India and the Globalization of Servitude

Colin Todhunter 

Angus Maddison has noted that India was the richest country in the world and had controlled a third of global wealth until the 17th century. The village was the centre of a rural economy that was an economic powerhouse of entrepreneurialism. The British Raj almost dismantled this system however by introducing mono crop activities and mill made products, and post independent India has failed to repair the economic fabric.

If anything implies that India’s social and economic fabric requires restoring, it is the findings of the 2014 global Multidimensional Poverty Index. Out of its 1.2 billion-plus population, India is home to over 340 million destitute people and is the second poorest country in South Asia after war-torn Afghanistan.

Some 640 million poor people live in India (40% of the world’s poor). Just 20 years ago, India had the second-best social indicators among the six South Asian countries (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan). Now it has the second worst position, ahead only of Pakistan. Bangladesh has less than half of India’s per-capita GDP but has infant and child mortality rates lower than that of India.

What is going wrong?

Former Indian Finance Minister P Chidambaram once claimed that his government’s economic neoliberal policies were pro-growth and pro equity and envisaged 85% of India’s population eventually living in well-planned cities. That would mean at least 600 million moving to cities. He stated that urbanisation constitutes ‘natural progress’. After 24 years of a shift towards neo-liberalism and increasing urbanisation, to what extent has the process thus far been ‘pro-equity’ or ‘progressive’?

The drive towards neo-liberalism and urbanisation has thus far been underpinned by unconstitutional land takeovers and the trampling of democratic rights. For supporters of cronyism, cartels and the manipulation of markets, which to all extents and purposes is what economic ‘neo-liberalism’ has entailed over the last two decades (see this and this), there have been untold opportunities for well-placed individuals to make an under-the-table fast buck from various infrastructure projects and privatisation sell offs: assets such as airports, seeds, ports and other infrastructure built up with public money or toil have been sold off into private hands.

The neoliberal model of development has seen the poverty alleviation rate in India remain around the same as it was back in 1991 or even in pre-independence India (0.8 percent), while the ratio between the top and bottom ten percent of the population has doubled during this period (see this and this). According to the Organisation for Co-operation and Economic Development, this doubling of income inequality has made India one of the worst performers in the category of emerging economies.

Unsurprisingly, struggles (both violent and non-violent) are now taking place in India. The naxalites and Maoists are referred to by the dominant class as left wing extremists who are exploiting the situation of the poor. But how easy it is to ignore the true nature of the poor’s exploitation. How easy it is to lump all protesters together and create an ‘enemy within’. How easy it is to ignore the state-corporate extremism across the world that results in the central state abdicating its responsibilities by submitting to the tenets of the Wall Street-backed ‘structural adjustment’ pro-privatisation policies, free capital flows and unaccountable cartels.

The subjugation of India

Powerful corporations are shaping the ‘development’ agenda in India and have signed secretive Memorandums of Understanding with the government. The full military backing of the state is on hand to forcibly evict peoples from their land in order to hand over land to mineral-hungry industries to fuel a wholly unsustainable model of development. Around the world, this oil-dependent, urban-centric, high energy, high consumption model is stripping the environment bare and negatively impacting the climate and ecology.

The links between the Monsanto/Syngenta/Walmart-backed Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture and the US sanctioning and backing of the opening up of India’s nuclear sector to foreign interests have already shown what the models of ‘development’ being pushed onto people really entails, not least in terms of the powerful corporate interests that really benefit and the ordinary people that lose out (see this and this).

Almost 300,000 farmers have taken their lives since 1997 and many more are experiencing economic distress or have left farming as a result of debt, a shift to (GM) cash crops and economic liberalisation. And yet the corporate-controlled type of agriculture being imposed and/or envisaged only leads to bad food, bad soil, bad or no water, bad health, poor or falling yields and an impending agrarian crisis (see this, this,this and this). This form of agriculture has meant the US and the UK are now facing similar crises (see this and this). It’s a global crisis.

In addition to displacing people to facilitate the needs of resource extraction industries, unconstitutional land grabs for Special Economic Zones, nuclear plants and other projects have additionally forced many others from the land. Moreover, it has been a case of massive tax breaks for industry and corporations and underinvestment in ruralinfrastructure and farming. It’s not difficult to see where policy makers’ priorities lie.

With GDP growth slowing and automation replacing human labour the world over in order to decrease labour costs and boost profit, where are the jobs going to come from to cater for hundreds of millions of former agricultural workers or those whose livelihoods will be destroyed as corporations move in and seek to capitalise and mechanise industries that currently employ tens of millions (if not hundreds of millions)?

Farmers (and others) represent a ‘problem’: a problem while on the land and a problem to be somehow dealt with once displaced. But food producers, the genuine wealth producers of a nation, only became a problem when Western agribusiness was given the green light to take power away from farmers and uproot traditional agriculture in India and recast it in its own corporate-controlled image. This is who is really setting the ‘development’ agenda.

India is acquiescing to foreign corporations. Take a look at the free trade agreement being hammered out behind closed doors between the EU and India. It all adds up to powerful trans-national corporations trying to by-pass legislation that was implemented to safeguard the public’s rights.

We could see the Indian government being sued by multinational companies for billions of dollars in private arbitration panels outside of Indian courts if national laws, policies, court decisions or other actions are perceived to interfere with their investments. This agreement could see rural Indian society being restructured and devastated in favour of Western corporate interests and adversely impacting hundreds of millions and their livelihoods and traditional ways of living.

The bedrock of any society is its agriculture. Without food there can be no life. Without food security, there can be no genuine independence. Nowhere is this the case than in India where 64% of the population derives its sustenance from the agricultural sector. To control Indian agriculture is to exert control over the country. One needs to control only seeds, agro-chemicals and resultant debt and infrastructure loans. The World Bank, the IMF and the US State Department are well aware of this fact. Indeed, US foreign policy has almost always rested on the control of the agriculture of poorer countries.

Looting the economy

Global agritech companies have been granted license to influence key aspects of agriculture by controlling seeds and chemical inputs and by funding and thus distorting the biotech research agenda and aspects of overall development policy. Monsanto already controls the cotton industry in India and is increasingly shaping agri-policy and the knowledge paradigm by funding agricultural research in public universities and institutes: it has been described as the “contemporary East India Company”.

In an attempt to control agriculture and despite evidence that suggests otherwise, agritech corporations promote the notion that they have the answers to feeding the world. People are generally hungry not because of insufficient agricultural production but because they do not have money to buy food, access to land to grow food or because of complex problems like food spoilage, poor food distribution systems and a lack of reliable water and infrastructure for irrigation, storage, transport and financing. If these deeper problems are not addressed and as long as food is not reaching those who are hungry and poor, increased agricultural production will not help reduce food insecurity.

We already produce enough food to feed the world’s population and did so even at the peak of the world food crisis in 2008. Moreover, India canalready feed itself and arguably doesn’t need modern technology of poisonous pesticides, destructive fertilizers and patented GE seeds that can’t match 1890 or even 1760 AD yields in India. India has been self-sufficient in food staples for over a decade and more than that for cereals. The country has reached this stage through, first and foremost, the knowledge and skill of farmers who have bred and saved seed themselves and exchanged their seed in ways that made our fields so bio-diverse.

Globally, four GM crops account for almost 100 percent of worldwide GM crop acreage. All four have been developed for large-scale industrial farming systems and are used as cash crops for export, to produce fuel or for processed food and animal feed. The answer to food security, food democracy and local/national food sovereignty does not lie with making farmers dependent on a few large corporations whose bottom line is exploiting agriculture for their own benefit under the guise of ‘feeding the world’.

