Obama and Human Rights (2)

We have seen thus far a troubling pattern of behavior in which top officials of the Obama administration have deliberately lied to the American people over the terrorist attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya which led to the death of Ambassador Stevens; seized the phone records of 20 Associated Press journalists in order to circumvent the confidentiality of their sources; prosecuted eight (8) of its ex-employees under the Espionage Act 1917 mostly for providing information to journalists; and targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status for extra scrutiny, placing their applications on hold for upwards of two years! In a supreme irony given the experiences of blacks in the evolution of US civil rights, the three dramatis personae at the core of these incidents, President Barack Obama, Attorney-General Eric Holder and former UN Ambassador, now National Security Adviser, Susan Rice are all African-Americans! Their actions appear to have systematically undermined civil rights, media freedom, liberty and dissent. So far the US and global media have condoned these abuses, perhaps because a “liberal” President sits in the White House creating the impression that liberalism is a label rather than a set of values and principles that should underlie policy and administration. The US media for instance, appears to have helped the administration downplay the gravity of the deception over Benghazi, and the almost deliberate tardiness in investigating the terrorist attack and bringing the perpetrators to justice. The media and rights groups have similarly shrugged off the IRS scandal, the persecution of journalist James Rosen and the seizure of AP phone records. Some may suspect that US and perhaps even Western liberals have been so enthused over their “victory” on gay rights that they are prepared to overlook any infractions of civil and media freedoms by their perceived ally, Obama. Indeed the only arena in which “human rights” have advanced in the US under Obama appears to be in respect of homosexual rights. It also does seem that the media will ignore any matter that could damage the Obama administration lest their conservative “enemies” benefit! The most shocking affront on privacy and civil rights, probably in the modern era (and possibly anywhere in the world!) has been the scale and depth of state-led surveillance and intrusion into private communications revealed by Edward Snowden, the fugitive, former NSA contractor now seeking refuge in Russia. You will recall that Snowden leaked information to Glenn Greenwald, a Guardian of UK columnist on the interception of US and European telecommunications data under a US program called PRISM and several others. Apparently the US with probably UK, Australian, New Zealand and French support and participation, targeted US citizens and allies, including NATO nations, the EU and other foreign countries in a complex web of spying operations to intercept internet and telephone conversations from over one billion users worldwide! The programs indiscriminately collected bulk information (so-called “meta data”) directly from central servers and internet backbones from telecommunications companies. These programs included PRISM under which the US National Security Agency (NSA) obtained direct access to servers from internet providers potentially providing them access to e-mails of millions of citizens and foreigners; Boundless Informant, a computer program that performs data collection; X-Keyscore deployed in Australia and New Zealand; Dropmire, which targeted foreign embassies and diplomats; Fairview, which targeted mobile phones especially text messages in foreign countries (such as Nigeria?), UPSTREAM and TEMPORA, which collected data directly from fiber optic cables and internet backbones; MAINWAY, which provided call records; MAINCORE which focused on financial records; Stellar Wind, through which data was mined; Echelon, which intercepted commercial satellite trunk communications; Turbulence, which included cyber-warfare capabilities, including targeting enemies with malware; and an Insider Threat Program, which presumably failed to detect leakers like Edward Snowden!!! In short the US government constructed a whole industry and infrastructure focused on invading and compromising private communications worldwide, based presumably on the need to detect and deter global terrorism. Of course the price its citizens and the rest of the world were required to pay was that in the absence of transparency about its activities, US security could as well use information obtained for any other purposes! Through these programs, the US is believed to have collected data from over 120 million US Verizon subscribers; bugged encrypted fax machines in EU embassies; hacked Chinese mobile phone companies and universities; spied on various EU diplomatic missions and offices; and spied on millions of e-mails and calls of Brazilians. I presume e-mails and phone calls of major Nigerian state officials couldn’t have escaped this vast spying web! And how have US liberals and media responded? Their posture has been a narrow focus on the travails of “leaker” Edward Snowden rather than illuminating the more fundamental debate on the continuing erosion of privacy and civil rights in pursuit of national security and vanquishing global terror. The irony is that this same US government’s main prescription for responding to “Boko Haram” terrorism in Nigeria was appeasement, poverty alleviation and regional empowerment!!! It is a historical tragedy that the erosion of civil liberties in the US is happening while a black American democrat sits in the White House. No doubt, one day a conservative, right wing White Republican will become president and inherit the vast police state that Obama, Susan Rice and Eric Holder helped create.

