January 11, 2010
Cabinda Rebels
Condolences to the Togolese national football squad on the loss of three lives from their contingent, including their bus chauffeur, due to the attack in Cabinda. In February 2005, this blog ran a brief profile on Cabinda in an article entitled A Country Called Cabinda…Oops Angola. But never could we have imagined that the Cabinda rebels would be bold, and foolish, enough to attack the football team from a neutral African nation that was on its way to attend the Africa Cup of Nations football tournament.
The Front for the Liberation of Cabinda (FLEC) would likely win no sympathies. It certainly must have enraged a lot of Africans, even those who might have been sympathetic to its cause.
>>Go to HomePage
January 9, 2010
Disown Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab Not
This blogger was invited to join a Facebook group called "150 Million Nigerians who have disowned Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab". The first thing that came to his mind was "that would have to be 150 million minus one" as he had no intention of joining such a group for whatever reason.
To "disown" connotes a refusal to accept as one's own or to repudiate. Irrespective of what one may say or think, Umar Farouk is a Nigerian. And while his actions certainly do not represent what one could expect from a "typical" Nigerian male adult (Muslim or not), disowning him does not in any way help understand why he did what he did and ensure that such does not happen again.
Every society is made up of people whose behaviors and attitudes span a Gaussian-like distribution. What this, in effect, means is that in every society, there are bound to be extremists. Of course, conditions in society also dictate what percentage of people end up holding and manifesting extreme views. In societies where people feel downtrodden, compromised or disenfranchised, there is bound to be a higher fraction of people holding extreme views.
Umar Farouks's extremism was undoubtedly driven by his religious beliefs—Islam, to be precise. How does disowning him help Nigerians understand what role extreme Islamic ideology played in causing him to attempt detonating an explosive device on board a US-bound airliner? How does it help Nigerians understand the complex interplay of religious faith, access to extremist religious groups and ideological brainwashing?
Umar Farouk is a Nigerian. Is there a significant number of young Nigerians out there (particularly Northern Nigerian Muslims) who see Osama Bin Laden as a hero? Is there a significant number of young Nigerians out there (particularly Northern Nigerian Muslims) who are sympathetic to the cause of Al-Qaeda? If yes, would a significant number of these people, given the chance, agree to work with Al-Qaeda against the United States? Where would their ultimate allegiance lie: in self, in family, in country or in religion?
Research conducted by Pew Research Center shows that quite a number of Nigerian Muslims not only agree that suicide bombings are sometimes justified but also support Mr. Bin Laden . While the Pew results may be debatable, they still call for deep soul searching.
The German publication De Spiegel recently published an article entitled "A Clash of Civilizations in Nigeria", in which Nigeria was described as a nation of increasing radicalism amongst both Christians and Muslims. Radicalism, in the sense that each religion is trying to outdo the other, leading to immense rivalry that often boils over.
Non-Muslim Nigerians would undoubtedly be particularly gutted and enraged by Umar Farouk's actions. One only needs to visit online forums to see the sort of comments some of them have left behind (the anonymity that the internet often leads some people to say things they would not dare say in public—but things they truly mean). Having to be viewed as security threats when they travel internationally because of an act driven by extremist Islamic ideology appears to be the straw that has broken the camel's back.
But disowning Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab solves nothing. Deeply disapproving of his actions would be a better approach, or strongly dissociating oneself from his actions. He remains a Nigerian. Nigerians are not all good people. They are just like the rest of humanity, for saints, sinners, terrorists and peacekeepers dwell within the borders of Nigeria.
The worst terrorist action on United States soil before the 11th of September 2001 was committed, not by Islamic extremists, but by a Catholic-raised American citizen, who was born and bred within the United States—Timothy McVeigh. But then, Americans are also just like the rest of humanity.
Related: An International Nigerian Terrorist
Related: An International Nigerian Terrorist
Labels: Nigeria, Religion, Terrorism, United States
>>Go to HomePage
January 8, 2010
King Leopold's Ghost
A few months back, this blogger decided to put in an entry for a creative writing competition. Surprisingly, he won. Not because of his outstanding writing or literary abilities, but because there happened to be only one other contestant. The winning prize was a coupon that allowed one to walk into some bookshops in the neighborhood and pick up a book—up to a certain monetary value of course. Thanks to this token, this blogger was able to do something old-fashioned that hadn't been done in years—he walked into a bookshop and browsed through books, without the clutters of reviews, opinions and counter opinions one finds on sites like Amazon.com.
The book that most caught his attention was by an American author called Adam Hochschild. It chronicled events in present day Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) from the late 18th century, when it became the personal fiefdom of the Belgian monarch, King Leopold II, to the assassination of its first democratically elected and short-lived leader, Patrice Lumumba (with the aid of the American and Belgian governments), focusing much more on the former. Those familiar with very recent Congo history know the rest—the three-decade reign of Joseph Désiré Mobuto (Mobuto Sésé Seko) and the beginning of the ongoing Kabila dynasty. What most of these events have had in common are instability, poverty, corruption and deep-seated authoritarianism.
Some Africans all-too-often blame the continents current plight on the scars of colonialism. While this alone cannot explain why some of the continent is the way it is, in a country like the DRC, the scars remain vivid. In Hoschschild's opinion, King Leopold's reign of the Congo was so brutal that about half the population (10 million people) perished, not largely due to disease but from state sanctioned executions and people being worked to death. Isidore Ndaywel è Nziem, a prominent Congolese scholar, puts the death toll even higher at 13 million.
Under Leopold's control, the Congo went from a being a prime ivory exporter to a rubber exporter. Export did not necessarily mean trade for it was pure exploitation. Locals were paid peanuts to export their products (which they were also forced to obtain, to the point of death, in most cases). What they got in return from Antwerp were weapons, used primarily by the colonial administration and its Force Publique militia to subdue them. The raiding and pillaging of villages, chopping off of hands and physical/sexual abuse of locals were well documented.
There were so many actors involved in the Congo play during Leopold's time that it is impossible to list them all in as short a post as this. But worthy of mentioning, for their good deeds, are E.D. Morel and Roger Casement, the British and Irish advocates who fought Leopold by publishing abuses in the Congo and pressurizing the British government to take action. William H. Sheppard, an African-American missionary of the Presbyterian Church, spent decades in the Congo, preaching to the locals and widely documented abuses there as well. Though a second-class citizen in his own segregated nation of the United States, he never ceased fighting for justice in the Congo.