Various reports have concluded that we need to support diverse, vibrant and sustainable agroecological methods of farming and develop locally-based food economies (see this and this). After all, it is small farms and peasant farmers (more often than not serving local communities) that are more productive than giant industrial (export-oriented) farms and which produce most of the world’s food on much less land. However, the trend continues to move in the opposite direction.

Part of the current ‘development’ agenda in India is based on dismantling the Public Distribution System for food. Policy analyst Devinder Sharma notes that the government may eventually stop supporting farmers by doing away with the system of announcing the minimum support price for farmers and thereby reduce the subsidy outgo. He argues that farmers would be encouraged to grow cash crops for supermarkets and to ‘compete’ in a market based on trade policies that work in favour of big landowners and heavily subsidised Western agriculture.

The result will be what the WTO/ World Bank/IMF have been telling India to for a long time: to displace the farming population so that agribusiness can find a stronghold in India (aided by the free trade agreement, which could see land in the hand of foreign entities who prioritise cash crops for export).

Monsanto, Bayer, Cargill, Walmart, Archer Daniels, Sygenta and other large corporations are ultimately eyeing control of the food system from lab to seed to field to shop to plate.

Hostage to ideology

Me-first acquisitiveness is now pervasive throughout the upper strata of society. Run out and buy some useless product because Kareena, Priyanka or another icon of deception says ‘because you’re worth it’… but never ever let this narcissism give way to contemplate why the rivers and soils have been poisoned and people are being been made ill in places like Punjab, agriculture is being hijacked by powerful agritech concers, land is being grabbed on behalf of any number of corporations or why ordinary people are violently opposing state-corporate power.

Much of this acceptance results from deals hammered out behind closed doors. Much of it results because too many are conditioned to be ignorant of the facts or to accept that all of the above is necessary for ‘growth’.

This is a country where the majority sanctifies certain animals, places, rivers and mountains for being representations of god or for being somehow touched by the hand of god. It’s also a country run by Wall Street sanctioned politicians who convince people to accept or be oblivious to the destruction of the same.

Many are working strenuously to challenge the selling of the heart and soul of India. Yet how easy will it be for them to be swept aside by officialdom which seeks to cast them as ‘subversive’. How easy it will be for the corrosive impacts of a rapacious capitalism to take hold and for hugely powerful corporations to colonise almost every area of social, cultural and economic life and encourage greed, selfishness, apathy, irretrievable materialism and acquisitive individualism, as well as the ignorance of reality ‘out there’.

And the corporations behind it all achieve hegemony by altering mindsets via advertising, clever PR or by sponsoring (hijacking) major events, by funding research in public institutes and thus slanting findings and the knowledge paradigm in their favour or by securing key positions in international trade negotiations in an attempt to structurally readjust retail, food production and agriculture. They do it by many methods and means.

Seeds, mountains, water, forests and biodiversity are being sold off. The farmers and tribals are being sold out. And the more that gets sold off, the more who get sold out, the greater the amount of cash that changes hands, the easier it is for the misinformed to swallow the lie of Wall Street’s bogus notion of ‘growth’ – GDP. And India suddenly becomes capitalism’s poster boy ‘economic miracle’.

If anyone perceives the type of ‘development’ being sold to the masses is actually possible in the first instance, consider that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old and if you scale this to 46 years then humans have been here for just four hours. The Industrial Revolution began just one minute ago, and in that time, 50% of the Earth’s forests have been destroyed. Forests are just part of the problem. We are using up oil, water and other resources much faster than they can ever be regenerated. We have also poisoned the rivers, destroyed natural habitats, driven some wildlife species to extinction and altered the chemical composition of the atmosphere – among many other things.

Levels of consumption were unsustainable, long before India and other countries began striving to emulate a bogus notion of ‘development’. The West continues to live way beyond its (environmental) limits. The current model of development is based on a deceitful ideology that attempts to justify and sell a system that is designed to fail the majority of the global population and benefit the relative few.

This wasteful, high-energy model is tied to what ultimately constitutes the plundering of peoples and the planet by powerful transnational corporations. And, as we see all around us, the outcome is endless conflicts over fewer and fewer resources. The outcome is also environmental destruction and an elitist agenda being forwarded by rich eugenicists, who voice concerns over there being ‘simply too many mouths’. The super rich who currently run the world regard most of humanity as a problem to be ‘dealt with’.

The type of ‘progress and development’ on offer makes any beneficiaries of it blind to the misery and plight of the hundreds of millions who are deprived them of their lands and livelihoods. If people cannot be removed from their land via making it economically non-viable to continue farming, tens of thousands of militia into the tribal areas to displace 300,000 people, place 50,000 in camps and carry out rapes and various human rights abuses.

The type of development that we are seeing is legitimised by a certain mindset and ideology: the ‘poor’ must be helped out of their awful ‘backwardness’ by the West and its powerful corporations and billionaire ‘philanthropists’. As with Monsanto and the Gates Foundation in Africa and the ‘helping’ of Africans by imposing a highly profitable (for the corporations) and controlling system of agriculture, the underlying premise harks back to colonialism and an imperialist mindset. What some might regard as ‘backward’ stems from an ethnocentric ideology, which is used to legitimize the destruction of communities and economies that were once locally based and self sufficient. The disease if offered as the cure.

If what is set out above tells us anything, it that India and other regions of the world are suffering from internal hemorrhaging. They are being bled dry from both within and without.

“There are sectors of the global population trying to impede the global catastrophe. There are other sectors trying to accelerate it. Take a look at whom they are. Those who are trying to impede it are the ones we call backward, indigenous populations – the First Nations in Canada , the aboriginals in Australia , the tribal people in India . Who is accelerating it? The most privileged, so-called advanced, educated populations of the world.” – Noam Chomsky.

Underpinning the arrogance of such a mindset is what Vandana Shiva callsa view of the world which encourages humans to regard man as conqueror andowner of the Earth. This has led that the technological hubris of geo-engineering, genetic engineering, and nuclear energy. Shiva argues that it has led to the ethical outrage of owning life forms through patents, water through privatization, the air through carbon trading. It is leading to appropriation of the biodiversity that serves the poor.

And therein lies the true enemy of development: a system that facilitates such plunder, which is presided over by well-funded and influential foreign foundations and powerful financial-corporate entities and their handmaidens in the IMF, World Bank and WTO.

To open economies to private concerns, proponents of economic neoliberalism are always fond of stating that ‘regulatory blockages’ must be removed. If particular ‘blockages’ stemming from legitimate protest and dissent cannot be dealt with by peaceful means, other methods will be used. When increasing mass surveillance or widespread ideological attempts to discredit and smear do not secure compliance or dilute the power of protest, beefed up ‘homeland security’ and paramilitary force is an ever-present option.

Across the globe, powerful corporations and their compliant politicians seek to sweep away peoples and their indigenous knowledge and culture in the chase for profit and control. They call this ‘development’. They will allow nothing and no one to stand in their way.

Learning Racism

David Neunuebel

When I was young I discovered racism.