Obama and Human Rights (1)

Which country has deliberately lied to its people about circumstances leading to the death of a high officer of state? Which country has embarked on a spate of prosecution of journalists whose views of the extent of human rights differed from governments’? Which nation has tried to undermine press freedom by seeking to circumvent confidentiality of media sources? Which government has seized phone records of scores of journalists in an attempt to find out where and from whom they got their information? Which state targets groups whose ideology and views differs from the ruling party’s using the state tax agency? Which country systematically invades the emails and phone records of millions of its citizens, foreigners, allies and enemies and persecutes anyone who dares to disclose its activities to the voters? Will that be Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Uganda, Saudi Arabia or Argentina? Well no! It is the United States of America under its first black president Barack Obama!!! On September 11, 2012 the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya and an annex building came under a coordinated attack, armed assault, rioting and arson. The weapons deployed in the fierce offensive included rocket-propelled and hand grenades, assault rifles, 14.5mm anti-aircraft guns, truck-mounted artillery, and mortars and diesel canisters. At the end of the attack next day, four Americans including the US Ambassador in Libya, J Christopher Stevens were killed and 3 Americans and 7 Libyans were injured. It was clear that prior to the attack, there was no protest at the consulate and the attack appeared clearly premeditated probably executed by Al Qaeda linked Ansar-al-Sharia elements, probably including a fellow named Ahmed Abu Khattala. On September 14, CNN correspondent Arwa Damon found the dead ambassador’s diary at the still unsecured site! In spite of the fact that this was a patent terror strike on the anniversary of the September 11 2001 terror strike in the US, on September 16, US Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice appeared on five major morning talk shows claiming (or actually lying) that the attack was “spontaneously inspired” by protests against the notorious “Innocence of Muslims” video and characterized the event as “violent demonstrations”. White House spokesman, Jay Carney also linked the attack to the video and denied that the attack was pre-planned or premeditated. Obama’s administration, it seems sought to mislead its citizens on the cause of the ambassador’s death so as not to suffer negative consequences in the approaching November 2012 elections, as has now become evident. The US Department of Justice also headed by that country’s first African-American Attorney-General, Eric Holder has prosecuted eight (8) of its employees for purported crimes under the Espionage Act 1917, “more than all prior administrations combined” according to Wikipedia. Many of the prosecutions were for providing information to journalists! The accused persons include Shamai Leibowitz, Jeffery Sterling, John Kiriakou, Bradley Manning (the alleged Wikileaks “leaker”), Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, Thomas Drake, James Hitselberger and Edward Snowden. On May 13 2013, Associated Press (AP) disclosed that phone records of 20 reporters had been seized by the Justice Department in an attempt by the government to circumvent the confidentiality of the journalists’ sources. The AP had published a story about a CIA operation regarding Yemeni terrorist Fahd al-Quso and government was determined to find out their sources. Rather than the more legally transparent route of issuing subpoenas, the Justice Department preferred to seize phone records from phone providers, including Verizon Wireless. The Washington Post has also reported that the department also monitored journalist James Rosen’s phone calls and e-mails and designated the newsman a “criminal co-conspirator” with some of the ex-employees it was prosecuting, in order to get legal grounds to obtain judicial warrants against him. They went further to classify him a “flight risk” to justify keeping him in the dark about the surveillance activity. Earlier this year, it emerged that the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had since March 2010, targeted conservative political groups applying for tax-exempt status for closer scrutiny based on their names and/or political themes. Groups with “Tea Party”, “Occupy”, “Patriot”, or “Israel” for instance, in their names were targeted. Themes that attracted scrutiny included typical conservative causes like focus on government spending, debt and taxes; wanting to “make America a better place to live”; criticism of how America was being run; interest in the Constitution and Bill of Rights; and seeking to challenge the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act aka “Obamacare”. For two years from April 2010, the IRS simply placed applications from such “objectionable” (?) names and themes on hold! A former IRS Commissioner, Doug Shulman who was implicated in these matters was (at the very least) a very regular visitor to the Obama White House.