There were also Swedish and other Christian missionaries, who worked hard to expose the brutality of Leopold's regime, and George Washington Williams, an African-American lawyer and historian, who first exposed Leopold's terror in the Congo. Practically no indigenous African voices were heard in those days, for even those who could read and write would hardly have been listened to, like the Nigeria-born Congo-resident and Europe-educated Hezekiah Shanu Andrew, who was driven to suicide once he turned against Leopold's regime.
While people speak of the ills and legacy of colonialism, it is in doubt whether African children are taught a fair representation of their recent history—and by recent, this blogger is referring to past 1,000 years. After all, their post-independence education systems were largely copied from the countries that colonized them. A fair teaching of history is not only one that is devoid of nationalistic patronage (as one may see in, say, France or Japan) but also one that hardly fails to mention the suffering and exploitation of the past (such as is taught in Nigeria).
While the brutality and executions of Leopold's regime in Congo were no planned genocide, they were a de facto genocide, given that millions of people were executed in a bid for Leopold to achieve his business aims. Leopold never visited the Congo in his lifetime and shortly before his death, sold it to the government of Belgium. A number of things have changed since then. Kinshasa, a once sleepy village and previously known as Leopoldville, has grown to a city of 10 million inhabitants. Stanleyville, named for Henry Morton Stanley, the British explorer who opened up central Africa to Leopold's insatiable greed, is today known as Kisingani.
Understanding Leopold's tyranny in the Congo should be a part of the Congolese educational curriculum. The aim here should not be to impart guilt on Leopold's descendants (the Belgian monarchy) or the descendants of citizens in the country he ruled (Belgians). Far from it. In one way or another, everyone alive today is descended from conquerors. Those who have been conquered and subdued have long vanished.
Notwithstanding, it is important to be conscious of history and this consciousness can partially be imparted by education. It is consciousness that gives rise to ideas and ideas, in turn, give birth to change. The Congolese consciousness must be aware of its recent past. In this way, it would not only prevent another Leopold or Mobuto Sésé Seko (a mini-Leopold reincarnate, some may say) from emerging, but find a way to forge ahead peacefully in this journey we all call life, in the incredibly large and mineral-rich state called the DRC.
Adam Hochschild's excellent book is called King Leopold's Ghost. You can view Mr. Hoschschild talking about the book on the C-SPAN video library website.
Labels: Colonialism, Congo (DRC), History, Human Rights
>>Go to HomePage
January 1, 2010
Nigeria: The Military at the Door
Sustained good governance in Nigeria appears to be near impossible. Few countries in the world have been so unblessed with bad political leadership as Nigeria has in her post-colonial history. When Nigeria returned to democratic civilian rule in 1999, after a decade and a half of military dictatorships, people were hopeful that much anticipated change had finally come. Well, some change did come but by 2007, a constitutional crisis ensued, when then president, Olusegun Obasanjo, decided to extend his stay in power—an attempt that failed.
Mr. Obasanjo then handed over to Nigerians an obscure governor, Umaru Yar'adua, as their future president. The phrase "handed over" is used to denote the fact that though Nigeria is, constitutionally, a democratic state, the results of elections at the Federal level of government were pre-determined by the ruling People's Democratic Party.
This blog was not only surprised by an impending Yar'adua presidency but also taken aback. In the last post on this issue (Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea, posted in December 2006), Nigerians were urged to reject Mr. Yar'adua given that he was largely untested and was reported to be suffering from a terminal illness. Whether or not they eventually did was irrelevant. Yar'adua became the president of Nigeria at Mr. Obasanjo's and the ruling party's behest. And that precisely is when the nightmare began.
Mr. Yar'adua is undoubtedly a very ill man. Media reports of his illness appeared not only to be very true but also to have been underestimated. Since assuming office as president of Nigeria, he has made a number of trips outside the borders of Nigeria for treatment, cancelling strategically important official functions and trips. Now, this should normally not be an issue as he is only human and bound to fall ill once in a while. But this is no normal situation. His last trip has seen him away from Nigeria for almost 40 days, with no word on who exactly is running the country.
There has been a veil of secrecy around Mr. Yar'adua's illness with some online rumors claiming that his in a coma, and others that he is in intensive care. His personal physician did however state that he was suffering from acute pericarditis — an inflammation of the lining around the heart, but only after it became impossible to hide the fact that he was very ill and also around the time he was last flown to Saudi Arabia for treatment.
Apart from this, not a single high-ranking Federal government official in Nigeria has been able to come forward and explain the state of the president, what his response to treatment is like and who happens to be running the country in his absence. The secrecy surrounding Mr. Yar'adua's illness hints at an impending end of his presidency.
Political schemers are undoubtedly very busy, working behind the scenes on how and when this end should be brought about, given that, from all indications, Mr. Yar'adua is incapacitated and unable to function. Even if he does eventually recover, resuming full duties, as President, may be near impossible and he would likely be pressurized to step down.
Mr. Yar'adau's illness has placed Nigeria on its latest constitutional crisis. He was meant to appoint a new Chief Justice of Nigeria before the 31st of December 2009. Unable to do this, the constitution, it appears was breached, with the outgoing Chief Justice appointing his successor. This appointment has been rejected by certain fractions in the Nigerian judiciary.
Mr. Yar'adua's vice, Jonathan Goodluck, has refused to assume presidential powers, probably out of fear of offending Yar'adua and ruling party loyalists. But, given the recent foiled airline attack by a Nigerian citizen in the United States, Mr. Goodluck was left with no choice but to dish out executive orders in regard to full cooperation with the United States.
If Mr. Yar'adau remains outside the shores of Nigeria much longer, be not surprised if even more constitution crises emerge. So much is required to be done now, with presidential approval. An accumulation of constitutional crises would likely have one inevitable end—the intervention of the Nigerian military. The Nigerian military may appear weakened but, be not fooled. The military would likely tolerate only so much "nonsense" from the ruling civilian political class. And if the military were ever forced to intervene, politicians would have only themselves to blame.
For now though, the show goes on.
Labels: Government, Nigeria, Politics
>>Go to HomePage
December 29, 2009
An International Nigerian Terrorist?