I grew up in the St. Louis area, Brentwood to be exact. Pretty white bread to be sure. I went to grade schools that were all white. But in that time and in that “neighborhood” you went to grade school to 6th grade and when you went to 7th grade you went to the high school (where the big kids went). It was called Brentwood High (school), BHS. Well, when I began attending BHS in 7th grade I discovered black people. Back then they were called colored [just like in the movies]. As I attended classes and walked the halls and played sports I was in constant contact with these “colored” people. I had no particular opinion about “colored” people. I befriended them and then one day I asked Steve, one of my best friends to come home for lunch since I only lived a couple blocks away and he lived “on the other side of the tracks,” although I really didn’t know where he actually lived. Yet. So that day Steve and I walked to my house for lunch. My mom made great sandwiches, lots of potato chips and for dessert her home made chocolate cupcakes. After lunch, since we had a lot more time before we had to head for school, we went up to my room and played and talked as 7th graders would. Then my mom called up and said, “David you and Stephen better get going back to school.” And so we did, just walked the two blocks back to school.

The next day, much to my surprise I was called “nigger lover” both at school and in my neighborhood. As a young 7th grader this was a total shock. At that age you really (really) want to be liked and this was a total shock. So I told my mother and looked for guidance. Mom said, “David, tomorrow you invite Stephen’s whole family to lunch!”

And there you have it.

I had acted on these instincts already by inviting Steve to lunch in the first place as a totally innocent, natural thing to do. Who would think anything of it? Who would think any differently? This was normal behavior, no big deal. It was my parents who taught me to think and believe this way and mom cemented the message very deeply.

My family took summer vacations from St. Louis to Florida to see my grandparents. On the way we would invariably stop for gas and I would be confronted with “White Only” and “Colored Only” restrooms and drinking fountains. I would always go to the “Colored Only” restrooms and drink from the “Colored Only” drinking fountains. This would piss off the white attendants and any whites who saw it but I’d just get back in the car, sit between mom and dad in the front seat and mom would just silently put her arm around me and pat me on the back. Spoke volumes.

As I grew older I got drafted into the U.S. Army. One of my duty assignments was in Texas. I became best friends with all the black guys. We’d do almost everything together. One evening we went off base into town to get dinner. Pretty normal stuff. We entered the restaurant and sat down and began to review the menu. Then suddenly the owner came up and said we’d have to leave because he didn’t serve “people like that,” a.k.a. “niggers!”

I got so angry I was about to make a fuss, throw a chair or something. I’d never experienced anything like this and was incensed. My friends, however, had experienced it a lot and they were the ones who had to calm me down and with a great deal of dignity simply said we should go. So we left. The next day I wanted to go to the armory and get some way to bomb that damned place. My friends were cool. I was not.

On another occasion a bunch of us got a four day pass to go to the beach to enjoy spring break with college kids. The beach was covered with kids with a long, snaky aisle of sand running through it for cars to drive slowly through the mass of humanity. Everything seemed okay until suddenly we heard a commotion. A brand new 1967 Plymouth was making its way down this makeshift avenue through all the kids. But then we saw hundreds of beer bottles and cans raining down on the car and a bunch of white guys running after it. It was obviously a very dangerous development so we moved up a small hill to protect ourselves.

We then saw four guys (two whites and two blacks – probably military) get out of the car (dumb) to confront these white thugs. It was a stupid thing to do because by that time dozens of drunk white guys attacked them, hit them to the ground, threw beer bottles and cans down on them at point-blank range. Eventually, if not miraculously, these four guys got away. But then the white thugs broke every window in the car and turned it over. Whew! Crazy stuff!

Needless to say as a young boy and then a young man, this is how I learned racism in America. It has stuck with me, been part of my life, who I am ever since.

Many years later friends whom my wife and I knew from church, became the directors of the Middle East Studies Program (MESP) for American college students. They were based in Cairo, Egypt with about 20-25 students. Each semester they’d take a 2-3 week study tour of Palestine-Israel to “study the conflict.”

After we visited them one year Richard asked if I’d be interested in returning to help as his assistant during one of these Palestine-Israel trips. Having never been there before and being adventurous I said yes. So the next Spring (1998) I went back to Egypt and assisted during this field trip to Palestine-Israel.

We were based in the Old City of Jerusalem. It was, indeed, adventurous. But also eye opening and shocking to say the least. I was totally incredulous about this conflict.

One day during one of our outings we went to Haifa University. I noted a sign that was a jobs advertisement. There were jobs available to people who would wanted to apply but, as Richard pointed out, only for those who have served in the Israeli Army. The hitch was Arabs couldn’t serve in the IDF. So there you had it – “White Only” and “Colored Only” again.

As we traveled through the West Bank we also saw blatant discrimination against Palestinians with roads for Jews Only, checkpoints for Palestinians, homes being built for Jews Only, while Palestinian homes were being demolished to make room for them. And get this, the Palestinians had to pay for the demolition of their own homes.

As a result of this trip and this epiphany I returned to Palestine-Israel every year after that for about ten years. In 2000 I became a delegate with CPT (Christian Peacemaker Teams) in Hebron [a particularly nasty neighborhood - for Palestinians].

Because I remembered, in the 1960s in the United States how the country had its own epiphany when we all viewed the brutal treatment of blacks in the south on black-and-white TV, I felt this method of communication would be of value with this racist story. So I purchased some cameras and began filming and interviewing people and made my first documentary, “Beyond The Mirage: The Face of the Occupation.”

Now many others have made short films and documentaries, much better than mine – and continue to do so. And with advent of YouTube, cheap digital video cameras and iPhones more and more people can tell stories through video.

So perhaps more and more people are becoming aware of the racism of the Israeli occupation and yet the situation has only gotten worse and worse. Even in the latest Israeli election (March 2015) the Jews living in the West Bank (perhaps 500,000 of them) could vote but the Palestinians living there (approx. 1.5mm) could not? Why is that? Is this democracy? And then there’s the Israeli invention of “Present-Absent.” A present-absentee is a Palestinian who was expelled from his home in Palestine by Jewish or Israeli forces before and during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war but who remained within the state of Israel. They couldn’t vote in recent election or any election for that matter.

In Israel there are also many of what are called “unrecognized villages,” Palestinian villages within Israel that do not receive municipal services, such as connection to the electrical grid, water mains or trash-pickup, and they cannot elect government representatives.

After occupying the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the Six-Day War of 1967, Israel began permitting Israelis who married residents in the territories to apply for their spouses to live in Israel under a program of family unification. But then the Israeli Parliament voted to block Palestinians who marry Israelis from becoming Israeli citizens or residents, erecting a new legal barrier as Israel finished the first sections of the new physical barrier against Palestinians.

Israel also has a law called the “Law of Entry into Israel”, a law allowing any Israeli and any Jew to travel freely in all parts of the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan river, but denying the same right to Palestinians – despite the fact that this is their country too. This law robs them of the right to visit towns and villages across the Green Line – places with which they have deeply rooted family, heritage and national connections.

Then there’s the Israeli “Nakba Law” which gives the Israeli government via its finance minister the right to impose harsh fines on government funded organizations that use funds for either marking Independence Day as a day of mourning or celebrating the Palestinian version of it, the day of Nakba (catastrophe in Arabic). Sorta like withholding fund for celebrating Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birthday (much less allowing a film called “Selma”).

To me justice looks like this. It is based on the fact that all people are created in the image of God and that God loves all the little children of the world, no matter what color their skin or how old they are, or whether they even believe in God. It is also based on the fact that all people are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights which means liberty and justice for all, not just some.

So, if white people can eat at that restaurant, then black people can too. If white people can live in that neighborhood, then black people can too. If white people can go to that school, then black people can too. If white people can have that job, then black people can too. And if white people can be President of the United States, then black people can too.

