Syriza, requesting six-month loan extension for Greece, accepts continued austerity

Robert Stevens

The Syriza-Independent Greeks government is set to request a six-month loan extension Thursday, reversing its previous pledges and accepting the debt-repayment scheme and austerity program dictated by the European Union.

Greece’s current loan agreement with the so-called “troika” (European Commission, European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund) expires at the end of this month. Without further loans, it will rapidly default on its foreign debt of €320 billion.

According to press reports, the request was scheduled to be submitted on Wednesday, but was held back by Athens in order to ensure that it was worded in a manner acceptable to the Eurogroup. Led by Germany, the euro zone governments have thus far rejected Syriza’s concessionary offers and insisted on an explicit acceptance of the current debt repayment plan.

The new government will reportedly agree not to roll back the austerity measures already implemented or take any action not approved by the troika, while asking for a loan extension of up to six months that is not formally attached to completion of the austerity programme agreed by the previous Greek government.

On Tuesday, a senior Greek cabinet minister, speaking anonymously, said, “We will ask for an extension of the current bailout agreement within the framework of the Moscovici plan.”

This is a reference to a document authored by Pierre Moscovici, economic chief of the European Commission, which Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis on Monday said he was prepared to sign. At Monday’s meeting of euro zone finance ministers in Brussels, the Moscovici document was withdrawn and replaced with another from Eurogroup head Jeroen Dijsselbloem demanding that Greece remain within the previous austerity agreement and impose further cuts.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble denounced the new Greek proposal, stating, “It’s not about an extension of the loan programme, it’s about whether this program is fulfilled, yes or no.”

A further indication of German opposition came Wednesday evening with the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) to grant a further extension of just €3.3 billion to Greek banks accessing the ECB’s Emergency Liquidity Assistance fund. At the current rate of deposit outflows from Greek banks, this sum is estimated to cover just one week of funding. The ECB board was split on the issue, with the Bundesbank’s Jens Weidmann opposing even this token increase.

In preparing to submit the new Greek proposal, Varoufakis met with Moscovici on Tuesday. On Wednesday he spoke by telephone with US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, who called on Greece to "find a constructive path forward in partnership" with its creditors. A US Treasury statement warned that “failure to reach an agreement would lead to immediate hardship in Greece, that the uncertainty is not good for Europe, and that time is of the essence.”

On Wednesday evening, Varoufakis tweeted that a Eurogroup teleconference would be held Friday to discuss Greece’s proposal.

Syriza has been desperately seeking to come to an agreement with the troika and the Eurogroup since its election last month on an anti-austerity platform. But the eurozone governments, led by Germany, have to date rejected the supposedly “left” government’s pleas for some form of verbal camouflage for what amounts to capitulation to the demands of EU and the banks.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble, in particular, has gone out of his way to crack the whip and display contempt for Syriza, exhibiting the arrogance and indifference of the bourgeoisie for the suffering of the Greek masses. The evident aim is to make Greece an object lesson on the futility of challenging the power of capital.

Syriza, a party that speaks for sections of the bourgeoisie and privileged upper-middle class layers in Greece, is incapable of mounting any real opposition to the dictates of the EU and the banks. It is part of the bourgeois political order and explicitly defends the capitalist economic system and its organizational and political framework in Europe, the EU.

It is being forced, before the eyes of the world, to systematically discard its “radical” pretences in something akin to a political striptease.

On Wednesday, the Greek government released documents outlining its negotiating positions and citing statements made by Varoufakis at the last two Eurogroup meetings. The documents are an extraordinary testament to the lengths Syriza has gone in repudiating its anti-austerity rhetoric in an effort to satisfy the rapacious demands of the European ruling elite.

In his presentation to the February 11 Eurogroup meeting, Varoufakis started by stressing that Syriza understood the austerity measures already in place in Greece would be permanent. “Greece has made a vast adjustment over the past five years at immense social cost” he said. “The new government takes this adjustment as its point of departure.”

He continued, “Our government will be the most reform-oriented government in Greek modern history, and among the most enthusiastic reformers in Europe.”

Addressing concerns that Syriza might implement a few reforms partially reversing austerity measures in place regarding privatisations, the firing of public sector workers, the slashing of pensions and cuts in the minimum wage, Varoufakis explained that Syriza’s proposals were so watered down as to be inconsequential. It was untrue “that we have rolled back previous reforms and added to our state budget,” he declared.

Regarding privatizations, he said “we are ready and willing to evaluate each and every one project on its merits alone. Media reports that the Piraeus port privatisation was reversed could not be further from the truth.” He went on to insist that “foreign direct investment will be encouraged.”