Until Christmas Day 2009, the notion of an international Nigerian terrorist could easily have been viewed as nothing but an oxymoron. There are fanatical Nigerian terrorists, no doubt. Largely driven by a politicized religious fervor and a zeal to fight for their God, these people, more often than not, dwell in poverty and hold onto contorted religious teachings. Their terrors have, however, largely been confined to the borders of the Nigerian Republic. They come and go, maiming and sometimes killing their fellow countrymen and countrywomen, who happen not to share their politico-religious views.
But, even then, such terrorist actions are an exception, rather than the norm in Nigeria. Such unfortunate exceptions include blood cold violence that followed the Danish publication of cartoons of the Islamic Prophet Mohammed in 2005 and the dumbfounding violence of a group called Boko Haram in 2009, one of whose aims was to rid Islamic Northern Nigeria of Western education and Western influence and ultimately introduce Islamic Sharia law in all of Nigeria. Boko Haram was eventually crushed by the Nigerian security services—at least, officially.
On 25 December 2009, while parts of the world celebrated the age-old ritual of Christmas, a young Nigerian citizen attempted detonating an explosive device on Northwest Airlines-operated Delta Airlines Flight 235 bound for Detroit (United States) from Amsterdam (the Netherlands). The Nigerian media outlet ThisDay reports him as being:
"...Abdul Farouk Umar Abdulmutallab, a 23-year-old son of [] Umaru Mutallab, former First Bank chairman. [Umaru] Mutallab, [also] a former [Nigerian government] minister and prominent banker recently retired from the Bank's board..."
Other media outlets have reported that the young Umar Farouk resided in an uptown luxury apartment in London (United Kingdom) and that his journey to the United States on Christmas day began in Yemen, and included stints in Ethiopia and Ghana. This was followed by a stopover in Lagos (Nigeria) before proceeding to Amsterdam (the Netherlands) and finally Detroit (United States). He is also reported to have studied at a British International School in Lome (Togo) and at the University College, London.
Given Umar Farouk’s privileged background, one can only be left wondering why on earth he decided to do what he did. Tens of millions of Nigerian kids would trade anything in the world to have the sort of opportunities he had. Fair enough, his family came out, after the incident, to state that they were totally gutted by what happened. But even surprising is the fact that his father had contacted security services both at the United States Embassy in Abuja (Nigeria) and the Nigerian security services to warn that Umar Farouk posed a threat and might be involved in planning a jihad.
The United States services went as far as blacklisting him, indicating he had "a significant terrorist connection" but did not go as far as putting him on its "no-fly list". Hence his ability to obtain a visa to fly to the United States.
Yemen, it appears was the breeding ground for Umar Farouk’s distorted and fanatical ideas. Given that Al-Qaeda has claimed responsibility for the botched attack, it appears increasingly likely that Umar Farouk was specifically trained for this mission in Yemen. The Yemeni government recently claimed that he was resident in the country for the purpose of studying Arabic.
If found guilty, and he most likely would, Umar Farouk could expect to spend the rest of his productive life behind bars in the United States. He would likely have a lot to talk about with the likes of Richard Reid, the shoe bomber.
It is indeed a thing of joy that Umar Farouk's attempted Christmas day attack failed and everyone got out of the airplane safe and sound. But the repercussions of this foiled attempt at destroying an American flying object and killing all those on board would be felt for some time to come.
Nigerians can expect more stringent security searches at airports worldwide. Such profiling is a logical reaction to an event like this. Unfortunately, increased security on Nigerian travellers could allow for more deadly non-Nigerian targets slip through airports worldwide. Most Nigerians couldn't care less about al-Qaeda and the message it preaches. al-Qaeda would likely find some sympathy amongst a fraction of Nigerian Muslims, but it is highly in doubt if that fraction is the majority.
The botched attack on Northwest Airlines Flight 235 has everything to do with a radical Islamic ideology promulgated by extremist groups like al-Qaeda. This is the point that must be emphasized. al-Qaeda’s ideologies could find sympathizers in your family, your neighborhood or your workplace. It is not ethnic, region or class specific. Though largely concentrated in the Middle East, it is becoming global.
The concept of an international Nigerian terrorist is no longer an oxymoron, for the tentacles of a radical and distorted Islamic ideology has slowly spread, and continues to slowly spread worldwide. Umar Faruok was only the latest bait, and a foolish one at that. Jail may offer him the solace and solitude to ponder over what he just did, that is, if he survives his time there.
Labels: Nigeria, Terrorism, United States, Violence
>>Go to HomePage
December 19, 2009
Comments are Back
After three long weeks of waiting, Blogger, it appears has finally sorted out the mess with regard to comments on this blog. All previous comments are now in place.
Related: Blogger, where are my comments?
Blogger is broken
Impatiently waiting for blogger
Labels: Blogger
>>Go to HomePage
December 15, 2009
Impatiently Waiting for Blogger
Impatiently waiting for Blogger to fix the comments problem on this blog, and on several other blogspot blogs. Past comments keep disappearing and reappearing leaving one to wonder what exactly the problem could be.
If Blogger were a serious revenue earner for Google, wouldn’t this problem have been fixed weeks ago? But then, it appears, this blogger is decided. Not long after moment this mess is over, to be as far away from Blooger as I can for good.
Still deciding on what new blogging platform to adopt but that really is a secondary issue. The main goal now is to see this blog restored to what it ought to be and for that one is left with no choice but to keep waiting impatiently for Blogger.
Labels: Blogger
>>Go to HomePage
November 29, 2009
Blogger is Broken
It appears blogger is having serious problems with comments, my blog being one that is greatly affected. The comments on some posts have totally disappeared (with blogger indicating 0 comment, where there are meant to be two or three comments). On other posts, though the number of comments is rightly indicated, the comments aren't displayed at all.
While this problem persists, I must say I have been quite fortunate to have backed up every single post and associated comment(s) before this happened--unconsciously foreseeing that something like this may just happen.
Some posts on this blog are best appreciated when placed in the context of the comments that followed. Comments have allowed for discussions and debates and, in some cases, pushed this blogger into further research on certain topics or issues.
Blogger's Terms of Service clears it of any liability, should there be a "deletion of, or the failure to store or to transmit, any Content and other communications maintained by [Blogger]". But then, nothing in life is free. After (or rather, if) this problem is solved, it may just be time to run away from Blogger to a paid blogging service. At least, payment comes with rights and I'm referring to rights that extend all the way to litigation.
