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.

As Sudan, Chad Open A New Page On Peace

By Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor
Independent Newspapers Limited.


The two ‘Horns of Africa’ countries which hitherto are torn on each others’ flesh have decided this week to let by-gone be by-gone, and turn a new page.
Chadian president Idriss Deby made a surprise visit to Khartoum last Monday, after each country has laid several accusations and counter accusations of sponsoring rebels to fight the other’s government. Deby’s visit no doubt has really laid a path for peace, as Sudan’s president Omar Hassan al-Bashir the following day issued a statement saying his country has completely turned the page in the conflict with Chad. In his words: “I say to our people in Sudan and in Chad, we have completely turned the page on problems between us,". “This visit has put an end to the problems between Chad and Sudan,” He added. Bashir has even accepted an invitation from Deby to pay a return visit to N’djamena.

This present peaceful meeting won’t be the first time the two oil-producing neighbouring countries are trying to put aside the rancour distorting their peaceful cohabitation.
In March 2008, the two countries entered an accord in Dakar, the Senegalese capital, but it crumbled months later when a major faction of Darfur insurgents, the Justice and Equality Movement, launched an unprecedented attack on Khartoum. The reprisal on Ndjamena, which came as a surprise assault came close to overthrowing Deby’s government before his military troops managed to rally and rout the rebels.

Mid January this year, Sudan and Chad okay the deployment of a joint force on their borders, in order to end the presence of rebels on each other's territory and halt their activities as part of normalisation efforts.

As Deby was brokering the peace, he stated “…a calm is not enough. Agreements and protocols alone cannot bring back confidence if politics are not included. It is time to outdo ourselves in order to seal this peace.” "If I am with you today, it's not purely for an accolade, I have come so that we can transform the current calm into definitive peace," he added.
Even Sudan leader has been flabbergasted by his core enemy’s surprise visit. "When we were told that President Deby was coming to Khartoum it was a surprise, but a pleasant surprise," Bashir said.
Bashir said joint projects would be set up in the border area between both countries in order to help those affected by the Darfur conflict.
The two countries have agreed to prevent armed groups from using the territory of either state against the interests of the other and to establish mechanisms to monitor their common border.
Analysts are of the view that al-Bashir is seeking cheap popularity, especially as he is standing to run this April for Sudan’s first democratic elections in 24 years. Al-Bashir is trying to douse tension in his conflict-devastated state ahead of the April elections. According to Roland Marchal, a senior research fellow and an expert on Chad-Sudan at France CERI international research institute, “Bashir will need to get an international community that is not too critical. It makes sense, especially as Chad has committed itself to not supply equipment to the Darfur rebels."

According to United Nations’ estimate, about 300,000 deaths were recorded when non-Arab insurgents took up arms against Darfur people in early 2003. But President al-Bashir put the death toll at 10,000. About 2.7 million people have fled their homes and been displaced in eastern Chad and western Sudan because of bloodletting clashes with these areas.
The war broke out when Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and Justice and Equality Movement (Jem) began attacking government targets and installations. The rebels were accusing Sudan of oppressing black Africans in favour of Arabs Janjaweed militia - who are accused of trying to "cleanse" black Africans from large swathes of territory.

Sudan government following the attacks then mobilised a self-defence militias. The government denies any links to the Arab. Al-Bashir has called the Janjaweed "thieves and gangsters".
But refugees have refuted Sudan’s government stance, saying air raids by government aircraft would be followed by attacks from the Janjaweed, who would ride into villages on horses and camels, slaughtering men, raping women and stealing whatever they could find.
The international community has blamed President Bashir on the crisis, and issue an arrest warrant on him last year. Even, last week another fresh charge was approved by the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, Africa Union (AU) has refused to honour ICC warrant on the sitting president.

The international community has welcomed this new initiative towards peace in these Horn of Africa countries.
No doubt, the new peace deal with not only be a relief to the people within this war-torn zone, but an economic benefits to other Africa countries, and international organisations who spend their resources in sending military peace-keeping force and relief materials.
The United States has congratulated the Governments of Chad and Sudan on the signing of the January 15 agreements in N’Djamena to normalize relations.
We believe that the normalization of Chad-Sudan relations provides an important opportunity to advance ongoing international efforts toward a peaceful resolution of the situation in Darfur, and we call on the Governments of Chad and Sudan to contribute actively and appropriately to these peace efforts. This agreement will also enhance regional stability and promote economic growth.
The UN has lauded the “positive step” between the Sudan and Chad governments in securing their common borders and joining resource to combating rebels.
The Assistant-Secretary-General for Rule of Law and Security Institutions in the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO), Dmitry Titov, told the Security Council that “While the challenges in Darfur remain enormous, there is a hope and an opportunity that the coming year will bring positive changes for the region”.

Quake: Is U.S. Invading Or Relieving Devastated Haitians?

