks.
The challenge in this new drive for peace is how Netanyahu would convince the Israeli hard-liners to accept it, and secure positive responses from Palestinian to see reasons to let the war end. The Palestinians mission in Washington and its officials are already trying to put spanner at the wheel of progress in the new found peace, as they say there would be no response for at least a day. They are demanding the halt in activities in West Bank and East Jerusalem settlements before it would embrace any direct talks.
Some analysts are of the view s that Obama and Netanyahu might have reached a private understanding that Israel would extend the construction moratorium in return for direct talks.
“This enables Israel to say it didn’t pay for direct talks, but there’s an understanding that once the expiration date rolls around, the moratorium will be extended,” said David Makovsky, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Among the other “concrete steps” Israel is expected to take toward the Palestinians, analysts said, is greater cooperation with the Palestinian Authority on security matters and increased economic aid for the West Bank. Netanyahu has suggested to aides that he has other steps in mind, Israeli officials said, but he has not yet disclosed them.

Obama’s stance reflected domestic political pressures on both men. Netanyahu, who is struggling to keep his fractious right-wing coalition together, has been under pressure at home not to appear to pay an additional price to lure the Palestinians to the negotiating table.

And with Democrats facing a tough time in the midterm elections in November, Obama has reasons for softening his public stance on Israel. Republican candidates have been courting Jewish voters, who ordinarily back Democrats, by trying to portray the president as anti-Israel.

Some analysts say last week’s session reflects what Aaron David Miller, a longtime Middle East peace negotiator, calls a “false calm” in the relationship. Miller predicts fissures in the relationship, the result of a “fundamental expectations gap” in which Obama expects more from the peace talks than Netanyahu will be able to deliver.

Apathy Of Nigeria To Citizens’ Execution In Libya

Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor (With agency report)

LAST YEAR when the report came that some Nigerians in their scores were awaiting the hangman’s noose in Libya, while a responsible government would have made good efforts at intervening for stay of execution or embark on plea bargain for lesser punishment, the Nigerian Foreign Affairs Ministry under the ex-minister Chief Ojo Maduekwe was busy faulting the report, claiming no Nigerian was on death row in the North Africa country. The chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Diaspora Affairs, Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa told Sunday Independent last week that the Federal Government through its foreign ministry had earlier denied that there were Nigerians on death row in Libya. Her words: “When we raised the alarm the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it was not true”.
Last week executions of 18 condemned inmates in Libya, consisting of 10 Nigerians and other eight foreigners from Chad and Egypt confirmed the fact that Nigerian government had not only put up a bland show to safeguard its own, but showed how irresponsible many of our public office holders are to the plight of the ordinary Nigerians, especially those abroad. It is not as if one is asking government to protect those of her citizens convicted for criminal acts in another country or encourage them to break the laws of other countries, but any responsible government with information of unfair hearing that led to the condemnation of some of her citizens would have acted, and ensured Libyan government mete out fair judgement on those on death row. Over 200 people are awaiting executions in Libya, with large number of them foreigners, a Libyan newspaper, Cerene, reported.
In reaction to the incident, Amnesty International’s Director for the Middle East and North Africa, Malcolm Smart said “In Libya we fear that death sentences were handed down after proceedings which fail to satisfy international standards for fair trial.” The rights group further argued that Libya is known to have unreasonably executed large number of foreigners, even with the flimsiest reasons. The Arabian country’s legal system often doesn’t give foreigners access to lawyers and its trial processes are done in Arabic language where foreigners are left in a lost paradise only to find themselves in gallows awaiting the executioner’s noose.
Prior to its ‘Great Revolution’, Libya like other Arabian countries adopted the Egyptian civil law. In the 1970s, the country adopted a new approach to government, which led to great reform in its legal system. Ironically, the People’s Republic ‘Jamahiriya’ that the Libyan government fashioned to open its country’s to the new era of global relations is one that is grossly unfair to foreigners where hundreds are executed at the flimsiest reasons. The current Libyan law stipulates that execution or pardon for an accused lies on the wish of the relatives of the victim of the crime.
While reports have it that more Nigerians are still awaiting the hangman’s noose in Libya, it then behoves on Nigeria government to act now and dispatch a strong team to negotiate their release and fair judgement. As Dabiri-Erewa rightly stated, the execution is expected to take place in batches. Then a quick action from our government will not only safe the lives of many of Nigerians that were unfairly sentenced, but would make Libyan government to be responsible enough to give fair hearing to Nigerians in the future. A Nigerian residing in Tripoli, who spoke on the conditions of anonymity to a media, said: "At least 10 Nigerians are among those that were executed. There are over 50 Nigerians awaiting execution. Some of them were convicted on flimsy reasons."
Nigerian government needs to learn from her neighbouring counterparts, Ghana, which passed through similar scenario when three of her citizens and a Nigerian were sentenced to death for a murder case in 1998.
In May 17 1998, three Ghanaians and a Nigerian were sentenced to death for murdering a Libyan national in a drug related case. The Ghanaian government took it upon itself and did all within its might to ensure her three citizens were let loose. The Ghanaian embassy in Libya took keen interest in the case and arranged for the defence of the accused persons during trial and subsequent appeal. According to a report on Ghanaweb, “Subsequently the embassy had contact with the family of the deceased to explore, in accordance with Islamic practice, the possibility of seeking clemency or the payment of compensation to cancel the death sentences. The family however, rejected any negotiations and insisted that the law should take its course.”
In May, 2007, the Libyan authorities notified the Ghanaian embassy and her Nigerian counterpart of the imminent execution of the condemned four. While Ghana’s government went the whole length securing a second stay of executions for her three nationals, the only Nigerian was executed since the Nigerian government, then under Olusegun Obasanjo, was too preoccupied with issues that would benefit their immediate families and bandwagon of allies and gave no iota of regard to a common and worthless Nigerian who found himself in such a mess in Libya.
But surprisingly, the then Ghanaian president went to Libya to intervene for the release of these three Ghanaians.
"In late May 2007, the President John Agyekum Kufuor visited Libya and raised, among other matters, the plight of the three nationals with the Libyan Leader who promised to look into the matter.”, Ghanaweb reported.
In June 2007, officials of the Embassy made another attempt to contact the family of the murder victim but the latter declined a meeting”.
"On December 29, 2007 the Ambassador of Ghana took the opportunity of visit to Ghat to discuss the matter with the Governor of the Province. The latter however explained that the case was a difficult one because of the persistent of the family to modify its position, not even on the instance of a request emanating from the office of the Libyan leader”.
"On January 20, 2008, the Embassy was notified yet again by the Libyan authorities that two of the three nationals were scheduled to be executed by 22nd January 2008. The Embassy immediately made representations to the Libyan authorities for a further stay of execution to allow time for consultations with Government on this development”.
"However, without responding to the Embassy's request, the Libyan authorities proceeded to execute the two nationals by firing squad, together with three others, including a Libyan, a Sudanese and an Egyptian”.
The Ghanaian government in the above case made efforts to ensure three Ghanaians were spared execution, even though they were eventually executed. This move alone shows in all ramifications that it is a responsible government and attest to the fact that they are more responsible and have high regard for every of their citizen within and outside Ghana, than what our Nigerian government display here as vividly illustrated in the aforementioned case.
In another murder case of a Senegalese where a Ghanaian and a Gambian were convicted and sentenced to death in May 2007, the Ghanaian government successfully secured the stay of execution for her national while the Gambian was executed. The Embassy of Ghana made representations to the Embassy of Senegal in Libya on the possibility of clemency from the family of the deceased. Even though the Embassy of Senegal was unable to locate the family of the deceased national, it took upon itself to offer clemency to the Ghanaian national.
If Nigerian government had intervened in the same way the Ghanaian government did in the above case, then the recent execution of 10 Nigerians would have been prevented or at a worse scenario delayed.
While last Sunday’s executions can not be reversed, our government can still save it’s face by immediately intervening to stop the remaining executions of the about 50 Nigerians in Libyan prisons.