Therefore, if Jewish people can eat at that restaurant, then Palestinians can too. If Jewish people can drive on that road, then Palestinians can too. If Jewish people can live in that neighborhood, than Palestinians can too. If Jewish people can have that job then Palestinians can too. If Jewish people have the right of return, then Palestinians do too. And if a Jew can be the Prime Minister of Israel than a Palestinian can too.

But to believe this is said to be “anti-Semitic.”  The reason it’s “anti-Semitic” is because it is critical of Israel and its policies and any criticism of Israel has been conflated into being “anti-Semitic.”

Of course, this is wrong, it is not anti-Semitic to criticize Israel.

It is not anti-Semitic to criticize and boycott apartheid South Africa on moral, human rights grounds.  It is not anti-Semitic to march from Selma to Montgomery by way of the Edmund Pettus bridge for equal rights for all.  Nor is it anti-Semitic to march from Ramallah to Jerusalem by way of Washington, DC, or through a St. Louis museum that closes down a debate on racism simply because it would include racism against Palestinians too, or through Seattle that recently voted to prevent any signs on the side of its buses that are critical of Israel.

In the words of Auschwitz survivor Hajo Meyer from an interview I did with him in Jerusalem (which you can see on Youtube), “You must criticize Israel if you at all care about the Jews and the Jewish heritage.”

Breathing Life Into Lake Victoria

Moses Hategeka

“In the 1960s up to early 1980s, our hilltops which are bare today were intensely covered with trees. We used to cultivate our crops and graze our animals in lowland areas as opposed to river banks. This has however changed due to population increase. Locals are now cultivating their crops adjacent to river banks to produce more food for their ever skyrocketing families. They are cutting down trees in search of firewood and building materials, and in doing so, contributing to the loss of vegetation cover, resulting into soils being washed downwards into river Kagera, and finally into Lake Victoria,”  says Frederick Muhumuza, an elderly peasant farmer in Kikagati  Isingiro District, along the Uganda- Tanzania boarder.

He adds that the resumption of Tin mining in the area which had closed down in the 1970s has led to the development of big stone quarries. Floods always wash away the opened soils from stone quarries to river Kagera.
According to a Senior production manager working in one of the vegetable oil industries In Mwanza region, Tanzania, “Most industries you see here are unplanned and uncontrolled, and most of them including the big ones don’t have waste management mechanisms. They discharge their untreated effluents into Lake Victoria, contributing to the industrial pollution of the Lake.”

Most chemical industries located in cities and towns along the shores of Lake Victoria such as Mwanza, Kisumu and Jinja, among others, are not connected to their central national sewerage systems and are unabatedly continuing to discharge their raw effluent into the Lake, with East African governments, and organizations such as, Lake Victoria Environmental management programme (LVEMP), Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation (LVFO), National Environment management Authorities, and National water and sewerage corporations doing very little  to abate the situation.

The Lakes’ ecological, fishery, water, and biodiversity resources, are also being destroyed by agricultural and mining pollution emanating from poor farming practices and artisanal mining activities in areas such as Geita and Musoma, in the Lake basin. Most farmers along the Lake basin and those living in its catchment areas regularly use organic pesticides and fertilizers to protect their crops and improve soil fertility. Some even use organochlorine pesticides such as dieldrin and aldrin which are very toxic to fish, fish breeding grounds and people’s health.

Most wetlands along major rivers such as Kagera, Nzoia, Mara, and Sondu- Miriu, which are the four major catchment runoff areas that feed water into Victoria are fast diminishing, as people encroach on them for agricultural and settlement purposes, meaning that, they are no longer acting as buffering strips. Water that is not properly filtered is thus being discharged into the Lake with excessive pollutants, leading to deteriorating water quality in the lake with catastrophic effect on the fish composition and catch, household incomes and livelihood standards of fishing communities. Many fishermen consequently engage in fishing immature fish, using illegal fishing gears, in a desperate move to make ends meet, leading to declining fish catch and possible extinction of some fish species.

Lake victoria, the second largest fresh water in the world, continues to be a key resource for riparian countries, through provision of food and water for various uses (industrial, agriculture, livestock, tourism, bio diversity conservation, and recreation). Export earnings from the lake amount to above US $400 million. The lake also supports the livelihood of over 30 million people. Why isn’t this key resource sustainably conserved? What is the problem at hand?

Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya, which principally share the lake, have a major responsibility of conserving it through their responsible established ministries. Since the lake’s total catchment area also includes Rwanda and Burundi, where river Kagera originates from, there is need for these five countries to come up with comprehensive ecosystem management mechanisms, ably fund organizations like LVEMP, LVFO, NEMAs and NW&SC, and task them to perform their stipulated mandate of conserving the lake through developing and implementing programs such as catchment afforestation, wetlands restoration, water hyacinth control and municipal and industrial waste management, among others.

Russia Proposes BRICS Parliamentary Group

Kester Kenn Klomegah


Russia's proposal to create an inter-parliamentary group in a joint effort to protect the economic and political interests, influence politics at the global arena and as an important strategic tool for promoting development among BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) member states has sparked discussions while others are watching bloc's new directions with interest.
 
Comprehensive plans have been outlined for the BRICS emerging market nations as Russia has started its presidency of the group from April till February 2016. Among the plans is creation of inter-parliamentary group and the priority to achieve strategic solutions to a full range of issues.
 
Valeria Gorbacheva, an Expert at the BRICS National Research Committee of the Rusian Federation, for instance, believes strongly that there is no doubt that inter-parliamentary cooperation among BRICS countries will be a significant part of the consolidation process. According to present knowledge, there is no parliamentary dimension in the pentalateral cooperation among BRICS countries, while bilateral inter-parliamentary relations are still underdeveloped.
 
In this regard, Indo-Russian inter-parliamentary initiative will become an important stimulus for this process. Russian side pay much attention to parliamentary dimension of BRICS and has already invited heads of two chambers of the Indian parliament to participate in the first BRICS parliamentary forum which is planned for June 8 in Moscow. Indian party promised to consider this invitation.
 
Russia is an active supporter of this process and Russian legislators hope that all BRICS countries will join the efforts on the development of inter-parliamentary cooperation. That is why within its presidency in BRICS, Russia will promote the creation of BRICS parliamentary assembly. This will definitely help BRICS to gain more and more strategic and long-term cooperation, according to objective views of Gorbacheva.
 
In the context of unilateral sanctions against Russia, this format of parliamentary cooperation can become a serious alternative to parliamentary platforms like those in PACE and OSCE. This is the reason why it is favorable to BRICS members to develop their coordination at the parliamentary level. Thus, BRICS parliamentary forum can become a new platform that will connect countries from three different continents, and countries which accumulate 42% of world's population and 27% of world GDP.
 
Without doubts, Russia wants to help promote inter-parliamentary cooperation in every way possible and also intends to encourage cooperation between trade unions, civil society organizations, and youth movements. As stated by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Igor Morgulov, the long-term aim is to transform BRICS from a "dialogue forum and tool of coordinating positions on a limited range of issues into a full-fledged mechanism of cooperation in the key issues of global economy and politics."
 
If all sides agree to participate in the proposed inter-parliamentary summit, Russia will organize a meeting in Moscow on preparations for such an event. The first parliamentary summit of BRICS may take place in June in Russia, Chairman of the Russian Federation Council's International Affairs Committee, Konstantin Kosachev told journalists in March.
 
"There are plans to hold a BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) parliamentary summit in Moscow in June this year," Kosachev stressed. For now, only Chinese parliamentarians have given preliminary agreement to participate in the summit, he noted. "I have an order from the Federation Council chairperson to establish direct contacts with national delegations of India, Brazil and South Africa, in order to get an understanding about the colleagues' plans," Kosachev noted.
 
