Placing the African youth at the heart of the food security debate

A protest rally in Pakistan’s capital Islamabad earlier this week was hushed up by the government as an insignificant move of opposition parties against the civil and military establishment.

It was all but an insignificant move on the political arena in the country where the voice of the masses is fast diminishing amid louder shouts of the elites. This public rally was against a draconian law that has been denying very basic rights to millions of people. The Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) residents in the northwest of Pakistan continue to live under the British-era colonial law in this age of postmodernism, where the world is witnessing a surge in movements for more freedom and rights.

The extent of discrimination towards the Pashtun tribesmen in Pakistan is unparalleled. When people from here see inauguration of metro train services and a variety of other developments in cities like Lahore, Karachi and Islamabad and then return to their mud homes and dusty streets – where even basic health, education and employment opportunities are literally non-existent – they are very likely to tilt toward frustration and militancy and rebellion.

In clear contrast to the rest of Pakistan, this large swath of land is ruled by the government, particularly its army with an iron rod. And, the dejected tribesmen here remain on their mercy for very basic needs, over a century after the British first imposed the Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR) in 1901.

The FATA area, close to the size of Belgium, is governed with rules that categorically state that three basic rights; namely the right to request a change to a conviction in any court, the right to legal representation and the right to present reasoned evidence are not applicable to its residents. Furthermore, it permits collective punishment of family or tribe members for crimes of individuals, and denies the locals many basic rights provided to the rest of Pakistanis elsewhere in the country.

The representatives of Wazir, Afridi, Momand, Orakzai, Mehsud, Bajur and other tribes have long been pushing the Pakistani government to immediately repeal this law, but they are confronted with a rather cold and cunning response from the ruling quarters.

A longstanding proposal for reforms and likely a merger of FATA into the Khyber Pakthunkhwa province – where its residents would at least fall under the jurisdiction of the country’s Constitution – seems to have hit a snag as the army and political groups in the country continue to engage in wrangling for their own vested interests.

Photo: The Wise Waziris

Living in countries where democracy has been the foundations of society for decades, it’s hard to fathom what it might feel like to head to the polls to vote for a president who will precede Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Africa’s first female president and Liberia’s symbol of democracy.  

Lines outside polling stations grew ceaselessly Tuesday night as the elections day came to a close. And while the freedom to vote in a country that until 11 years ago was under vicious civil wars is a cause for celebration, with over 20 candidates running for the position in office, analysts believe no one will win with a straight 50% majority vote. 

“For the first time in three generations we will be transferring presidential authority democratically and peacefully from one elected leader to another” Sirleaf said the night before the election. For the first time in Liberian history, the country is also managing its own elections, without the help of the UN. 

Tuesday may have been a somewhat peaceful election day, yet the candidates on choice seem to stand for a political reality vastly different from that of Sirleaf’s 12 year tenure in office, during which time she was also awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Leading the polls are Prince Johnson, former rebel leader who played a big role in the First Liberian Civil War and is widely known for his capture, mutilation and murder of former President Samuel Doe. Another candidate running for the high seat is former international football player George Weah, who has been sitting in the Senate since 2014. But no hopeful female successor is amongst the male heavy candidate line – for the time being, Sirleaf remains the first and only president in African history. 

During her time as Liberia’s President, Sirleaf stabilised a country that has otherwise suffered from tumultuous civil wars, dating back decades. Prior her democratic election in 2006, the role of the president was often chosen by either corrupt elections, or simply the murdering of one ruler by the next. Another challenge for Sirleaf during her presidency was the collapse of Liberia’s health service after the catastrophic outbreak of the West African virus of Ebola, where Liberia was among the countries worst affected between 2013 to 2016. 

According to the polls, over 2 million citizens will vote for a leader who promises to stabilise Liberia’s economy and boost access to electricity; in conjunction many of the country’s women have set camps outside one of Monrovia’s busiest streets in a collective pray that this power shift brings continued peace. 