Labels: Blogger
>>Go to HomePage
November 25, 2009
Blogger, where are my comments?
I noticed yesterday (the 24th of November 2009) that most comments on this blog have simply disappeared. With the exception of the last ten posts, comments on blog posts no longer show up. Though blogger still indicates that the comments are meant to be there, they do not show up when clicked.
It appears I am not alone.
Blogger (Google) please fix this problem.
Labels: Blogger
>>Go to HomePage
November 18, 2009
Twin Buildings
Which came first?
The building above is the National Arts Theatre, a center for performing art and cultural events. Originally built for the Festival of Arts and Culture (FESTAC), held in 1977.
Location: Iganmu, Lagos, Nigeria.
Completed in: 1976
Information Source: Wikipedia and local knowledge.
The building above is the Palace of Culture and Sports. An indoor complex for culture and sport.
Location: Varna, Bulgaria.
The complex has three sports halls - 'Kongresna Hall', 'Mladost Hall' and 'Hall 20'.
Completed in: 1978
Information Source: Wikipedia
Location: Iganmu, Lagos, Nigeria.
Completed in: 1976
Information Source: Wikipedia and local knowledge.
Location: Varna, Bulgaria.
The complex has three sports halls - 'Kongresna Hall', 'Mladost Hall' and 'Hall 20'.
Completed in: 1978
Information Source: Wikipedia
>>Go to HomePage
November 16, 2009
From the Blogosphere
Should an American President Bow Down to Royalty?
[African]-American bloggers discuss whether their president should have bowed down to the Japanese emperor during his recent visit to Japan.
Via Booker Rising
Nigerian construction industry to become world's fastest growing by 2018
Construction growth in Nigeria will be the fastest of all markets, according to the latest 10-year forecast from Global Construction Perspectives and Oxford Economics. The new study says China will overtake the US as the world's biggest construction market by 2018, but that the fastest growth will happen in Nigeria. The survey said infrastructure is the hottest sector to be in and that "it is set to grow in emerging markets by a staggering 128 per cent from now to 2020, compared with just 18 percent over the same period in developed countries"... Via ThisDay Online
Photo manipulation at its best
Good blogs to follow for occasional posts with reams of these types of images are InstantShift or Smashing Magazine.
Via White African
>>Go to HomePage
November 15, 2009
The Car as Contraceptive
Though there is a general consensus that global human fertility rates have fallen significantly over the last 60 years, it remains apparently clear that, in general, the global human population is still increasing. And even a country like China, which implemented a national policy on birth planning in 1979 (the so-called 'one-child policy'), is still experiencing an increase in its population albeit at a much slower rate than in the past.
While Japan is aging at a rate that has alarmed its government, the United States still manages to stay above the 2.1 threshold (I wonder who came up with this figure, which I am informed is only valid in industrialized countries, where child mortality is relatively low). The government of Japan recently passed a law to grant families about $145 per month for every child under 15 from April 2010, according to the Christian Science Monitor.
Eager to stabilize its already shrinking population, Japan is doing all it can to ensure that young Japanese couples choose to have babies, just like their parents and grandparents before them. The BBC's Robin Lustig, has taken the bold and unusual move of describing Japan as a "slowly dying" nation. And, Japan, being a largely phenotypically homogenous nation state, would find it anything but easy to spare a thought for letting in migrants—be they Chinese, Thai or Vietnamese. Think of what happened to the Brazilian-Japanese who were let in some years back only to be encouraged to return back to Brazil at the peak of the global financial crisis, as reported by Time Magazine.
A general perception is that wealth leads to fewer children. Therefore, in more affluent nation states (such as Sweden, Singapore and Canada) one sees fewer children being born in relation to the number of fertile women than in say less affluent nations (Niger, Afghanistan, Liberia). But there is more to this than simply affluence. Several of the oil-rich nations of the Middle East have fertility rates that are beyond what is required to stabilize their populations in the long-term.
Religion and its cultural underpinnings have long been bastions that encouraged procreation. And even in the absence of religion, some scientists would tell us that one of the primary purposes of existence is to procreate. In other words, to pass on one's genes. In the wildest forms of nature, this may be true. Animal populations in the wild tend to be regulated by natural conditions that tend to favour or disfavor genetic transfer (bumper rains, droughts or diseases) . But several human populations have overcome such natural limitations. While in the highlands of rural Ethiopia, a drought almost inevitably leads to the death of hundreds or thousands of people, this is no longer the case in China, which now produces more food than it consumes.
The modern lifestyle is largely responsible for decreasing fertility rates globally. This is a lifestyle that is largely independent of culture or ideology. Families who live in high-density cities are likely to have fewer children than those who live in small villages. Add some degree of education, greater individual choice and access to an ever-increasing array of contraceptives and you have the perfect recipe for what is slowly but steadily becoming the global norm amongst the highly educated working class—the one or two kid family. At the very most, three kids, which I consider as being the practical maximum. The welfare states of Western Europe also help to reinforce smaller families, as the traditional role of children as care givers in later life is taken up by the state. But what drives this practical maximum? Several things of course but few are more visible and as potent as the automobile.
Whoever designed the first modern automobiles either did not view them as equipment that were to be used to ferry large families around or envisioned a future in which family sizes would be small. Though the chassis, engines and interior design of cars have come a long way since Ford introduced the Model T, one thing has remained practically unchanged—the number of passengers that can fit into a car.
Ford's Model T could sit four or five people in total and so would most sedans, hatchbacks or station wagons on sale today. Consciously or unconsciously, family sizes have been dictated by the number of children that can be crammed into the back seats of family cars. In this way, the car has done a good job in slowly setting the maximum number of children that people who depend on it eventually go on to have.
Of course, there are families who own two, three or more cars. And there are also those who choose to go beyond the three kid threshold and opt for minivans, otherwise known as multi-purpose vehicles. But these would be exceptions rather than the norm in most parts of the world where people own cars.
Labels: Contraception, General, Population
>>Go to HomePage
November 7, 2009
Of Mayor Bloomberg and New York City
Not so many city mayors are as well known as Michael Bloomberg, the incumbent mayor of New York city. Mayor Bloomberg is, these days, known to be an Independent, which is a sort of oddity, given that every other political affiliation in the United States appears to be either for the Democratic or Republican Party.
