Remembrance Day

Today, the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth paid tribute to those who fought and died during the great war as the First World War is also known. The Queen of England and Head of the Commonwealth, led the commemorative ceremony. She laid a wreath at the Cenotaph in London this morning in a colourful ceremony. High Commissioners of former British colonies , members of the Royal family, the British officials also laid wreath at the foot of Cenotaph. This years commemoration is the first without any veteran of the Great war. Hence it had special connotation, for we must not forget the sacrifice of those who fought and died for the freedom that we do enjoy today.

It is important to note that, the factors that caused the First and the Second World Wars have not disappeared, hence we need to show our support for soldiers and their families who are now fighting in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan. While today was Remembrance Day, the Armistice Day will be commemorated on the 11th of November. It will marked 90 years since the end of the First World War. Today's commemoration was introduced by King George V upon the suggestion of Edward George Honey. It was the hegemony of Germany that forced the UK and others into the First and Second World Wars and today, the threat posed by Germany is still well alive . Even though the Germans are not using weapons as they did in the past, they are using European Union Diplomacy to get what Adolf Hitler was not able to achieve via the use of arms. Hence the world need to be alert with Brussels. Perhaps Britain will have to come again to rescue by attempting to curtail the ever growing power of the European Union.

Nelson Mandela Foundation has touched the very existence of the Republic of Congo ( Final part)

In my post yesterday, I expressed my surprise at how the government of the Congo, instead of reacting robustly to what is fit to be classified as blackmail or smear campaign, carried out by the Nelson Mandela Foundation, toward their President, they (government)decided to adopt a low profile. Even though there was no grand reaction from Brazzaville, Bienvenu Okiemy, Congo's minister of Communications and official government spokesman, did however organise a Press Conference to give his government's own part of the story. But the Press conference, did not only come too late, it was organised in a haphazard manner to a point that, even the national Radio station was not invited. The only media invited were the national TV station known as Tele Congo, a private TV station called DRTV . This private TV is owned by a Congolese Army General . And print media oufits that were invited to take part in Mr Okiemy's Press Conference were those close to him. Absent were the international media, medium through which, President Denis Sassou Nguesso has been a constant staple for vilification. Why did Mr Okiemy organise a conference in a smuggling manner? Why did he refuse to invite the international press or their correspondents based in Brazzaville? Is he really loyal to his boss and country or he is just a disguised fifth columnist? Mr Okiemy is not alone. There are many Congolese government ministers and other influential people gravitating around President Denis Sassou Nguesso who are in fact mercenaries at the service of those who want to destabilize Congo. There is even one notorious French White man in Brazzaville,who is the architech of all the pass, present and future smear campaigns against Congo and her President. But since he is a White man, the legendary respect given to those who give no value to anything black, hence he is unpeturbed.

Culture of immediacy

But while I do point accussing fingers at all the incompetent and treacherous persons surrounding President Denis Sassou Nguesso, I am equally aware that, Congolese , like most Africans, seem to have lost all sense of direction. They have a culture of immediacy and are always ready to sell and run down their countries to the highest bidder. Most Africans don't have any ideology and others are over idealistic and often facinated by Western cultural values and level of development. Concerning Congolese, it is disheartening to see how they have declined in terms of nationalism and ideological orientations. In the 60s, 70s and 80s, when Congolese left their country for a visit abroad, every one knew that, they were nationalists or were left leaning. That the Nelson Mandela Foundation did what they have done and there has not been any out cry, shows that, Congo has gone down hill.

