Monthly Archives: January 2022

THE SITUATION. Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama on Wednesday, January 19, said he won't enforce National Capital Region's "no vaccination, no ride" policy in his city. Until there's an order from the national government, he said, public utility vehicles here may accept everyone, including the unvaccinated. Meaning, he will follow the national order only when it comes.

But on the "no vaccination, no entry" policy, Mayor Mike embraced the rule in his January 19 executive order banning, among others, the unvaccinated from malls and indoor venues in the city.

Cebu Governor Gwendolyn Garcia, on the same day, said she disapproves of the "no-vaccination, no ride" policy. She also put her foot down on the "no vaccination, no entry" policy implemented by other LGUs like Cebu City, backing her principle with a January 19 memorandum order (3-2022) to all mayors in the Capitol's jurisdiction to refrain from "requiring the presentation of a vaccination card for any educational, employment and other similar government transaction."

WHAT STRIKES THE PUBLIC at once is this: The chief local executives of the two biggest LGUs in Cebu have contrasting beliefs on an important matter -- the vaccination cards -- in the government response to the pandemic. The mayor wants it used to encourage vaccination; the governor sees it as a tool of oppression.

Mayor Mike favors the no vax, no entry rule against the unvaccinated and includes it in his executive order. Guv Gwen disagrees with the no vax, no entry policy and reminds her mayors to avoid it from any government transaction. Mike will implement the no vax, no ride rule once it comes from Manila. Gwen does not like it but doesn't say if she'll disobey a national order to enforce it here.

NO DEFIANCE. Neither LGU leader is defying national government policy, for now.

The governor appears to comply with national policy under Republic Act 11525, which establishes the vaccination program against the coronavirus. She cited the part that says "vaccine cards shall not be considered as an additional mandatory requirement for educational, employment, and other similar government transaction purposes." Her memo to the mayors echoes that prohibition of the law and doesn't go beyond that.

Notice that Gwen's memo doesn't touch on any ban on private establishments catering to the public. That gives private owners the discretion to impose their own rules, provided none will violate any express government order. Thus, in the 44 towns and six component cities of Cebu, malls and similar businesses may or may not require the vax cards, while in Cebu City, there is an express order from City Hall to require the cards for admission.

NO COLLISION, YET. The governor has expressed her opposition to the no vax, no ride policy, calling it "anti-poor" and repeating once more her belief that vaccination is a matter of choice. "Give that respect to the individual," CNN quoted her Wednesday. Yet it has not come to the point where she is defying the order. There's no order yet. With the confusion in Metro Manila, it may not come soon but when it does, she can make her choice, as she did in that imbroglio last year over airport arrival protocol.

Different rules among the LGUs -- because of different mindsets of their leaders -- but they don't directly clash or collide yet. Still, it is setting up the stage for similar incidents in the earlier part of the coronavirus emergency when rules in Cebu City differed from those in the province. One time, the governor called out an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) official, a councilor, for interfering with Capitol rules at the airport.

TOO SOON TO FORECAST failure of the agreement among Metro Cebu mayors and the governor regarding a united front on the anti-Covid campaign.

Last January 7, Cebu Province and the tri-cities of Cebu, Mandaue and Lapu-Lapu announced they agreed that the anti-Covid policy of entire Cebu should be uniform. The three city mayors met the night before with the mayor and Presidential Assistant for the Visayas Michael Lloyd Dino and discussed the need for similar guidelines and regulations in dealing with the pandemic. Typhoon Odette increased the urgency of being united so as to speed up rehabilitation and recovery, Guv Gwen stressed.

They started the posture of a "One Cebu" by agreeing on similar border restrictions.

THE LAST WORD. Now the apparent differences of policy seen from the mayor and the governor are still mostly talk. As cited earlier, there is yet no direct and frontal clash. And local policy-making has not yet crossed lines of national fiat. The gap may still be bridged but surely, the posture shaping up does not look like the kind they want to present to their public and the decision makers in central government.

It could bolster the IATF and Palace argument for having the last word over the LGUs in a time of emergency and crisis.

See more here:

EXPLAINER: Different mindsets of Mayor Mike, Guv Gwen on using vax cards against the unvaccinated. But could any LGU defy central government policy? -...

India claims to be the biggest democracy in the world. But looking at the recent trends one wonders, whether this claim holds any substance. Since its independence India concocted an image of secular democratic republic as stated in its constitution. But it could not hide the reality from the world for too long. Over the years, the atrocities against the minorities and the oppression against dissent contradicts the Indian claims of democracy and exposed its real face for what it truly is; electoral autocracy.

Democracy pertains to the basic principles of equality, freedom of speech, inclusiveness, and participation of public in decision making in a nation. The death of democracy in India entered into its final stage as the BJP, champion of Hindutva ideology, came in power in 2014. Hindutva, as a matter of ideology considers Hindus superior to other religious communities; considers them as true Indian as opposed to members of other faiths. The basic democratic principles were slammed in India, and a religio-nationalist and fascist movement has taken a national stage. The key target of hate and violence since then have been the Muslims of India which constitute 14% of the population. Not only Muslims but other religious minorities in India were also mistreated and targeted by Hindutva aligned groups since BJP came into power.

Indias democracy has eroded over the years as extremist elements have ingressed in highest echelons of power corridor. The situation has deteriorated to the point where Freedom House has downgraded Indias position as a democracy to Partly Free. Sweden Varieties of Democracy Institute not only classified India as an Electoral Autocracy, it also made to the list of top 10 autocracies. The Economist List also downgraded Indias position in democratic countries ranking from No.35 to No.53. The condition is worsening day by day as the fascist Hindu ideology is on rise.

Since 2014, BJP government supported harassment, unwarranted arrests, and prosecution of activists, journalists, students, academics, and others critics of the government or its policies.