On the promised reinstatement of laid-off state employees Varoufakis had already said this policy would apply to “just one tiny little miserable percent of those who lost their jobs.” He told the Eurogroup meeting that just 2,013 workers would be rehired, and promised that this “tiny number” would “have no adverse effect on competitiveness and no fiscal bearing as [the reinstatements] will be paid for entirely by other savings in the state budget.”

Syriza’s “reform” of pensions was barely a change in the existing policy and would cost almost nothing, pleaded Varoufakis. He said the “restoration of the pension cuts we announced concern pensioners living at or below the poverty line and comes up to less than 2 euros per day per eligible pensioner—a grand total of around 9.5 million.” [Emphasis added].

On the minimum wage, Syriza is proposing merely a return to the level that prevailed before the austerity measures were launched. On this issue as well, big business had nothing to fear, Varoufakis assured the assembled finance ministers. The “government will phase in its restoration to the 2012 level gradually, from September onward,” he said, and only “after consultation with employers and trades unions.” It would apply, moreover, “only to the private sector.”

Posing the question, “Will it reduce the competitiveness of the private sector?” he answered, “The government commits to reforms, e.g., in social security. Reducing the tax on wages will ensure it does not.”

Varoufakis was addressing finance ministers who in 2010 alone imposed €487 billion in austerity cuts, with hundreds of billions in further cuts since then. Varoufakis concluded, “Some of you... were displeased by the victory of a left-wing, a radical left-wing party. To them I have this to say: It would be a lost opportunity to see us as adversaries. We are dedicated Europeanists. We care about our people deeply but we are not populists promising all things to all people.” [Emphasis added.]

The Eurogroup listened to Varoufakis, but did not even bother to look at his latest paper outlining Syriza’s proposals.

The fact that the Eurogroup has rejected such miserable proposals out of hand shows that the European Union will not allow anything to be legislated in Greece, or anywhere else, that impinges on the ongoing transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.

The Daily Telegraph summed up the position of the ruling elite when it lauded Lithuania, calling it “the euro zone’s newest member… where the minimum wage is €300 per month and which is now asked to cave so Syriza can increase the Greek minimum wage to €751 per month.”

If any agreement is reached between the Eurogroup and Greece it will be based on a continuation of austerity enforced by Syriza. Even then, the growing scale of Greece’s foreign debt is such that it cannot be paid off. More and more commentators are concluding that Greece is edging toward default and exit from the euro zone.

The Guardian warned in its editorial Wednesday that Greece’s application for an extension “would be only a temporary, if welcome, respite to the underlying problem.” The editorial continued: “It would be foolish to assume that it represents a conclusive step back from the brink.”

Japanese prime minister pushes to end constitutional limits on the military

Peter Symonds

Under conditions where US imperialism is resorting to war as an instrument of foreign policy in Ukraine, the Middle East and the Asia Pacific, other major powers are also seeking to remilitarise and remove any restraints on their use of military force. That is the significance of the call by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for a fundamental revision of the country’s post-war constitution.

Last week, in his first keynote policy speech to parliament since the December election, Abe formally put constitutional change on his government’s agenda. He exhorted the “people of Japan” to “be confident,” exclaiming: “Isn’t it time to hold deep debate about revising the constitution? For the future of Japan, shouldn’t we accomplish in this parliament, the biggest reform since the end of the war?”

Constitutional revision has been a longstanding ambition, not only of Abe. Substantial sections of the Japanese political establishment object in particular to Article 9 of the constitution, which renounced war forever and declared that land, air and sea forces would never be maintained. The constitution was drawn up by the post-war American occupation under General Douglas MacArthur, although from the 1950s the US encouraged Japan to establish its own substantial “self-defence forces” as part of their Cold War alliance.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Japanese ruling class has increasingly viewed the post-war constitution as an intolerable impediment to pursuing its own imperialist ambitions in Asia and internationally. Amid rising geo-political tensions, the Abe government has already expanded military spending, re-oriented defence strategy to fighting a war with China and is waging a propaganda campaign to whitewash the war crimes of the Japanese military during the 1930s and 1940s.

Last July, Abe took a further major step in undermining Article 9 by announcing a “constitutional reinterpretation” allowing for so-called “collective self-defence”—in other words, for Tokyo to militarily support the US and other potential allies, even if Japan was not directly threatened or under attack. A battery of legislation to give legal force to this “reinterpretation” has already been drawn up and will be pushed through the national parliament after local elections in April.

As part of its “pivot to Asia,” the Obama administration has actively encouraged Japan to take a more aggressive stance toward Beijing and play a greater role in “regional security”—that is, in supporting the US military build-up in the Indo-Pacific region against China. Washington welcomed the Abe government’s statement on “collective self-defence” as it opens the door for the closer integration of US and Japanese forces, including in Japan itself, where nearly 50,000 American military personnel are based.