Racism And Nigerians In Diaspora

By Paul Arhewe,
Online/Foreign Editor

Last Sunday another spate of maltreatment was meted out to some Nigerians living in Warsaw, the capital city of Poland. This latest incident, like some past ones claimed the life of a Nigerian, while 32 other foreigners, mostly Nigerians were arrested.
The unfortunate Nigerian, Maxwell Itoya died of gun-shot injury, after police raided some Nigerian traders selling shoes at the bazaar at the Stadium in the Praga district of Warsaw. Maxwell was trying to intervene in the case of Police arrest and brutal treatment of another handcuffed Nigerian when he was shot in the stomach. Max, who had lived many years in Warsaw was legally married to Monika, a Polish woman, and has three children, aged 10, four, and two.

While Nigerian government through its foreign ministry has called for immediate and full inquiry into the killing of her citizen, Polish police spokesman Mariusz Sokolowski said his country’s prosecutor’s office has already began investigation into the assault against a policeman, and would determine if the policeman had broken the law by firing his gun.
However, the Polish police was quick to give the media another version of the same story reporting that the ill-fated Nigerian was running away from patrol team, and was chased into the market place, where the policeman handcuffing him mistakenly shot him when mob protesting his arrest tried to besiege him. Even if this version is true, resisting arrest shouldn’t be a justification to take the life of a foreigner, especially in a highly racist country like Poland, where such incident would definitely be associated with xenophobic outburst. In Nigeria, hardly would there be an incident of police brutalising white foreigners; even though the Nigeria police are good at brutalising their own countrymen.

Definitely, it is expected the Polish police would have to defend themselves and blame the protesting mob. Sokolowski in defence of his colleagues said "This man could have been saved and police officers started to resuscitate him, but they were repeatedly attacked with stones by a group of foreigners and were forced to defend themselves, and had to stop the resuscitation". In civilised society of which Poland belongs, tear gas is usually used by police to disperse angry or protesting crowd not live bullets? If the victim was to be Polish citizen I dare say the police man wouldn’t shoot him to death.
A Nigerian named Caesar living in Warsaw, who claim to be an eyewitness to this deadly act in the marketplace, said the Polish police are usually brutal to blacks, and highly segregate against them. According to him, “this is the latest in a long line of police abuse and brutality towards blacks in this predominately racist country”. “The open air market place, which is referred to as Stadium, is made up of mainly Ukrainians and Vietnamese traders, but the biased report would have you believe that it is only Nigerians that were arrested and causing problems”, he added.
While the police and government should be apologising sincerely, they are busy prosecuting the 32 arrested foreigners. According to report, 25 out of those arrested would face charges of assaulting a police officer, which when found guilty would send them to prison for 10 years.
Nigerian government should do more than calling the Polish authorities to probe the case, like in previous similar incidents. Our government usually make statements, after which no further deliberations or actions are taken. Nigerian government, through its embassy in Warsaw, should follow thoroughly every phase of this particular probe.
Nothing has been heard again on Emmanuel Egisimba’s case. Egisimba died last year in Chinese town of Guangzhou after trying to avoid police brutality. He jumped headlong from a second floor shop and died. Hundreds of blacks’ after the death of Egisimba protested calling Nigerian government to intervene in the frequent maltreatments and molestations they face in this Asian country.
In another similar case, in 2008, a Nigerian businessman, Ojide Ekene, was said to be descending the steps leading to a subway metro station to look for some place to urinate when the security men accosted him and began to beat him. He was allegedly hit on the head with heavy iron battens, knocking him to the ground in a pool of his own blood.
But the Chinese consulate had said that Ekene fell on the staircase of Yulong building as he tried to run to urinate, adding that in the process he got a heavy hit on his head. Many of such dehumanising cases come up frequently, but Nigerian government usually do little to address them.
The frequent brutalities and xenophobic treatments that Nigerians are made to suffer in Poland, and other racist countries should be properly addressed, and their governments should be held responsible anytime such ill-treatments occur. The bland and indifferent attitude these governments have put up in addressing the frequent and continuous maltreatments of Nigerians in their countries has prompted their police to have a field time in this intolerable act Nigerians are made to pass through.
While these foreign countries hear news of those brutalities Nigerian police melt out to their citizens on daily basis, they tend to see our citizens in their countries as trash that can be maltreated knowing full well Nigerian government would only make noise and cannot bite anytime such ugly trash happens.
Our government usually dream of making Nigeria to belong among the leading 20 economies in the world, one wonders how this tall hallucination and mirage of a dream would come to reality when the same government have little value for her citizens especially those in foreign lands.
Unites States can sacrifice huge resources in order to rescue an American in distress no matter where the challenge is coming from. Last year, when some Somali pirates hijacked a U.S. ship and held its American captain, Richard Phillips, as hostage the US Navy immediately diverted its guided missile destroyer, Bainbridge, and successfully rescued Phillips alive after keeping watch on the pirates movement for days.
Poland is among the less-developed countries in Europe. One wonders, supposing our country is well managed by our past governments and leaders, what would Nigerians still be doing in a society that overtly shows they hate them. I believe they would in drove be returning to their fatherland. As the popular maxim goes ‘no place is like home’. It is then a task on Nigerians and our government to ensure things work here in order to prevent such beastly treatments our brothers and sisters are made to pass through in unfriendly countries. While, waiting for that time to come, our government need to show it cares and values her citizens no matter where they are reside.