Mr. Bloomberg himself has toyed with being a Democratic Party supporter and a Republican Party politician. As a matter of fact, Mr. Bloomberg marketed himself as a Republican when he ran for office in 2001 and 2005. It was only in 2007 that he decided to adopt the label of Independent, according to his Wikipedia profile.
Close to the end of his second tenure as mayor of New York came a surprise when Mr. Bloomberg began pushing the New York City Council to vote in favour of an amendment to the law permitting him to run for a third term. The existing law allowed for a two-term limit.
Now, to those of us on the this side of the Atlantic, the phrase “third term”, especially in politics, is enough to send shivers down one’s spine. Names of people like Olusegun Obasanjo, one-time Nigerian president who sought a third-term but failed, comes to mind. So does Mamadou Tandja, the president of Niger who recently secured a third term in a way thought dubious by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) that his country was suspended from the organization (see Xinhua report on the issue).
The United States is, to a large extent, respected and somewhat envied for its supposedly strong legal system and New York city is meant to be an embodiment of modern and forward looking America. What recently happened in New York city is quite surprising, to say the least, moreso given that no public referendum was held on the issue.
Mr. Bloomberg narrowly won the election, according to the New York Times, and would now serve as mayor of New York for the third time. Having spent close to $100 million on his election campaign, it is not surprising—according to the New York Times, he outspent his rival, Bill Thomspon by 14 to 1.
One could only sit back now and wonder if Mr. Bloomberg may someday be interested in a fourth or even a fifth term—after all, one reason he has chosen to hang on is because he believes the city of New York needs him, especially in these post-global recession days.
The United States did away with absolute [British] monarchs long ago for the very simple reason that absolute power not only corrupts but so does power when allowed to reside in the hands of one person for too long. One may argue that Mr. Bloomberg is no absolute ruler, given that he governs with the City Council of New York. But the final word does reside with him.
The Chinese government understand the dangers of absolute power in the hands of one individual (think Mao Tse-Tung). Though it claims to run a communist system, the communist party refreshes its leaders every now and then and for good reason. At the higest level of politics in China, money is much less important than it is in the United States.
Photo: Manhattan skyline from Lsuza's Flickr Photostream.
Labels: Democracy, New York City, Politics, United States
>>Go to HomePage
November 5, 2009
Downstream Deregulation Followup
Nigeria's current 'installed' refining capacity
This is a follow-up to an earlier post on this blog entitled 'Downstream Deregulation', in which arguments were put forward on the need for deregulating the downstream oil sector in Nigeria. I would like to present a few facts on the current state of Nigeria's oil refining sector based on publicly available information.
There are four refineries in Nigeria with a total refining capacity of 445,000 barrels/day. The four refineries are:
Port Harcourt Refinery I: Completed in 1965. Original capacity of 38,000 barrels/day. Debottlenecked in 1973 to refine 60,000 barrels/day. Located in Alesa-Eleme near Port Harcourt.
Warri Refinery: Engineering contractor was Snamprogetti Spa of Milan , Italy. Contract awarded in 1975 and construction completed in 1978. Original capacity of 100,000 barrels/day. Debottlenecked to 125,000 barrels/day in 1985. Cost = $478 million
Kaduna Refinery: Engineering contractor was Chiyoda of Japan. Contract awarded in 1976 and refinery commissioned in 1979. Capacity of 100,000 barrels. Half of this is fuels and the other half is waxes, asphalt and lubes. Debottlednecked to 110,000 barrels/day in 1985. Cost = $525 million.
Port Harcourt Refinery II: Engineering contractors were JGC Corporation/Marubeni Corporation of Japan and Spibatignolles of France. Contract awarded in 1985, with the refinery commissioned in 1989. Capacity of 150,000 barrels/day Cost= $850 million.
Some key points are: (1) Since 1989 no additional refining capacity has been added in Nigeria. (2) Investments required are so huge that no local private company could undertake to construct a refinery.
The data above were gleaned from the Nigerian business publication BusinessDay and are based on a lecture delivered by Alex Ogedengbe, a former managing director of Port Harcourt Refinery.
Nigeria's Petrol Consumption and Population Growth
Petrol consumption in 1998 was 18 million liters/day or 113,000 barrels/day. This had almost doubled by 2009 to 35 million liters/day or 220,000 barrels/day. Figures are from ThisDay Newspaper, republished on AllAfrica.com.
As of 2003, the state-owned Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) was importing as much as 70% of petrol consumed locally, according to Alexander's Gas and Oil Connections, an authoritative site on oil and gas issues. This is indicative of poor refinery utilization.
And finally, it appears that the rate of increase of petrol consumption in Nigeria (assuming linear growth) is higher than the rate of increase in population. It means that, on average, each Nigerian resident consumes more petrol in 2009 than he/she did ten years ago, directly or indirectly. It also means that the cost of subsidy per person also increases. To what extent such subsidy would be sustainable in the long term is the big question.
Nigeria's current 'installed' refining capacity
The data above were gleaned from the Nigerian business publication BusinessDay and are based on a lecture delivered by Alex Ogedengbe, a former managing director of Port Harcourt Refinery.
Labels: Nigeria, Oil and Gas, Refining
>>Go to HomePage
November 4, 2009
Business and Morals
The past year and a half has been difficult for many across the globe. We watched as some of the most powerful financial institutions on the planet came close to collapse, literally going with bowls in hands to governments, begging for cash to stay alive. It didn’t matter whether it was in the United States, Ukraine, Britain, Hungary, Latvia or Ireland. The very core of key players in the world’s financial system was shaken and if not for the intervention of governments, we would likely have seen unimaginable social unrest, anarchy and homelessness in countries as far apart as the United States and Russia.
Every other person has an opinion as to what caused what the mainstream media has come to dub “the Global Financial Crisis”, though I doubt the bulk of people in Papua New Guinea or indigenous groups in the Amazon noticed that there was a crisis in the first place. Investment banks and their uncontrolled appetite for risk, would undoubtedly bear the brunt of the blame. So would other banks and financial institutions. But governments, whose regulatory arms were either lax, ignorant or complicit would not go scot free either.
What was initially known as the sub-prime crisis (in relation to mortgages given out to sub-primers or people who would barely have been able to pay back) evolved into something so huge that the very foundations of capitalism and the free market system it advocates were called into question. But, could the problem really be said to be capitalism or the human appetite for risky reckless behaviour, especially when the rewards at the end of the day could be enormous.