Paul Arhewe, Online/Foreign Editor



The U.S. role in administering aids and relief effort to the millions left devastated in the massive January 12 quake has been criticised many as a moved to invade the poor Latin American country. Critics slight Pentagon’s despatch of 15,000 troops (comprising those troops on ground and those who are on high sea) to Port-au-Prince as signalling invasion, other than providing relief aids.
France and Brazil were the first to let out their voices against U.S. move, when America soldiers refused landing permit to their medic teams sent to help the millions injured and those traumatised.
Though, U.S. government is claiming it intends to maintain peace and security in the state that is fast growing into a ‘state of nature’ as described in the Hobbessian cannibalised and uncivilised early stage of human society.

Last week, six helicopters pack full with American soldiers landed in Haiti’s presidential palace. This move alone would openly signify a new version of takeover, maybe a new pattern of conquering new kingdom as witnessed in the early years culminating into human civilization.

The Italian government official who led the country's response to the L'Aquila earthquake has condemned relief efforts in Haiti as a disorganised "vanity parade", ahead of an international conference on rebuilding the devastated country.

Guido Bertolaso, the head of Italy's civil protection service, said there had been a fundamental lack of leadership thus far in foreign aid missions to Haiti, warning also that the large US military mission in the country was not entirely helpful.

Also the Venezuelan and Bolivian presidents vent their anti-U.S. invective, claiming Washington was using a relief operation in Haiti to mask a military takeover of the impoverished country.

"The empire," said Mr. Chavez using his favourite epithet for the United States, "is taking Haiti over the bodies and tears of its people."

"They started with the airport," he said, referring to Port-au-Prince's single runway airfield, which U.S. forces have operated since last week, assisting hundreds of aid planes in landing”.

"If you want to go inside the destroyed presidential palace, you'll find US Marines standing in your way," Chavez added.

"They brazenly occupied Haiti without consulting the UN or the OAS (Organization of American States)," said Mr. Chavez, who on Sunday made similar accusations about the U.S. relief effort in Haiti.

Meanwhile, Bolivian President Evo Morales, one of Mr. Chavez's closest allies in the region, said he would request an emergency UN meeting "to repudiate and reject this military occupation of the United States in Haiti."

"It's not right the United States should use this natural disaster to invade and militarily occupy Haiti," he told a press conference.

"If you have all these problems with the injured and the dead from the earthquake, you have to go there to save lives, and you don't do that from a military standpoint," he added.

The U.S. tight grip on the relief efforts have stalled and slowed the rate of administration of food in the devastated poor country. Many prominent individuals including Jean Saint-Vil, Canada Haiti Action Network, Pierre Labossiere, Haiti Action Committee, USA , Noam Chomsky, MIT, Niraj Joshi, Toronto Haiti Action Committee, Roger Annis, Canada Haiti Action Network, Brian Concannon Jr., Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti, BC Holmes, Toronto Haiti Action Committee, Yves Engler, Canada Haiti Action Network, Peter Hallward, Middlesex University, Kevin Pina, journalist and film-maker, and Kevin Skerrett, Canada Haiti Action Network, recently took to undersigning an open letter to protest the increasing death toll that is mounting in Haiti over U.S. tight grip on the emergency relief.
According to them, “Since the US Air Force seized unilateral control of the airport in Port-au-Prince, it has privileged military over civilian humanitarian flights. As a result, untold numbers of people have died needlessly in the rubble of Port-au-Prince, Leogane and other abandoned towns”.

“If aid continues to be withheld, many more preventable deaths will follow. We demand that US commanders immediately restore executive control of the relief effort to Haiti's leaders, and to help rather than replace the local officials they claim to support”.

The open letter further stated that “We note that obsessive foreign concerns with 'security' and 'looting' are largely refuted by actual levels of patience and solidarity on the streets of Port-au-Prince. The decision to avoid what US commanders have called "another Somalia-type situation" by prioritizing security and military control is likely to succeed only in provoking the very kinds of unrest they condemn”.

“In keeping with a longstanding pattern, US and UN officials continue to treat the Haitian people and their representatives with wholly misplaced fear and suspicion”.

The U.S. government has rushed in its own military to re-establish a repressive force under cover of a “humanitarian” mission needed to bring aid to people who are injured, hungry and thirsty, and without shelter.

Spokespeople from what is left of Haiti’s government estimate that some 200,000 people have died in the disaster, that hundreds of thousands have left the capital area to seek shelter in the North of the country, and there are still some 609,000 without shelter in the capital area itself. (Reuters, Jan. 25)

The U.S. Marines and Airborne forces have seized the destroyed presidential palace, the banks, the Port-au-Prince airport and the severely damaged seaport. The U.S. forces took control of air traffic at the airport on Jan. 14. Currently 120 planes can land daily on the one runway, but 1,400 planes are backed up waiting for U.S. permission to land.

Accompanying the U.S. troop surge, the U.N. forces that have occupied Haiti since 2004 have rebuilt their command, which was severely damaged by the earthquake, and are increasing the number of troops from 9,000 to 12,500. Canada, which invaded Haiti in 2004 along with the U.S. and France after the U.S. deposed President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, has doubled its contingent to 2,000 troops.

All reports on the ground from Haiti show that Washington gave first priority to the military buildup, while delaying emergency aid. Comments from officials engaged in aid and rescue missions — even from U.S. allies — show that by giving the military priority, Washington hampered the international humanitarian effort.