Egypt or Nigeria

Last week in “Egypt’s Continuing Revolution”, I laid out my interpretation of contemporary events in that country which can be summarized thus-the people of Egypt took their destiny into their hands and demanded freedom and democracy in January 2011. The principal obstacle to their objective was the dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak, and Egyptians rose against him in their millions. The Egyptian military sided with the masses and Mubarak was duly toppled. And then a new obstacle appeared-Muhammed Morsi who they had marginally elected as President, and his Muslim Brotherhood! Morsi, you will recall scored 5.5million against 5.2miillion votes for Ahmed Shafiq in the first round of presidential elections and obtained 13.2 million (51.23%) in the second round to his opponents 48.27%. Evidently Morsi and the Brotherhood had a different strategic intent-to replace the people’s aspiration for freedom and democracy with their own vision of an Islamic Caliphate! The Egyptian masses erupted again, in more millions and the military for the second time answered their call and removed Morsi. My conclusion, then and now, was that there was no military coup in Egypt, only a continuing people’s revolution in pursuit of self-determination, and an army that has opted to play a historical role, albeit consistent with its enlightened self-interest, on the side of the people. 22 million Egyptians, almost double those who voted for Morsi in the presidential election, signed the “Tamarud” petition for his removal and millions more massed in demonstrations demanding his exit. For obvious reasons, events in Egypt have resonated in Nigeria! There has been some nervousness about how to understand those developments and what implications they have for Nigeria, if any? Some of President Jonathan’s foes for instance, who will be happy to remove him by whatever means possible, hint not too subtly that if a “coup” or revolution can happen in Egypt, perhaps it may (or should!) happen here too! On the other hand, the discomfort in pro-Jonathan circles is very evident-given the level of popular discontent in Nigeria, if a military intervention of any sort is condoned in Egypt, wouldn’t that send a dangerous signal to our own military? I believe the circumstances in Nigeria and Egypt are vastly different and I would caution analysts and politicians against drawing the wrong lessons from the North African nation. I will attempt to distinguish, as lawyers do, between the two situations. As I pointed out in last week’s article, Egypt has existed as one country since 3200 BC with the unification of the Upper and Lower Nile. It is a predominantly Arab/Muslim nation with ninety percent of the populace adherents to Islam. The debate in Egypt is not over Islam, but what role it would play in politics, the constitution and the state. Nigeria on the other hand is a relatively recent “geographical expression” created by British colonialists, which in spite of 100 years of amalgamation and 50 years of political independence has refused to merge into one nation. We are a complex mix of peoples, ethnic nationalities and religions. This diversity severely complicates our political options and imposes sub-optimality on the nation. Secondly Egypt is just struggling to define its path as a civilian democratic nation. Nigeria on the other hand is making its third attempt at democracy, and this third try is already fourteen years old, with a third civilian president in the saddle. We have certainly not become a stable democracy and commentators who say we have achieved “civilian” rather than “democratic” rule are not completely incorrect, but unlike Egypt where the nation endured decades of personal dictatorships under Mubarak, and Sadat, Nasser, Naguib before him, personal dictatorships have not thrived here. Gowon, Babangida and Abacha all failed to entrench themselves as permanent sovereigns, and Obasanjo’s third-term dream was similarly frustrated. Thirdly the nature and character of the military in both countries is vastly different. Egypt’s military somehow insulated its corporate reputation from the disrepute which Mubarak’s regime acquired and its rank and file did not become tarnished with politics as happened in our country. At a critical moment, the Egyptian military in 2011 defined itself as protectors of the people and guarantors of their revolution. The Nigerian military on the other hand left office with their “espirit de corps” severely strained and their institutional reputation in tatters! The 1966 coup, civil war and the discredited regimes of Babangida and Abacha almost destroyed the armed forces and the ethnic and religious nature of our politics implies that military interventions in politics are or are assumed to be based on ethno-religious, rather than patriotic considerations. Finally the anti-Jonathan proponents of a “coup” or “revolution” unlike the youths and women of Egypt who massed at Tahrir Square to demand Morsi’s ouster can hardly be described as revolutionaries! Indeed many of those who may be secretly hoping for a military solution to the “Goodluck Jonathan problem” are some of the most conservative (some may in fact say retrogressive) and hegemonic elements in Nigeria. Will anyone believe that Ango Abdullahi, Junaid Mohammed, Aminu Tambuwal or Nasir El-Rufai desire a genuine people’s revolution across Nigeria? There is a final reason we should discountenance talk of a coup in Nigeria-I strongly suspect that rather than help disaffected power blocs retrieve “their” power from an unwanted president, a coup in the current context in Nigeria may precipitate the final unraveling of the concept of a united Nigerian nation.