As soon as Modis reign began, dozens of murderous attacks on Muslims by Hindu mob were reported in Uttar Pradesh. The BJP government sided with the murderers in the name of religion while the judiciary stood idly toeing governments policy of appeasement towards Hindu extremists. It shows the reality of secular veil of India where only Hinduism is considered the Holy religion.

Muslims were attacked openly and the authorities accepted this culture as normal. Muslim majority areas were targeted. Even the special constitutional status of IIOJK was revoked in August 2019 as Modi government unilaterally nullified the constitutionally granted semi-autonomy to erstwhile state of Jammu & Kashmir.

Citizen Amendment Bill allows migrants from adjacent countries to apply for Indian citizenship if they dont follow Islam, implying that citizenship in apparently secular India is based on religious identity. Muslims have also been the victims of communal rioting and mob lynching on several occasions. Modis government and its allies constant anti-muslim rhetoric, along with the authorities lack of condemnation, has fueled the idea that such illegal and unconstitutional violence is tacitly supported.

The governments treatment towardspolitical opponents is the major predictor of democratic deterioration in India. Indian state has consistently shown contempt for dissent under Modi, attempting to portray critics of the administration as anti-national. Academics, activists, and journalists who criticize the powers that be, have been targeted by the central government. Authorities recently detained a young student climate activist, Disha Ravi on allegations of sedition for sharing toolkit to create and spread awareness about the farmers protest.

Several alarming political tendencies in the Indian nation have been identified, including the development of a Hindu-majority political brand. The executives overwhelming concentration of authority, as well as the governments crackdown on political dissent and the media. Much of the shift is linked with the prime ministers image, whose electoral appeal is based on his self-acclaimed desire to disrupt politics as usual. Despite multiple scandals, Prime Minister Narendra Modi enjoys enormous popularity. His hold on the popular imagination has not lessened, and its repercussions for Indian democracy are immense. Today, India is no less than a scam in the name of democracy where there is no freedom of speech, freedom of opinion, freedom of religion and basic rights.

*The author is an economist & independent researcher. She is a graduate of NUST & Quaid-i-Azam University. She served at the Ministry of Planning Development & Special Initiative as Young Development Fellow. She can be reached at [emailprotected]

See the original post here:

Unmasking The Autocratic Nature Of Indian Democracy OpEd - Eurasia Review

During the Great Depression of the 1930s, the most crippling form of poverty was seen as the poverty of dignity. To read all the letters and diaries and recollections of the time is to see that the severe economic hardship caused by the loss of a job was often considered temporary and survivable. But what destroyed the human spirit what petrified people the most was a loss of dignity caused by the loss of work.

The generation of the Great Depression demonstrated that economic poverty did not permanently cripple, as long as human dignity survived. That kept alive a spirit of hope and will. When a person lost dignity, however, he lost everything. A loss of money is recoverable; a loss of dignity often is not.

The word dignity seems to have gone out of favor. Politicians, educators, and media commentators rarely use that word very much. They talk about income and rights and inequality and discrimination, but almost never dignity.

Yet dignity has a much longer history in the human lexicon than any of those other words. Over centuries of human existence, dignity defined the highest of human ideals and pursuits. The work one does, the way one provides for and protects ones family, has historically been a crucial ingredient of human dignity.

For centuries, work has been bound with human dignity. But that connection appears to have weakened. Once seen as the party of working people, the Democratic Party has evolved into a party that considers work to be a burden, inconvenient, and even degrading. Such attitudes come out in the partys shifted economic and social agendas.

President Bidens Build Back Better plan, strongly supported by nearly all Democrats, sought to make more permanent certain unconditional government grants to adults with children, regardless of whether those adults were working. These grants were instituted by the American Rescue Plan, enacted by the Democrats last March, which changed the child tax credit to automatic taxpayer grants to adults with children, with no work requirement.

Admittedly, eliminating the child tax credit work requirement recognized the problems involved in finding a job during the Covid shutdowns, but the job market is now wide open. Therefore, as Republicans argue, the recent expiration of the Covid-inspired child subsidies presents an opportunity to return to the original scheme, which included a work requirement.

This dismissal of work, ironically, reflects an attitude that infused the Great Society social welfare programs instituted during the 1960s. But because those programs proved disastrous to people who became trapped in them, the 1996 welfare reform sought to reinstate work requirements and thereby restore work to an important value in social policy.

Despite the success of the 1996 reform, Democrats now want to return to the work-dismissive status of the 1960s. Even more ironically, this dismissal of work occurs when jobs and work opportunities are plentiful.

When a society dismisses and disregards a foundation of human dignity, it travels a path toward inhumanity and oppression. One consistent characteristic of oppressive, totalitarian regimes is the disregard for human dignity. Such regimes talk about income and rights and inequality and discrimination, but they completely disregard human dignity.

Throughout all of human history, dignity has been tied up with work. It is not money or consumption or leisure that confer dignity, it is work, because work builds the foundation of human independence, allowing individuals to set the terms of how they and their families will live. Work is the only way through which individuals can take responsibility for their lives and the lives of their families.

But Democrats seem to look at work as an injustice that no person, especially someone who is poor or of minority status, should have to endure. That dismissive attitude toward work perhaps explains why Democrats now struggle with the blue-collar and working-class vote. Democrats of course claim that these voters have become racist, but perhaps a more accurate reason they have left the party is because of Democrats degrading view of work.

The current leftist view of work has been solidifying for decades. Expanding the opportunities for work has increasingly taken a back seat to finding new protected categories of people and undermining social traditions. Indeed, the lefts focus seems to be on government benefit programs rather than job creation.