Lack of ideological orientation

Some Congolese leaders are at present, acting like a people who have no ideological orientation. They display ostentatious wealth to a people who are in majority suffering or in poverty. In short, the Republic of Congo or some of it leaders are no longer hardworking, they are attracted to fast wealth, hence corruption has prospered thus hampering all efforts put in place by President Denis Sassou Nguesso to make the country a better place for the majority. The Republic of Congo is gradually becoming another Democratic Republic of Congo, which in fact is a euphemism of a failed state. While Congo has not yet become a failed state, President Denis Sassou Nguesso must work hard and be bold enough to fight corruption and also arrest those who are behind Congo's worst malady. In the past Congo was a country with people who had an ideology and were bold enough to choose the Eastern block. They also stood firm in their support for the freedom Namibia, Zimbabwe, Angola and Mozambique. At that time, the leader was Marien Ngoaubi and later on , Denis Sassou Nguesso. It worked then, because around Sassou Nguesso or Marien, they were men and women with a goal. Saddly it is no longer the case. At present Congo's President is surrounded by people who are not patriotic. He is surrounded by people who are thinking about the depth of their pockets and those of their families and friends rather than the wellbeing of the state. Hence, organisations such as the Nelson Mandela Foundation can write or declare whaterver they want and no body in the government can react. Only some few nationalists and loyalists such as Alain Akouala Atipault do have the couarge to stand and talk to organisations such Nelson Mandela Foundation.

Meanwhile, in a move that shows that Brazzaville has been affected by the Nelson Mandela Foundation's Press Release and relations between Brazzaville and Pretoria might suffer, Mr Rodolphe Adada, minister of state in charge of Industrial development and the Promotion of the Private sector has been dispatched to South Africa to meet the South African government and perhaps the Nelson Mandela Foundation.

The Nelson Mandela Foundation has touched the very existence of the Republic of Congo ( part one)

The Nelson Mandela Foundation has rattled the feather of Congo's President, Denis Sassou Nguesso. How? The feather rattling came up when Nelson Mandela Foundation issued a Press Release, denying that Nelson Mandela ever wrote the foreword of a book coauthored by President Denis Sassou Nguesso and French journalist Edourd Dor. That communique was not just an ordinary feather rattling, it touched the very existence of the Republic of Congo. It destroyed in one day, all what those who are in power took years to build and that many Congolese did identify themselves with. And the most appalling of all was that, since the controversy errupted Congolese government officials or it minister of Communications Bienvenue Okiemy, seem to have gone under hiding. It was as though the claims made by Nelson Mandela Foundation was correct. But the truth is that, Nelson Mandela Foundation was wrong. Nelson Mandela made the statement that is today the cause of the row. But why has the Congolese government adopted a low profile? The only top Congolese government official who made a declaration was Mr Alain Akouala. But the problem with Mr Akouala's declaration is that, he did not make his declaration in support of President Sassou Nguesso as a government minister, but he showed his support as the chair of a local organisation.

While the reaction of Brazzaville leave many pending questions than answers, those running Nelson Mandela Foundation seem not to understand what many people in countries such as Congo and other parts of Africa feels about Nelson Mandela. To many, Mr Mandela belongs to them. In Congo for example, from elementary school, children were drilled to consider Nelson Mandela and the liberation of countries such as Angola, South Africa, Namibia, Mozambique and Zimbabwe, who were at various stages ruled by racist White regimes as a national cause. Most ANC leaders were given refuge in Congo. It is therefore saddening that, today, Denis Sassou Nguesso who along with late President Marien Ngoabi took the freedom of Nelson Mandela and the end of apparthied as a personal and national case, is being dragged in the mud, and there is no out cry within the government and even within the local media. It must never be forgotten that, Congo played an important role in the freedom of Nelson Mandela, the end of apparthied, the independence of Angola and Namibia, hence in 1988, negociations that led to the withdrawal of South African soldiers from Angola and that paved the way to the the independence of Namibia took place in Brazzaville.

That every one that counts in Congo with the exception of Alain Akouala sat quiet and the Press went silent, besides some sporadic articles in some newspapers after the Press Release from Nelson Mandela Foundation, speaks volumes about the decay of the national fibre of Congolese. What has happened with Congolese who were known to be very patriotic? Is it that, they are dissatisfied with those ruling them to a point of not caring what and how others treat them?