One word hardly heard these days, especially in financial circles, is morality. Yes, morality. That old-fashioned religious sounding word that requires of one to question whether what he or she is doing is just and fair. In the opinion of this blogger, the financial crisis cannot be discussed without bringing in a moral context. The more philosophical ones may opt to refer to it as ethics for fear of sounding like vicars or preachers. The Financial Times has been reviewing what role morality/ethics could play in brining bankers, traders and businesses as a whole back on a sane footing.
This blog is of the opinion that capitalism, as a system, brings out the best in human creativity and productivity, allowing people to modify their neighbourhoods, cities and countries in ways that would be unimaginable if such a system were not in place. Ideas are transformed to products that make life better, thanks to capital made available by...well, banks or the markets. But, modern day capitalism is developing one deep flaw—a flaw that could come to hunt it three or four generations down the line. That flaw is short-term uncontrolled greed at the expense of long-term survival.
Greed, when controlled, is undoubtedly a good thing. It fires the spirit within us and brings out the best of our competitive nature. But uncontrolled greed is dangerous and like a explosive device that has been set off, ends up destroying not just itself but every other thing around. The growing desire for quick, and sometimes outrageously high returns on investments is, to say the least frightening. Thus, was Bernard Madoff able to successfully con his clients, individuals and institutions—some to the tune of millions of dollars. So also did pension funds across the world see billions of dollars worth of investments vanish in the past year and half, even in funds or businesses they thought were relatively safe. The global financial system is becoming so interconnected that hedging ones risks would only get more difficult in future—the safe investment fund you run to is deeply linked to probably hundreds of risky ones.
Profits are great and so is wealth. Everyone and every business should be free to strive for them. But, if the cost of making that 50% return on an investment is the pollution of ground drinking water, or the deposition of toxic metals into rivers, or the making credit readily available to hundreds of thousands of individuals with poor credit histories who would most likely never pay back, or permitting financial institutions that promise outlandish savings interest rates to operate in ones domain, or the degradation of land and forced displacement of powerless people, then we could only be said to be poorer.
The people of Iceland may not be starving or running short of bare necessities, but they certainly feel less wealthy today (on average) than they did say, three years ago. What goes around comes around. Every business decision taken today of which morals or ethics are pushed aside could likely be subject to litigation in future. The law of karma holds true, whether in the Seychelles or in China. Unethical practices, lucrative as they may seem in the short term, more often than not have disastrous long term consequences.
>>Go to HomePage
November 1, 2009
Dambisa Moyo: Aid Isn't Working for Africa
Dambisa Moyo, a Zambian-born economist and author of the widely acclaimed book 'Dead Aid: Why Aid is Not Working and How There is Another Way for Africa' was recently interviewed by Forbes in its Thought Leaders series.
Dead Aid makes for a refreshing read for a number of reasons. First of all, it is represents the voice of a young, highly educated and confident lady (whose resume boasts stints at Goldman Sachs and the World Bank) on a workable way forward for the African continent. Secondly, it puts forward strong and coherent arguments as to why African governments should listen less to people like Bono (of the U2 rock band) and more to well trained and knowledgeable economists on how to build their economies. In Dambisa Moyo's words, no European government would take lessons from Michael Jackson (now of blessed memory) on how to structure their economies.
Ms. Moyo is of the view that aid, rather than enhancing development, stifles it. She also thinks it breeds corruption, undermines democracy (though she is of the view that Western-style democracy shouldn't be a priority in Africa today--a view somewhat shared by this blogger) and makes the receiving governments less accountable to those they govern. Aid, in this case, could be bilateral aid (between two countries) or World Bank multilateral aid/loans. NGO and charity aid are of different matter altogether and are not criticized in Dead Aid.
When a significant part of a government's income is based on foreign aid or long-term low interest multilateral loans, such a government cannot be truly accountable to its citizens. After all, come what may, there would always be some cash in the coffers of government--to the benefit of the ruling class. Dead aid makes strong arguments for the issuance of sovereign bonds (local or international) as proper ways through which African governments should source for funds. In other words, African governments, like the rest of the world, should strive to make use of capital markets to fund development. In so doing, these governments would open up avenues for the private sectors in their economies to also source for funds. And then comes development.
A great problem in much of Africa today isn't the shortage of business or innovative ideas. Rather, it is the absence of capital, i.e. credit. Lack of credit stifles growth and aid only makes it worse. A number of African countries have made use of the international capital market to issue bonds recently--Ghana and Gabon, for instance in 2007. Attempts by some African countries to raise funds in the markets three decades earlier turned nasty as most ended up defaulted on their debts. Though the cost of borrowing remains relatively high for most African nations, it keeps coming down as time progresses.
Almost twenty sub-Saharan African countries are credit rated and most have ratings high enough to tap the international bond market. If African countries are to survive, new financing models must be sought. These are models that gradually rid them off dependency and make them more of equal partners on the global stage with those nations that provide them aid.
Cutting back on aid should mean striving to build up trade with important emerging economies (China, for instance), attracting Foreign Direct Investment, issuing bonds in the capital markets and putting remittances (monies received from citizens resident abroad) and domestic savings to good use. These, in Dead Aid's opinion, are the way forward. An analogy, in this blogger's opinion, would be of a child, who, from birth is entirely reliant on parents or guardians. Such reliance is a metaphor for aid, just as the child is a metaphor for most African nations at independence. As the child grows, he/she becomes more independent and less reliant on parental finances. And, as an adult, the 'child' becomes totally weaned off parental finances and is able to find his/her place in the world.
One could only hope that African governments are listening to the likes of Ms. Moyo. John Kufuor, former president of Ghana, recently stated that people like Dambisa Moyo do not speak for Africa, based on a report in the Dutch online newspaper NRC Handelsblad International. In other words, Africa still needs aid. But a good thing is that, even Mr. Kufuor
...agrees with [the] Rwandan president Paul Kagame, who believes the ultimate goal of development aid should be to make itself redundant.
Unfortunately, the NRC Handelsblad report is fraught with an error when it states:
...[Ms.] Moyo says aid to Africa should be cut entirely because it only leads to inertia and corruption.