But it is only work that can create true individual independence and self-sustainability, as well as conferring the pride of accomplishment and contribution. On the other hand, maybe the left does not want independent, self-sustaining individuals; maybe the left wants the majority of society ultimately dependent on government.

Work, and the habits nurtured by work, have throughout human history provided the means by which people can acquire certain vital virtues, such as self-discipline, self-restraint, thrift, and delayed gratification. Work fosters ambition and responsibility. The constitutional framers believed that a prosperous democracy required a virtuous citizenry, and that virtue proceeded from work.

As one Democrat member of Congress said during a hearing about the lack of work requirements in Build Back Better, mention of the so-called dignity of work is like hearing fingernails on a chalkboard. This derision of one of the most foundational virtues underlying our society and democracy is what is most troubling about the Democrats.

If there is no dignity in work, then there should be no work, since no one should be forced to perform undignified activities. But if no one works, how are people to become virtuous citizens independent of their government? If no one works, where are all the tax dollars to come from?

What is most troubling about the Democratic agenda and the liberal outlook is not the price tag of their social and economic programs. What is most troubling is how the left continually seeks to fundamentally transform American society and culture.

At the very center of society is the individual, but the left wants to remove the individual from that role; the left wants government at the center. One way to do that is to remove the ability of the individual to serve as an independent foundation of government and society.

Degrading the dignity of work will certainly achieve that goal. Then, once dignity is removed, and then work degraded, all individuals will indeed be alike they will all be dependent on the government to tell them what rights they have and what benefits they will receive. Once that occurs, will there even be any questions as to how those government beneficiaries are to vote?

Patrick Garry is professor of law at the University of South Dakota, senior fellow at the Center for Religion, Culture, and Democracy, and author of The False Promise of Big Government (ISI Books).

See the rest here:

How Ending Expectations That Adults Work For A Living Erases Dignity - The Federalist

Feds recognition of Halftown is wrong

For the second time in two years, many of us are left frustrated by seeing videos and hearing reports of Clint Halftowns mercenary police carrying out another act of oppression against Cayuga Nation citizens trying to earn a living on their territory, while Seneca Falls and Seneca County police look on from the roadside.

As a scholar with lifelong ties to the area, researching governance politics and building relationships with Cayuga Nation citizens, I am disappointed to see these downstream effects of the federal governments wrongful recognition of Halftown as a representative of the Nation.

However, while social media reactions and local news coverage often focus on whether Halftowns mercenary police force is permitted by the federal government, and even suggest that local police should exercise jurisdiction, these analyses and solutions miss the point of why Clints police are illegitimate. The so-called Cayuga Nation Police and Tribal Court are illegitimate because they carry no authority under the Great Law of Peace. The rightful governing body of the Nation the Council of Chiefs and Clanmothers has removed Halftown from his role on Nation Council multiple times since the early 2000s. Their authority flows from their own law, the Great Law of Peace, while Clints authority flows only from his relationship to the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Rather than calling for local police to intervene more actively, we should instead collectively call on the federal government to respect the Council of Chiefs and Clanmothers authority and removal of Halftown.

Ed. note: Wolkin is a PhD student in the Department of Geography at the University of Washington.

More:

LETTER: Federal government's nod to Halftown as leader is wrong - Finger Lakes Times

I remember the day of 2nd oath-taking ceremony of President Hamid Karzai in an old beautiful palace in Kabul where I was invited as a guest with President Asif Ali Zardari. President Hamid Karzai apparently looked too interested in improving relations with Pakistan. But, with the passage of time, Afghanistan fell in the hands of India and India became the darling of Afghanistan.

If we see the historical pattern of Afghanistan-Pakistan relations we see the hard fact that the Afghan intelligence agency has always remained hostile towards Pakistan and kept the Afghan leadership away from Pakistan while remaining more closer to India.

It is interesting to note that NDS manipulated the first Taliban government and now the present one has also drifted into its clutches as we see its hostile attitude towards Pakistan. The reasons are that NDS is on the payroll of India. The manipulation is done from New Delhi.

Historically, all the successive governments in Afghanistan have drawn this consistent mindset from the anti-Pak groups within KHAD (Khadamat-e Aetla'at-e Dawlati) and WAD, State Intelligence Agency, which were the main military security agency and intelligence agency of Afghanistan during 1980s until 1996. Both were accused of human rights abuses in mid-1980s which included use of torture, use of predetermined "show trials", widespread arbitrary arrests, detentions and execution of prisoners without trial. Mohammad Najibullah remained the director of KHAD while Osman Sultani and Muhammad Fahim were the directors of WAD in the past. We all had witnessed how KHAD created a warzone in our country after Afghan-USSR conflict filled by WAD. The series of oppression and violence continued by the kHAD with its changed name to WAD and now NDS. The mindset of every Afghan government consistently remained anti-Pakistan as it has never accepted Durand Line as international border and we see the new Afghan government having the same old claims against Pakistan.

As interior minister, I did my best to bring Afghanistan closer to Pakistan along with international efforts and bilateral scope which is matter of public record.

It was proposed in a meeting with Richard Holbrooke (former US ambassador to UN) who facilitated the meeting between Haneef Atmar, the former interior minister of Afghanistan, and me where I was fully mandated by my government to proceed with it to improve relations with Afghanistan.

We met first during one of the conferences on our initiative of Friends of Pakistan and then in a hotel in Washington where we finalised a draft agreement to work out a doable draft. We both decided to take the draft agreement to our respective cabinets as it is mandatory to sort an approval of the cabinet.

Accordingly, I got the approval on my return and Amtar got the approval from his cabinet and eventually we met in Islamabad again. The ceremony was televised in the world and it was officially witnessed by John Mueller, the then Director of FBI, on my request.

