IRAN: INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY AND IRAN AGREE TALKS

News of Iran’s imminent return to the negotiating table has allayed concerns of further instability in the Middle East. The talks, which are being forced through by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are expected to take place on December 13 in the country’s capital, Tehran. The talks are being held side by side with separate discussions involving Germany, France, Britain, China, Russia and the United States, and are also aimed at defusing the rather complex Middle East powder keg.

The IAEA’s attempts to inject some calm to the tense proceedings have so far been met by strong Iranian resistance. Iran continues to assert that its nuclear intentions are pure and that its purpose for acquiring nuclear capability is non-military. Iran’s return to the negotiating table has surprisingly been met with anything but elation and optimism which most certainly owes to the fact that too many proclamations of a ‘new dawn’ have been sounded out in the past but without progress on the ground commensurate with previous shades of optimism. Dare I say that the present debacle is rather akin to the parable of ‘the boy who cried wolf’.

Matters are not made any easier by the country’s leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who appears to revel in the attention directed by the international media towards his region of the world, albeit for the wrong reasons. Needless to say his latest pronouncements that “the Iranian nation is not seeking an atomic bomb, nor do they need to build an atomic bond” was not only met with silence which it deserved but also derision. To many, Ahmadinejad will continue to fail in his attempts to pull the wool over the watching world’s eyes if he, on the one hand states that the country’s nuclear enrichment programme is geared towards peaceful aims, but at the same time, prevents the IAEA from visiting alleged nuclear enrichment sites and also, continues to threaten the state of Israel, for all their faults, with eternal damnation.

The restrained pronouncements in light of the latest developments by leading global figures perhaps tells its own story and buttresses the writer’s earlier assertions. Catherine Ashton, the Foreign Policy supremo of the European Union cautiously asserted that the talks “could be an initial step on the path to resolving outstanding issues.” The United States, via its State Department Spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, offered: “In the past Iran has been unwilling to do what it needs to do despite the best efforts of the IAEA. But we commend the IAEA for keeping at it and we call on Iran to do what it needs to do to meet the international community’s concerns.”

The announcement comes a week after the Pentagon reported that Iran had fired at an unarmed American drone thereby risking an international incident with the capacity to morph into a major conflict. Nonetheless and in spite of the air of pessimism which pervades, the agreement to return to the table is encouraging and signals a climb down from the ‘chest puffing’ which the conflict’s main protagonists – Iran, Israel and the United States – have so far been engaged. Liberals will argue that the sanctions regime has been effective at forcing Iran to utilise diplomatic channels to resolve the dispute while ‘hawkish Republicans’ and Benjamin Netanyahu’s – the Israeli President - supporters will state that Iran is utilising the talks as a smokescreen whilst it completes its nuclear programme. Although President Obama’s victory most certainly means that the United States will only engage militarily against Iran as a last resort, the writer however believes the threat of an Israeli pre-emptive strike still looms large and has not been allayed by Iran’s sudden and unexpected move.

GAMBIA: PRESIDENT SET TO GO AHEAD WITH PRISONER EXECUTION

In what many would consider a ‘slow news week’, the Banjul government attracted the sort of publicity which in most weeks would have passed unnoticed under the global news radar.

Last week Amnesty International revealed that the government had executed about nine of the country’s 47 death row prisoners. Amnesty International added that further executions were to follow “in the coming days”. The recent executions come as a shock not least because the last State sanctioned execution occurred in 1985.

At the time of writing President Yahya Jammeh’s motives for persevering with the executions are still unclear although some of the executed individuals had been arrested on treason allegations. Unfortunately Jammeh’s latest pronouncements indicate that more executions are to follow. In early last week’s press release, Jammeh asserted: “By the middle of next month, all the death sentences would have been carried out to the letter; there is no way my government will allow 99% of the population to be held to ransom by criminals.”