What Tuesday’s elections will bring to one of the world’s poorest countries, where approximately 64% of the population live below the poverty line, is still unknown. But what is certainly needed is a leader who will preserve the immeasurable stability and rhetoric of peace brought on by a women who must never be forgotten. 

The Nobel Prize Committee has awarded this year’s Peace Prize to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), a coalition of campaigners from over 100 countries that works towards achieving a total ban on nuclear weapons.

In a time when global concern over nuclear war is at its highest level for decades, the Oslo-based committee is sending an important message to leaders in Washington and Pyongyang.

The prize recognises ICAN’s effort in drawing attention to the disastrous consequences of this kind of weapon. The organisation played a key role in the negotiations that led to the United Nations signing an historic Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons last June. However, the world’s nine biggest nuclear powers: the US, Russia, France, the UK, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea, boycotted the treaty. It's now hoped that this year’s Nobel Peace Prize could help pressurise countries who haven´t signed the treaty, with the next step involving the nuclear-armed states.

Because of today's increasingly high risks, as the fallout between the US and North Korea escalates and with American president Donald Trump threatening to abandon the nuclear deal reached with Iran, the prize's award is timely. However, tensions have not stopped rising: in a period of just twenty months, Kim Jong-un has released ten mid-range ballistic missiles and overseen three nuclear tests. The White House's response could not be less conciliatory with Trump promising "fire and fury never seen before in the world."

If leaders of nuclear nations continue clinging to the outdated idea that such weapons provide security, it is crucial that citizens increase their fight to assert an opposing view: that aggressive foreign policy jeopardises a country’s security and can lead to consequences of unspeakable proportions.

It is therefore clear, that nuclear nations cannot be expected to assume the role of peace makers. Pressure from civil society, enhancing social awareness and increased media pressure must be used to prevent nuclear proliferation spiralling out of control. ICAN activists work through these means and their effort today is more important than ever.

Burundi's inability to keep its house in order is an open secret. In one of the most atrocious incidences in the East African region, during a period of just two years, over 2,000 people have been killed and over half a million displaced from their homes and forced to seek cover in neighbouring countries.

In April 2015, Burundian President Pierre Nkurunziza declared he would vie for a third term in office; a move that goes against the constitutional provisions that allow a maximum of two terms. Needless to say, this triggered a bloodbath occasioned by indiscriminate and frequent killings, arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, torture and rape.

Over 100 journalists have fled the country since the war broke for fear of their lives. The climax of the atrocities happened last month when police opened fire on a group of refugees peacefully demonstrating to have their country and its sanity restored. At least 39 of them were killed, including a 10 year old girl. President Nkurunziza’s government remains unmoved and has blocked all channels of engagement with regional and international actors.

Attempts by the East Africa Community mediating team, UN Security Council, the Human Rights Council's Commission of Inquiry and the African Union to ameliorate the situation has hit a dead end. The country has also withdrawn from the International Criminal Court as a way of shielding itself from prosecution on crimes against humanity.

The killings and torture however continue unabated and have threatened to return the country to the civil war that claimed over 350,000 lives between 1993 and 2005. Yet the international community has all the resources to stop this. The East African Community and the African Union, two bodies that President Nkurunziza retreats to enforce the sovereignty of Burundi should crack the whip and force him to understand that a state cannot be sovereign when its people live in fear.

Guided by the 2015 Peace and Security Council resolutions, the African Union should institute targeted sanctions on the holders of the highest office responsible for the mass atrocities, while forcing Burundi's government to allow deployment of AU human rights observers and military experts. The UN and the international community must also impose strict and targeted sanctions on anyone mentioned in the perpetration of crimes against humanity.

These are extraordinary times in the country and they call for a change in modus operandi if the world wants to avoid yet another genocide, because this has all the hallmarks of one.

Photo: IRC - Please, support!

It begins with protests against police brutality, against institutional violence on black people. It goes into public areas, kneeling during national anthems. It then develops into far-reaching debates about society and culture. Black lives matter. Blue lives matter. Black people aren't safe. Police aren't safe. Why must black men die at the hands of police? Why can't black people just get in line?