It was about exchange of information on terrorists and exchange of terrorists. It was indeed a great step to improve relations. But. with the change of interior minister, it was torpedoed as the new minister Gen Bismillah was strong opponent of international border. Afghan government did not honour the agreement to allow us to set immigration and customs check post on Chaman border. The Afghani fighter jet once again destroyed our check post just a day before my visit to Chaman.

The intent was quite clear that Afghanistan did not want good relations with Pakistan. In the meantime, the attacks by the Indian-trained Baloch boys under Brahamdad Bugti increased in Balochistan. I presented undeniable proofs of involvement of Afghan and RAW Intel with satellite images to President Karzai in his office in Kabul. They included video clips and pictures of the Indo-Afghan training camps in Qandahar that made President Karzai speechless in the presence of PM Yousaf Raza Gilani and the then ISI DG Gen Zaheer.

However, I must respect President Hamid Karzai that he admitted the presence of training camps. He clearly said it was not in his hands, hence Pakistan should talk to US to finish these, whereas he could help Pakistan only if Islamabad hands over Mullah Baradar to them who was imprisoned in Pakistan. It did not happen and the camps continued to operate despite the fact that we managed the migration of Brahamdad Bugti to Switzerland with the help of some friendly countries.

President Dr Ashraf Ghani, former NSA of President Hamid Karzai, followed President Karzai to keep Pakistan away from Afghanistan. I had serious arguments with him in Istanbul about unholy alliance between RAW and NDS against Pakistan.

Let me say that their national intelligence agency is the same coming from three successive regimes and all the SOPs are against Pakistan as matter of policy. As Afghan Taliban are now using the same anti-Pakistan bureaucracy and intelligence operators, we should not expect that the mindset of Afghans brainwashed by India can be changed. It is understood that Afghan Taliban had cemented their working relations much before the takeover of Kabul.

The present Afghan hostility goes back a long time and was well reflected by the Afghan forces attack duly led by the local commanders of NDS on our fence. We can see the real intent of new Afghan government. The Afghan refusal to accept friendly offer of PM Imran Khan in the IT sector further tells the intent of Afghan mindset. I appeal the Afghan Taliban to work for peace in the region and do not play in the hands of India.

The writer is former interior minister of Pakistan, author of five books, ex-Chairman Senate Standing Committee on Interior and Chairman IRR Islamabad. He can be reached at: rmalik1212@gmail.com, Twitter @Senrehmanmalik

See original here:

Why is Afghanistan ditching us? - The News International

On January 8, in a speech marking the 110th anniversary of the African National Congress (ANC), South African President and ANC leader Cyril Ramaphosa underlined his partys determination to help resolve various political and developmental challenges across Africa.

He not only disclosed plans for the ANC to strengthen its support for parties working to entrench democracy in Sudan, Libya and South Sudan, but also reiterated his partys commitment to finding African solutions to ongoing conflicts in countries ranging from Mozambique and Lesotho to Sudan and Ethiopia.

That the ANC used the occasion of its anniversary to voice its dedication to promoting democracy and economic development generally in Africa, and particularly in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region, is undoubtedly commendable.

Nevertheless, the ANCs continuing reluctance to honestly talk about, let alone do something to address, the economic and political crisis in neighbouring Zimbabwe despite it also having consequences for South Africa is raising questions about the sincerity of the partys self-declared resolve to find African solutions to African problems.

South Africas neighbour to the North suffered catastrophic economic policies and relentless oppression under Robert Mugabes rule for 38 years. And the land-locked country, which removed Mugabe from power in 2017, is still suffering from endemic corruption, uncontrolled inflation, stagnant salaries, widespread poverty and routine attacks on those calling for truly democratic governance and accountability under authoritarian President Emmerson Mnangagwa.

This permanent state of crisis has led hundreds of thousands of Zimbabweans to seek better futures in other countries, and especially in South Africa, over the years.

The exact number of Zimbabwean migrants in South Africa is not known, but estimates range from a few hundred thousand to more than two million.

About 180,000 Zimbabweans are currently in possession of a Zimbabwean Exemption Permit (ZEP) a visa that excludes its holders from requirements of South Africas immigration and refugee acts and allows them to freely work, study or conduct business in the country. But many more Zimbabwean nationals are believed to be residing and working in South Africa without any visa or work permit.

In recent years, as South Africas own economy started to stumble and its unemployment rate reached record levels, some segments of South African society started to blame the large number of Zimbabwean migrants living and working in the country for their economic struggles. As a result, small political parties that employed anti-migrant rhetoric, such as ActionSA and the Patriotic Alliance, performed surprisingly well in the November 2021 municipal election.

In response to this growing anti-migrant, and especially anti-Zimbabwean, sentiment, the ANC sprung into action. Soon after the municipal election, the ANC government announced its intention to end the ZEP visa scheme and told all permit holders that if they do not obtain a different visa or voluntarily leave South Africa by December 31, 2022, they will face deportation. As most ZEP holders do not have the necessary qualifications to switch to work or study visas, this means they will either remain in South Africa as irregular migrants, or return home to try and make a living in an economy in permanent crisis.

The decision to end the ZEP scheme is hardly in line with the ANCs self-declared commitment to help other African peoples overcome political, economic, and democratic challenges. Indeed, the move will only push more Zimbabweans into economic precarity and will do nothing to help resolve the crisis that caused them to migrate to South Africa in the first place.

If the ANC genuinely wants to be the unifying and results-oriented political party that President Ramaphosa purported it to be in his January 8 speech, it needs to abandon its populist anti-migrant policies, and even more crucially, it needs to stop ignoring the devastating political and economic crisis at its doorstep.

Unfortunately, South Africa is not the only country where the government is hellbent on denying the existence of a crisis in Zimbabwe. Indeed, the entire SADC seems willingly blind to the damage the Mnangagwa administration is inflicting on Zimbabwe and the wider region with its ineffective economic policies and oppressive governing methods.