Cameron’s Daunting Task Of Changing UK

By Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor

The political terrain in United Kingdom has embraced a new atmosphere. This is not only because the Conservatives, in a coalition with the Liberal democrats, have taken the rein of power from the opposition position it has been subjected to since the past 13 years , but that young stars, like Obama, are now calling the shoots in one of Europe’s biggest economy. 43-year-old David Cameron is UK’s youngest Prime Minister since the last 200 years (since Robert Banks Jenkinson in 1812), with six months younger than former PM Tony Blair, and his deputy from Liberal Democrats Nick Clegg is also 43.

The results of UK general election last week have shown that there are neither vanquished nor outright winner for the three major political party leaders. For Cameron, prior to the votes, he was greatly favoured to sweep the polls and maintain an exclusive government, but he ended up with a hung parliament; embracing a plea bargain to woo the liberal democrats in coalitional government. Clegg was the hero during the great debates; outshining his opponents, but became the loosing team that others must take along in realising their kingship. Gordon Brown of the Labour party outrightly admitted his flop and party’s failure, but his decision to quit was really timely, and has won him the respect as a quintessential contemporary politician, what Blair would have loved to achieve during his time.
The tasks before Cameron, no doubt is daunting. As the loquacious and major critic of Brown, especially since the latter became Prime Minister in June 2007, Cameron would need to outshine Brown’s performance and proffer results to those many economic and financial criticisms he had levelled against his predecessor. He will be assessed based on how successful he is able to turn around the British post recession economy, and manage those many flaws Brown had incurred.
The British society is one that is conservative in nature; hence, there is the need for the new Tory administration to cut down the rising government expenditures, another pitfall which Brown administration carried along. The taxpayers in Britain are the ones bearing the huge cost used in maintaining the about 100 ministers, where there are about 170 cars for ministers alone that gulp 20 million pounds annually. No wonder, a segment of the British society are calling government to introduce public transportation to ministers so as to save the huge cost in funding cars and the entourages that go with public officials. Boris Johnson, a columnist with UK Telegraph, sums this up by arguing that “Politicians should stop wasting our money and start taking public transport”.

Britain is a major player in the global economy. Cameron has a huge task in cooperating with his America counterpart, Barack Obama to give a facelift to the world’s economy that is still finding its feet after the great recession that hit major economies last year.
The realities of contemporary challenges on global economy may just be a different ball game in tackling by extrapolation from the past. There is also the challenge emerging super economies are portending to the developed western states, of which UK belongs. China, India, and Brazil are all set to surpass the ‘old’ economies of the west within no more than a decade or two. The Third world or developing economies in Africa and part of Asia are no longer developing; they are ever ready to continue their plea for aids and bailouts, even though they provide the raw materials on which engine the global economy. The new British government under the leadership of the Tories need to put the machinery in order to provide a deep and valuable trading partnership with the aforementioned nations.
On the political scene, Cameron would really need to win the trust of his co-travellers, especially in the coalition government that is formed with the opposition, as a writer rightly puts it “The formation of a coalition means conspiring with political enemies and smiling in front of the cameras pretending to agree”. There is also the glaring eyes of Labour party that will be watching to catch on the flimsiest gaffe.
In addition to this the new government need to rebuild the trust of the electorate in their government, which was the undoing of Brown at the later part of his administration. Cameron’s speech when assuming the mantle of power as PM lays credence to this: “One of the tasks that we clearly have is to rebuild trust in our political system. Yes, that's about cleaning up expenses, yes, that's about reforming parliament, and yes, it's about making sure people are in control and that the politicians are always their servants and never their masters”.
The UK support with U.S. on the Iraqi and Afghan wars is another tough decision Cameron would need to look into. Of recent, the deaths of British soldiers in Afghanistan are on the rise, and this is not too appealing to the British citizenry. Cameron would decide whether to cut short the number of UK troops in these war zones or decide to totally hands up, which is not too possible, as it would not be a pleasing pill that the American government will love to swallow.
The tasks before Cameron has made his new position not too enviable, as he has a lot on his hands today, but changing the expectations of the British people has to be high up on his priority list.