This could be one mechanism to strengthen the political cooperation of the BRICS grouping. But, as the inter-parliamentary group does not yet exist, judging its effectiveness is difficult says Hannah Edinger, a Director at Frontier Advisory (a research, strategy and investment advisory firm that assists clients to improve their competitiveness in emerging market economies) headquartered in South Africa.
 
The BRICS countries have a number of overlapping goals concerning global development, and cooperate across various platforms. More recently, they have sought to strengthen this by institutionalizing their cooperation through the New Development Bank.
 
"An inter-parliamentary group will add another dimension to the cooperation between the five states. The group will create a framework for discussions to take place regarding the resolution of conflicts and the reformation of existing international institutions, as part of the BRICS countries’ attempt to balance the current international economic system towards greater incorporation of the views of the emerging world. The first forum will be held in Russia in July this year at the seventh BRICS Summit," Edinger wrote to Buziness Africa.
 
She argues that there may be initial challenges. "The creation of the BRICS inter-parliamentary group, which appears to be driven by Russia at the moment, will allow the BRICS countries to counter other parliamentary groups such as the EU. It therefore seems as though Russia is hoping that the BRICS parliamentary group will lend it legitimacy in light of its involvement in the Ukraine, by addressing questions of sovereignty and independence of states that differs from what it refers to as Euro-Atlantic doctrine," says Edinger.
 
Professor Ramesh Thakur from the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University shares similar optimistic views about BRICS future development and its important role on the global arena. "BRICS is potentially of great significance as an alternative site of, and an actor in, global governance. It is both symptomatic of and will further consolidate an alternative grouping to the dominant Western-controlled institutions of global governance," he told Buziness Africa media in April.
 
"The early initiatives are in international economic governance. But there is considerable political and strategic potential also. To that end, any further institutionalization of dialogue and interaction, such as a BRICS inter-parliamentary union, could help to solidify the group's identity," Professor Thakur stressed in his discussions with this researcher and writer.
 
In an email comment to Buziness Africa, Francis Kornegay, a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Global Dialogue, said that he was quite skeptical about a BRICS inter-parliamentary group. "I doubt that it will be taken seriously and could likely generate derisive feedback from any number of quarters given the democratic deficits of China and Russia. Neither country is a parliamentary democracy. Certainly not Beijing's. Russia's is a Potemkin parliament with little credibility under the clear personal rule of Putin," he wrote further in his email.
 
"It is quite possible that the idea of such a group is simply one more attempt by China & Russia to make IBSA redundant as India, Brazil and South Africa are authentic parliamentary democracies and have an IBSA parliamentary forum. Also, the core business of BRICS is global economic governance reform, anything else suggesting a manifestly political programme is really a distraction. Global economic governance reform is the political as well as the economic agenda of BRICS. Not sure BRICS needs a parliamentary group for this," Kornegay explained assertively.
 
The Institute for Global Dialogue (IGD) is an independent South African-based foreign policy think tank dedicated to the analysis of, and dialogue on the evolving international political and economic environment and the role of Africa and South Africa. It advances a balanced, relevant and policy-oriented analysis, debate and documentation of South Africa's role in international relations and diplomacy.
 
Brazil's sous-sherpa at BRICS, Director of Regional Mechanisms of the Foreign Ministry of Brazil, Flavio Damico, told TASS news agency at the end of March that the place and role of BRICS in the modern system of international relations "has been a significant factor in world affairs right from the moment of its establishment as countries in the group have big influence in decision-making on the international arena."
 
"After they began coordinating their actions, their influence has grown even more," the diplomat said. "Wide coordination between the BRICS countries became the new factor in the international life," he added. The countries in the organization are "very large and complex," and it is only logical that "there are spheres where coordination and cooperation are moving forward very fast and some spheres where more effort is needed to see tangible progress," Damico said.
 
As a further step to consolidate the group's footprint, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has ordered to sign a memorandum on cooperation with BRICS countries in the sphere of science, technologies and innovations, the official website of the Russian government reported in March. The memorandum aims at "forming a strategic system for cooperation in the sphere of science, technologies and innovations between countries-members of BRICS." The memorandum will be signed by Russia's Ministry of Education and Science on behalf of the Russian government.
 
According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation official website, Russia has assumed the role as president in the BRICS bloc from April 1, 2015, to February 16, 2016. As the BRICS president, Russia in tandem with its partners, intends to take new and major steps towards transforming BRICS into a mechanism for coordinating strategic and routine actions on a broad spectrum of economic and international political issues.
 
Russia's main priorities as the BRICS president are helping to consolidate strategic stability and regional conflict settlement, strengthening weapons of mass destruction non-proliferation regimes, fighting international terrorism and drug trafficking, and strengthening international information security.
 
The BRICS countries collectively represent about 26% of the world's geographic area and are home to 42% of the world's population. In 2013, the share of the BRICS countries reached 16.1% in global trade, 10.8% in military spending and 40/2% in production of non-renewable energy resources. The BRICS consumer market is the largest in the world and is growing by $500 billion a year. The next BRICS summit will take place in Ufa, the capital of Russia's Volga republic Bashkiria, on July 8-10, 2015.

Asia's New Future: Towards a Community of Common Destiny

H.E. Xi Jinping

There are certain historic occasions that are likely to remind people of what happened in the past and set people reflecting on them. This year marks the 70th anniversary of the end of the World Anti-Fascist War, the victory of the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the founding of the United Nations. This year is also the 60th anniversary of the Bandung Conference and will witness the completion of the ASEAN Community. As such, it is an important year to be commemorated as well as a historic juncture to reflect on the past and look to the future.

Over the past 70 years, the world has experienced profound changes as never before, making a difference to the destiny of mankind. With the days of global colonialism and the Cold War long gone, countries are now increasingly interconnected and interdependent. Peace, development and win-win cooperation have become the prevailing trend of our times. The international forces are shifting in a way that is more favorable to maintaining world peace. Countries are now in a better position to uphold general stability in the world and seek common development.

Over the past 70 years, Asia has also gone through unprecedented changes. After gaining national independence, Asian countries took their destiny in their own hands and strengthened the force for regional and world peace. Asian countries were the first to advocate the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence and, together with African countries, put forward the Ten Principles on handling state-to-state relations at the Bandung Conference. Since the end of the Cold War, Asian countries have gradually come up with an Asian way of cooperation in the course of advancing regional cooperation, which features mutual respect, consensus-building and accommodation of each other's comfort levels. All this has contributed to a proper approach to state-to-state relations and to progress in building a new type of international relations.

Over the past 70 years, more and more Asian countries have found development paths that suit their own national conditions and embarked on a fast-track of economic growth. Having emerged from poverty and backwardness, they are on course to achieve development and prosperity. Regional and inter-regional cooperation is flourishing. Connectivity is pursued at a faster pace. As a result, there is a strong momentum in Asia with countries striving to outperform each other. Accounting for one third of the world economy, Asia is one of the most dynamic regions with the most potential and its global strategic importance has been rising.