As recently as October 2021 the SADC claimed that Zimbabwes problems are nothing but consequences of the prolonged sanctions imposed on the country by Western nations. The regional body further stated that sanctions are a fundamental constraint and hindrance to the countrys prospects of economic recovery, human security and sustainable growth.

This is an erroneous, and dangerous, take. It is not foreign powers that are keeping the country in a permanent state of crisis, but its own government. If the Mnangagwa government is allowed to blame all of the countrys ills on foreign powers, without taking any responsibility for its many, obvious and damaging mistakes and missteps, Zimbabwe can never get back on its two feet and stop being a challenge for the region.

However, even if Zimbabwes dilemmas and failings were solely the consequences of modern imperialist schemes, it would not be acceptable for the SADC countries to make a few supportive statements and abandon Zimbabwe to its fate. If Zimbabwe is still under an imperialist attack, then SADC countries should step forth and introduce comprehensive measures to help their besieged brothers and sisters in the country.

Indeed, it is time for SADC nations, led by South Africa, to propose African solutions to African problems and establish country-specific migrant quotas and formal procedures to help deal with the demanding Zimbabwean situation. While SADC leaders can preach about mysterious imperial plots and pretend there is no debilitating political crisis in Zimbabwe, they simply cannot do away with the victims of oppression and bad leadership on the ground: the hundreds of thousands of migrants compelled to seek sustainable economic opportunities and jobs in SADC countries, especially in South Africa.

Many are low-skilled migrants who require entry-level jobs in the farming, manufacturing, transport and hospitality industries. Some are skilled migrants who seek jobs in, among other sectors, education and health. Others are informal traders and small business owners who want to establish sustainable enterprises. Without SADCs formal support and interventions, however, many will remain enormously deprived and subject to exploitation.

Hence, in 2022, the SADC has two options. It can either stick with the narrative that Zimbabwes problems are caused solely by foreign plots, and continue to turn a blind eye to Zimbabwes governing party ZANU-PFs tyrannical policies and omnipresent failures. But it should accept that if it chooses this path, its member states, and especially South Africa, will continue to see thousands of irregular migrants rushing to their borders. Or the SADC can choose another path and take the necessary steps to promote democracy and support economic development in Zimbabwe by accepting and exposing the failures of the ZANU-PF.

The former liberation parties that dominate the SADCs ranks have to admit that regional inaction has clearly bolstered the often unruly and violent regime in Harare. African nationalism and historical considerations should not be used to mollify Zanu-PFs leadership and obfuscate its sheer brutality and established incompetence.

One of the SADCs crucial shortcomings is the failure to monitor and help rectify problematic developments in Zimbabwe (and elsewhere) in good time. The SADC, for instance, did not anticipate the November 2017 military takeover that deposed former President Robert Mugabe or the flawed elections that followed the bloodless coup, but it eagerly endorsed both developments.

Today, there are credible fears that the government and the Zimbabwe Election Commission are conspiring to limit new voter registrations for the 2023 general and presidential elections and the SADC, as usual, is silent on such an injustice.

Systematic voter suppression does not bode well for a nation desperate to hold free and fair elections and gather global support for an economic turnaround. In fact, it will certainly lead to more Zimbabwean migrants flocking to the adjacent countries that support Harares dubious modus operandi but are rather displeased by irregular migration.

Going forward, the SADC must pay extraordinary attention to Zimbabwe and steer it towards holding credible elections. After all, the SADC has a responsibility to advance common political values, systems and institutions and safeguard the wellbeing of all its citizens including Zimbabwes distressed migrants. And the ANC, which reinstated its commitment to supporting democracy and economic development in the region on January 8, should lead these efforts.

The views expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeeras editorial stance.

Here is the original post:

Its time for the SADC region to hold Zimbabwe to account - Al Jazeera English

The formal handing over of the departments at Dublin Castle to the Provisional Government is to take place today. The Viceroy, Lord Fitzalan, will, as the King's representative, receive the Ministers of the Government as at a Privy Council.

Vast crowds assembled at the gates of Dublin Castle at midday today in anticipation of the entry of the eight members of the Provisional Government to take over the departments of Government transmitted their charge by the British authorities in accordance with the terms of the Treaty. No intimation had been given to the public as to the hour at which the event would be likely to take place.

Indeed no definite hour was arranged, but the people had a sense that what was about to happen would be the most momentous incident yet witnessed in the history so rapidly unfolding itself in these day of Anglo-Trish amity and they were prepared to wait, no matter how long, in order not to miss it.

Mr Michael Collins, who is acting as head of the Provisional Government, had been out in the country since Saturday's ratification of the Treaty and did not return to the city until late in the afternoon. He was then for some time in consultation with his fellow Ministers at the Mansion House concerning one or two questions connected with the taking over of Governmental powers and machinery.

It was not until about 20 minutes past one that they concluded their conference and telephoned a message to the Castle that they would arrive by 1.40. Punctually to the minute they arrived, driving from the Mansion House in three taxi-cabs.

Mr M Collins and Mr John McNeill were amongst those noticed in the first car and tremendous cheers were sent up by the waiting crowds as the cars swung through the gates and up the hill into the Upper Yard. A considerable portion of the crowd ran in through the gates after them, and so fast was the chase that some of them arrived in time to see the eight Ministers step out of the cars and enter the Castle Mr Michael Collins leading. The remaining seven were Messrs. Wm Cosgrave, Edmund Duggan, Patrick Hogan, Finian Lynch, Joe McGralh, John MacNeill and Kevin OHiggins.

A few moments later the Lord Lieutenant, Lord Filzalan, who had been warned of the Provisional Governments impending visit, arrived in a big car from the Vice Regal Lodge, accompanied by Major Holt, Controller of the Viceroy's household.