Terror Attack: Do Nigerians Deserve To Be Demonised?

By Paul Arhewe ,


The Christmas botched terror attack attempted by Umar Farouk AbdulMutallab, a 23-year-old Nigerian, is not only a condemnable act but one that requires the maximum punishment that goes with such act.
Howbeit, last week, the American State Department in its bid to stiffen security watch on likely terror attack chose to include Nigeria in a watch-list of countries of interest (countries that should be closely monitored to assuage surprise attacks), alongside with 13 other known terrorists-sponsoring countries.
The implication of this measure is that while other countries, especially in the western world would begin to exercise extra caution in dealing with Nigerians travelling to their countries, foreign investors would be dissuaded as they would not want their reputation smeared in indulging with a country under a terror watch-list.
While the actions of U.S. is widely criticised, in this part of the world, many are of the view that the bulk of blame should rest with American government for its intelligence’s failure to avert the failed attack by not acting promptly on the information provided by AdulMutallab’s father two months before the attempt on the U.S. aircraft. The American securities failed to act on the vital information that would have seen AdulMutallab been placed on a no-fly watch list. Though, President Barack Obama has claimed responsibility for this security lapses, this is not enough as cooperation is required from other countries, including Nigeria, in nipping in the bud any future development of terrorist act.
One is tempted to believe that the inclusion of Nigeria in terrorist watch list by U.S. is not based only on the isolated AbdulMutallab botched attack. As a measure to save face, the blames for the terror attack should definitely be shared with others.
In 2001, the convicted Briton shoe bomber, Richard Reid, used the same PETN chemical explosives in a failed attempt to blow up a transatlantic airline. America failed to tag UK a terrorist state and put the country in its watch-list of country of interest; but for a black African state, this tag is well suited. The listing of Nigeria is no doubt an overreaction from the American government, and a delisting would go a long way in averting a show of diplomatic quagmire.
There are glaring facts that the suspect in question was not influenced within the Nigerian borders, but recruited in London, and got the suicide bomber-instinct from his association with an al-Qaida branch in Yemen, which has taken responsibility. The suspect associated with a notorious radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Awlaki has been linked to other attacks, including that carried out by an American army Major Nidal Malik Hasan at the Fort Hood army base in Texas in November 2009.
If AbdulMutallab’s natural parents were in support of his move, they wouldn’t have proceeded to thwart it months before its execution. This is a pointer that Abdulmutallab’s sponsors, as clearly seen, are outside his native country, not within, and a case to show U.S. placement of Nigeria on a watch-list is not a deal fair.
The Yemen government is also trying to save its face from shame as a terrorists- breeding state by claiming the explosives AbdulMutallab used were not from their country but from Nigeria. AbdulMutallab that spent only 23 minutes in Nigeria before embarking on the suicide mission may not have gone to any market in Lagos to buy PETN explosives. The PETN chemical is the basic ingredient in detonating cords used for industrial explosions and can be collected by scraping the insides of the wire, said James Crippin, a Colorado explosives expert. Used in military devices and readily found in blasting caps, the chemical is stable and safe to handle but requires a primary explosive to detonate it. The question is how would the suspect, acting alone, get these explosives within 23 minutes he was in Nigerian soil? Suppose he got it from Nigeria, the fact still remains that those directing his moves were from Yemen. They would surely have arranged the substance for him. While, Nigerian government should not foreclose the premise that collaborator(s) may have aided the suspect within the country, instead of passing blame the Yemeni government should proceed with the ongoing onslaught against terrorists groups that are fortifying their base in this middle-east country.
Nigeria, no doubts has some past experiences of deadly religious uprisings, such as the 1980s Maitatsine sect attack, 2009 Boko Haram bedlam, and the recent Kala-kato crisis in Bauchi. These religious strives may have attracted the attention of America and prompted the decision to tag Nigeria a terrorist sponsoring state, especially when hundreds are killed on a flimsy and baseless religious protest. While it is expected that Nigerian government should address security lapses that give room for nursing internal religious sect, which preaches anti-America and anti-western civilisation, the American government, no doubt should have a definition for international terrorism, which should be different from religious rankling, which is present in every country, especially in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious state as Nigeria. Nigerians are lovers of longevity. Every normal Nigerians, outside those whose mindsets have been polluted and whitewashed by influences outside the shores of the country like AbdulMutallab, would daily pray to outlive the years their great grandfathers lived; it is unimaginable seeing a normal Nigerian fronting to be a suicide bomber. No wonder Nigerians are tagged the happiest people, despite the numerous factors that should make them every second sad.
It is a welcome development for countries, not only U.S., to tighten their airport securities, with newly introduced security measures such as full-body scanning and explosive detection technology, the use of “Puffer” machines, a simple frisk or bomb-sniffing dogs all would likely detect the chemical explosive PETN, as experts disclosed. With this in place, there is the need for countries to cooperate in ensuring a safer world than the move by American government to blacklist Nigeria. While, AbdulMutallab should be made to pay for his sins, as the outcome of a U.S. federal grand jury has indicted him last week on six charges, including one that could put him away for life, a peace- loving country like Nigeria should not be witch-hunted; rather seeking her cooperation in the fight against terror would be to the advantage of humanity.