Abe now plans to press ahead with his far broader objective of sweeping constitutional change, well aware that he faces major obstacles. Any constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of parliament before being put to a popular referendum for ratification. More fundamentally, the government confronts deep-seated public opposition, especially in the working class, to any attempt to revive Japanese militarism or change the constitution.

In calling for a “deep debate,” Abe is preparing a lengthy ideological offensive. He has already seized on the barbaric execution of two Japanese hostages by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militias to argue for the removal of constitutional and legal restraints on the military’s ability to launch rescue operations. Undoubtedly, the government will exploit or manufacture a series of terrorist or war scares to try to stampede public opinion into supporting constitutional change sometime after upper house elections in mid-2016.

The driving force behind the revival of Japanese militarism is the deepening breakdown of global capitalism, which is fuelling geo-political rivalries and tensions around the globe—from the provocative intervention of the US and its allies in Ukraine, to the new US-led war in the Middle East and Washington’s “pivot” against China. Like Germany, Japan continues to pursue its objectives within the framework of the US alliance, but, at the same time, is rearming in order to pursue its own imperialist interests, which may come into conflict with those of the United States.

Having suffered what it regarded as a humiliating defeat in World War II, the Japanese ruling elites only reluctantly accepted the constitution foisted on them by the American occupation. Abe often speaks of “escaping the post-war regime,” by which he means not only removing the constitutional shackles on the Japanese military but ending the country’s post-war subordination to American interests.

In his 2006 book, Towards a Beautif ul Country: My Vision for Japan, Abe declared that Article 9 of the constitution “failed to provide a necessary condition for an independent nation.” That reflected the US stance toward Japan, he wrote. “In order to protect national interests of its own and other Allied powers, the US ... drafted the constitution not to let Japan challenge the Western-centred world order again.”

Abe is determined to remove the restraints on Japanese imperialism’s ability to aggressively prosecute its interests internationally. In just over two years since he came to power in December 2012, Abe has mounted a far-ranging diplomatic offensive to strengthen Tokyo’s ties around the world, visiting more than 50 countries on five continents.

At the same time, the Liberal Democratic Party government is seeking to amend or abolish basic democratic rights contained in the post-war constitution. It is proposing to grant sweeping “emergency powers” to the prime minister, restore the emperor to his pre-war status as head of state and replace the “fundamental rights” of citizens with patriotic “duties,” including to respect the national flag and anthem. Above all, these anti-democratic measures will be used against the working class under conditions of mounting government attacks on living standards.

The re-emergence of Japanese militarism holds great dangers for the working class in Japan and internationally. Amid a mounting economic crisis and growing inter-imperialist rivalry, all the major powers are preparing for war. The US and Japan fought a bloody war between 1941 and 1945 that cost millions of lives in order to determine which power would dominate China and the Asia Pacific. While the US and Japan are currently allies, the unresolved questions of the last war continue to fester, threatening new tensions and conflict.

The sole social force capable of halting the accelerating drive to war in Europe, the Middle East and Asia is the international working class. The International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) and its sections are the only organisations fighting to build a global anti-war movement of workers and youth on the basis of a socialist and internationalist perspective to abolish the root cause of war—the bankrupt capitalist system and its outmoded nation-state system.

Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus

PR Chari

Foreign Secretary Jaishankar is scheduled to visit Pakistan for resuming the interrupted Indo-Pak dialogue, which has got the talking heads in New Delhi into a tizzy. Why on earth did the Prime Minister reverse course after taking the firm position that Pakistan could not indulge in unacceptable conduct and hope to continue efforts to normalise relations with India? It would be recollected here that the Pakistani Foreign Secretary had gone ahead last year during his visit to India to meet separatist leaders from Kashmir in New Delhi, despite being specifically urged not to do so. That act of deliberate intransigence had caused Prime Minister Modi's ire, and his announcement that no further dialogue with Islamabad was possible due to its obduracy. 

What has happened then to occasion this policy reversal? It has been alleged that US pressure on New Delhi was responsible. President Obama has made the inclusion of Pakistan within the structure of various dialogue processes into an article of faith, despite Pakistan's many transgressions. This is vividly demonstrated by Obama's Afghanistan policy, which privileges Pakistan above all others for being doled out financial largesse, despite its proven links with al Qaeda, Taliban and militant groups of all descriptions. It is therefore quite possible that President Obama strongly urged Modi to resume the dialogue with Pakistan and not complicate the American plans for withdrawing its forces from Afghanistan. Indeed, there are committed elements in India who also believe that dialogue with Pakistan should be an uninterrupted and uninterruptable process that is not subject to the vagaries of day-to-day occurrences.