What Dambisa Moyo advocates is a gradual moving away from aid dependency in as short a time span as possible. And that makes a whole lot of sense, especially if Africa is ever to develop and compete on the global stage.
Labels: Africa, Aid, Economics, Government, Zambia
>>Go to HomePage
October 26, 2009
On the British National Party
The British National Party (BNP) is a far-right, whites-only political party in the United Kingdom, formed as a splinter group of the British National Front by John Tyndall in 1982. The party's current chairman is Nick Griffin, himself a former national organiser of the National Front. -- Wikipedia introduction to the BNP
In the past week there has been quite some focus in the British media on the BBC's decision to allow the chairman of the British National Party (BNP), Nick Griffin, to participate in the prime-time television discussion program Question Time. Protests were held outside the BBC Television Center by anti-BNP demonstrators, who felt that the BBC was legitimizing the face fascism in Britain by allowing someone like Griffin airtime on what ought to be a respectable television program.
For information about the BNP and what it stands for please consult Wikipedia. Worthy of note is that while the BNP currently has no seat in the British parliament, it has two European parliament seats.
Most nations of the world have their extremes when it comes to politics and the United Kingdom is no exception. However, when, in today's world there exists a political party that publicly advocates for policies that would favor sending away people of foreign decent (read 'non-white' and for no other reason that the fact they are of foreign descent) away from Britain, albeit through 'generous grants', one is left wondering to what extent such a party understands how much some foreigners have contributed to British businesses and society. Would such foreigners also include the wealthiest man in Britain, Lakshmi Mittal, who happens to be Indian?
The BNP, knowing that it could soon become an illegal organization as a result of an upcoming equality bill, would soon be left with no choice but to admit people irrespective of ethnic or racial background. And this would undoubtedly be the beginning of its end. You can read more on the equality bill from the British government website. But for now, fueled by the ongoing recession in Britain, it thrives by playing the age old game of the politics of segregation--them and us.
At a point in recent history, Britain was an empire. Its influence stretched from India to much of the African continent. British colonies adopted the English language and some British customs. And Britain took in fine spices and culinary delights of some of its colonies, leaving out the raw materials that fueled British industrialization. And, imperial Britain moved some people between its colonies--like Indians to East and Southern Africa to work. Some people from the colonies moved to the United Kingdom for various reasons. Empires are breeding grounds for a degree of ethnic mixing and the British Empire was no exception.
Down the line, the descendants of these people have become British. For the BNP to label them foreigners, when they know no other home but the United Kingdom is an insult. At this point in our human history, our efforts should be targeted at solving critical issues facing our world today--environmental pollution, climate change, potential energy shortages. These are global issues that require global solutions. And one cannot think globally when not veiled by the myopic, parochial and self-serving interests of the BNP. It is indeed unfortunate that such a party rubs shoulders with the mainstream in the United Kingdom today. But then, its death is imminent. And the sooner it happened the better.
The video below is from YouTube and, according to its maker, shows that the BNP is an openly racist party. Under its policies, a talented person like Barack Obama would never become British, let alone prime minister.
Down the line, the descendants of these people have become British. For the BNP to label them foreigners, when they know no other home but the United Kingdom is an insult. At this point in our human history, our efforts should be targeted at solving critical issues facing our world today--environmental pollution, climate change, potential energy shortages. These are global issues that require global solutions. And one cannot think globally when not veiled by the myopic, parochial and self-serving interests of the BNP. It is indeed unfortunate that such a party rubs shoulders with the mainstream in the United Kingdom today. But then, its death is imminent. And the sooner it happened the better.
The video below is from YouTube and, according to its maker, shows that the BNP is an openly racist party. Under its policies, a talented person like Barack Obama would never become British, let alone prime minister.
Labels: Immigration, Politics, Race, United Kingdom
>>Go to HomePage
October 25, 2009
The Truth About Dinosaurs
Found this online via Google Reader and loved it. Original image from this blog.
Labels: Humor
>>Go to HomePage
October 24, 2009
Doing Business in China
Selling to the dragon
The Economist recently ran an article on the difficulties of selling foreign goods in China. As expected, this publisher on the virtues free-market economics complained about the 'Chinese walls' companies face when trying to open up new markets in China. Companies, in this case, refers to European and American domiciled multinationals like Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Bayer, Unilever and Dell.
There is little doubt that China is a huge market to which all of the world is eager to sell--especially as it gets richer. Difficulty in getting in due to cultural hindrances, poor understanding of Chinese society or Chinese government policy, could be frustrating.
Sometimes though, one wonders what special value a company like Procter & Gamble could add in China. Okay, it brings advanced manufacturing techniques, global management principles, knowledge on integrated product development etc . But, there are Chinese companies producing the sort of products it makes at lower and more affordable prices. And therein lies the dilemma.
Of the large number of comments I came across following the Economist's publication, one in particular left me thinking. Based on it, one could put forward the following criteria for ANY foreign company or government planning to get into the Chinese market today:
1. Got Valuable Raw Materials? You're Welcome: Crude oil preferably but natural gas could be just as good. China would also be willing to open its market if you've got coltan, cobalt, iron-ore, bauxite, platinum, coal, lithium and copper. Expect therefore to see more friendly gestures between China and the resource-rich nation of Russia as well as between China and several African nations.
2. Got a Nice Brand? We'll Buy: Guccis, Rolexes, Ferraris, for example. But then your market would be limited to the hyper-affluent upper class (which, even in the emerging economy that China is, would be tens of millions of people), who are able to afford such luxury items. You could still make good money though, as the market grows. Coca-Cola, McDonalds, Marlboro etc are brands that the not-so-affluent segment of society can afford and would rush to.
3. Got high Value Technology? We're Interested: General Electric, Boeing, Airbus, Philips etc. Companies with specialized high-tech know-how that takes years or decades to perfect. But watch out. While Airbus now assembles some A320s in China, Chinese aviation is not that far behind with its ARJ21. Some of these companies fully understand that while enjoying good market share in China today (Airbus and Boeing come to mind), they may really be living on borrowed time in that market.
The picture may indeed start changing two decades down the line. The ability for companies like Boeing and Airbus to stay one step ahead of the game will be crucial for their survival in the Chinese market. But then, eventually, technologies will converge globally and it may indeed become a race built on competitive collaboration rather than one built exclusively on competition.