Over the past 70 years, Asian countries have gradually transcended their differences in ideology and social system. No longer cut off from each other, they are now open and inclusive, with suspicion and estrangement giving way to growing trust and appreciation. The interests of Asian countries have become intertwined, and a community of common destiny has increasingly taken shape. Be it the arduous struggle for national independence, or the difficult periods of the Asian financial crisis and the international financial crisis, or the hard time in the wake of devastating disasters including the Indian Ocean tsunami and earthquake in Wenchuan, China, the people of Asian countries have always come to those in need with a helping hand and worked together to overcome one challenge after another, demonstrating the power of unity in face of difficulties and the spirit of sharing weal and woe. This said, Asia still faces numerous challenges. Some are the old issues left over from history and others are new ones associated with current disputes. Asia is also confronted with various traditional and non-traditional security threats. Hence it remains an uphill battle for Asian countries to grow the economy, improve people's livelihood and eliminate poverty.

A review of the path traversed over the past 70 years shows that what has been accomplished in Asia today is attributable to the persistent efforts of several generations of people in Asian countries and to the hard work of many statesmen and people of great vision. Tomorrow, Singapore will hold a state funeral for Mr. Lee Kuan Yew. Mr. Lee was a strategist and statesman respected across the world for his outstanding contribution to the peace and development of Asia and the exchanges and cooperation between Asia and the world. I want to take this opportunity to pay high tribute to Mr. Lee Kuan Yew and all those who made contribution to Asia's peace and development.

Asia belongs to the world. For Asia to move towards a community of common destiny and embrace a new future, it has to follow the world trend and seek progress and development in tandem with that of the world.

The international situation continues to experience profound and complex changes, with significant development in multipolarization and economic globalization. Cultural diversity and IT application are making constant progress while readjustment is accelerating in international landscape and order. Countries around the world are losing no time in adjusting their development strategies, pursuing transformation and innovation, changing their economic development models, improving economic structures and opening up new horizons for further development. At the same time, however, the world economy is still in a period of profound adjustment, with risks of low growth, low inflation and low demand interwoven with risks of high unemployment, high debt and high level of bubbles. The performance and policies of major economies continue to diverge, and uncertainties in the economic climate remain prominent. Geopolitical factors are more at play and local turmoils keep cropping up. Non-traditional security threats and global challenges including terrorism, cyber security, energy security, food security, climate change and major infectious diseases are on the rise, and the North-South gap is still wide. The noble cause of peace and development remains a long and arduous journey for mankind.

We have only one planet, and countries share one world. To do well, Asia and the world could not do without each other. Facing the fast changing international and regional landscapes, we must see the whole picture, follow the trend of our times and jointly build a regional order that is more favorable to Asia and the world. We should, through efforts towards such a community for Asia, promote a community of common interest for all mankind. I wish to take this opportunity to share with you my thoughts on this vision.

To build a community of common destiny, we need to make sure that all countries respect one another and treat each other as equals. Countries may differ in size, strength or level of development, but they are all equal members of the international community with equal rights to participate in regional and international affairs. On matters that involve us all, we should discuss and look for a solution together. Being a big country means shouldering greater responsibilities for regional and world peace and development, as opposed to seeking greater monopoly over regional and world affairs.

To respect one another and treat each other as equals, countries need to, first and foremost, respect other countries' social systems and development paths of their own choice, respect each other's core interests and major concerns and have objective and rational perception of other countries' growing strength, policies and visions. Efforts should be made to seek common ground while shelving differences, and better still to increase common interests and dissolve differences. The hard-won peace and stability in Asia and the sound momentum for development should be upheld by all. All of us must oppose interference in other countries' internal affairs and reject attempts to destablize the region out of selfish motives.

To build a community of common destiny, we need to seek win-win cooperation and common development. Our friends in Southeast Asia say that the lotus flowers grow taller as the water rises. Our friends in Africa say that if you want to go fast, walk alone; and if you want to go far, walk together. Our friends in Europe say that a single tree cannot block the chilly wind. And Chinese people say that when big rivers have water, the small ones are filled; and when small rivers have water, the big ones are filled. All these sayings speak to one same truth, that is, only through win-win cooperation can we make big and sustainable achievements that are beneficial to all.

The old mindset of zero-sum game should give way to a new approach of win-win and all-win cooperation. The interests of others must be accommodated while pursuing one's own interests, and common development must be promoted while seeking one's own development. The vision of win-win cooperation not only applies to the economic field, but also to the political, security, cultural and many other fields. It not only applies to countries within the region, but also to cooperation with countries from outside the region. We should enhance coordination of macroeconomic policies to prevent negative spill-over effects that may arise from economic policy changes in individual economies. We should actively promote reform of global economic governance, uphold an open world economy, and jointly respond to risks and challenges in the world economy.

China and ASEAN countries will join hands in building an even closer China-ASEAN community of common destiny. The building of an East Asia economic community for ASEAN, China, Japan and ROK will be completed in 2020. We should actively build a free trade cooperation network in Asia and strive to conclude negotiations on an upgraded China-ASEAN FTA and on Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) in 2015. In advancing economic integration in Asia, we need to stay committed to open regionalism and move forward trans-regional cooperation, including APEC, in a coordinated manner.

We will vigorously promote a system of regional financial cooperation, explore a platform for exchanges and cooperation among Asian financial institutions, and advance complementary and coordinated development between the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and such multilateral financial institutions as the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank. We will strengthen practical cooperation in currency stability, investment and financing, and credit rating, make progress in institution building for the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralization and build a regional financial security network. We will work towards an energy and resources cooperation mechanism in Asia to ensure energy and resources security.

China proposes that plans be formulated regarding connectivity building in East Asia and Asia at large to advance full integration in infrastructure, policies and institutions and personnel flow. We may increase maritime connectivity, speed up institution building for marine cooperation in Asia, and step up cooperation in marine economy, environmental protection, disaster management and fishery. This way, we could turn the seas of Asia into seas of peace, friendship and cooperation for Asian countries.

To build a community of common destiny, we need to pursue common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security. In today's world, security means much more than before and its implications go well beyond a single region or time frame. All sorts of factors could have a bearing on a country's security. As people of all countries share common destiny and become increasingly interdependent, no country could have its own security ensured without the security of other countries or of the wider world. The Cold War mentality should truly be discarded and new security concepts be nurtured as we explore a path for Asia that ensures security for all, by all and of all.

We believe that countries are all entitled to take an equal part in regional security affairs and all are obliged to work to ensure security for the region. The legitimate security concerns of each country need to be respected and addressed. At the same time, in handling security issues in Asia, it is important to bear in mind both the history and reality of Asia, take a multi-pronged and holistic approach, improve coordinated regional security governance, and safeguard security in both the traditional and non-traditional realms. It is important to conduct dialogue and cooperation to enhance security at national and regional levels, and to increase cooperation as the way to safeguard peace and security. It is important to resolve disputes through peaceful means, and oppose the willful use or threat of force. Security should be given equal emphasis as development, and sustainable development surely provides a way to sustainable security. Countries in Asia need to step up cooperation with countries and organizations outside the region and all parties are welcome to play a positive and constructive role in upholding development and security in Asia.

To build a community of common destiny, we need to ensure inclusiveness and mutual learning among civilizations. History, over the past millennia, has witnessed ancient civilizations appear and thrive along the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers, the Indus, the Ganges, the Euphrates, and the Tigris River as well as in Southeast Asia, each adding its own splendour to the progress of human civilization. Today, Asia has proudly maintained its distinct diversity and still nurtures all the civilizations, ethnic groups and religions in this big Asian family.

Mencius, the great philosopher in ancient China, said, "Things are born to be different." Civilizations are only unique, and no one is superior to the other. There need to be more exchange and dialogue among civilizations and development models, so that each could draw on the strength of the other and all could thrive and prosper by way of mutual learning and common development. Let us promote inter-civilization exchanges to build bridges of friendship for our people, drive human development and safeguard peace of the world.