UK 2010 POLLS: Nigerians Put Up A Good Fight

Paul Arhewe,
(With Agency Reports)

The 2010 United Kingdom general elections made history as the numbers of foreigners who vied for seats in British parliament was unprecedented. Out of the 4,149 candidates battling to secure seats in the parliament, 315 of them were independent candidates. 89 Asians partook as candidates in the poll while Africans from Ghana, South Africa, Uganda and Nigeria were among the hundreds that vied in the election.
Three out of the five Nigerians that contested in the election won parliamentary seats in different constituencies, while the forth gave a hot contention for her constituency.
Helen Grant a 48-year old attorney, whose father is a Nigerian and has a Briton mother and the Conservative Party's parliamentary candidate, faced hostility after surviving controversy in 2009 when it emerged she was once a member of the Labour Party.
Grant born in London became the Conservative Party's first black female Member of Parliament for the mostly white, rural, and staunchly Conservative district of Maidstone & The Weald of Kent. She was chosen by Conservative Party leader David Cameron to succeed Ann Widdecombe, who is retiring. Ms. Grant is running on a platform of reforming Maidstone Hospital, defeating Kent International Gateway “to protect our beautiful Kent countryside from predatory developers”, and emphasizing local suppliers and producers.
She secured the seat for Maidstone and the Weald constituency with 23,491 votes (48 per cent), beating second and third runner ups Peter Carroll of Liberal democrat who garnered 17,602 votes (36.0 per cent) and Rav Seeruthun of Labour with 4,769 (9.7 per cent).
Conservative Party activists who complain that the A-lister was "foisted" on them by the party's leadership predicted that some local Tories will not campaign for her but will instead help Tory candidates in neighbouring seats. Donal Blaney, a Tory activist and blogger, said: "There are a number of people in the association, activists who go out in the pouring rain, that are upset and a lot of them have said they will not campaign to help Helen. They will help Greg Clark or Damian Green, people who have a track record as Conservatives. "Parachuting people into safe seats and imposing them is a disservice to activists. Part of the bitterness that has arisen over Liz Truss [a candidate whom many Tory activists oppose on their A-list, because she had an affair with a married Tory MP while she was married] and Helen Grant is that activists have been labelled the 'Turnip Taliban' when they are the people who have kept the Tory party afloat and are now being denigrated."
Grant first emerged on Booker Rising’s radar screen in 2008. The Maidstone & the Weald seat is the Conservative Party’s 10th safest district. I.e., barring a massive catastrophe, expect to see her in Parliament this year. There have been minor complaints from local activists that she is “insufficiently Conservative” (because she was once a Labour Party member, she’s only been a Conservative Party member for four years, and some local activists didn’t like that she made the A-list so quickly), but nothing serious. She was inspired to become a Tory by Mr. Cameron.
Grant was raised by her single mother on the Raffles council estate in Carlisle ("council estates" are called public housing projects in America) without a car or a television. She later became captain of her school tennis and hockey teams, and also did track & field and cross-country. Ms. Grant is a former under-16 Judo Champion in North of England and Southern Scotland.

Grant later obtained a law degree at the University of Hull, undertook solicitors' finals at the College of Law in Guildford and qualified as a solicitor in 1988. Her law experience lies in family law and health care. She is now Senior Partner at Grants Solicitors LLP, Croydon, where she has been since 1996. She is also the founder of Grants Solicitors, a specialist firm focused on solving family breakdown.
Responding to a question about why she wants to enter politics, she said: "I have always had strong views and I have always fought for what I believed in. I believe in individual freedom combined with personal responsibilities, free enterprise and a non-interfering state. I have also always felt strongly about being compassionate toward other people and have held firm opinions on issues surrounding families, women, social justice and social mobility, probably because of my work and my personal background. My party political awakening came in 2004. My children were no longer babies and were becoming more independent, my business had started to mature, with a good management team in place, and I was ready for a new challenge where I might be able to continue helping other people both as individuals but also on a broader scale. Politics seemed to be the obvious route. I had a brief flirtation with the Labour Party because at the time they were holding themselves out as the champions of social justice, which was important to me, but I quickly realised that they were not. Moreover they were failing to deal with the aspirations of normal people in our country. When David Cameron became leader of the Conservative party in December 2005 I was instantly attracted and inspired by his views on all of the above issues and I joined the Conservative party shortly after, in January 2006."
Now a wealthy woman due to her law practice, Ms. Grant is married and has two teenage children. She has lived in Surrey, England since 1994 and enjoys tennis, movies, major sporting events, and family life. She is a member of the Conservative Party Family Law Reform Commission, the National Advisory Group for Domestic Violence, and the Society for Conservative Lawyers.
Grant would join MP Adam Afriyie and Lord John Taylor as black Conservatives in Parliament as the emerged victorious.

Another Nigerian who pulled a big win in the UK 2010 poll is Chuka Ummuna. He contested under the Labour Party, won the constituency seat for Streatham with 20,037 votes (42.8 per cent), beating Chris Nicholson of Liberal Democrat with 16,778 votes (35.8 percent), Rahoul Bhansali of Conservative with 8,578 votes (18.3 percent), Rebecca Findlay of Green Party with 861 votes (1.8 per cent), and Geoffrey Macharia of Christian Party with 237 votes (0.5 per cent).
Ummuna who was born and bred in Steatham is well known in his community and sometimes referred to as ‘the UK Obama’.
Prior to becoming Labour’s parliamentary candidate in Streatham, Ummuna was Vice Chair of Streatham Labour Party from 2004 to 2008 and had held a variety of positions throughout the local party. He is a member of the GMB and Unite trade unions and sits on the Management Committee of progressive pressure group, Compass
“I know our party will do everything we can for the residents of this fantastic place”, Ummuna said after emerging victorious on Friday.
In March 2008 Umunna was selected by the Streatham Labour Party as its parliamentary candidate at the next General Election. He succeeds Keith Hill, the current Labour Member of Parliament who has held the seat since April 1992 and is to retire.

He has lived in the Streatham parliamentary constituency all his life (save for a short stint away studying). In his formative years Umunna attended Christ Church Primary School in the Brixton Hill part of the constituency and he is presently a School Governor of Sunnyhill Primary School and sits on the Board of Sunnyhill Children’s Centre, both in Streatham Wells. He lives on Streatham High Road.

Umunna is a specialist employment law solicitor by profession and works at a Central London law firm where he primarily acts for employees but also employers. In addition, he sits on the Board of Generation Next, a not for profit social enterprise which provides activities for young people in London, and has been involved charitable youth work in Lambeth too.
Prior to becoming Labour’s parliamentary candidate in Streatham, Umunna was Vice Chair of Streatham Labour Party from 2004 to 2008 and had held a variety of positions throughout the local party. He is a member of the GMB and Unite trade unions and sits on the Management Committee of progressive pressure group, Compass.

