GLOBAL PERSONALITY OF THE WEEK

The events of last week draw attention to the dangers faced by war reporters in their attempts to highlight the consequence of war. Last week, the legendary Sunday Times reporter, Marie Colvin, 56, was killed alongside the French photographer, Remi Ochlik, 28. Marie Colvin is a veteran of conflicts in Egypt, Gaza, Syria, Libya and Sri Lanka where she has fearlessly reported under the hail of bullets.

Controversy still surrounds the events which occurred in the moments leading up to her death although one recalls the Syrian army’s recent pledge to ‘kill any journalist who sets foot on Syrian soil’. The UK Foreign Secretary, William Hague, couldn’t have captured the mood any better than he did in his recent statement made in the aftermath of Colvin’s death. He proffered: “She died helping people of Syria share their plight with the world. A great loss for all”. In closing, both Colvin and Ochlik died in their attempts to make a difference, lets all follow their example in making ours.

MALI: UN CONCERNS OVER AFRICA'S POTENTIAL NEWEST CIVIL WAR

“The UN Secretary-General is deeply concerned about fighting between Tuareg rebel groups and government forces in northern Mali…he is especially troubled by the large-scale humanitarian consequences of the crisis, including civilian casualties and thousands of internally displaced persons (IDPs) with many more seeking refuge in neighbouring countries, thus aggravating an already dire humanitarian situation throughout the Sahel region.” - Spokesperson for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on the Mali conflict


Last week the UN launched an appeal for $35.6 million in its response to the worsening humanitarian crisis in the northern part of the West African country of Mali. The conflict between government forces and Tuareg rebel groups has resulted in the deaths of dozens and the displacement, within and outside the country, of nearly 130,000 people. The majority of the displaced people are said to have fled to neighbouring Mauritania, Niger and Burkina Faso.


The recent clashes, which began on 17th January has reignited the decades-long conflict between the Malian government and the Mouvement National de Liberation de l’Azawad (MNLA) which was temporarily brought to an end via the 2009 peace deal signed by both parties. The nomadic Tuareg seek greater autonomy from the Malian government coupled with demands linked to land, cultural and linguistic rights. The MNLA’s official mission statement proffers that the group’s aims include freeing “the Azawadan people from the illegal occupation of Azawadan territory held by Mali” and further “to hold a referendum to determine if Azawadians want a separate independent republic”.


The Malian government have so far repeatedly claimed that the rebels are al-Qaeda collaborators or in essence, the West African branch of the organisation. It is also widely claimed by media agencies that the MNLA rebels comprise of returning fighters who fought alongside Libya’s now dethroned Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. The government itself have hardly covered themselves in glory. It has strongly been accused by NGO’s and media outlets that it has deliberately targeted and shelled civilian areas populated by the Tuareg and also of not doing enough to protect the Tuareg peoples.


Amnesty International has been particularly scathing in asserting that both the MNLA and the Malian army have failed to protect civilians not involved in the conflict as stated in the Geneva Convention. Gaetan Mootoo, the organisation’s researcher on West Africa said last week: “It is the civilian population who are bearing the brunt of this indiscriminate bombing. In addition to human casualties the attacks have killed dozens of cattle, camels and goats which the nomad Tuareg population rely on … these bombings violate international humanitarian law and the government must stop them immediately”.


The West African economic bloc, together with the USA and France has called for an end to the violence. The UN in particular has called on the rebels to immediately cease its attacks on civilians and government forces and rather to engage in dialogue with the Malian government to resolve their grievances. What is concerning is the humanitarian consequence of the civil strife and the refugee crisis spawn as a result hence the UN’s calls for funds. Adrian Edwards, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) spokesperson, said last week that the funds “will be used by UNHCR to provide emergency assistance to the displaced in Mali and neighbouring countries”.


Unfortunately the resumption of hostilities detracts attention from the famine and hunger in the neighbouring Sahel region of Africa and the longer the conflict persists, the more likely it is that preventable deaths caused by famine will become commonplace. If the Malian government is to avoid fresh bloodshed it needs to act now by swallowing its pride and engaging the rebels in roundtable talks as opposed to the armed engagement currently being favoured by both sides. Unfortunately the losers of this sad debacle will be the civilian non-actors in the violence and the Tuareg populace who ironically have borne the greatest losses since fighters representing the tribe took up arms against the Malian government.