China proposes that a conference of dialogue among Asian civilizations be held to provide a platform upon which to enhance interactions among the youth, people's groups, local communities and the media and to form a network of think-tank cooperation, so as to add to Asian people's rich cultural life and contribute to more vibrant regional cooperation and development.

Right now, the Chinese people are working in unison under the strategic plans to complete the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects, and to comprehensively deepen reform, advance law-based governance, and enforce strict Party conduct. Our objective is to realize the "two centenary" goals for China's development and for realizing the Chinese dream of great national rejuvenation. I wish to use this opportunity to reaffirm China's commitment to the path of peaceful development, and to promoting cooperation and common development in the Asia-Pacific. China will be firm in its determination and resolve and all its policies will be designed to achieve such a purpose.

Now, the Chinese economy has entered a state of new normal. It is shifting gear from high speed to medium-to-high speed growth, from an extensive model that emphasized scale and speed to a more intensive one emphasizing quality and efficiency, and from being driven by investment in production factors to being driven by innovation. China's economy grew by 7.4% in 2014, with 7% increase in labor productivity and 4.8% decrease in energy intensity. The share of domestic consumption in GDP rose, the services sector expanded at a faster pace, and the economy's efficiency and quality continued to improve. When looking at China's economy, one should not focus on growth rate only. As the economy continues to grow in size, around 7% growth would be quite impressive, and the momentum it generates would be larger than growth at double digits in previous years. It is fair to say that the Chinese economy is highly resilient and has much potential, which gives us enough room to leverage a host of policy tools. Having said that, China will continue to be responsive to the new trend and take initiatives to shape the new normal in our favor. We will focus on improving quality and efficiency, and give even greater priority to shifting the growth model and adjusting the structure of development. We will make more solid efforts to boost economic development and deepen reform and opening-up. We will take more initiatives to unleash the creativity and ingenuity of the people, be more effective in safeguarding equity and social justice, raise people's living standards and make sure that China's economic and social development are both sound and stable.

This new normal of the Chinese economy will continue to bring more opportunities of trade, growth, investment and cooperation for other countries in Asia and beyond. In the coming five years, China will import more than US$10 trillion of goods, Chinese investment abroad will exceed US$500 billion, and more than 500 million outbound visits will be made by Chinese tourists. China will stick to its basic state policy of opening up, improve its investment climate, and protect the lawful rights and interests of investors. I believe that together, the people of Asian countries could drive this train of Asia's development to take Asia to an even brighter future.

What China needs most is a harmonious and stable domestic environment and a peaceful and tranquil international environment. Turbulence or war runs against the fundamental interests of the Chinese people. The Chinese nation loves peace and has, since ancient times, held high such philosophies that "harmony is the most valuable", "peace and harmony should prevail" and "all men under heaven are brothers". China has suffered from turbulence and war for more than a century since modern times, and the Chinese people would never want to inflict the same tragedy on other countries or peoples. History has taught us that no country who tried to achieve its goal with force ever succeeded. China will be steadfast in pursuing the independent foreign policy of peace, the path of peaceful development, the win-win strategy of opening-up, and the approach of upholding justice while pursuing shared interests. China will work to promote a new type of international relations of win-win cooperation and will always remain a staunch force for world peace and common development.

Close neighbors are better than distant relatives. This is a simple truth that the Chinese people got to know in ancient times. That explains China's firm commitment to building friendship and partnership with its neighbors to foster an amicable, secure and prosperous neighborhood. Under the principle of amity, sincerity, mutual benefit and inclusiveness, China is working actively to deepen win-win cooperation and connectivity with its neighbors to bring them even more benefit with its own development. China has signed treaties of good-neighborliness, friendship and cooperation with eight of its neighbors and is holding discussion to sign a same treaty with ASEAN. China stands ready to sigh such a treaty with all its neighbors to provide strong support for the development of bilateral relations as well as prosperity and stability in the region.

In 2013, during my visit to Kazakhstan and Indonesia, I put forward the initiatives of building a Silk Road economic belt and a 21st century maritime Silk Road. The "Belt and Road" initiative, meeting the development needs of China, countries along the routes and the region at large, will serve the common interests of relevant parties and answer the call of our time for regional and global cooperation.

In promoting this initiative, China will follow the principle of wide consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits. The programs of development will be open and inclusive, not exclusive. They will be a real chorus comprising all countries along the routes, not a solo for China itself. To develop the Belt and Road is not to replace existing mechanisms or initiatives for regional cooperation. Much to the contrary, we will build on the existing basis to help countries align their development strategies and form complementarity. Currently, more than 60 countries along the routes and international organizations have shown interest in taking part in the development of the Belt and the Road. The "Belt and Road" and the AIIB are both open initiatives. We welcome all countries along the routes and in Asia, as well as our friends and partners around the world, to take an active part in these endeavors.

The "Belt and Road" initiative is not meant as rhetoric. It represents real work that could be seen and felt to bring real benefits to countries in the region. Thanks to the concerted efforts of relevant parties, the vision and action paper of the initiative has been developed. Substantive progress has been made in the establishment of the AIIB. The Silk Road Fund has been launched, and constructions of a number of infrastructure connectivity projects are moving forward. These early harvests have truly pointed to the broad prospects the "Belt and Road" initiative will bring.

The cause of peace and development of mankind is as lofty as its is challenging. The journey ahead will not be smooth sailing, and success may not come easily. No matter how long and difficult the journey may be, those who work together and never give up will eventually prevail. I believe that as long as we keep to our goals and make hard efforts, we will together bring about a community of common destiny and usher in a new future for Asia.

Zambia: The Search for Quality Jobs

Martin Clemensson

Employer Organizations’ have important role to play in promoting social justice and human rights in the world of work. It is for this reason that the ILO recognizes the need to have strong Employers representation to ensure they add value to their member enterprises and meet their representation, advocacy and service delivery needs.

Let me make quick reference to the world employment and social outlook trends, which are shaping the thinking around employment now. The latest reports highlight that trade liberalization and investments in infrastructure and education have long regarded as the key drivers of economic development.

However, this approach has failed to address the vulnerable economic growth patterns typically found in many developing countries, with raising youth unemployment including among university graduates as witnessed in Lusaka last week and growing income inequalities.

The report provides evidence that “strategies which focus on promoting decent work opportunities tend to yield sustained development results.”
There are very few countries that have managed to improve economic growth without correspondingly increasing the quality of jobs. Economic growth that goes hand in hand with improved decent work outcome is generally more sustainable.

Whereas the Zambian economy has witnessed a steady growth over the last decade, averaging 6.4 per cent, this has not been met with a corresponding increase in the number of jobs created over the same period, which has averaged 2 per cent per year. A number of factors contribute to this, chief among them being that the primary source of growth for the Zambian economy is the mining sector, which is a highly capital intensive sector and there are few linkages between this capital intensive sector with the domestic economy there is not enough local content.

The goal in today’s market is to promote more and better jobs, which consequently leads to development. A number of questions, however, need to be addressed to attain this result. For instance, “How does decent work interact with the economic and investment policies that are needed to achieve economic and human development?” “What makes employment policies and social protection successful in developing countries?” “To what extent can the gains from development be shared fairly while maintaining enterprises dynamism?” and importantly, “What is the role of labour standards in this respect?”

These are pertinent questions that need informed answers. And it is in the answering of these questions that we as ILO advocate for the spirit of tripartism, effective dialogue, rights at work and employment creation, in order to achieve economic development that leaves no one behind.
And it is discussion around these issues that ZFE can make its contribution in the shaping of the development discourse in Zambia more so as Zambia and the rest of the world are moving closer to the post 2015 development agenda.