As a person of mixed Nigerian, Irish and English descent, Umunna would become the first person of Black parentage to represent one of the three parliamentary constituencies covering the Brixton area. Aged 30, Umunna also become one of the youngest MPs in the country.
Commenting in March 2008 on his selection as Labour’s parliamentary candidate in Streatham, Umunna said “Streatham is my home – I grew up here – so it is a great privilege to have been selected as Labour’s next Prospective Parliamentary Candidate in this constituency.
“Labour has achieved a lot and this country is a far better place to live than it was in 1997 with unemployment in Streatham down from 10.2 percent then, to 5.2 percent now, but we still have lots of work to do.
“I am very grateful to Labour Party members for selecting me to succeed Keith Hill, who has been a fantastic MP for Streatham, and I relish the prospect of getting out and about and taking our message to the community with him between now and the next general election.”
Local residents welcomed Umunna’s selection as Labour’s parliamentary candidate. The Rev. Lisa Wright, retired curate at St Leonard’s Church, Streatham, said:
“Myself and Chuka’s family were members of St Margaret’s Church in Streatham for many years. I think he would make a wonderful MP for the area and the fact that he is a local boy will definitely appeal to the people here. He is part of the new generation in this new political era!”
Richard Guy, a local firefighter from Streatham said:
“Chuka is a childhood friend – we both grew up in Streatham together. I remember how proud he was of me when I became a firefighter – his admiration for those (like me) working in our public services to keep this country functioning is unswerving
Also, Chi Onwurah, another Nigerian won the Newcastle Central seat under the Labour party flagship. Onwurah secured the parliamentary seat with 15,692 votes (45.9 percent), beating Gareth Kane of Liberal Democrat with 8,228 votes (24.1 percent), and Nick Holder of Conservative with 6,611 votes (19.4 percent).
Onwurah was born in Wallsend in 1965, grew up on Hillsview Avenue in Kenton and went to Kenton School before studying Electrical Engineering in London. She lived in many different cities around the world, always remember Newcastle where she was brought up. Her maternal grandfather was a sheet metal worker in the shipyards of the Tyne during the depression. Her mother grew up in poverty in Garth Heads on the quayside. In the fifties she married a Nigerian student at Newcastle Medical School. Her father practiced dentistry in Gosforth. She said in her profile “I was still a baby when my father took us to live in Awka, Nigeria. But two years later the Biafran Civil War broke out bringing famine with it and, as described vividly in an Evening Chronicle article in 1968, my mother, my brother and sister and I returned as refugees to Newcastle, whilst my father stayed on in the Biafran army”.
Two Nigerians, Abiodun Akinoshun and Kemi Adegoke lost to other candidates in the polls. While Adegoke put up a good fight by clinching 22.2 per cent (10,684) of the votes in her constituency, Akinoshun got the worst result with 438. Akinoshun contested for the Erith and Thamesmead parliamentary seat as an independent candidate. He got 438 votes, losing to Labour candidate, Teresa Pearce who got 19,068 votes. Adegoke contested under the flagship of Conservative Party for the Dulwich and West Norwood parliamentary seat. She lost to Labour candidate Tessa Jowell who scored 22,461 votes (46.6 per cent).

Any Dividends Of Jonathan-Obama Meeting?