GLOBAL PERSONALITY OF THE WEEK

The Libyan people deserve 1worldinternational’s Global Personality of the Week award. The past week marked the anniversary of the uprising which led to the overthrow of the Gaddafi regime. The country of course faces a bumpy future in this transition period but we are certain that its people will agree that the current instability is a price worth paying for the dictator’s removal.

VENEZUELA: HAS CHAVEZ FINALLY MET HIS MATCH?

Last week, the 39 year old governor of Miranda state, Henrique Capriles Radonski, was selected by the Democratic Union Coalition (MUD), a conglomerate of Venezuelan opposition parties, as its candidate in upcoming presidential elections scheduled for October. According to the election chief, Teresa Albanes, Mr Capriles won about 62% of the nearly three million votes cast by the public during the election. The elections were unprecedented being the first time an opposition presidential candidate had been chosen by open public ballot rather than the parties’ hierarchy.


The ever charismatic Capriles is expected to face the larger than life incumbent Hugo Chavez on 7th October, the date on which the presidential elections have been scheduled. Mr Capriles strongly opposes Mr Chavez’s radical nationalisation programme, which has seen several of its industries nationalised with varying degrees of success, claiming that it is a disincentive to investment.


Chavez for the most part has shrugged off the opposition’s challenge and even declared himself winner months before the identity of his challenger became known to him. His dismissal of the opposition may appear pompous to some but then again why should he entertain any fears of defeat when he has not only won three consecutive presidential polls since 1998, but his party, the United Socialist Party (PSUV), has controlled the country’s National Assembly since 1998.


Recent evidence suggests that Chavez would do well to take his challengers more seriously than he is at present. For one, the principle of “Bolivarianism” which is inherent in his government policy and decision-making has not exactly enhanced the quality of life of his country’s people. The idea of “Bolivarianism” is named after Simon Bolivar, the 19th century Venezuelan general who led the struggle for independence from Spain and Portugal throughout most of Southern America. The principles of “Bolivarianism” champion economic self-sufficiency, instilling in people a national ethic of patriotism, equitable distribution of national resources, eliminating corruption and encouraging grassroots people participation amongst several others.


In fact some say that the country has regressed in the last few years of Chavez’s rule. Evidence bears out that during his administration, homicide rates have more than doubled, and kidnappings as well as drug trafficking are now commonplace. In particular the capital city of Caracas is now classed as one of the world’s most dangerous cities. In addition, the country’s Police force has come under fire for corruption and reports of abuse of power. Press freedom has also been significantly curtailed leading to criticism from the NGO, Human Rights Watch, and the press organisation Reporters without Borders. Further the drive towards nationalisation of the country’s resources has not helped the country’s people or economy as was hoped. There are claims that many large and productive farms nationalized by the government now lay idle since the government took ownership of them. The same has been said of supermarkets seized from their private owners whose shelves now lay empty. Despite this the government is at press time making arrangements for the nationalization of the country’s gold industry.


To add to the above, Chavez is still courting controversy by using his weekly live TV programme, Alo Presidente (Hello President) to admonish opponents and the West. He also recently spoke out regarding US sanctions against Iran by declaring that it was essentially “imperialist aggression”. He has also been recently accused of undermining international sanctions against Syria by allegedly continuing to supply diesel to its government which in turn is used to fuel military machinery and armoury in the current political troubles in that nation.


2008’s congressional elections where his party lost its majority to the opposition, as well as the defeat suffered by the President in a referendum which included proposals to allow an acting President to run indefinitely for office shatters the notion of ‘invincibility’ which the President and his supporters would like one to believe. Would Capriles be able to topple Chavez in October? One is tempted to answer in the affirmative although Chavez retains the knack of proving to his critics that he remains a cat with at least nine lives.

1WORLDINTERNATIONAL GLOBAL PERSONALITY OF THE WEEK

It was reported in the past week that the Burmese monk, Ashin Gambira had been arrested by the authorities following reports of an interview where he was alleged to have stated that the Burmese government still had the “characteristics of a dictatorship”. Gambira has past form having been arrested in 2007 following an uprising against the national government.

