The crisis in Ukraine has re-ignited a lot of bad blood between Russia and the West, each trying to be the moral authority over the other. Putin's Russia eventually gained Crimea for itself, and the Eastern provinces of Ukraine which are mostly pro-Russian threatened to follow in the footsteps of Crimea and seek a referendum.
Up to this moment, Putin has been hailed by many as a master tactitian, and deservingly so. He had managed to outsmart the West (but not the sanctions of course), and was (and still is) in the process of building strong alliances with other 'not-so-west-friendly nations'.
The downing of Malaysian flight MH17 is certainly a big problem for his government and his power base. On board the plane were 285 civilians,
- 154 Dutch nationals, 27 Australians, 23 Malaysians, 11 Indonesians
- Six Britons, four Germans, four Belgians, three from the Philippines and one Canadian
- All 15 of the crew were Malaysian
I'm just wondering how the authorities of the countries whose nationals died in the crash would react. They would probably join the anti-Putin camp (if it is confirmed that his people had anything to do with it).
The plane went down in rebel controlled area, so it's difficult not to assume that they were behind thye plane's take down.
DISCLIMER: THIS PICTURE IS THE PROPETY OF THE DAILY MAIL
Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy was brought in for questioning in connection with the 'influence peddling' charges brought up against him. The 59 year old is accused of throwing his weight at the time unto the justice system for in formation.
It is alleged that Sarkozy was worried about the behaviour of his parties elite, as there was an investigation into some of the practices of he and his party mates.
Prosecutors were seeking to establish whether Sarkozy promised a top-level job to a magistrate in Monaco in return for information as to whether corruption charges brought up against him would go to trial. As usual, Sarkozy denies any wrong doing and says the interrogation was a 'political probe'. Sarkozy was subjected to 15 hours of questioning, the first of it's kind for any French President.
Sarkozy was hoping for a comeback in 2017, after losing to Francois Hollande in what was seen by many as a disgraceful defeat. The sudden interrogation comes after Sarkozy's lawyer and two magistrates were arrested and put under formal investigation just a few hours earlier. Under French law, being sent before the court would be the next step before a possible formal investigation against a suspect, but this step almost always never leads to trial, especially against high-ranking individuals like a former president.
Sarkozy had been hoping to benefit from the disfunctional state of his party, and it's lack of leadership to be their presidential candidate for 2017. It should be noted that his centre-right UMP party is itself involved in several allegations. He also saw the dismal approval ratings of current president Francois Holland (last poll put him at 17% overall approval) as an opportunity to re-take the Palais de l'Elysées. This probe has obviously tarnished his road to the presidency.
Over the years, Sarkozy hof scandals. First was the scandal l'Oréal heiress Liliane Bettencourt where it is alleged Sarkozy received envelopes full of cash (illegal donations) from the Mme Bettencourt to the tune of tens of thousands of euros.
There is also the Gaddafi scandal where he is accused of having received up to the sum of $70mn (the amount differs according to the source) from the late Lybian leader for his campaign. French law prevents any candidate from receiving cash payments above £6300. It was information concerning the investigation of this case that he sought when he allegedly 'abused' his power. He may have just proven himself. Ghadafi's payment is alleged to have come through bank accounts in Switzerland and Panama.
It is alleged that in formation aobtained by tapping the former president's phone and listening to his conversations with his lawyer Thierry Herzog showed that he'd been 'abusing his power'. Investigators were looking to gather evidence to support allegations he received money from gaddafi for his 2007 campaign. When he discovered his phone had been compromised, he acquired another name under the pseudonym Paul Bismuth to safely communicate with his lawyers.
Ever since the interrogation, his supporters have come out in support of him.