Climate Change: Africa’s Demands And Its Challenges

By Paul Arhewe,

As world leaders gather for the next two weeks, starting Monday in Copenhagen, Denmark on a major UN climate change summit that would proffer solutions for combating the 21st century monster that is gradually changing the world’s natural habitat, the role of Africa countries in making this a huge success is invaluable. As the Kyoto Protocol’s requirements expire in 2012 world leaders in the summit would forge a new pact to tackle greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. The Kyoto Protocol, which was negotiated in 1997 at the United Nations Climate Change Summit in Japan and ratified in early 2005, seeks to compel the 37 industrialised countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over the five-year period of 2008-2012 to an average of five per cent against the 1990 levels.

Earlier this year African leaders threatened to boycott the Copenhagen summit unless huge aid is given to countries in continent to cope with climate change, arguing that highly industrialize countries in the west and Asia are major promoters of this destructive gas. Among their requests include aid for finance, technology and support for capacity building. Developing nations, also are calling on rich countries to cut their emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020.
Last month, in order to develop a united front, in an emergency summit, 10 members of Africa Union met and agreed on an undisclosed amount (expected to be in trillions of US dollars) to demand during the ongoing talks in Copenhagen.
Africa countries will suffer more from the impact from climate change, as some of the achieved progress and developments in the past decade would be reversed. Also, ecological shocks are predicted to feature in the continent, as an offshoot of the global warming. Estimation from UN Environment Program shows that between 75 million and 250 million people in Africa, as a result of climate change, may face water shortage by 2020. $50 billion annually is needed by the continent to cope with climate change and rising temperatures.

The summit is expected to propose annual fund of $10 billion for the next three years to aid poor countries create strategies to combat climate change. In addition, hundreds of billions of dollars would be needed yearly to set out new energy path and adapt to new climates.

Some African countries, like South Africa, are beginning to show efforts on how to contribute in making less future emissions of greenhouse gas. President Jacob Zuma announced on Monday his country’s plan to cut gas emissions by 42 percent by 2025, on the basis that rich countries meet the requests to provide aid to poor African countries.

Scientists opine that the continuation of climate change would result in grave consequences, with continual rise in temperatures that would lead to extinction of plant and animal species, the flooding of coastal areas, extreme weather conditions, drought and wide spread of pandemic diseases.
As Africa countries seek ways to increase their energy supplies, the challenge is to seek ways to develop clean energy sources. There is a need for collaboration between World Bank and Africa Development Bank to build up framework for the continent’s clean energy development. Also, private investment is required to promote efficient energy source for Africa.
The challenge of adapting to climate change, even after global carbon emissions are reduced, is one that requires a long-term programme, where Africa governments need to systematically integrate adaptation issues in their policies.
The preservation of continent’s vast forest is a major way it can contribute in protecting the global climate. Hence, the continual encouragement and campaigns to discourage deforestation is germane, and a task Africa leaders should champion.

CAMBODIA: SHINAWATRA’S ADVICE AND DIPLOMATIC TIES WITH THAILAND

CAMBODIA: SHINAWATRA’S ADVICE AND DIPLOMATIC TIES WITH THAILAND

By Paul Arhewe,


The ousted Thailand Prime Minister is in news again. Thaksin Shinawatra, this time, is in news not on commentaries concerning his self imposed exile in lieu of corruption charges against him, but that Cambodia, a neighbouring country to Thailand, chooses to overlook his fugitive status and charges to appoint him economic adviser.
This appointment has already started causing diplomat strain between the two Asian nations. Already, both countries have retaliated in closing their embassies, cutting off any diplomatic ties.
Shinawatra, who is on the run following his ouster from premiership by a bloodless military coup in 2006, avoided his country’s request to face corruption charges levelled against his government. He fled Thai in August 2008 before the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions sentence him to two years jail term for unlawfully breaking a conflict of interest law while in power.
The present Thai government in October announced that it would strip Shinawatra of his royal wards and his rank during his service as police officer.
Most of Shinawatra’s allies in government were all sent packing during the heat from the anti-Thaksin protesters who occupied Bangkok’s airport for days; grounding all economic and political activities in the country last year.

Thai government has officially written to Cambodia authorities demanding the extradition of Shinawatra; the latter turned down the request, saying Shinawatra is not a prisoner in its own soil. Cambodia government stated in a document that charges against Shinawatra is “politically motivated” and vowed not to extradite him if he decides to stay in Cambodia or to travel in and out to execute his advisory duties.