By Paul Arhewe , Online/Foreign Editor




LAST WEEK, Nigerian Acting President, Goodluck Jonathan, embarked on a four-day trip to Washington where he spent two days with other leaders from 47 countries in a Nuclear Security Summit organised by U.S. President Barrack Obama. He also had the opportunity to engage in a 15-minute chat with the American leader.
Comments from many quarters see this development as a significant impetus, which is a bolster on our hitherto passive relations to events at the international scene, especially as no remarkable meeting with renowned international leaders from the West was held by the administration of ailing President Umaru Yar’Adua.
Last Thursday, the Foreign Affairs Minister, Odein Ajumogobia, as he rightly acknowledge, the Jonathan trip to U.S. was very successful and would accrue immense benefits to Nigerians at home and those in diaspora. His words: “it was a very successful visit and I think it is important that Nigeria engages with the world again”. “I think we did so in a very open and successful way”. Jonathan in his trip had the opportunity to meet other America figures like Vice President Joe Biden, the World bank President, and was a special guest speaker at the Center for Global development (CGD) in Washington.
Though, many people are of the view that the time the Acting President spent in discussing with Obama was not enough to make a meaningful discuss, nevertheless the significance of the meeting is that more avenues and opportunities for Nigeria and the United States to cooperate in mutual economic, political and other basic areas of interest would continue to unfold.
Amusingly, a commentator in the Independent Newspapers website argued that “since President Yar’Adua was not availed the opportunity to meet Obama for a minute, Jonathan that was able to converse with him in 15 minutes, this indeed is an improvement”.
The U.S. and Nigeria share some traditional positive bilateral relations that are based on mutual efforts toward development and peace. Nigeria has played important role in regional and global peacekeeping exercises, a front-role in ensuring peace reign in Africa. Despite this great achievement the country has carved a niche for itself over the years in its foreign engagements, last year Obama visited some African countries, by-passed Nigeria and visited her neighbour Ghana. That event put pay to that fact that the Obama-led administration was not really moved in forming cordial ties with our then government under Yar’Adua, which Jonathan was deputising. Events, since his assumption in office have indicated that Yar’Adua is not favourably disposed to partaking at events in the international scene. This is displayed when last year he preferred to embark on a trip to Saudi Arabia to observe the inauguration of an education institution than attending a United Nations summit.
U.S.-Nigeria bilateral relation in past years especially during the military regimes had suffered strained ties. It was not until in July, 2006 that Nigerian airlines resumed direct flights to U.S. after a decade ban by America on direct flights between the two countries due to the excesses of the military rules in the 80s and 90s. Though, in terms of economic tie, there has been proportional growth over the years in economic ties between the two countries, when compared to what others foreign countries share with the African giant. U.S. has since taken over as the major importer of crude oil from Nigeria, where it is the fifth largest supplier of crude to the American country. For instance, according to Energy Department data in December 2009, U.S. bought about one million barrels of oil a day from Nigeria. As at last year, Nigeria was the 14th largest goods trading partner of the U.S. with $42.2 billion in two-way goods trade for 2008.
There abound many gains that would be accrued from the new-found wind in the sail of Nigeria-America relationship, from the offshoot of Jonathan’s four-day trip to U.S.
While on one hand, Jonathan has used the trip to stamp his authority and recognition of his administration by other country leaders, the visit of the Acting President to the Nuclear Security Summit indeed was an avenue to announce the comeback of Africa’s most populous country to happenings in the world arena.
The last year attempted Christmas Eve terror bombing on a Detroit-bound aircraft by a Nigerian youth, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was indeed a big dent that culminated in straining the bilateral relations between the two countries. This did not only result in the enlisting of Nigeria in a terrorist watch list, but incurred a stiffen measures and checks against Nigerians travelling abroad, even a visa ban on our ministers to U.S. was threatened.
Jonathan’s visit to Washington, (even though the result should not be expected too sudden) no doubt would go a long way to make U.S. rethink its stance against Nigeria and propose to remove its name from country to be monitored against sponsoring terrorist, more especially as our Acting President has hinted the American leader of our progress with security measures in our international airports. Many analysts have emphasised on the economical effect of adding Nigeria to that terror list. In this regards, as U.S. reconsiders in lifting the blacklist on Nigeria, other Western countries would start to see her in a new light, and mete out fair treatments to Nigerians in their countries and engage her in positive bilateral relationships.
Obama has expressly shown his approval of Jonathan Acting Presidency, even before his recent trip to Washington. During the inauguration of Nigerian new Ambassador to U.S., Prof. Adebowale Adefuye, last month, the American leader declared his support for the ongoing reforms embarked by Jonathan with regards to strengthening democracy, improving the economy and restoring peace and security in Nigeria. Obama said “In this difficult time, we applaud Nigeria for taking steps to restore confidence in the country’s political system while adhering to democratic principles”.
“We are encouraged by Acting President Jonathan’s public promises to strengthen democratic reforms, improve the economic environment and address the ongoing violence and impunity seen in the Niger Delta and Jos”. “We look forward to supporting these efforts to improve the lives of all Nigerian citizens,” he said.
U.S., as the world leading democratic nation, is at the forefront in striving to sustain the democratic tenets in countries struggling in their embryonic democracies, like Nigeria.
In past decades, Nigeria has either had bones to grind with U.S. on issues pertaining to democracy, human rights, and corruption. Nigerian 2011 polls are now barely one year away, the U.S. has always joined other voices in calling for electoral reform and of recent joined in calling for the replacement of the incumbent Independent National Electoral Commission Chairman, Professor Maurice Iwu, who many have raised their voices against as a symbol for failed elections in the country.
Jonathan certainly, among his discuss with Obama would have touched on his administration proposed moves in ensuring a free and fair poll, and a cause for the world to believe his government is really out to make it right this time. The U.S. has always offered its support to ensuring that Nigeria next year’s elections are free and fair, and political institutions are strengthened to consolidate on our democracy.
No doubt, the gains from the Acting President’s visit to Washington have already started yielding early results. Last week, while Jonathan was having roundtable discussions with Obama and other world figures, Adefuye was hosted alongside with American Ambassador to Nigeria, Robin Renee Sanders, in the launch of U.S.-Nigeria Bi-national Commission by U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.
The Bi-national Commission among other benefits would among other benefits, is a forum to strengthen the democratic institutions that are germane to hold free and fair elections in Nigeria, especially as 2011 polls draw near. The commission will also promote regional cooperation in the country and also encourage development in key areas, particularly in Niger Delta. It will support Nigeria in its fight against corruption, strengthen its democracy and civil society. And lastly, the commission would also support the country in ensuring food security and agricultural development.
The Bi-national Commission through its governance group will first prepare for Nigeria’s 2011 polls, and put in place $25 million food-security initiative that will focus on supporting the country’s agribusiness, farmer cooperatives, access to markets and work on staple crop yields, Sanders said. The commission “represents the future of this strategic dialogue and provides the framework for us to discuss these key areas we share with Nigeria,” she added.
Indeed, Jonathan’s invitation to stand shoulder to shoulder with his counterpart’s from other countries, even in his acting capacity, is a proof that his leadership in Africa’s populous state is accepted by world leaders. The World Bank last week also commended the positive leadership qualities Jonathan is putting forth in his acting capacity, and thus gives its support for more developmental projects for the country.
While more and more of this general acceptance is rushing in, it is then a challenge on the Acting President and his government not to let Nigerians down, and the eagle eyes of the world that is waiting to see positive changes. Even if these changes come in terms of improvement in electricity supply and electoral reforms that would usher in legitimate government that come through Nigerians votes in 2011, then Jonathan would have successfully engraved his name on a platter of gold; of which Nigerians would remain ever grateful.

U.S. Healthcare Overhaul Resultant Economic Spill-over Effects

Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor (with agency reports)

U.S. PRESIDENT Barack Obama was indeed a proud man having successfully won the nudge from Congress to sign the historical healthcare bill last week. The healthcare reform bill, estimated to have coverage for 95 per cent of America populace (over 32 million more Americans), marks a landmark and the biggest change in U.S. healthcare sector for decades. The bill was passed by 219 votes from democrats against 212 of Republican in U.S. House of Reps. No Republican supported the bill. The Republicans are of the view that the measures were too expensive to run and it makes government to take over the health industry. Obama successfully won more democrats cleverly, at the eleventh hour, assured the Americans that no federal money would be used for sponsoring abortion.

The economic implication of the world’s largest economy health overhaul would not only affect the American society but have a spill over effect to other economies of the world.
Millions of middle-income people in the American society would be forced to buy commercial health insurance policies; this which is expected to cost them 9.5 percent of their income would make insurance companies smiling to the banks.
Insurance companies would get at least $447 billion of taxpayer money to subsidise the purchase of their products. This would boost their financial and political power; where they would have great influence on future reform.