The Economist recently ran an article on the difficulties of selling foreign goods in China. As expected, this publisher on the virtues free-market economics complained about the 'Chinese walls' companies face when trying to open up new markets in China. Companies, in this case, refers to European and American domiciled multinationals like Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Bayer, Unilever and Dell.
There is little doubt that China is a huge market to which all of the world is eager to sell--especially as it gets richer. Difficulty in getting in due to cultural hindrances, poor understanding of Chinese society or Chinese government policy, could be frustrating.
Sometimes though, one wonders what special value a company like Procter & Gamble could add in China. Okay, it brings advanced manufacturing techniques, global management principles, knowledge on integrated product development etc . But, there are Chinese companies producing the sort of products it makes at lower and more affordable prices. And therein lies the dilemma.
Of the large number of comments I came across following the Economist's publication, one in particular left me thinking. Based on it, one could put forward the following criteria for ANY foreign company or government planning to get into the Chinese market today:
1. Got Valuable Raw Materials? You're Welcome: Crude oil preferably but natural gas could be just as good. China would also be willing to open its market if you've got coltan, cobalt, iron-ore, bauxite, platinum, coal, lithium and copper. Expect therefore to see more friendly gestures between China and the resource-rich nation of Russia as well as between China and several African nations.
There is little doubt that China is a huge market to which all of the world is eager to sell--especially as it gets richer. Difficulty in getting in due to cultural hindrances, poor understanding of Chinese society or Chinese government policy, could be frustrating.
Sometimes though, one wonders what special value a company like Procter & Gamble could add in China. Okay, it brings advanced manufacturing techniques, global management principles, knowledge on integrated product development etc . But, there are Chinese companies producing the sort of products it makes at lower and more affordable prices. And therein lies the dilemma.
Of the large number of comments I came across following the Economist's publication, one in particular left me thinking. Based on it, one could put forward the following criteria for ANY foreign company or government planning to get into the Chinese market today:
1. Got Valuable Raw Materials? You're Welcome: Crude oil preferably but natural gas could be just as good. China would also be willing to open its market if you've got coltan, cobalt, iron-ore, bauxite, platinum, coal, lithium and copper. Expect therefore to see more friendly gestures between China and the resource-rich nation of Russia as well as between China and several African nations.
2. Got a Nice Brand? We'll Buy: Guccis, Rolexes, Ferraris, for example. But then your market would be limited to the hyper-affluent upper class (which, even in the emerging economy that China is, would be tens of millions of people), who are able to afford such luxury items. You could still make good money though, as the market grows. Coca-Cola, McDonalds, Marlboro etc are brands that the not-so-affluent segment of society can afford and would rush to.
3. Got high Value Technology? We're Interested: General Electric, Boeing, Airbus, Philips etc. Companies with specialized high-tech know-how that takes years or decades to perfect. But watch out. While Airbus now assembles some A320s in China, Chinese aviation is not that far behind with its ARJ21. Some of these companies fully understand that while enjoying good market share in China today (Airbus and Boeing come to mind), they may really be living on borrowed time in that market.
The picture may indeed start changing two decades down the line. The ability for companies like Boeing and Airbus to stay one step ahead of the game will be crucial for their survival in the Chinese market. But then, eventually, technologies will converge globally and it may indeed become a race built on competitive collaboration rather than one built exclusively on competition.
Labels: Business, China, Emerging Powers, Globalization
>>Go to HomePage
October 23, 2009
While I was not blogging
Most bloggers believe they have an audience, and that is one reason they write. Of course, there are blogs that are barely visited, except by their authors, but that shouldn't be a reason to stop blogging.
While it is certain that no blog would last forever, I'm often left wondering what the average blog lifetime might be. How many blogs ever make it beyond the first year? This blog has been in hibernation thrice—for various reasons—but never for once did I contemplate permanently shutting it down. My greatest fear was that Blogger (my blog host), having detected significant inactivity, may have decided to shut it down. This, of course, depends on what is legally permitted in Bloggers Terms of Use. Good enough though, that didn't happen.
The latest hiatus on the blog has been the longest so far (well over a year and a half). Between February 2008 to September 2009, not a single post was published. Furthermore, I decided to put the blog under lock and key—meaning it couldn't be accessed by those whom I hadn't granted prior permission.
The effects of this weird, though necessary, policy was obvious. This blog vanished from the blogrolls of various bloggers. Indeed, I kept reading blogs even while I wasn't blogging. One by one, I watched as Blogger A, and then Blogger B and then Blogger C deleted this blog from their blogroll. I guess it was only natural. There was no need hoping that my blog would be resurrected from its seeming eternal death. It was safer to believe it was gone for good. What's the point keeping a blog on your blogroll which you couldn't even access.
Once in a while, I received an email from someone I hadn't previously known concerning my blog (sometimes through Global Voices, an organization I once contributed to, and other times from my private email account). I received a total of about ten such mails while my blog was inaccessible. The mails may have been different, but the requests were literally the same: "Do you still blog? Could I please have access to your blog? I used to be an avid reader."
Within the past one year and eight months of silence, I did wonder if blogging itself had a future. Every other person seems to be on Mark Zukerberg's Facebook, or a regional equivalent. Onliners not on Facebook are probably using the microblogging site Twitter—in the Indo-Western half of the world, that is. A large chunk of China-resident onliners may stick to their bulletin boards (BBS), which works just fine for them. Facebook remains blocked in China, since July 2009, according to the website Inside Facebook.
Not wanting to sound conservative, I'm of the opinion that while Facebook is great for online social networking, it not the sort of place where one could share ideas to a global audience—non-Facebookers simply can't access or join in the conversations on Facebook and I see this as a huge limitation.
Twitter, I equate to a world gone mad on SMSes. I'm still trying to understand how one could adequately link blogging and Twitter and wonder if I may have to wait till Google buys up Twitter, as it increasingly does to startups that threaten its financial future.
And finally, there's the ever-present Main Stream Media (MSM). Corporate or government driven, it hovers over New Media (Blogs, Wikis, Twitter, Facebook, MySpace) like the proverbial Goliath over David (a giant over a youngster). Neither would be vanishing any time soon. But huge corporate-driven media, like Rupert Murdoch's empire, already feel the pinch of government-sponsored media and New Media. Maybe it's time it changed its business model and understood the reality of the new world we now live in.
>>Go to HomePage