Egypt's Continuing Revolution

The Arab Republic of Egypt is one of Africa’s oldest nations. Egypt was established in more or less its current form with the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt around 3200 BC. The Muhammad Ali Dynasty was inaugurated in July 1805 and the country obtained independence from Britain in February 1922. With a population estimated at 84.5million people, it is one of the most important and strategic in the Arab world. The country had been ruled by the military since the 1952 revolution of the Free Officers Movement under Generals Muhammad Naguib, Gamal Abdel Nasser, Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak, until 2011 when Egypt stunned the world! In what must count as one of the most fascinating political events in contemporary history, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians gathered in Tahrir Square demanding an end to the dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak and his sons. The movement was led by young people and did not have a religious basis. Indeed, the Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood and the extreme Salafists were reported to have been initially wary of confronting the Mubarak regime until Tahrir Square gathered momentum and fervency. Egyptians of all groups, Muslims, Coptic Christians, secularists and Islamists, young and old were united in demanding freedom and democracy, and in a very sophisticated manner urging the Egyptian military to side with the people. What the Egyptian masses did was at once profound and pragmatic- they excised Mubarak from his military support base and gave the Egyptian armed forces a new role definition as protectors of the people rather than their government. On January 25, 2011, widespread protests began against Mubarak and by February 11, he resigned and the military assumed custody of power. Field Marshall Mohammed Hassan Tantawi, chairman of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, became de facto Head of State, although it was clear that this was a constitutional custodianship on behalf of the revolution and it would have been inconceivable for Tantawi and his military brass to attempt to appropriate power. The military duly oversaw a democratic transition including parliamentary elections on November 28, 2011 and a presidential election on June 24, 2012. Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party won the presidency and this is where the story gets complicated. The Brotherhood, you will recall, did not start or lead the revolution. The core of the demand of the Tahrir Square protesters was democracy and freedom and its support was broad-based across religious and political segments of Egyptian society. If anything, the protests were led by secular youths employing modern technology, internet and social media, rather than the mosque as the channel of mobilisation. Indeed, one of the most remarkable images of Tahrir Square was of Christians guarding Muslims while they prayed, sending a message that the revolution transcended sectarian divides. As a matter-of-fact, the Muslim Brotherhood seeing and seeking not to discourage the unity of the anti-Mubarak coalition had pledged not to contest both parliamentary and presidential elections. But all that changed as power lay in abeyance and the brotherhood, the best organised political group in Egypt, reversed its pledge and formed a political party to grab power. Morsi then, as many feared, began to seek (much as the Iranian Ayatollahs had done with another popular revolution in another overwhelmingly Muslim nation) to replace the popular revolution with his own Islamist vision. In a stunning reversal of the united rhetoric of Tahrir Square, months later, I watched a Muslim Brotherhood demonstration with large placards saying, “We don’t want democracy, only Islam!!!”. Morsi shut out other groups- secularists, youths, women and Christians, from the constitution-making process and rammed through an Islamist constitution and steadily began to over-reach himself, assuming, erroneously it turns out, that the revolution was over, and a Muslim Brotherhood take-over was complete and irreversible. Even though Morsi’s Islamist constitution was approved by 64 percent of voters, only 33 percent of the electorate participated, all liberal and secular groups having boycotted the process. Morsi soon had alienated every group except his brothers- the powerful military, the judiciary, Christians, youths and intelligentsia, and most fatally, the streets! The people of Egypt, of course, did what they had learnt to do in January and February 2011- return to the streets and soon the same “referee” who gave Mubarak a red card on behalf of the people would issue the same marching orders to Morsi and his parliament. I consider the debate over whether what happened on July 3, 2013 was a coup or not a nonsensical waste of time. If the military did not carry out a coup when they toppled Mubarak at the urging of millions of their people, why would doing the same to Morsi (who indeed was in the process of organising a “coup” against the people’s demand for freedom and democracy) be regarded as a coup? In my view, the way to understand developments in Egypt is to understand that the Egyptian revolution is a continuing one. The quest for freedom and democracy, which the masses of Egypt have embarked on, is a process and not a destination they arrived at when they voted for Morsi. If anyone, Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood, interim President Adly Mansour, Muhammed El-Baradei and even the military, seeks to undermine their aspirations, Egyptians will rise up against them. The point is Egyptians have found freedom and will not give it up to anyone!