The President Thein Sein-led government threatens to undo its attempts at repairing its reputation which has included sanctioning the release of scores of political prisoners by this latest re-arrest of a recently freed political prisoner. Ashin Gambira is this week’s 1worldinternational Global Personality of the Week for his relentless campaign for human rights in Burma.

THE MALDIVES: TROUBLE IN PARADISE

1worldinternational’s “2012 News Stories to Watch Out For” column published at the start of the year failed to predict recent developments in the Indian Ocean Island of the Maldives which has seen its three year old democracy threatened. This week, it was reported that the country’s President Mohamed Nasheed had stepped down to prevent violence and bloodshed following recent protests by opposition groups. The waters were subsequently muddied by Mr Nasheed’s proclamation that he had in fact been ousted by way of a military-backed coup orchestrated by mutinous Police and military officers.


Mr Nasheed assumed power in 2008 following the country’s first democratically held elections which ended the 30-year rule his predecessor, Maumoon Gayoom. During his leadership, Nasheed, who was once a political activist and prisoner as a result, has endeared himself to the international community by vociferously advocating climate change awareness. The ousted President’s calls for initially reinstatement, and now demands for snap elections have thus far fallen on the deaf ears of his replacement, Mohamed Waheed, who was also Mr Nasheed’s Vice-President and who has also now unequivocally ruled out any elections before October 2013.


The international community’s response has been, for want of a better word, lukewarm. The US, via its Assistant Secretary for South Asian Affairs, Robert Blake has requested both sides to make “compromises”. The compromise solution been sought is a US backed coalition or national unity government which Mr Nasheed has plainly rejected. In response to Mr Nasheed’s calls for snap elections, the US through Robert Blake have stated that it is too early to hold elections given that Maldivian state institutions such as the Police, the judiciary and electoral commissions need to be strengthened before November 2013 when the next elections are expected to be held.


The 9-member Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) which deals with serious violations of the Commonwealth’s political values and which also has the power to suspend member states for violations of democratic values is scheduled to hold an emergency conference today about the recent unrest. Meanwhile, Mr Nasheed is still calling for an independent investigation into the alleged coup while his Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) supporters allege Police victimisation and intimidation. Once again, the UN’s response to recent events has been criticised as has been the case with issues it is seized with at the present time. The US’s response is also questionable as it does appear to sanction the overthrow of a democratically elected government through its pronouncements that it favours a coalition government. Surely the US should condemn the overthrow of Mr Nasheed and the intimidation and violence which his supporters have been subjected to. The Commonwealth like the UN has also been slow to react although the international community has been successful in putting pressure on the new government which has ensured that the arrest warrant against Mr Nasheed has not been executed and in turn preventing further bloodshed.


Although the facts are somewhat thin on the ground, what is clear is that Mr Nasheed left office against his will. Under this circumstance, the Commonwealth has no other option but to suspend the country from the organisation until an election date is set, preferably within the coming months. The EU and the US should follow suit by threatening sanctions against the country until a date is set for next elections. Although the country’s new President has pledged to carry out independent investigations into the alleged coup, there are doubts that this investigation may be compromised by his relationship with supporters of the country’s former leader, Maumoon Gayoom and his affiliation with opposition parties. Therefore, the international community, via the UN needs to take conduct of the investigation itself as an impartial observer to the proceedings. In the event of the international community’s failure to respond effectively, we as individuals can also take matters into our own hands by leading a boycott of the country’s tourism industry which is the Maldives’ major source of revenue. Its government would no doubt pause and heed the cries of democratic activists if its purse strings were to be threatened. The developments in the coming weeks will no doubt determine the country’s course for generations.

GLOBAL PERSONALITY OF THE WEEK

Chinese dissident, Zhu Yufu is this week’s 1worldinternational Global Personality of the Week. Mr Yufu, is at present facing trial in the country’s eastern city of Hangzhou for composing a poem sent via Skype which allegedly references Tiananmen Square. Observers recall that the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989 is one of the country’s darkest moments hence the government’s hard line stance in its approach to this matter.