President Jammeh’s government appears to be backtracking somewhat on the back of the criticism it has faced since Amnesty International’s revelations. In a statement released late last week the government muddied already murky waters by appearing to refer to Amnesty International’s report as mere speculation. It has to date failed to clarify either one way or the other whether it has indeed executed any prisoners at all.

Ousainou Darboe, leader of the UDP opposition party has called on the government to reveal the whereabouts of the nine prisoners said to have been executed in this seemingly first round of capital punishments. “If the government denies that any execution has taken place, it should go further and parade all those on death row on TV for their families and the public to see them. If the execution has indeed taken place, the international community should consider imposing travel bans on Jammeh and his ministers,” Darboe said.

The second strand of Darboe’s statement appears to have been assimilated and heeded by Catherine Ashton, the European Union foreign affairs supremo. In a counter statement in response to Jammeh’s threats to execute all prisoners on death row within the next month, Ashton demanded an immediate cessation of all executions. “In light of these executions, the European Union will urgently consider an appropriate response,” she added.

If the government’s latest statements are to be used as a barometer to gauge its determination to follow through on the promise of further executions, it may well appear that its appetite has been quenched by the furore which has enveloped it since its internal affairs became breaking global news. Jammeh’s unpredictability however implies that the preceding statement must be absorbed in tandem with a disclaimer. Now in his fourth term since he came to power via a coup d’etat in 1994, Jammeh continues to lead a government which pays little to no regard to matters relating to civil liberties, human rights and press freedom. In spite of his ego and unstinting obduracy the country’s heavy reliance on foreign aid means that Jammeh can ill afford to alienate the EU and the international community who are responsible for propping up its precariously unstable economy.

BAHRAIN: GOVERNMENT CONTINUES ASSAULT ON OPPOSITION ACTIVISTS

The writer refers to Bahrain as the gift that keeps on giving, the reason being that the Bahraini government keeps on providing enthusiasts of global politics and international law with something to write about. It has certainly been successful at grabbing our collective attentions although not for the reasons it would prefer to be famous for.

Last week, opposition activist Nabeel Rajab was sentenced to three years in jail for effectively having the audacity to lead ‘peaceful’ protests against the government. The country’s courts are expected to hear his appeal next week.

Although the decision to sentence Rajab came as no surprise to observers, the length of the sentence for the ‘crime’ was even by Bahraini standards unprecedented. The EU’s foreign affairs High Representative Catherine Ashton has led calls against the Bahrain government’s anti-democratic stance. Ashton highlighted that Rajab had done nothing wrong and added that his sentencing was linked to his calls for the government to respect its citizens’ fundamental freedoms.

Victoria Nuland, the U.S. State Department spokeswoman stated that the U.S. was deeply troubled by Rajab’s sentence. She continued; “We’ve made it clear that it is critical for all governments, including Bahrain, to respect freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.” The NGO Amnesty International has gone even further than both the EU and the U.S by stating that it was a “dark day for justice.” Amnesty International’s Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui averred that Rajab’s sentence eliminates the potential for change in the country. Sahraoui affirmed: “Like many others in Bahrain, Nabeel Rajab is a prisoner of conscience, jailed solely for peacefully exercising his right to freedom of expression and assembly.”

The government’s publicity machine has since gone into overdrive in anticipation of the global opprobrium it expects to rain down upon it. The government insisted that it had evidence to hand which conclusively showed that Rajab had caused the deaths of innocent people by inciting “violence and escalation against law enforcement officers”. The country’s interior ministry also confirmed that about 700 security officers have been injured since clashes began last year. It has however failed to explain why others charged with the same offence appeared to have been given lighter sentences that that which befell Rajab.