In two studies conducted by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) their findings show that the U.S. health care reform measure would pay dividends for small businesses and other groups, and costs incurred by the American federal government would help reduce total health spending over time.

“Health Care Reform-Big Benefits for Small Business” explains the many ways in which small businesses will benefit from health care reforms. Only 35 percent of businesses employing fewer than 10 workers offer health insurance, and those that do usually pass on a higher share of the cost to workers than do larger businesses, the report says.

A key problem is that small businesses typically pay more for health insurance because of the way policies are sold. Reforms that would create more competition among insurers and reduce their administrative costs “would significantly reduce the cost small businesses incur providing health insurance,” EPI said.

The other study, “Seeing the Big Picture in Health Reform and Cost Containment,” shows why a federal government investment in health care reform could produce big savings in total costs over time and argues that cost analyses focusing strictly on the cost of health reform to the federal government are misguided

Fundamental health reform is worth doing even if it does not pay off in big federal budget savings. The reason is simple: Health care is an area where the more costs are loaded up on the federal government, the more efficiently care tends to be delivered overall.

That helps reduce total health spending over time, spending that is currently rising faster than gross domestic product, according to EPI.

Obama's proposal takes the more modest Senate bill as his basic framework. But, in what is perhaps his proposal's most notable feature, he scales back the Senate bill's main revenue source, a tax on high-cost insurance that he has strongly supported. Instead, he would impose a new tax on the unearned income of the wealthy.

He would expand subsidies to help working-class and middle-class families afford coverage. To win over some of the bill's strongest sceptics, seniors and state officials, he would expand the Medicare drug benefit for seniors and Medicaid assistance for budget-strapped states.

There is no independent cost estimate yet, but the proposal's additions drive its price tag higher than the Senate bill's $871 billion. White House health-care czar Nancy-Ann DeParle estimated the increase at $75 billion over 10 years, which she said would be offset by bigger cuts in subsidies for private insurers that offer Medicare Advantage plans and higher fees on drug companies, among other sources. By reining in Medicare, the proposal would still reduce the deficit by $100 billion over 10 years, the White House said.

The health reform, no doubt is a laudable project that would affect millions of lives, but those Americans opposing the successful passing of the bill cling their argument on the cost implication of the bill on U.S. economy, and the future increase in cost of health insurance middle-class Americans would be made to pay.

The economy is not the primary reason Americans oppose the bill, says Gallup's Newport.
Only five percent of Americans said they oppose the bill because it would cost government too much and increase the federal deficit.
“The No. 1 reason Americans say they oppose the bill is personal cost,” says Newport.
Of those opposed to the bill, 20 per cent say it will raise the cost of insurance, according to an earlier Gallup poll.
Almost as many people, 19 per cent, say the bill does not address real problems in healthcare. Eight percent of those polled said they don’t know how the system would work, while another eight per cent said they’re against big government controlling the bill.

It is estimated that beginning from 2014, American insurance firms will no longer be able to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, a requirement that America’s Health Insurance Plans, the insurer trade association, has predicted will lead to an explosion in premiums because the legislation will not create universal coverage. In the early going, premiums are indeed predicted to rise to those who earn too much to merit government subsidies; but other individuals will see their premiums drop, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Moreover, as insurance companies get 32 million new customers, they will receive a tremendous infusion of cash that should enable them to reduce their prices.
When health plans have to compete for the business of individuals and small businesses in the insurance exchanges, they will have an additional incentive to moderate their premiums. In the long run, if insurance costs drop, more of the 23 million people (a third of them illegal immigrants) who remain uninsured will be able to afford coverage, and there will be less danger that people will buy it only after they get sick.

The bill requires that insurers provide a certain minimum level of benefits in the health insurance exchanges that individuals and small firms must use to buy coverage, beginning in 2014. That should help carriers because they can charge more for mandatory benefit packages than for the catastrophic plans that they often sell in the individual and small-group markets. Also, people who are now covered by their employers will be able to buy insurance through the exchanges if the actuarial value of their plans is less than 60 percent and/or their share of the premiums costs more than 9.8 percent of their income. While it’s unclear how many people will be affected, moving them from a low-benefit employer-provided plan to a higher-benefit individual plan purchased in an insurance exchange should also raise revenues for insurance companies.

There are some downsides for insurance companies: For one thing, the legislation will cut about $200 billion in government payments to Medicare Advantage plans. Those companies that are heavily involved in that market, such as Humana, will certainly feel the pinch. But as Medicare tries to find ways to pass financial risk onto providers, private insurers will be enlisted to help, because they know more about managed care than the government does.

As for the excise tax on so-called “Cadillac plans,” the final version of the bill has pared this down to predicted revenue of about $70 billion over 10 years. That’s a very small portion of health plan revenues and will be passed onto employers, in any event. And the $74 billion in other new taxes that will be levied on insurance companies to pay for reform is a rounding error compared to the size of the revenues they’ll get in the next decade.

So if this reform bill is so good for insurers, why have they opposed it, and why does the stock market view reform as bad for insurance companies? I think it’s because of short-term thinking: Instead of focusing on how the expansion of coverage will provide new business and shore up a rapidly eroding system, insurance executives and investors only see increased government regulation that will restrict the insurers’ freedom of action. They should rethink their position in light of the opportunities this legislation opens up.

It is germane to note that developing countries also stand to benefit from the massive cash flow the U.S. health overhaul would proffer. This health reform measure has opened new opportunity to outsourcing companies, especially has hospitals and Insurance companies would begin to seek ways in minimizing their expenses. The health care overhaul would likely bring bulk of new business from customer enrollment, customer service, and claims processing, as insurance becomes universally available to US citizens. Different outsourcing destinations such as the Philippines, India, Mexico, and China will probably be clamouring to get the lead in healthcare outsourcing; however, it is likely that those who will benefit the most from the bill are those that can offer onshore capabilities or those that are near shore, such as Mexico and Canada.