We're all familiar with the debate and the ways in which identity politics has thrust discussions headlong into areas which are riddled with difficulty. Whether that means legitimate concerns about 'who' gets to speak on an issue, to more specious claims of people being equal in poverty. Inequality, social inequality, injustice and mistreatment predicated on race and ethnicity are real. They are historically real, and persist today in forms of political marginalisation as well as economic isolation. The stats are all there: cycles of poverty and imprisonment, held together by prejudice.

Yet, the FBI deems it necessary to label Black identity activists as a potential threat to safety. Rather than tackling the structural causes of grievance, the FBI has deemed the grievance a problem of 'perception', and is calling those activists violent. 

"The report, dated August 2017 and compiled by the Domestic Terrorism Analysis Unit, said: 'The FBI assesses it is very likely Black Identity Extremist (BIE) perceptions of police brutality against African Americans spurred an increase in premeditated, retaliatory lethal violence against law enforcement and will very likely serve as justification for such violence.' Incidents of 'alleged police abuse' have 'continued to feed the resurgence in ideologically motivated, violent criminal activity within the BIE movement'."

Although certainly there will be dangerous elements in the movement, there are legitimate concerns which are being brushed aside; in the context of Trump's America, with its white supremacist celebrations, this is a highly worrying development. 

Spain is experiencing its greatest political crisis of the last 40 years, with the Catalan secessionist rebellion strongly threatening the foundations of the state as it was designed in its Transition to Democracy, conducted after the death of dictator Francisco Franco.

This pact brought peace and democracy, but did not guarantee political stability in a very complex country, which is still divided between strong ideological and territorial fractures.

In the Spanish Civil War, unlike in World War II, "the wrong side won", as put by historian Eric Hobsbawm, dragging the country to a fierce fascist dictatorship that lasted for almost 40 years. However, the greater tragedy is that Spanish fascism has never been completely defeated, not even during the Transition. Back then, progressive political forces were not able to push Franco's heirs out of power, limiting themselves to an agreement with them in the pacto de olvido, the pact of forgetting, whereby past crimes were pardoned without reaching the courtroom.

Thus, Spanish democracy has never been able to completely bury the legacy of its former dictator and authoritarianism lingers in the political and social spheres. Franco himself is buried and glorified in the Valley of the Fallen, a huge mausoleum that looks down on Madrid, which has had repeated calls for its closure and continuous rejection by the right-wing Popular Party (PP), founded by members of Franco’s cabinet.

Whenever PP is in power, authoritarian features come to the fore, especially during state crises, such as today in Catalonia, where the Madrid Government did not hesitate in its use of force in trying to prevent the independentist referendum. But antidemocratic actions have previously been used, such as in the so-called "gag law" that encourages censorship and is in constant recentralising nationalist attempts to limit autonomous communities’ powers; reminiscent of the Franco times when languages ​​and regional institutions were totally prohibited.

The proliferation of authoritarian behaviour has culminated in Catalans losing patience. If, a few years ago, their ambition was to achieve nationhood status within the Spanish State, today this has proliferated to demands for outright independence.

The Catalan crisis underpins the fragility of Spain’s Transition. So far, the regime is responsible for drafting the 1978 Constitution and the return of a highly criticised monarchy. However, the model has been exhausted and now only a new transition led by progressive forces can turn Spain into a tolerant and openly democratic country, where Catalonia can once again feel at home.

Unfortunately, the Popular Party, although stained by endless corruption cases, continues to win votes in the rest of Spain due to its hard stance on Catalan secession, while the independentist sector is strengthened by Madrid's repression and lack of dialogue. Therefore, both gain from maintaining the conflict rather than achieving a peaceful resolution. To stay in power, current political leaders prefer to stir up hatred, putting the region at risk of escalating violence with unpredictable consequences.

If you thought the Shia Hazara minority wasn't suffering enough in Pakistan and Afghanistan now the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are exploiting their children for Tehran’s strategic aims in the Syria war.