Orange Caf Champions League semi final results : another victory for Heartland FC of Owerri, Nigeria

Dan Anyim stadium of Owerri, Eastern Nigeria was today the venue of an away semi final match, that pitted host club Heartland Football Club of Owerri against Tout Puissant Mazembe Football Club from the Democratic Republic of Congo southern city of Lubumbashi. The final score line is 2 goals to 1, in favour of the host. With this victory over the footballers from the DRC, the Naze millionaires, as the Nigerian Heartland FC club are also known, have registered a 100% victory in their Owerri base.

While that victory is crucial, the Nigerian club will know whether they are the ones to replace Al Ahly FC of Cairo, Egypt as Africa's Champion on the 7th of November in Lubumbashi. On that day, they will be the guest of Tout Puissant Mazembe in their La Kenya stadium. But, given the uneven results that TP Mazembe have registered playing in front of their spectators, the Nigerian club has a chance of winning the return leg and lifting this year's Orange Caf Champions League. In doing so, Heartland will be the second Nigerian club after regional rivals Enyimba FC's back to back victories in 2003 and 2004 in what was then known as the MTN CAF Champions League. However, it won't be easy for Heartland FC, for they will be playing against a club who last lifted the continental trophy in 1967 and 1968. Furthermore, the lone goal that TP Mazembe has scored in Owerri is very important.

My recent visit to the United States (part 2)

Benefits

It was also an occasion for us to exchange our personal professional experiences with future journalists from the University of South Florida and their lecturers. We also learned how a single news story could be developed and transformed in order to make it much more interesting and marketable. At the University of South Florida and also at the different media houses within the locality that we visited, we witnessed directly, how our profession has undergone profound transformation as well as how media houses and journalists were adapting and also adopting to the new trend. On a personal level, I was glad and will forever be grateful to the professional advice given to us by Dr Robert Dardenne.

Example

We often, (I in chief) do complain that, Western Press in general and the American Press in particular, does always present the African continent in bad light. The other complains that often comes up, but mostly conveyed by African journalists, are that, African states are corrupt and also that, democracy is not advancing or advancing at a snail pace. In both instances and occasions, Dr Robert Dardenne, while not absolving the Western Press in their stereotypical and prejudicial reports about Africa, he (Dr Dardenne) pointed out that, most often, African journalists themselves were the ones championing the course of poorly reporting about Africa. How? You may have asked. He gave the example of the Nigerian Press, that he pointed out was good. but he stressed that, the Nigerian press spent time writing about corruption and the loopholes in the democratic process in Nigeria and seldom wrote anything good about the country or it democratic process. Dr Dardenne concluded that, a reporting culture that regularly criticizes the government without mentioning anything positive about the government or country becomes redundant or has little or no influence. Dr Dardenne was correct in his analysis, for a merry-go-round of negative reports, at the end of the day, has little or no effect on the government and the people and it may be one of the reasons why the fight against corruption or the promotion of democracy, has not succeeded in most African states.

Below is the link of the tour that we had at the Austin Capitol in Texas, USA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMIo8TyoXhg

Report on the International Visitor Leadership Programme

The Edward J. Murrow Programme for Journalists, held in collaboration with the United States Department of State, which began on the 28th of September 2009 in Washington DC and which ended on the 16th of October this year in New York, was a tremendous educational and discovery visit for me . Before I could be selected by the African Regional Service in Paris, France to be part of the programme, I had always nursed the dream to visit the United States. Hence I can now conclude that, the Edward J. Murrow Programme for Journalists has helped me to achieve a personal dream. For the just concluded programme provided me with a unique platform to create new friend and increase my network beyond my initial confines. The programme also made it possible for me to visit the United States beyond my expectations and discovered many things, especially how the media was adapting to the rapid and changing media landscape.