The Ukraine Crisis simply showed the world that the stand-off that came about as a result of the Cold War. For some time, things seemed to have normalised and tensions seemed to have calmed down, but the Ukrainian crisis and the Referendum of Crimea and it's eventual decision to join Russia unearthed old wounds and showed just how polarized and divided the world still is. The West on the one hand considers the 'actions of Russia' as unconstitutional and a violation of International Law. Russia on the other hand has blatantly denied having anything to do with the crisis in Ukraine. The result, a Russia under the weight of heavy sanctions, a russian president with about 70% approval rating.
The current situation has created a sort of East vs West scenario which is totally bad for global growth and co-operation. Here's how. First of all, at the United Nations Security Council, India and China refused to support a declaration of unilateral sanctions on Russia. It should come as no surprise, as both countries also have their own territorial disputes and they expect Russia to give them ir's support against their adversaries if it ever comes to that. India has has territorial diputes with Pakistan over the Kashmir region, while China on its part has a long list of territorial disputes out of which it would love to come out victorious, so it only makes sense that both India and China refused to support unilateral sanctions on Russia.
As if that wasn't enough, both Russia and China vetoed a UN resolution to impose sancrions on Syria, a decision which appalled not only the West, but also most of the rest of the world. The Sino-Russian partnership was formally cemented when Russia and China signed a $400bn gas deal which spans 30 years. It is true that the terms of this deal are bad for Russia, but there's no denying the fact that it gives Vladimir Putin and a sanction plagued Russia great leverage over a West which is increasingly 'disgusted' with Russia's actions on the international stage. To add to that, this deal has the potential to disrupt global energy markets vigorously.
That is the Eastern part of the story. The West on it's part has been beefing up its alliances too. This is seen in the Europe vist of US president Barack Obama. The US and its allies have since the Crimea crisis, sought to prove to Russia that it hasn't gone out of their control, and in doing so, have sought to get as many nations on their side as possible. It is no doubt, the US congress was quick to uplift the travel ban they had placed on Narendra Modi even though as the leader of India, he now has automatic travel immunity. Modi, now the Prime Minister of India was issued a travel ban during his time as Chief Minister of the indian state of Gujarat for failing to stop the slaughter of muslims by hindus.
This was seen by many as a sign of desperation, as the US needs a strong ally in Asia to counter the growing might of China.
If anything, the Ukraine crisis has deeply divided the world along geographical, political and ideological lines, and it remains to be seen how these divisions would affect the livelihoods of ordinary citizens.
DISCLAIMER: THIS PICTURE IS THE PROPERTY OF WAR NEWS UPDATES
Africa has always been a troubled continent for as long as we can remember. You remember thye ancient empires of Mali, Songhai and Kotoko? You remember the wars they used to indulge in? You remember the tribal wars in Cameroon in the 1800's and how deadly they were? Those were 200 years ago. In recent times, we've had civil wars in Liberia, Congo, Mali, Central African Republic, Sudan and Somalia; talkless of the Arab Spring that rocked Northern Africa. Africa it seems, is a battle field. Several wars have forced numerous men, women and children to flee their homes, and even their countries and become refugees in other countries, often with poor living conditions.
Thing is, with the exception of the violence in the Central African Republic, these were mostly wars influenced by disputes over each faction's share of the national wealth, or who was the rightful leader of the country, or a leader who had been voted out of office but refused to leave power, or some other reason. This is fast changing. Nowadays, it's about religion.
Conflicts have now become strongly linked to religious beliefs, and make no mistake, it's not an entirely islamic thing. The Anti-Balaka militia in the Central African Republic are a Christian extremist militia group that was formed after the rise of former president Michel Djotodia to power; and they bof course, have carried out serious hate crimes against muslims in that region. That of course, is just a domestic, and of course a soft example. Look further East and West, and you get an idea of what the real deal is.