The Lord Lieutenant proceeded at once to the Priry Council Chamber and there received the members of the Provisional Government. The simple stateliness of the Chamber with its two great brass chandeliers, pendant over the red cloth-covered table, which occupies the centre of the room, must have impressed the new Ministers. The proceedings were private, but it is understood that the Viceroy, as representative of the King, received them as His Majesty would receive new Ministers.

Following this, the Provisional Government is formally to take over the department of the Castle.

An official statement of the proceedings will be issued later in the day.

Cork Examiner editorial: January 17, 1922

Dublin Castle has long been associated in the Irish mind as a symbol of oppression the outward sign of a system of rule against which freedom-loving Irishmen have instinctively rebelled. Castle rule, as the familiar phrase goes, was a widely-used synonym for injustice, and for the Irish people the repugnant story of Dublin Castle does not awaken pleasant memories.

It was the seat of British rule in this country, and its officials were almost invariably anti-Irish in their sympathies. We do not propose here to go back on its unwholesome history or to revive bitterness by recalling its association with oppression as a political lever. To be called a Castle hack was a mark of opprobrium for anyone who was described by such an epithet.

The Castle backstairs has been regarded as the ladder on which snobs and anti-Irish Irishmen rose to titles and preferment. Dublin Castle, in a word, has long stood as a barrier to Irish freedom and progress, and it typified the rule of force which held Ireland in subjection.

British governments came and went, some professing friendliness and some openly advocating oppression, but the rule of coercion or extortion, or both, always persisted as the permanent officials at Dublin Castle remained, and Castle rule and oppression came to be regarded as interchangable terms. Even Mr Asquith, when he visited Ireland some years ago, frankly admitted that Dublin Castle was a failure.

Buttressed as it has been by British strength, it lasted too long, and the formal handing over of its Departments to the Irish Liaison Government is an event on which the country can congratulate itself.

Elsewhere will be found an account of the proceedings at which Lord Fitzalan received the members of the Provisional Government, and the official record of the historic function. It may be said that "time turns the old days to derision" when Dublin Castle and all it stood for in Ireland comes to be.

It will bring forcibly to the minds of Irishmen everywhere the complete metamorphosis that has taken place in Irish affairs, and make all vividly realise that one by one the obstacles that blocked the road to freedom are being removed, as one might say, by a magic touch.

The Irish Free State is being gradually evolved, and Dublin Castle, which hitherto ruled Ireland, will itself be ruled by the Irishmen it sought to oppress. The day is breaking in Ireland for which the country has long and patiently waited through tribulation and suffering, and if the people of this country were as emotional as some of their critics believe them to be, the entry of the Provisional Government into Dublin Castle yesterday, and the formal taking over of its Departments, should arouse them to exceptional enthusiasm.

Men trained in the school of suffering may not be effusive in displaying their emotions, nevertheless, the fact that Dublin Castle has, to all intents and purposes, changed ownership, is something that must be regarded as a stirring sign of the times.

See more here:

How the Examiner reported the handover of Dublin Castle, 100 years ago today - Irish Examiner

While Saudi Arabia has been trying to open up to the world through its recent tourism blitz, it has still not converted many believers to its commitment to human rights abuses and emancipation of women.

In an effort to boost its creditability, it determined to act as a destination for funding and support of filmmakers and artists across Africa.

Should films change the worlds perspective of a people? Or should a film change how people present themselves? Thats the question that immediately cropped up after the Saudi screening, at its Red Sea Film Festival of Becoming.

READ MORE Inside the rise of Mohammed bin Salman

Becoming, a series of five short films, is a project by a group of female Saudi filmmakers, Hind Alfahhad, Jowaher Alamri, Noor Alameer, Sara Mesfer, and Fatima al- Banawi. Together, they try to give the women in their stories power of control through their own narration.

Having been promoted and produced by the Red Sea Film Festival, Becoming is one of the projects that the Saudi-owned Ministry of Entertainment has sponsored. It can be argued to be a cultural product to whitewash Saudi Arabias violations against women, political activists, human rights defenders, as well as the LGBT community.

According to Amnesty International, among those harassed in Saudi Arabia, arbitrarily detained, prosecuted and/or jailed were government critics, womens rights activists, human rights defenders, relatives of activists, journalists, members of the Shia minority and online critics of government responses to the Covid-19 pandemic.

In a country where all known human rights defenders inside its borders have been either detained or imprisoned, efforts were made to launch an international film festival back in 2019. Its first edition was held in 2021.

The festival is the bridge between capital and art that the Kingdom is trying to blend together to change its image of an emancipated woman only interested in fashion and consumerism to one that can also contribute to the arts. The festival also has established new programming features and film markets to fund and support projects by filmmakers from all over the world, as part of its seeking to empower cinematic talents, preparing them to launch and succeed in the world of cinema.

We often hear phrases like The Tunisian film about sexual abuse, The Somali story of famine, The Kurdish film highlights female militancy, The Syrian film about female sexuality. In the case of Becoming, we risk labelling it as that film on womens rights rather than delving deeper into the storytelling methods and techniques that influenced each director.

The film tells five stories of different women from various classes, educational and societal backgrounds:

All women are in charge of their fate.

The theme of patriarchy is woven throughout the film, but more so due to its existence in society rather than state-imposed policies. Nevertheless, whether victims or victorious, the female characters take charge of the plot, similar to what the five directors are doing in the Saudi filmmaking scene.

Having said that, the filmmakers deconstruct different taboos and humanise the insecurities that the various characters face. The film achieves this simply by treating each taboo as an issue applicable to all women; not just those specifically to Saudi Arabia or elsewhere in the Middle East.