Even though we have visited three regions of the United States, namely: Washington DC, Florida (Saint Petersburg and Tampa) and Texas (Austin), it was the Washington DC and Florida stops that will forever remain engraved in my memory because of the quality of its programme content. All in all, I am a fulfilled person after spending three weeks in the United States. And while in the United States, I did benefit or learned a lot. I will like to insist here on that, I made contacts that may be of help to me professionally and academically now or in the future. But while the programme is already wonderful, in my humble opinion, I think the programme nonetheless needs some changes or improvements, in a bid for it to attain it primary objective or objectives. However, before penning down my proposal or suggestions and observations, I would first want to present below a brief detail of my visit and stay in the United States. I will like to point out that, all visits that we made, even though in such circumstances, some visits or appointments are bound to be more interesting than others, the general programmes and its appointments were by and large, very useful. Our visit to the United States Department of state in Washington DC, the University of South Florida, the Austin Police Department, Leander High School, Austin City Hall, the Capitol in Austin and the Office of Public Citizen in Austin were not only very interesting, they were equally very instructive. At the University of South Florida, we saw firsthand how US future journalists were being or are being trained academically.

Angolagate: a verdict at last?

An intricate court case filed in Paris, France, which pitted high profile French officials against the state, has came to an end last Tuesday October 27th. Anyway, that is, if the 36 out of the 42 accused personalities who have been found guilty accepts Tuesday's verdict and do not interject an appeal. The French government decided to open a court case after human right and civil society organisations raised an alarm, over the sales of weapons to Angola at the height of the civil war in the southern African state. The periods when the sales of weapon took place was between 1983 and 1988. During this period, it is estimated that, the accused French officials sold weapons used in the former Soviet Union to the government of Luanda at the lump sum of € 530 million, in which, they personally made a profit of € 270 million.

There are two consequences following the sales of weapons to the Angolan government during the civil war, by the accused French government officials, this is according to specialists of the Angolan civil war. Some specialists claim that, the civil war, which began in 1975 , pitting the ruling MPLA against UNITA, led by late Dr Jonas Savimbi was prolonged and became vicious because of weapons that the governement bought from the former Soviet Union via France. While other specialists are of the opinion that, without the purchase of those weapons, Luanda won't have won the civil war in 2002 after the killing of Jonas Savimbi.

Amongst the high profile French officials found guilty last Tuesday are fomer French interior minister Charles Pasqua and Christophe Mitterand, eldest son of France's fomer President late Francois Mitterand. The others who were also found guilty are businessmen Pierre Falcone and Arcadi Gaydamark. Strangely, the Angolan government was excluded from the final verdict, but Luanda, has today reacted angrily and has threatened to retaliate.

Sudan Policy Aims at Ending Genocide Implementing Peace Accord

Despite the presence of U.N. and African Union forces in Darfur, violence against civilians continues, Secretary Clinton says.

By Stephen KaufmanStaff Writer

Washington — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton unveiled a “comprehensive” U.S. policy for resolving the conflicts in Sudan, focused on ending human rights abuses and genocide in the Darfur region, fully implementing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) and ensuring Sudan does not become a haven for violent extremists.

Speaking to reporters at the State Department October 19, Clinton said today’s Sudan, four years after the signing of the CPA, is “at a critical juncture, one that can lead to steady improvements in the lives of the Sudanese people or degenerate into more conflict and violence.”
The people of Darfur still live in “unconscionable and unacceptable conditions,” Clinton said. The U.S. focus, she said, is on “reversing the ongoing dire human consequences of genocide by addressing the daily suffering in the refugee camps, protecting civilians from continuing violence, helping displaced persons return to their homes, ensuring that the militias are disarmed and improving conditions on the ground.”

The situation in Sudan has emerged as one of the largest and most devastating humanitarian crises for the 21st century, the State Department said in an October 19 statement. More than 20 years of fighting between the government and the SPLM has killed more than 2 million people, and key portions of the 2005 CPA remain unfulfilled and will be a flashpoint for future armed conflict unless implemented, Clinton said.

In addition, Sudan’s ruling National Congress Party and government-supported militia launched a genocidal campaign in 2003 against ethnic groups affiliated with a potential rebellion, killing hundreds of thousands, displacing 2.7 million people and creating more than 250,000 refugees, according to the State Department statement. Sudan’s president, Omar al-Bashir, has been indicted by the International Criminal Court for his alleged role in the Darfur genocide.
Instability in Sudan not only jeopardizes the future of the country’s 40 million inhabitants, but can also “be an incubator of violence … in an already volatile region,” Clinton said.