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen has gone as far as offering Shinawatra a residence whenever he chooses to assume his advisory post. The Cambodia leader is obviously intervening in Thai’s internal affairs, as his actions and words has confirmed that he will not comply with the extradition treaty with Thailand to make Shinawatra serve his jail term in Thailand.
Hun Sen’s remarks and choice for Shinawatra as economic adviser is seen as provocative and deemed unethical diplomacy towards Thailand. The media in the region are not taking it lightly with him, as it engaged in a face-off with the Prime Minister when he arrived in the venue to chair the 15th ASEAN summit
For appointing Shinawatra economic adviser, Hun Sen is not only meddling into Thai’s domestic affair and threatening its national security but also breaching the agreement reached by Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) community, which prohibits country members from intervening in other countries’ internal affairs. Hun Sen’s actions raises suspicion and to what ulterior motive he intend to achieve.
The Cambodian leader is obviously sacrificing cordial diplomatic ties between the two countries for favouritism to a friend. In his words: "Allowing Thaksin to stay in Cambodia is virtuous behaviour...good friends need to help each other in difficult circumstances,"

Thailand and Cambodia has suffered a strain relationship since June 2008 from the ongoing border conflict over land surrounding a 10th century temple.

The Thai government is not against the appointment as they see it as a private issue between Cambodian government and Shinawatra, but are pushing that he be extradited whenever he sets foot on Cambodia soil. Thai’s Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said the appointment is a Cambodian matter. In his words: "We don't have to analyse anything, the appointment is a private relationship between Cambodia and Thaksin. It hasn't had any impact on us."
"It's not a surprise. Cambodia has previously hired other foreigners as advisers and it did not cause us any problems. We don't have to worry too much, but if Thaksin happens to be in Cambodia then we have to ask for his extradition." added Suthep.
In ordering the recall of Thai ambassador from Cambodia, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said Cambodian government has implicated Thai’s judicial system and effects public sentiment in his country.
However, Vejjajiva insists that the action to recall its envoy is a mere reaction from Thailand and will not significantly affect the relationship of the two Asian countries.
Even thought cross border trade between the countries goes on as normal the Thai government intend to review its cooperation with Cambodia, and calls Cambodia government to explain its actions in relations to Thai’s judicial system.
By the weekend this threat from Thai government, after the recalling of its envoy, create a second blow to its already tensed relationship with Cambodia, where it revoke a memorandum of understanding between the two countries on developing an overlapping maritime area rich in oil and gas reserves in the Gulf Thailand.

Cambodia government sees the whole scenario as an overreaction over its own internal affair. Spokesperson for Cambodia foreign ministry said "The Thai government is trying to mix things up."
The irony of Cambodia’s government position is that it wants Thai to clarify the status of the two countries relationship. It also wants to have a good relationship with Thailand in spite of its glaring actions that is beginning to tear down the already tense relations the neighbouring Asian countries share.
As Obama kicks-off his Asian tour last weekend, this tension between Thailand and Cambodia is one that needs to be resolved, especially as United States and ASEAN seek to mark a milestone in their relationship.

OBAMA: NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WELL DESERVED?

By Paul Arhewe, Online Editor

Less than nine months ago where the world stood still to give accolade to its first global president, another major feat is added to the feathers of American first black President Barack Obama.
Obama is announced, last Friday in a most surprisingly fashion, the winner of this year's Peace Nobel Prize.
Being the humble and gentle man he is, Obama told the world in a cable channel that he is honoured and feels he 'doesn't deserve this award'. His words: "I do not view it as recognition of my own accomplishment. I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of those that have achieved so great feat to be accorded this Nobel Prize".
While many who disqualify him support the aforementioned view, majority see him as worthy to be crowned the world's peace ambassador even within a short space of time when he took over the ruin left in the White House by his predecessor.
Obama winning this esteemed prize is seen by those disqualifying him as the biggest joke of the millennium, and a means to watered-down the value associated with the prize.
Be that as it may, Obama is awarded this prize based on his meaningful bold contributions in four spheres that affect the lives of all humans. This include continual move to global nuclear disarmament, provocative contribution in soliciting support for global climate change and the inspirations many have tapped from him in areas of democracy and good governance. It takes a superhuman to achieve these within short term, especially when many leaders in our part of the world have contributed in debasing the virtues left for spurring development in their countries talk less in fending for global development and peace.
While Obama's contenders for the award, like Zimbabwe's Prime Minister Tsvangirai and former Israeli's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert may have promoted peace in their countries and sub regions, for instance Tsvangirai reneged from his rightful mandate to lead his fellow countrymen for a power deal with the power drunk Robert Mugabe, this is commendable but not a feat that can really measure up to Obama's strides that is not unidirectional but an integrative push for promoting global peace.
Before assuming office January 20, Obama had not only push for peace in Middleeast but back up his words with actions by reversing many peace sapping policies that President Bush championed that led to his disgraceful exit from office.
As a peace ambassador, Obama not only closed the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, detention camp where many dehumanising treatments were melted out to inmates, sometimes based on stereotyped inclination, but a major advocate for respect for human rights and diplomatic moves for combating threats to global peace. Before the entrant of Obama calls have long being on ground for the camp closure without positive response from previous American leaders.
With an extraordinary diplomatic gifting, within short time he had converted many foes of America to her allies. Russia now is treading soft spot with America, and many other Middle East countries, despite the harsh and unfriendly posture President Bush's administration honoured them with, are beginning to mull over expanding their friendship with US.
In his recent visit to Africa, Obama in Cairo told the world that US is opening a new frontier in dealing peacefully with the Arab world. Some of his critics believe that the US president is a good talker without substantial result to commensurate with the former. Again, while it is too early to measure his level of achievement, the direction he is towing is a pointer to the performance he stands to attain.
Some analysts have condemned some of the American president's speech as palliative approach or rounds of moral equivalency, like his speech in Cairo recently where he compared those living in terror in Israel with those Palestinians still waiting for clean water and a state of their own. Such statement is faulted because it bodes ill for any prospect geared towards ensuring peace to reign in the Middle East.
The award, definitely, is given to spur Obama to speed up action in fulfilling those promises and actions already embarked in area of nuclear disarmament and climate change and the safeguarding of global peace. The US president has even acknowledged this in his speech on Friday in respect to the award. His words: "I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations to confront the challenges of the 21st century."
Since more is expected of the American president in area of global peace, and his speeches and actions are trailing this direction then the Nobel Peace award is one that is well deserved and one that will further challenge Obama into doing more for mankind and global peace.