An example can be found in the fifth film: a female teenager feels awkward and panics due to her first menstrual cycle, not because she happens to live in Saudi Arabia, but because she is a female adolescent who has difficulty talking with her mother about intimate issues.

The film and its unique access to intimate stories should not be seen to as the cameras look into the hidden lives of these women where their faces and bodies are hidden from the outside world. But rather the cameras struggle to tell the stories of these women, regardless of if they are of the exotic east or the west, because these stories resound across borders.

Despite efforts to provide a cleaner version of its image through the festival, many may look the other way as the Kingdom can offer much needed monetary support. In particular, African filmmakers and storytellers searching for foreign entities to fund their projects amid a lack of state support, the Saudi Arabian Red Sea Film Festival will indeed be a destination for many.

It is expected the festival will support and fund films about Africa and the challenges that the continent is facing, from political oppression to persecution of women and the LGBTQ+ community.

For example, a $30,000 award was granted to the Tunisian film Contra in post-production. The film, directed by director Lotfy Nathan, centres on resistance as it follows the story of Ali, a young Tunisian who dreams of a better life over making his precarious life selling contraband gas at the local black market. The film is set after the anti-government protests which initiated the Arab Spring.

The Kingdom itself has tried to quell the Arab Spring within its borders since the first day it erupted in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen. Riyadh continues to support counter-revolution movements in these countries by intervening politically or militarily.

Read more here:

Is Saudi Arabia whitewashing female emancipation through its film festival? - The Africa Report

The Nationalities and Borders Bill, which passed through the House of Commons last December, represents another attack on the oppressed and exploited. The bill serves to further whip up nationalism and racism, which the ruling class relies upon to keep the working class divided.

Under this new law, British-born citizens who have dual citizenship could be at threat of having it revoked without first being informed at the whim of the Home Secretary. In fact, even those without a second citizenship, who the government deems to be linked to another country, are at risk. This includes two-out-of-five non-white people in Britain.

This bill comes after the tragic news of 27 refugees drowning in the Channel, which the Tories have cynically used to bang the drum about taking back control of the UKs borders.

In response to this, the bill seeks to fragment the already difficult asylum process, by granting the protections of the 1951 Refugee Convention only to those that arrive in the country through so-called legal means. But since the vast majority of refugees cannot reach Britain through legal channels, they will face being returned to whatever danger they have been forced to flee from.

Priti Patel has cynically claimed that this bill is meant to protect refugees against gangs of smugglers. She has said that this will clamp down on the ability of these smugglers to make profits off those in grave danger. But no amount of repressive laws or tough rhetoric will protect migrants and refugees.

The imperialists are both responsible for creating the chaos and danger that millions of people are forced to escape from; and they profit handsomely from refugees who survive the dangerous passage to Britain.

The whole bill reeks of ruling class hatred towards victims of war crimes and economic turmoil abroad, as well as disdain for minorities that consider themselves settled here in Britain. It is a continuation of racist policies that have unleashed fear and misery on minorities for decades.

As far back as 1981, under the British Nationality Act, a persons citizenship could be revoked on grounds of unacceptable behaviours. But, we should note, this prerogative was almost never used. Yet since 2014, the Home Office has had the right to strip people with or without dual citizenship of their right to British citizenship, even if this would leave them stateless.

Patels Home Office has drastically ramped up the amount of British citizenships revoked in the last two years, with around 100 a year since she came into office. In the years prior, this figure was around a quarter of this amount.

The controversial clause nine of the bill which is being debated in the House of Lords at the time of writing gives the government powers to revoke citizenship without any warning. Rest assured, the Tories inform us, they will not make anyone stateless, and this will not affect the right to appeal.

Yet the legislation presided over by this government has already ensured that someone can be left stateless de facto stripped of the most basic human rights. This new clause will place Britain in pole position as the only country able to leave citizens stateless without notice.

The idea that the right of appeal is left intact is a cruel joke. How can you appeal your citizenship when there is no due process; when there are no checks or balances in place? Instead, a persons basic rights are left at the mercy of a single individual, the Home Secretary, who has made a name out of scapegoating and marginalising minorities.

Human rights campaigners Reprieve have reported that at least 63% of adult British women in Syria are trafficking victims. Under this latest reactionary legislation, there is no doubt that the Tories will wash their hands clean of these suffering women and their children.

This is an all-out assault not only on the rights of refugees, but of trafficking victims also. Patels Home Office clearly believes that there are second-class British citizens who, if push comes to shove, belong somewhere else in the world.

This bill is centred around the crude euphemism of removing the citizenship of those deemed a threat in some vague way to the public good. But the idea of such a public good one that traverses class lines and interests is a fiction.

We have to ask: was it in the public good to detain and deport at least 83 British citizens to countries they did not know, with languages they were unlikely to speak? Was it in the public good to destroy thousands of disembarkation records from the Windrush generation, and create a hostile environment that has made thousands of British citizens live in fear?

But the Windrush scandal was certainly not a one-off. Everything Patel has done as home secretary shows the schism between what is good for the rich and powerful, and that which is in the interests of the majority.

Patel presided over the new Crimes and Policing bill, which in the wake of a young woman Sarah Everard being killed by an active police officer, gave the police even more powers to act without recourse.

Patel has told the police to stamp down any protest which looks like it is working. And she has further extended stop-and-search rights by the police, meaning that anyone the police dont like the look of mainly young black men can be treated as a criminal at first sight.

This is a serious attempt to bolster and enhance the institutions of the state, by hardening the repressive powers at the governments disposal, and by allowing its agents to ruthlessly pursue their aims carte blanche. Naturally, this is not conducive to the good of the majority.