The poem titled “Its time” has resulted in Yufu being charged with the crime of “inciting subversion of state power”. A few lines of the poem read: “With your own two feet/ Its time to head to the Square and make your own choice/ Its time people of China/ Its time”. Yufu’s previous term in jail does not appear to have altered his course and we hope his actions continue to inspire dissidents and human rights activists alike in their fight for justice.

SENEGAL PROTESTS: IS IT BIGGER THAN THE STORM IN THE TEA CUP ITS PRESIDENT WANTS US TO BELIEVE?

Protests continue afoot in Senegal which was until recently one of Africa’s most stable countries. The protests were sparked by the country’s President’s announcement that he intended to seek a third term in forthcoming elections in February. Critics say that President Abdoulaye Wade’s move violates the terms of the country’s constitution which limits the number of terms the incumbent can serve as President to two. At the time of writing, global news outlets report that several people had lost their lives in the violence, the result of confrontations between protesters and the Police. Disturbingly, there have also been reports of security services firing live rounds into congregating protesters.


The winds of change have blown ever so slightly in the country since June 2011 when critics alleged that Mr Wade’s proposed constitutional amendments were designed to facilitate the promotion of his son, Karim Wade, who is also currently the country’s Energy Minister to the position of Vice-President. As a result of that uprising, the June 23 movement (M23) was borne with its aim being the organisation of “national resistance” until President Wade renounces his intentions to pursue a third term in power.


The protests have intensified since 27th January of this year when the Conseil Constitutional (Constitutional Court) of Senegal approved Wade’s candidacy along with several others but rejected the candidacy of three independent candidates, including that of the country’s most famous son, Youssou N’dour. The Court was tasked with deciding whether Wade had violated Article 27 of the constitution which limits presidential terms to two and ruling on whether Wade had been validly nominated by his party. The latter issue being the result of claims by his opponents that he had been nominated by two parties, the first of which was his Senegalese Democratic Party (PDS) who he has represented for most of his political life, and the second being a conglomerate of unregistered parties. The country’s constitution disallows the nomination of a candidate by an unregistered party or by two parties.


In this vein, the Court upheld Wade’s claim that he was exempt from the application of the 2001 constitutional amendment engineered by Wade himself, as he had been elected a year before its adoption by the country. The Court also ruled that it Wade’s Democratic Party (PDS) which had nominated him and not the improperly constituted and unregistered alliance of parties, the “Forces Alliees 2012” or “Allied Forces 2012”. At the same time the Court invalidated the candidacy of N’dour, Abdourahmane Sarr and Keba Keinde on the grounds that Article 28 of its constitution prohibited individuals from standing for elections without the support of a registered political party or in the alternative, the endorsing signatures of 10000 registered voters verifiable by the Constitutional Court.


The decision was met with derision and outrage by many, most of whom allege that the country’s five Constitutional Court judges are on the payroll of Wade himself. With the first round of elections set to take place on 26 February, many fear that the incumbent who will be 92 at the end of another tenure lacks the energy to force through the bold reforms which he championed following his assumption of power in 2000. The conflict ravaged African continent can certainly do without further instability, this time in a country which is supposed to be a beacon of democratic values. The intimidation of opposition figures, arrest of human rights activists and shooting of unarmed protesters has gained the attention of the United Nations (UN). The organisation’s Human Rights chief, Navi Pillay, in a press communiqué stated: “The reports of excessive use of force by Police in response to violence by some protesters are very disturbing given Senegal’s tradition of respect for freedom of association, assembly and expression.” She added: “Senegal has a good record of peaceful democratic elections and traditions which could easily be jeopardised if the current extremely tense situation spirals into further acts of violent retribution”.


The allegations of nepotism and claims that Wade is running the country like a personal fiefdom bears similarities with Gabon’s Omar Bongo and Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak who groomed and positioned their sons to take over office in their respective countries. The former succeeded while the latter was toppled by his people in the process. Judging by the scale of protests and the fervour being exhibited by the Senegalese people, Wade is more than likely to experience the fate which befell the latter than the passive resistance met by the former whilst installing his son as President.