IS SON REALLY SAFEGUARDING NIGERIAN CONSUMERS?

By Paul Arhewe,

Online Editor INL.

In this age where competition in business world is very keen, where manufacturers of products and services continually seek ways in improving their products’ quality in order to maintain their goodwill and continuous consumers’ patronage, the rate at which substandard goods are flooding Nigerian markets is unprecedented.
To make matter worse, the performance of Standards Organisation of Nigeria (SON), the government agency established to regulate standard of products/services delivered within Nigeria and those imported into the country, have remained ineffectual, docile and further aggravates the sufferings of Nigerians by the activities of some of its official with their slapdash deals with businessmen and manufacturers for personal gratification.

While, the intensions of the former military Head of state General Yakubu Gowon in creating the then Nigerian Standards Organisation (NSO) through the ACT 56 of 1971 was for the benefits of all Nigerians, the reformations of the agency by the military regimes of General Olusegun Obansanjo in 1976, Major General Muhammadu Buhari in 1984 and General Ibrahim Babangida in 1990 have seen NSO change only in nomenclature to SON as poor performance underscores its protecting the interest of Nigerian consumers.
Quality of consumable products available in contemporary Nigerian market is a far cry from those available in the 80s and 70s.
Made in Nigeria goods such condensed milks, soft drinks, detergent, leather wear and clothing materials, among other many canned eatables are watered down in bid for the manufacturers to accrue more profits at the detriment of consumers.
This greed for exploiting Nigerians with substandard goods are not only trademark associated with domestic goods; those imported, that hitherto début Nigeria market with high quality are soon diluted as importers connive with foreign manufacturers to make new brand of low quality products exclusively for Nigeria market; where these same substandard prototypes are not permissible in their originating country or other foreign markets.
For instance, an imported men’s roll-on from Dubai when it début Nigeria market was of a high quality when applied can last two days with its fragrance remaining fresh even after taking bath, but today, after six months, the same product when applied after ten-minutes one is not aware it is used. This is just an instance of hundreds of many watered down products Nigeria consumers are subjected to in their everyday living.
Many electronics product in our markets would only pack up after one to two months of their usage, where the original ones are either not available or off-shelf to only astute buyers who are ready to part with higher payment for them.
This matter becomes painful when these same products even in our nearby neighbouring countries like Ghana and other francophone African countries are of higher quality compared to what we get here.
There is another phase to this, while it is expected that these diluted products should be cheaper to the original and standard ones, Nigerians most times end up paying same price as for the original ones. Assuming manufacturers of these products bear increasing costs of production and attempt to hike their prices, so far their qualities are maintained the motives for hiking price would be understandable. But, where there is increase in the prices of substandard products higher than the price of standard ones this does not only portend a clear scam against consumers but also a crime against humanity as the health implication and moral justification for this is in many cases have grave consequence.

At this juncture, the question is how effective is SON in ensuring Nigerian consumers always get the best of quality of what they consume?

The Product Registration Unit of SON was created November 2002, with the function, inter alia, to establish reliable information on quantity, quality, source and origin of products/services manufactured in and/or imported into Nigeria, this include product/services available in any part of Nigerian environment. Also, the agency’s unit has the duty to obtain relevant information on persons and organizations responsible for producing/importing such products/services and the legal status, genuineness or otherwise of such business operations; ensuring and/or facilitating fair-trade practices as a function of standardization; preventing dumping of substandard products/services into Nigeria, thereby facilitating consumer-protection functions.
If this unit of SON is actually performing the above listed functions then our market would not be saturated with substandard products.

One is tempted to believe that the agency carries out products test and measurement unsystematically; depending only on quantitative basis, and secluding quality standardization. If this is not, why does inconsistency in products quality elude the agency’s experts? Or is the agency lacking in proper data management; in filing and recording past quality from those substandard ones available on daily basis in our markets? Does the agency have any monitoring group? If it does, how frequent is monitoring conducted, and what modus operandi is utilized in collecting samples to be tested? Answers to the above questions are germane as they really tell if SON is out there safeguarding the Nigerian consumers’ interest or if some saboteurs among the agency’s staffers have sold their conscience for bribe collection from manufacturers and importers to pass whatever quality they bring forward for testing.