Some outsourcing companies in some developing countries have already began their strategizing to expand their network to U.S. following the passage of the health bill into law last week. According to Nasdaq and the Times of India, outsourcing firms such as Firstsource Solutions and WNS are now planning to increase their onshore presence in the U.S. to help them win contracts by expanding their relationships while maintaining potential clients at arm’s length, building trust. Other companies such as Genpact in the meantime, are looking for possible mergers and acquisitions with other companies so that they can broaden their expertise and take advantage of more business from the healthcare industry.
In Africa, South Africa’s outsourcing industry is really gaining ground as more and more multinational outsourcing companies are expanding their operations there. Also, in the continent insurance industry is consolidating fast and stands a chance to further boost its gain with effective competition this health reform from the world’s biggest economy tend to give.

Black History Month And Racism In Contemporary American Society

By Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor
(With Agency Reports)

February each year is set aside as the Black History Month. Events during this month are observed in United States and other part of the world to reflect on the contributions and prices paid by black activists in ending slave trade and racism targeted against blacks.
While this year’s Black History Month is marked with events to encourage equal human rights, an ugly incident in Los Angeles almost marred the celebration. Three teachers at a South Los Angeles elementary school were suspended for allegedly encouraging students to celebrate O.J. Simpson, Dennis Rodman and RuPaul during Black History Month. The intentions of these white teachers were to make mockery of the Africa American history.
While, other children were carrying pictures of President Obama and Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who represent the face of true positive contemporary black Americans, these indicted teachers encouraged their students to carry placards of blacks currently passing through a nefarious case or those that have laid bad precedence for the black race. For instance Dennis Rodman, nicknamed "Dennis the Menace" and "The Worm", ex-basketball player experienced an unhappy childhood, was shy and introverted in his early years. After aborting a suicide attempt in 1993, he reinvented himself as the prototypical "bad boy" and became notorious for numerous controversial antics. He dyed his hair in artificial colours, presented himself with many piercing and tattoos and regularly disrupted games by clashing with opposing players and officials.
Some reactions against the aforementioned incident suggest that racism still has its root deep root in Western world.
According to the president of the Los Angeles branch of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People, Leon Jenkins, "I just can't fathom what these teachers were thinking of except to make a mockery of African American history,"

L.C. "Chris" Strudwick-Turner of the Los Angeles Urban League likened the episode to a series of racially provocative incidents at UC San Diego, where a Feb. 15 off-campus party mocked Black History Month.

"These kinds of things build on each other," she said. "When something like that happens in [San Diego] and there is no immediate consequence, which emboldens others. That's why I was glad that LAUSD took them out of the classroom right away."

Pollard-Terry said Simpson, Rodman and RuPaul were included on a list of prominent African Americans approved by the school for study during Black History Month.

There are many Africa Americans that have put up positive contributions in the fight against racism against blacks.
Martin Luther King Jr. was a civil rights activist who paid the price in the end for wanting change. Malcolm X was not only a Muslim minister, but also a human rights activist who died for change. Harriet Tubman (a.k.a. Black Moses) as well, she helped free slaves with her underground railroad. Let's not forget the Tuskegee Airmen, Jackie Robinson or Rosa Parks who all paved the way for black airmen, athletes and civilians to have an equal existence. But is that all? Did no one else contribute?
What about contemporary Africa Americans, is their roles significant in The Black History Month?

There are great black poets such as Maya Angelou, who is still alive and still creating great works in film rather than in books.

Bill Cosby: not only is he a great family man on television, but he has also been a contributor to debates about blacks in colleges, the ghettos and what needs to be done now to better our black communities. Even Jesse Jackson should be a notable mention; he's still fighting for the civil rights of others and politically campaigning for better schools in black communities as well.

How about scientists like Madame CJ Walker, who contributed to the hair care of all? Dr. Charles Drew, who performed heart transfusions when no one thought he could. There were plenty of inventors, chemists and educators such as Percy L. Julian, George Carruthers, George Washington Carver, James West and Granville T. Woods who helped to create railroads, observatories and peanut butter.

A lot of these scientists were the first to experiment with objects lying around and created useful commodities for us today. They have also paved the way for black people to become something more than what they were expected to become.

How about successful black people? Do you pay attention to great directors and producers like Spike Lee, Tyler Perry, Robert Townsend or Suzanne De Passé? Both Spike Lee and Robert Townsend have been creating movies since the 1980s.

Both have made the main focus of their movies centre around the racial and social divide of cultures, and they should be honoured more for their work. Some say that Tyler Perry is the new Spike Lee. I mean, have you seen his movies? He should be praised for capturing the essence of black families and putting them into films.

There are great actors and actresses such as Halle Berry, Will Smith, Martin Lawrence, Denzel Washington, Sanaa Lathan and more who owe their careers to veteran actors and actresses such as Dorothy Dandridge, Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, Danny Glover and Whoopi Goldberg.

All of these entertainers have made us laugh, cry and love with their portrayal of characters in all of their movies we watch almost every day. Some of them are beginning to get recognition at award shows like the Emmys and Golden Globes, but more need to be recognized for their outstanding performances.

Athletes such as Michael Jordan, Kareem Abdul Jabaar, Magic Johnson, Wilt Chamberlain, Muhammad Ali, Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Florence Joyner and plenty more have paved the way for the great athletes today like Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Mike Tyson, Marion Jones, Adrian Peterson, Reggie Bush, Venus and Serena Williams and so forth. We watch these players every day beyond the month of February, so let's continue to recognize them as well.

The music industry also has given us great producers like Berry Gordy and Russell Simmons. Both men have produced artists such as Run DMC, LL Cool J, Jay-Z, the Temptations, Supremes and let's not forget the late-great Michael Jackson, who should be honoured for the path he has opened to most of today's artists. There are other great artists like Boys II Men, Jodeci, En Vogue, Patti Labelle and Aretha Franklin who started the way for today's performers as well.
While the above listed Africa Americans have contributed immensely and are still contributing to make a difference in their immediate American society and the world at large, they are giving the black race a louder voice and create impetus for their black president (Obama) to turn things around.