The fate of Sudan’s people is “profoundly important” to U.S. officials, from President Obama on down, Clinton said. The decision to pursue the two goals of improving human rights in Darfur and fully implementing the CPA “simultaneously and in tandem” reflects the Obama administration’s “seriousness, sense of urgency, and collective agreement about how best to address the complex challenges” to both, she said.

“We are realistic about the hurdles to progress,” but “the problems in Sudan cannot be ignored or willed away,” Clinton said, adding that although dialogue will continue with the parties in the conflict, “words alone are not enough” to end the conflict and humanitarian suffering, and the United States is prepared to take measures to encourage progress. “Assessment of progress and decisions regarding incentives and disincentives will be based on verifiable changes in conditions on the ground. Backsliding by any party will be met with credible pressure in the form of disincentives leveraged by our government and our international partners,” Clinton said.

The secretary said the United States has “a menu of incentives and disincentives” that includes both political and economic measures, but added “we want to be somewhat careful in putting those out” when she was asked to specify potential actions. In an October 19 statement on the comprehensive strategy, Obama warned that Sudan is “poised to fall further into chaos if swift action is not taken,” and the conscience of both the United States and the international community requires action “with a sense of urgency and purpose.”

The president said he plans to renew U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese government. “If the Government of Sudan acts to improve the situation on the ground and to advance peace, there will be incentives; if it does not, then there will be increased pressure imposed by the United States and the international community,” he said.

At the State Department, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said there will be “no rewards for the status quo, no incentives without concrete and tangible progress,” and “significant consequences for parties that backslide or simply stand still.”To track progress on the ground, the United States has more sources of information than in the past, including the hybrid United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force in Darfur (UNAMID), the 10,000 U.N. peacekeepers in the south, and the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. “We’re in contact with all the parties, and I’d have every confidence that our challenge will not be lack of information,” Rice said.

ELECTION, REFERENDUM SCHEDULE ADD TO URGENCY

Retired U.S. Air Force General Scott Gration, who is the Obama administration’s special envoy for Sudan, said there is a strong sense of urgency to improve the situation in the country because Sudan is scheduled to hold national elections in April 2010. And a referendum in southern Sudan on self-determination, which could lead to that region’s independence, is likely to be held before the end of 2011. “Success requires frank dialogue with all parties in Sudan, with the regional states and international community. We all must work together to get tangible results on the ground, to achieve a lasting peace, a better life for future generations of Sudanese. And we must not stop until our task is complete,” Gration said.

According to the October 19 statement from the State Department, the Obama administration has learned “critical lessons” from previous U.S. efforts to resolve the conflicts in Sudan, including the need to engage both with allies and “with those with whom we disagree,” holding individuals responsible for genocide and humanitarian atrocities, and valuing Sudanese counterterrorism support, but not as “a bargaining chip to evade responsibilities in Darfur or in implementing the CPA.”

The October 19 statement said that rather than viewing process-related accomplishments such as the signing of a memorandum of understanding between two parties as a means of determining progress, U.S. officials instead will base their assessments on “verifiable changes in conditions on the ground.”

“Each quarter, the interagency at senior levels will assess a variety of indicators of progress or of deepening crisis, and that assessment will include calibrated steps to bolster support for positive change and to discourage backsliding. Progress toward achievement of the strategic objectives will trigger steps designed to strengthen the hands of those implementing the changes. Failure to improve conditions will trigger increased pressure on recalcitrant actors,” the statement said.
The statement also said the United States will be working with international partners to provide assistance for the April 2010 elections and the 2011 referendum with the goal of “a peaceful post-2011 Sudan or an orderly transition to two separate and viable states at peace with each other.”

Along with providing assistance for voter registration and education, balloting, election monitoring and other services, the Obama administration will encourage parties in the north and south to enact legal reforms conducive to a more credible electoral process, work for the “timely and transparent demarcation of the north-south border,” and support efforts to develop a post-2011 wealth-sharing agreement between the two.