In a distressing confirmation of the otherwise buzzing topic, the Human Rights Watch has now categorically charged Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) with recruiting Afghan children, as young as 14 and living in Iran, to enter fight in Syria. The IRGC is supervising the Fatemiyoun Division, an exclusively Afghan armed group supported by Iran to aid the Assad regime in Damascus.

This reputed rights body has come up with solid and undeniable evidence of at least eight minor Afghans thrown by Iran into the flames of war in Syria, where they all lost their lives. The evidence presented by the Human Rights Watch (HRW) in a report issued on October 1st is based on the tombstone epitaphs of these child soldiers inside Iran. Middle East director at the HRW Sarah Leah Whitson has described the Iranian regime's manipulation of the Afghan children as "preying on vulnerable immigrant and refugee children", amounting to indisputable war crimes.

It was equally frustrating to note these frightening accounts fell on deaf ears in practically all relevant quarters of the world, even among the parties to the conflict, and failed to stir any engaging debates or proposed call to actions in the international community.

The Kabul government – which should have reacted strongly to amplify the calls for justice for its vulnerable refugees in Iran – instead chose to stay silent as if surrendering in defeat and acknowledging this as the destiny of those who were forced to find refuge in its country. Instead what the asylum seekers found in Iran is death for the sake of Iran, as foot soldiers on a murky front in a war that to them, means nothing. 

Besides the governments in Tehran and Kabul, the third important player in this complex paradox is the religious leadership, which doubles as a political body in th Hazara community. Aim to safeguarde its people from the preachings of hatred, it only pavines the way for them to take up arms under one pretext or another and embark on this deadly journey.

These bright and dedicated Afghans deserve a much better life of peace and equal opportunities where they can thrive in their own country, instead they are forced into alien lands leading filled with thorny and deadly paths. 

Photo: RFS

On an average day, every day of the year, approximately 10 Northern Irish women and young girls travel to England for access to abortion treatments. Until just a few months ago, the 30th of June 2017, this ‘privilege’ for choice and fair treatment also cost between £425 for the pill, to £1,395 for advanced pregnancy abortion, not including travel costs. Needless to say, England’s newly enacted law that covers the costs of abortion treatments and travel for Northern Ireland’s women is a milestone. But as long as the Republic of Ireland maintains one of the strictest abortion laws in Europe, the need to fight for women’s rights remains high on the agenda.

And so last Saturday, thousands took to the streets of Dublin in the annual Choice march. This time around, the peaceful protest carried on its back more resilience, and certainly more determination as Ireland’s recently elected Taoiseach (prime minister), Leo Varadkar, announced there will be a referendum on abortion laws in May or June 2018. With worried headlines reading “abortion referendum just before Pope’s visit in August”.

Although abortion has always been illegal is the predominantly Catholic country, it was adopted into the constitution as an eighth amendment in 1983, affording women and an unborn child equal rights, with 67% of the population in support. This means that in Ireland, abortion is completely illegal unless the women’s health is under threat through complicated medical conditions or high risk of suicide. Much like its neighbouring Northern Ireland, the right to choice allowed to women and young girls in their most vulnerable state is their legal right to travel to England, at their own expense, of course.

To say Ireland is a repressive country with medieval laws and ideology wouldn’t be quite accurate. The country prides itself in offering referendums on frequent issues. It was the first country in the world to fully legalise same sex marriage through a referendum and has in June elected its first homosexual prime minister from an ethnic minority background and the youngest to ever lead the country. In 2015, Ireland also went from being one of the last countries in Europe to give trans people a means to change their legal gender to one of just five countries in the world where a person can change their gender by simply filing a declaration. And it doesn't stop there, this year, medically supervised injection centres for heroin users opened, in conjunction drug decriminalization for personal use has remained high on the agenda.

How can a country that holds abortion as a crime worthy of up to 14 years imprisonment at the same time vote for same sex marriage, safe drug taking and even decriminalization of substance use? Because this is not a question of Catholic morals, this is a question of women’s rights. As is evident, our modern society is willing to bend God’s wishes in every which way, except when it comes to women’s equality. And for that, we can never stop fighting.

Photo: Twitter