With characteristic insincerity, Johnson has pointed towards the diversity of his Cabinet to prove why this new bill simply cannot be considered racist. Far from demonstrating the PMs cynical point, this argument only tells us that looking at peoples skin colour over their class ideas and interests is no answer to the oppression and marginalisation that minorities face.

The rest of the Tory leadership has fallen in step, trying to fan the flames of their culture war as a means to cut across rising class struggle and unity. Once again, the working class of all colours is being baited into fussing and fighting amongst ourselves.

With protest movements over climate change, racism, and violence against women rocking the British establishment in recent years, it is little surprise that the Tories are maneuvering to stamp out the actions of workers and youth who are demanding change.

The Tories are attempting to stem the tide of struggle that lies ahead; to tell a significant minority that their citizenship is a luxury, not a right, that can be relinquished if one dares to rock the boat too much. Just accept your lot and keep your head downor else seems to be the message.

We need only think back to the right wings public shaming of Shamima Begum a vulnerable teenage girl who was groomed by Islamic fundamentalists, and later stripped of her citizenship by the government. Ghislaine Maxwell, on the other hand, a woman who groomed young girls for the rich and powerful, has been allowed to keep hers. The hypocrisy is nauseating.

We should be under no illusion that this bill is about keeping ordinary people safe. In reality, it is about keeping the capitalist class safe from any opposition. If anyone threatens the power, profits, and privileges of the ruling class, the government will have no problem using this bill against them.

In order to fight this menace which is intended to marginalise British citizens and scapegoat refugees we need a campaign against all power-grabbing opportunities by the capitalist class.

This bill is not separate from the policing bill that has sparked mass protests. It is not separate from the Tories giving more stop-and-search powers to the police. And it is not separate from the shutting down of left-wing voices, both online and on the streets.

For many, this bill proves the fear that many felt before: that our hard-won democratic freedoms remain fragile; and that basic rights can always be rebuked under the capitalist system.

One Momentum activist recalled the story of his father who, after moving to Britain, never gave up his Bangladeshi passport, as he was never completely sure that the authorities wouldnt send him back to Bangladesh.

At the same time, we are once again seeing that the Labour Party, under its current leadership, is no vehicle to combat the Tories and their repression.

Starmer, after staying silent on this bill, has even backed the knighthood of Tony Blair a man who is responsible for millions of people having to flee their homes in other countries. It is not difficult to see whose interests Starmer serves.

Despite this failure from the Labour Party, this latest reactionary bill has not been ignored. Those on the genuine left are picking up on the horrific nature of this bill and are fighting back.

Social media has been awash with those explaining the implications of the bill, as well as drawing light to how this ties into the long and sordid history of racism and imperialism in Britain. Petitions have been signed by many, and protests have been organised.

But we cannot fight this as a single issue, nor can we fight it alone. Workers and youth must come together to say not only that refugees are welcome here, but that the working class must unite and fight to take power into its hands, in order to put an end to the racism, xenophobia, bigotry, and jingoism that capitalism spawns.

Boris Johnsons days may be numbered. But he and his capitalist backers are desperately doing everything to increase their own power. This is not a sign of strength, but of weakness.

Workers and youth must reply to show their strength, by organising and rallying around a bold socialist programme capable of transforming society in the interests of the vast majority. We urge you to join us in this task.

The rest is here:

Nationalities and Borders Bill: A shameful attack on the oppressed - Socialist Appeal

BNP central leaders attend a discussion marking the 86th birth anniversary of former president and the party founder Ziaur Rahman organised by its Dhaka north and south city units at the National Press Club in Dhaka on Friday. New Age photo

BNP on Friday strongly opposed the governments move to hike gas tariffs and warned that people will not accept it in any way.

Theres a proposal to raise the gas prices of double-burner stove connections to Tk 2,100 from Tk 975 and single-burner stove 2,000 from Tk 925 at the consumer level, said BNP senior leader Khandaker Mosharraf Hossain.

Speaking at a discussion, he said a threefold increase in gas prices has been proposed unreasonably.

We would like to clearly say that gas prices cannot be hiked. Any increase in the gas tariffs wont be accepted. We strongly oppose such a move, the BNP leader said.

BNPs Dhaka south and north city units jointly arranged the programme at the National Press Club, marking the party founder Ziaur Rahmans 86th birth anniversary.

Mosharraf, a BNP standing committee member, said that the government raised the prices of fuel oil, diesel and electricity a few days ago, causing serious public sufferings.

He said that the government was implementing big projects taking money from peoples pockets and creating scopes for the ruling party to get big commissions.

The BNP leader alleged that the ruling party leaders were siphoning off huge amount of money abroad through indulging in plundering and corruption.

He said that the current government was least bothered about public sufferings since it was not elected by people.

Well no longer tolerate the unfair activities of the government. We must ensure the fall of this regime to get rid of all these injustices. Lets all work together to attain this goal, Mosharraf said.

About 12 Human Rights organisations a letter to United Nations to ban Rapid Action Battalion from deploying the peacekeeping missions, he said that Awami League thought that it would be able to overcome the consequences of oppression and suppression by keeping peoples mouths shut.

But the entire world now knows that there are no human rights in Bangladesh... The sanctions were also imposed by the US on an organisation in Bangladesh and its some high officials. Its a matter of shame for us as a nation, the BNP leader observed.

He said that Bangladesh was being humiliated in this way only because of Awami Leagues lust for staying in power by force.

Mosharraf called upon the people of all walks of life and all democratic forces to get united to overcome the current situation of the country and restore its dignity by establishing a democratic and elected government.

No autocratic regime will willingly quit power without a push...The people of Bangladesh could oust autocratic ruler Ershad. Of course, were hopeful that the people of this country will overthrow the current despotic regime in the same way to restore democracy, he said.

See the rest here:

Move to hike gas tariffs to be rejected: BNP - newagebd.net