Severally, it is proven that some products imported to Nigeria from other countries do not share same quality with those available in the originating countries where these products are made. Would SON claim ignorant of these facts? Or does the law that established the agency not give it the power to reject products with differing quality from those available in other markets outside Nigeria? If it does, then the agency is really working below par.
Nigeria market is now a known dumping ground for fake and substandard products. The ease for allowing these products to spread and remain in our markets is not only embarrassing to Nigerians but highlight the fact that the country’s protection for consumers is one of the lowest globally.

Are Nigerians Consumer Rights Respected?
Consumers universally posses some rights which manufacturer of goods and services and government agencies for protecting their rights need to respect and protect. Among those recognizable rights include the right to derive satisfaction of basic needs, the right to safety, the right to be informed, the right to choose, the right to be heard, the right to redress and the right to consumer education.
Juxtaposing the aforementioned: consumers’ rights with SON performance for Nigerian consumer, how has the agency fared? Again, the satisfaction derived from the consumption of substandard products would never be wholly satisfying as when quality ones are within consumers reach. For instance, the problem of epileptic power supply in the country; no thanks to Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN), has made the influx from Asian countries substandard generating sets that has added to the suffering of the ordinary Nigerian consumers. How then would users of such nerve-breaking products claim satisfaction from them when they pack up within one to two months from the date of purchase, even though they are labelled as new?
The presence of SON’s officials assessing and monitoring these products daily on our borders and every entry points in the country, still these fake products still elude their assumable vigilant presence. While the above scenario gives credence to the fact that the right of consumers to satisfaction and safety is consistently violated, the level of information and education available to consumers in this part of the world is either not available or sparsely spread.
The widening gap between the rich and poor in the Nigerian society, where the middle class is not visibly seen, has left the poor having a forced choice of buying substandard products as a way to make ends meet (which in most cases do not meet). As their choice for substandard products are readily ripped off as they end up spending three times or much more the price for genuine ones.

Role Of Information Dissemination In Consumer Protection

A well-informed consumer in a country is a vital tool in expediting effective protection. The Communication Publicity and Marketing Unit has the responsibility for creating awareness in ensuring that Nigerians are informed on the statutory activities of SON. The outlets available for this unit of SON in implementing this onerous task of awareness creation for consumers’ protection include, inter alia, the use of jingles to create awareness, preparations of press releases/briefings on the agency’s activities, participation in Trade Fairs/Exhibitions, participations in Workshops and Seminars.
In this era of SERVICOM where Federal government has entered into a social contract with the Nigerians in order to make her citizen have right to demand good services from its entire establishments including its agencies, with relatively low level of consumer awareness in the country, Nigerians have the responsibility to demand from SON on its stake in improving the quality of goods available to them and how well their rights as consumers are safeguarded.
Poor consumer education in the country has made many users of consumable products such as beverages, confectionaries, toiletries among others, from discerning the difference between expired goods and healthy ones. Recently, the Zonal coordinator of SON in Borno and Yobe states identified expired products as the major challenge the zone face. Markets in these North-Eastern States are flooded with expired products with some having two or three year’s expiration. Consumers in these states would everyday risk their health as they consume them, especially as there is little effort from agencies such as SON to conduct regular and wide reaching consumer education.
Many Nigerians are not aware that there are standard expected of manufacturing companies to stick to as their produce their products. When there is no awareness how can consumer claim their rights? Even, the existence of SON is elusive to many Nigerians.

Is overlapping statutory jurisdiction the problem?
In time past SON has accused NAFDAC of usurping on its oversight functions; where the former DG of the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) Dora Akunyili and SON’s DG Dr. John Ndunuba Akanya were at loggerhead over which agency should operate in some area of jurisdiction for consumers protection. While, the overall functions of the above two agencies, including others like the Consumer Protection Council (CPC) are to see that Nigerian consumers are adequately protected, there is nothing wrong for them putting their manpower resources in getting this task effectively done, without recourse to time and resources wasting on operational jurisdictions, which are normally stated in the parliamentary Act that usually brought their creation.
SON a member of International Organization for Standardization (ISO) should wake up to its statutory responsibility by ensuring that global standard applies in all cases during the execution of its statutory functions without bending the rule in any given circumstances, so as to make quality products and services available in the Nigeria market. The agency’s officials should be closely monitored against collecting kick-backs in approving substandard products.
While it is germane for government to make distinctive clarification of the operational jurisdiction of these agencies there is then a need for an overhaul of SON, especially as government seeks to make Nigeria a leading economy in the comity of nations, with its 20:20:20 economy policy.