Babatunde R Fashola at 50

The Governor of Lagos State, His Excellency, Mr Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN) also known as BRF, turned 50 on Friday, June 28, 2013. He was first elected on April 14, 2007 and assumed office on May 27, 2007 and was reelected on April 26, 2011 and sworn in to his second and final term on May 29, 2011. Before his initial election in 2007, this column wrote a strong endorsement of Fashola based not on personal or partisan considerations, but on an objective review of his performance at an interaction with segments of the Lagos business and professional elite at the LBS Breakfast Club in the run-up to the 2007 elections. I sat through that presentation attempting to look into his soul, character and person and I concluded that this was an atypical public servant whose motivation was likely to be service, rather than power and self. I have been very gratified that he has not disappointed me and the vast majority of Lagos voters who endorsed him in 2007 and more overwhelmingly in 2011. Fashola attended Birch Freeman High School, Lagos and Igbobi College Yaba, Lagos for advanced level studies. I was in Form 5 at Igbobi while BRF was in Lower Six, but we were neither friendly nor close. He studied Law at the University of Benin, graduated in 1987 and was called to the Nigerian Bar in 1988. I am told by those who closely watched him that Fashola was dedicated, focused, well-prepared and thorough in his court room presentations. He has brought those same attributes to bear on his gubernatorial duties in Lagos State. He practiced in the law firm of Sofunde, Osakwe, Ogundipe and Belgore engaging in varied aspects of litigation and commercial law practice and became a Notary Public of the Supreme Court and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). Apparently BRF had been involved behind the scenes in the transition committees that laid the ground work for the Bola Tinubu administration in 1999 and served on a panel of enquiry into certain housing matters in the state. When Tinubu’s erstwhile Chief of Staff, Alhaji Lai Muhammed (now ACN/APC publicity secretary) resigned to contest the Kwara governorship in 2002, he turned to Fashola to take up the role and to the surprise of everyone, including Fashola himself, Tinubu tapped him to contest the 2007 governorship on the platform of the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN). Fashola’s performance in office has been nothing short of remarkable! He has made huge impact on Lagos across a wide and diverse array of sectors-infrastructure, security, education, health and social welfare, sports, ICT and innovation, agriculture, trade and investment etc. Most importantly he has shown Nigerians that the possibilities are immense, where there is the right leadership. In the area of security, he has kept Lagos secure, against significant odds- an under-resourced federal police with low morale has been made to function effectively with resources generated through an innovative public-private partnership funding mechanism, the Lagos State Security Trust Fund which has improved policing logistics and improving personnel welfare and infrastructure. Fashola has transformed infrastructure in Lagos State. A visitor who was last in Lagos in 2006 would not believe the changes in the state-the Lekki-Ikoyi Link Bridge, the Lekki-Epe Expressway, the ongoing Badagry expressway and rail line, the Ikorodu road expansion and BRT project, and new roads in virtually all areas of the state will astound any objective observer. The concentration on social spending on the education and health sectors continues apace with investments in infrastructure-new general hospitals, new primary health centres, specialized hospitals, significant upgrades at the Lagos State University Teaching Hospital (LASUTH) etc. have improved the delivery of health care across the state. Many schools have been upgraded and teachers training and morale has also received significant attention. A Lagos State Innovation Council is seeking ways of fostering creativity and innovation in the state; the state is quietly transforming agriculture, building rice mills and positioning to achieve food independence in the short and medium term. There is an airport project; a seaport project; a free trade zone; a new ministry of energy to drive energy self-sufficiency,…no sector has been left untouched by Fashola’s truly transformative touch. Most importantly in my view, BRF has brought a new ethos and values to governance in Lagos State and offered a worthy alternative model to his colleagues in the rest of Western Nigeria and the country. He has shown that there is nothing intrinsic in our genes as black people that makes us unfit for leadership; he has demonstrated that government can indeed be an effective instrument of transformation even in a corrupt and dysfunctional nation like ours; he has proved that it is possible to assemble a leadership team in the public space that can function as effectively and competently as any in the private sector. I have said on my TV programme, “The Policy Council” that if Nigeria was a rational country where people acted in their own best interest rather than in a subjective and ultimately self-destructive way, there would be an overwhelming clamour for Fashola to contest the 2015 presidency. That is my own personal preference and that seems to me like the path his political party, the ACN/APC should be taking rather than considering presenting obviously unsuitable options to the Nigerian people based simply on ethno-religious considerations.