For its part the Bahrain government has no incentive to restrain itself from maintaining the current status quo not least because its strategic location in the Middle East makes it a viable alternative as an oil transport route out of the Gulf region to the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran currently holds sway. The fact that the country also hosts the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet further complicates matters thus rendering any idea of political will being mustered and mobilized by the U.S. redundant. The Bahrain government, like its Russian counterpart who drew the ire of the watching world with its absurd decision to jail members of the Russian female punk rock band, Pussy Riot last week, fails to appreciate the significance of the oft-repeated mantra spawn by the current writer. The said mantra being that the movement for change is akin to a hydra which will not cease to exist when one of its heads - the movements’ individual foot soldiers – are incarcerated or silenced.

ETHIOPIA: GOVERNMENT WAGES FURTHER ASSAULT ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION

The principles of freedom of speech and expression came under serious attack in the past week in the East African country of Ethiopia where journalists, opposition politicians and bloggers were sentenced to terms in jail for allegedly conniving with rebels to overthrow the government. The prison sentences imposed on the said individuals ranged from between eight years to life imprisonment.


2009’s Anti-terrorism law

The assault on freedom of speech and expression in the country has slowly gathered steam over the last few years but has intensified since 2009 when an anti-terrorism bill was passed by its parliament. One of the by-product of the provisions of the law would see individuals jailed for up to 20 years if found to have published information which could ‘incite’ terrorist activities. This provision appears to stretch the definition of ‘terrorist activity’ to include the work of journalists, bloggers, artists et al which have the temerity to criticise the government when it falls short of maintaining international human rights standards.


The ‘Convicts’

Needless to say unrelenting opprobrium has been heaped on the decision since the verdicts became public knowledge not least because the Ethiopian government has serious form when it comes to incarcerating individuals who voice any forms of dissent against it. Amongst those jailed in this latest onslaught on freedom of speech were Andualem Arage, an opposition politician from the Unity for Democracy and Justice Party (UDJ) who was jailed for life, along with Berhanu Nega and Andargachew Tsige who also received life sentences in absentia.

Probably the most well known of the individuals jailed is blogger and journalist Eskinder Nega who was sentenced to 18 years in jail. Nega appears to have offended the authorities by having the audacity to challenge the government’s decision to arrest, under the aforementioned anti-terrorism legislation, Debebe Eshetu, an actor in the country who has also been a constant thorn in the government’s flesh. In addition, the said individuals and others who received similar sentences were accused of being members of the US-based opposition group Ginbot 7, which the government has classed as a “terrorist organisation”.


Prime Minister Zenawi

The country is led by Prime Minister Meles Zenawi of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary democratic Front (EPRDF) who is currently serving a fourth 5-year term in power following an election victory in May 2010. As has been the case with elections held on the continent, opposition groups refused to accept the decision on the grounds that the elections were not free and fair while international observers chorused in unison that the elections failed to adhere to international standards. Zenawi is said to have been one of the writers of the country’s constitution which was created in 1994. Zenawi has also been the country’s only Prime Minister since multi-party elections were first held in 1995.


Criticisms of the latest convictions

The European Union (EU) has voiced strong concerns about the sentences. The organisation’s foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton averred that the principle of freedom of expression enshrined in the Ethiopian Constitution is somewhat compromised by “a lack of clarity with regards to what constitutes a terrorism offence”. The prominent Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), Amnesty International added: “The Ethiopian government is treating calls for peaceful protest as a terrorist act and is outlawing the legitimate activities of journalists and opposition members”.


Sound-off

The detainees’ legal representatives appear to have already set plans in motion to appeal the decision of the authorities. Whilst trying to avoid being labelled a ‘prophet of doom’, it is highly unlikely that the appeals will result in the release of any of the convicted persons. One notes that the country is highly dependent on foreign aid for its economic stability as was the case with the East African country of Malawi where democratic ideals were also threatened by the government in similar circumstances. In Malawi threats of withdrawal of foreign aid and the West’s follow through of the threat was sufficient enough to check the excesses of the government. In the same vein it is unlikely that any measures taken by the West, short of those implemented in Malawi, will be effective as a means of preventing further strangulation and stifling of freedom of speech and expression by the Ethiopian government.