How Can ILO Support ZFE Achieve Its Objective?

Creating enabling conditions for social Dialogue is key to the work of the ILO. We encourage tripartism within Member states by promoting social dialogue to help design and implement national policies. Achieving fair terms of employment, decent working conditions, and development for the benefits of all, cannot be achieved without the joint active involvement of workers, employers and governments.

Our role is to support Governments, employers` and workers` organization to establish sound labour relations, adapt labour laws to meet changing economic and social needs, and improve labour administration.

For example, the Government of Zambia made the request to review the labour code in 2011 when the patriotic Front Government came into power and ILO is still committed to the cause although progress has been stalled
The ILO is committed to help the Government, the employers` and the workers` organization to establish sound labour relations, adapt labour laws to changing economic and social circumstances, and improve labour administration. In supporting and reinforcing employers` and workers` organizations, the ILO will assist, through the provision of technical assistance expertise and capacity development, to create the condition for effective dialogue among the tripartite partners.

Garissa College Massacre: What Should Kenya Do?

Muuse Yuusuf

Heart-broken relatives, families and Kenyans in general are mourning the death of students who were killed by Al Shabaab fighters at the Garissa University College. They cannot understand the reason why innocent students, who went to university to improve their life and the lives of their fellow Kenyans, had to meet violent death at the hands of this murderous terrorist cult, which has mainly been terrorising Somalis. The murdered students were singled out by crazed and brain-washed terrorists for the slaughter for belonging to a different faith in this multi-faith and ethnic country!

The incident has again given Al Shabaab a wider publicity for their organisation and their “cause,” their claim that their action is a revenge for the invasion of Kenyan forces of Somalia in 2011. They have also shown that, although their power and influence have been weakened, a handful of well-organised and well-motivated individuals can stage deadly and spectacular guerrilla attacks on civilian targets, such as schools, reminding us of the terrorist attacks on a school in Peshawar in Pakistan, where hundreds of many innocent children were murdered by terrorists.

The Kenyan government and the public are in deep shock to see a college full of diligent students blown up by a ferocious fight by a handful of terrorists. It is particularly heart-breaking for the Kenyan government to watch its citizens butchered inside its territory by Al-Shabaab, the same organisation, which prompted its forces to invade Somalia in 2011. Indeed, it is more than three years since the invasion and anyone who analyses the current situation on the ground can see the following scenarios becoming reality as the days go by.

If the invasion was meant to protect Kenyan citizens and country’s tourism industry from bombings and kidnappings by terrorists, it has failed to do so. Let alone protect the tourism resorts of Mombasa and Malindi, bombings became normal features in Nairobi as evidenced by the Eastleigh bus bombing in 2012, the Westgate mall incident and now the Garissa massacre. Three years ago, who would have thought bombs planted by Al-Shabaab would explode in Nairobi, equating this beautiful metropolitan city to the war-torn Mogadishu in terms of insecurity?

If the military adventure was aimed at securing Kenya’s borders with Somalia, insecurity along the border is worse than ever, a classical example is Al-Shabaab’s current attack on Garissa University College. Although Kenyan forces have helped the Somali government to remove Al-Shabaab from some regions, including the strategic port town of Kismayo, it seems though the problem has shifted to Kenya, particularly the Somali region where insecurity has increased compared to the situation prior to the invasion.

Crackdowns and raids on towns in the Somali region in Kenya by the Kenyan security forces demonstrate the gravity of the situation inside the country. In 2012, Garissa, a city of 350km north-east of Nairobi, the same town where the massacre of students happened, was reported to be a “ghost” town after sweeping security operations mounted by the military, causing the death of many people, including students.

Considering the history of this volatile region, it is this author’s firm belief that border countries or front line states should be excluded from any peace-keeping or peace-enforcement operations because their presence will only complicate the situation. The Ethiopian invasion helped create Al-Shabaab and extremism, the opposite of what the military adventure was supposed to achieve. The international community should keep in mind the existing unbalanced power structure in the region in which Somalia, a poor and broke nation has found itself tormented and bullied by two powerful neighbours.

In short, Kenya, please come out of Somalia quickly before it is too late. By staying in Somalia, Kenya might be making the chance of stabilizing Somalia much harder, as it might be jeopardizing its own internal security.

Social Media and Nigeria’s Democratic Space

Audu Liberty Oseni

A tremendous change in the Nigeria’s political process has been the rise in social media. How the social media has influenced politics in Nigeria is prominently noted by the inability of the political parties to change election results. The use of social media such as Facebook, Blackberry Messenger, WhatsApp, Twitter, Blog, MySpace, YouTube and Instagram has emerged as an important means of electioneering and policing of election results.

The power of social media played a prominent role at the Ekiti and Osun states governorship elections. In the Ekiti State governorship election, accredited election and citizens observers, civil society situation room, APC, PDP and INEC situation rooms deployed observers to the field that relied mainly on SMS, WhatsApp, Twitter, Facebook, BBM,  and  Instagram, for incidents reports from the field.
 
Three hours after voting commenced, observers and citizens started broadcasting election results announced in their respective voting centres using twitter, facebook, BBM, WhatsApp, and SMS. As elections results in respective voting centres went viral on social media, political parties, citizens and international observers were monitoring social media, tracking and analyzing election results. Although INEC constantly maintained election results cannot be announced using social media, some of us at the Centre for Democracy and Development http://www.cddwestafrica.org/  situation room having monitored the social media knew that APC had lost the Ekiti state governorship election to PDP. Having monitored election results trending on social media, jubilation started in Ado Ekiti, the state capital, before the official announcement of the result by INEC. 
 
At the March 28th, 2015 Nigeria presidential election, social media played a prominent role not only at the electioneering campaign but also at the mandate protection by ensuring election results were broadcast before official announcement by the INEC. Just like in the case of Ekiti and Osun states, few hours after voting started; results started trending on social media. The results made it clear to Nigerians that All Progressive Congress (APC) had won in the Northeast, Northwest, Southwest, and was competing with PDP in the North Central while the People Democratic Party, PDP had led in the Southeast and South-South.

Agitated by the election results trending on the social media, PDP Accused APC of posting fake election results on social media. PDP charged Nigerians to totally disregard results on social media and wait for INEC to announce the official results. Indeed Nigerians waited for the official announcement from INEC but there was no major difference between the results announced by INEC and those trending on social media.

Ekiti, Osun and March 28, 2015 presidential election are suffice examples that show how powerful social media can be in checkmating election rigging. With social media and digital communication increasingly being used as tools for reporting incidents and happening in elections, it becomes important for political parties come to terms with the fact that citizens now have power to monitor election results making it impossible for election results to be changed since the results are already in the public domain waiting for official announcement by INEC. The extent to which social media proves effective in attracting young Nigerians to election activities now makes it possible for citizens’ vote to count. Nigerians have more to gain than lose in the social media sphere that has taken over as a medium of communication among young citizens globally. 

The emergence of social media and it’s utilization in elections has obviously frustrated Nigerian politicians and stopped the popular strategy of changing election results by the returning officers in collaboration with political parties.   The social media age is a revolution to Nigeria’s democracy.  Those who must win elections must win the will of the people. The days of changing election results by the returning officers have gone. By the power of social media, citizens now know who won the election before results are officially announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC. Ekiti, Osun states governorship and the March 28th, 2015 elections are suffice examples. Social media has become a force and we must live up to this reality.