Perhaps, the most deadly of them all, are Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al-Shabaab in Somalia and Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb (Algeria). These two groups, both with strong ties to Al-Qaeda, have been responsible for some of the most brutal attacks on african soil. What's most disturbing is that unlike the Anti-Balaka, they seem to have strong internatonal backers and sponsors; and still, their attacks are not due to a particular injustice by a particular government. They seem to be out to att(ack any state that is vulnerable. In fact, their foreign links are so strong that they can afford to recruit fighters from foreign natioàns as far as the United States and the United Kingdom. I remember watching this interview on CNN where a mother in Oregon, USA, who's son suddenly disappeared for months only to call her one day to say he was in fine and in Somalia. This guy had come into contact with one of the radical muslim clerics and had been radicalised and brainwashed into becoming a fighter. Unfortunately for this mother, she only recognised her son's body when she was watching the news one day. He'd been killed in battle, and his body lay in the streets. As for Boko Haram, they are now recruiting youn fighters from Niger.
So why is this religious extrepmism skyrocketing in Africa? That's actually a very difficult question to answer. Take for example Al-Shabaab, one of the branches of Al-Qaeda, it's name in arabic means 'youth' or 'youngsters', and it formally joined Al-Qaeda in 2012 as a cell, and since then, it has been responsible for some of the deadliest attacks in East Africa. For example
-May 2014: Suicide attack on Somali hotel
-February 2014: Attack on Somali presidential palace
-September 2013: Attack on Westgate Mall in Kenya
Boko Haram on its part means 'Western Education Is A sin'. Take a look at some of the activities of Boko Haram in the not-so-distant past:
-06 May 2014: Attack on northern village killing hundreds
-May 2014: Attack on Borno killing 200 people
-April 2014: Attack in Abuja killing 71 people
-April 2014: Attack on boarding school, and kidnapping 270 girls
-August 2011: Attack on UN building in Abuja, killing 26
-June 2011: Attack on Nigeria Police Headquarters in Abuja.
As shown by the timeline, both groups are out ton kill, and both groups have as mission, the implementation of sharia law in their countries of origin, and in the whole of Africa. It comes as no surprise that Boko Haram kidnapped over 270 girls from a boarding school in northern Nigeria, and the leader of the group, Abubakr Shekau promised to sell them because 'Allah told him to do so'. This is a clear sign of muslim extremism and radicalism.
So why has extremism been on the rise in Africa? It's really difficult to answer this question. It may seem safe to assume that it is as a result of the growing prevalence of islam in Africa, but that may be misleading. Islam in itself is an amazing religion, but it is often misinterpreted by many people for several reasons. Ufortunately, these are usually people who have the power and authority to influence the thoughts and views of young people who are always the target of terrorist organizations. Fareed Zakaria, host of CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS once said on his show that if you just look across the world, you'll find Islamic Centres, sponsored and maintained with Saudi oil money, and their mission, to promote radicalism. It seems the Saudis believe the easiest way to gain influence in the world is by jeopardizing as many governments as possible. Just for a fact, Saudi Arabia took over from Qatar as the number one sponsor of the Syrian rebels. This sponsorhip of terrorism is what has led many analysts to believe that Saudi Arabia is the main sponsor of Al-Qaeda, and hence, Boko Haram and Al-Shabaab.
It could also be said that poor economic conditions, and high unemployment breed radicalism and extremism. A case in point is the North of Nigeria, where a majority of the over 60 percent of Nigerians who reportedly live in extreme poverty are based. It is often seen as one of the regions that have benefitted the least from Nigeria's fast growing economic wealth. Somalia is no exception. It is one of the most arid and barren lands in Africa, with some of the most arid conditions and some of the most barren lands in Africa. Couple this with the extremely high levels of illiteracy and unemployment in such areas, and you realise that it is really easy for young men in such areas to be brainwashed. The World Bank estimated in 2011, that Northern Nigeria had the world's highest illiteracy level and that poverty remains high in Nigeria the growing wealth
It is also worth noting that these groups usually originate from areas that have been neglected by governments, or oare strongly opposed to the ruling government. This could be the case with Boko Haram. It becomes confusing, when you cobsider the fact that during their April attack in Abuja, Boko Haram killed many muslims too. As for Al-Shabaab, they have said the Westgate Mall attack was revenge for a number of reasons, one of which is the presence of kenyan troops in Somalia, which they see as their territory.