South Africans Post Aparthied Xenophobia

By Paul Arhewe, Online Editor

Many recurring incidences in time past have shown that our South African brethrens have consistently display aversion for Nigerians living in their country. This prop up tendency to set aside the brotherhood characteristics we share, and forgetting the past how Nigerians have supported the fight against apartheid when it lasted.
In May last year, some South Africans embarked on xenophobic attacks that were aimed at foreigners, including Nigerians who they perceive as competitors for the dearth jobs and business opportunities that should be their birthrights. About 23 people were killed, though, President Yar’Adua admitted that no Nigerian was killed, but affirmed that properties and business centres belonging to Nigerians were burnt and destroyed. However, information disclosed in some other sources show that some Nigerians on their way to church and those seeking refuge in places of worship were actually among those victims. With these constant attacks on Nigerians living in South Africa, it shows some South Africans posses short memories and myopic sense of reasoning on the fact that their fellow indigenous brethrens are not only living in Nigeria and earning their livelihood, but that reprisals could easily erupt.
Recently, the trio criminals who murdered the South African reggae legend Lucky Dube, before court gave its verdict for life sentences for the crime, made statement that should not be seen as too flabbergasting, but one that has since characterised the path many South Africans have chosen against Nigerians and other foreigners in their country. The trio admit that they had thought Lucky Dube was a Nigerian that was why they attack to rob and kill him. Some South Africans reacted by saying “does Dube look like a Nigerian”? This act alone is enough to justice the height of hatred some South Africans have for Nigerians. Assuming those criminals were aware Dube was not a Nigerian, by now we would still be enjoying the presence of one reggae legend that is cherished globally. This is to say those criminals did not only kill the reggae legend but also killed a Nigerian, for this was their motive of attacking and murdering him in the presence of his little son.
Nigeria openly fought against apartheid in South Africa while it lasted. Our government provided safe haven for many present South African leaders who were on self imposed exile when the heat from apartheid was still hot. I remember many releases of Nigerian musicians in the 80s and early 90s were not complete without a track or two dedicated to the fight against apartheid. The Ras Kimonos, The Evi Ednas, The Orits Wilikis, The Mandators, and their likes championed the anti-apartheid course for blacks in South Africa. If Nigerians possess the same hatred that is assuming great propensity in some South Africans, the reprisal of many abuses and death of Nigerians in time pass would have brought a colossal damage to the existing brotherhood in our black race. Nigerians have large heart for welcoming strangers, and in most cases giving them more respect and favours to the detriment of their fellow indigenes.
Where did this hate culture spring from in South Africans? The root of hatred for Nigerians is not tied to a singular factor. In his article ‘Why Does the black community hate Nigerians’ one Dr.Odaibo traced this to the overbearing self confidence that Nigerians possess. Other blacks with their different experiences and backgrounds are suspicious of Nigerians, and thus become uncooperative and non-supportive to their course. This goes on to breed the growth of loathsome reactions against this overbearing self confidence that Nigerians display. Nigerians whichever country they reside stand to quickly blend with the system and display ample understanding of the societal workings, by virtue of their education, experiences and worldview. To this, other blacks have interpreted as sign of too much aggression. Does it mean Nigerians posses the aptitude to get acculturated better and faster than other Africans, and this is a source for envious loathsomeness?
Another reason for this hate culture is traceable to the corrupt and fraudulent tendencies of some Nigerians that have smeared the rest of us, which is now a basis for stereotyping.
Outside Nigerian borders, the first impression people form when one discloses his or her identity as a Nigerian is that you have an inclination to defraud, and special care and attention should be applied in dealing with you. This is also not uncommon with our black brethren from South Africa and other African countries. One Nigerian professor on a trip to Cape Town board a taxicab, and the driver knowing his identity told him in South Africa the Somalis businessmen are well respected because of their honesty than their Nigerian counterparts. The wide spread of scams and ‘419’ activities had never helped Nigerian image in this regard; as internet frauds is growing in proportions, where many Nigerian youths spend all day in cyber cafes and in their internet connected systems at home seeking for ‘mugu’ to hoodwink.
In the real sense of it, the perception formed from this stereotyping of Nigerians as fraudulent is fallacious. Most Nigerians are hardworking people with the sense to excel through diligence and honesty at their given professions. Nigerians maybe loud and assertive in wherever they find themselves, this should not be misconstrued for vulgarity. They may choose to conduct their activities and arguments in a rambunctious manner; such should not be used to becloud their real potentials of strong intellect, fun, sense of humour, which unusually characterise their loud partying with lot of show off. To those South African brethren who chose to hate, their mentality and psychologies may have being fragmented by their previous experiences during the suppressive colonial/ slavery apartheid era? This has gone a long way to given them a culture which is subservient and disposed to fright during competition they see coming from Nigerians curving a living from their soil. Truly Nigerians also tasted the bitterness of colonialism, but the hangovers of its effect is having little toll on our contemporary way of living. Nigerians are known to be competitive and enterprising. Our South African brethren should not take this for hostility. It is admonished that ability to cohabit and have an open heart to enterprising foreigners is a way to building and developing a strong and vibrant economy. No country is an island to itself; that foreigners are in South Africa should be seen as an avenue for consolidating and developing the different economic sectors of the country and not to wreck it. I think if this perception is formed among those South Africans on the path of loathsomeness, not only would African economy greatly benefit from this, but xenophobic attacks would be a forgone issue in the country. Also I think Dora’s ‘Nigeria Rebranding’ programme is a weapon to be extensively apply in dousing the effect of negative perceptions used in stereotyping honest Nigerians outside the shores of our country.