The presence of weak governments, with weak armies in many of these territories is also of particular concern. Take for example, the high rates of religious violence in Lybia after the fall of Ghadafi. The same can be said of the present administration in Abuja. It ponders me that Cameroon, which shares boundary with Cameroon, and is not nearly as rich as Nigeria has been able to contain Boko Haram, prevented them from entering its territoy and even gone as far as intercepting the flow of a shipment of arms to Boko Haram militants.
Whatever the case, we can all accept that unless an all in clusive solution is found, these attacks would only continue, and would become deadlier.
EGEOGHO CARLSON KIMBI
THE CHANGING FACE OF GLOBAL
POLITICS
So the U.S. and the EU have imposed sanctions on russian officials and even a bank
linked to Putin. Every once in a while, we see a leader who gives
Western countries a hard time, but it's not very usual we see one who
does it with so much tact, skill, wisdom and success. The bad news for
the West is, this time there are two: Vladimir Putin of Russia and Xi
Jinping of China. The people of Crimea voted
96% in favour of re-joining Russia.
The West calls the Referendum
illegal; but wasn't it the same referendum the West supported in Kosovo,
Malvinas(The Falklands) and Sudan despite criticism? Why the double
standards then? To make matters worst for the Ukraine and better for
Russia, Donetsk now wants a referendum to join Russia. Trust me Putin is
certainly doing something right. As for the sanctions imposed, they
have been laughed at in Russia. Anyone who followed Vladimir Putin's
address in Parliament would have noticed that he had(and still has) the
overwhelming support of the Russian Duma, especially the women. Infact,
some Russian officials came out and said they would love for their names
to be included on the list of those sanctioned by the West, because it
would be a sign of Patriotism.
As for the effects of these sanctions,
the russian rouble is down at record lows against the U.S dollar and the
russian stock market plunged. Moreover, the top russian oligarchs lost
close to $6 billion in the first week alone. That's just one part, now
let's look at the other part: Vladimir Putin won the presidential
elections by 65% of the votes, but since his sending of troops into
Crimea, his approval ratings have soared to 72%. What this implies is
that even those who were formally opposed to him now support his
actions. This is good news for him. Now compare that to the approval
ratings of these othe three leaders: Barack Obama 40%, David Cameron 39%
and Francois Hollande 17%. Who's winning here?. But I did notice one
striking thing during Barack Obama's press conferences defending the
sanctions. That usual charisma, eloquence, bullishness and glow we have
become used to, was totally lacking. It was almost like he was just
imposing those sanctions under some form of obligation. Here's my
interpretation: This is a guy who came to power under a number of
ideals, but now he's tired of western double standards. He may well just
be trying to please war-hungry Republicans like John McCain and Lindsey
Graham. Sorry Barack, you're just 'another' U.S president. Another
thing I realised is that the U.S-France-UK-Germany alliance works out
mostly in America's favour. Look at these examples: NSA tapping Angela
Merkel's phone, NSA spying on EU delegates, Victoria Nullan saying f***
the EU... Maybe the EU should consider whether it's people like that
alliance. I also notice the misuse of the statement 'international
community'. Nowadays, it's just used to mean the U.S and it's allies.
The U.S has very little to loose from sanctioning trade with Russia,
because U.S-Russia trade stands at $40 billion, but E.U-Russia trade
stands at almost $500 billion. The E.U must realise that the sanctions
would hurt both ways, but not very the U.S. The U.S has very little to
loose. Take a look: 40% of French, Italian and Spanish; 55% of German;
95% of Hungarian and Polish gaz comes from Russia. What happens if Putin
directs his pipes to China, India and Africa? Riots in Europe. Perhaps,
Putin now realizes he needs China and Africa more; and perhaps, he now
realizes he has the political and economic capital to cause political
turmoil in Europe. Perhaps too, he now realizes that there are
consequences to every action.