Conspiracy theorists have also speculated that the BJP's humiliating defeat in the Delhi state elections, despite Modi's personal canvassing, alongside other stalwarts of the BJP and the RSS, made it imperative to divert public attention away from this electoral disaster. Hence, the dramatic decision to resume the shelved India-Pakistan dialogue although nothing has changed in the bilateral situation. This conclusion has some merit. But subsequent clarifications by the Government have sought to play down the significance of this overture to Pakistan by urging that the Foreign Secretary's visit to Islamabad is part of a larger diplomatic endeavour. Visits are also planned thereafter to the other SAARC capitals to infuse new life into this moribund organisation. The policy implications of this modality are of the essence and need to be emphasised, especially in the light of Prime Minister Modi's radical declarations during the last SAARC Summit meeting  in Kathmandu held in November 2014.

After identifying terrorism as the major security threat confronting the regional grouping, Modi predicted that regional integration could occur “through SAARC or outside it” if the group failed to reach consensus on the many fundamental issues that were bedevilling this regional organisation. Modi also asserted, significantly, that India would work “through SAARC or outside it, among some or all of its members,” which presages a new approach to dealing with India's South Asian neighbours. Plainly, this was Modi's instinctive reaction to Pakistan's obstructive conduct during the Summit meeting, where it did not allow several proposals for achieving regional cooperation to be passed. Under its Charter, unfortunately, the founders of SAARC had opted for all its decisions being taken by consensus, and not on the basis of majority votes, which has enabled intransigent members to halt decision-making for frivolous and implausible reasons.

Modi's message to Islamabad was plain. If the situation so warranted India could work within the SAARC modality or with individual SAARC countries or with smaller groupings of its members. A new relevance was thereby accorded to bilateral relations and sub-regional groupings within the ambit of SAARC. Reportedly, a BJP spokesperson had declared earlier that “South Asia will grow without Pakistan if they don’t want to be on board. They anyway see themselves as a part of the Islamic West Asian world; good luck to them.” The Foreign Secretary could pursue these propositions during his forthcoming visit to Pakistan, in addition to the set-piece agenda for Indo-Pak meetings that must perforce include border incidents, terrorist activities, hostile propaganda, apart from more constructive items like strengthening trade relations and facilitating people-to-people relations. 

In his subsequent visits to the other SAARC countries the Foreign Secretary could also explore the possibility of invigorating the possible sub-regional groupings within SAARC  where some natural affinities are available, and trade, communications and similar cooperative linkages are already existing. A sub-regional grouping that would include Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal (BBIN), or India, Maldives and Sri Lanka (SIM) is presently conceivable. And, a sub-regional grouping comprising Afghanistan, Pakistan and India (API) can be visualised in the fullness of time if the politics of these countries transcends their present dissensions.  

Viewed in the SAARC perspective the resumption of the Indo-Pak dialogue offers Pakistan both a challenge and an opportunity to redeem its present image of being the global centre for jihad and religious terrorism. It would be in the self-interests of both China and the US to support these initiatives that derive from the SAARC modality.

Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?

Salma Malik

A year ago, the morning of 7 January 2014 started as an average routine day for the children of Ibrahimzai village in Hangu, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. However, few minutes later, 14-year-old Aitzaz Hasan, prevented a suicide bombing attack on the school, courageously saving 2000 pupils, and embraced martyrdom in the process. Aitzaz’s sacrifice affected everyone and his death was mourned and eulogised everywhere. However, given the spreading geography of fear, life soon returned to what can be tragically termed as normal.

Eerily reminiscent of the January attack, on 16 December 2014, what began as a normal turned into a day of mourning and national reflection itself, for the Army Public School, Peshawar, came under a terrorist attack that left 148 dead; and 134 were children. The attack was launched specifically by the Khorasani group of the Pakistani Taliban, in retaliation of the Pakistani military’s Operation Zarb-e-Azb. There was an outpouring of grief, solidarity, condolences and condemnation from not just within Pakistan, but from world over.

Educational institutions coming under attack isn’t a new thing; there have been several such cases in the recent part alone. These acts are often highly condemned, but they generate widespread fear, and the state promises to doing “more” vis-à-vis security as well as bringing culprits to justice.

The immediate and instinctive reaction felt by all was one of immense grief, and above all, anger. Anger at being helpless and at why the government had taken no concrete measures to address terrorism in the past and especially this particular incident, for which there was credible intel on. As a knee jerk reaction, in response to the civil society seeking the jugular, the moratorium on death penalty was lifted conditional to those booked under terrorism charges. Several faced execution. The sole designated governmental response body, the NACTA, which after many hiccups, had coughed up the national internal security policy, predictably went missing in action. The government formed a parliamentary committee of all political stakeholders to formulate a national action plan to counter terrorism and extremism and produce concrete proposals in seven days’ time. Massive crackdowns to flush out sleeper cells and miscreants across the country is underway. The civil society has intensified its activities such as holding vigils, country wide condolences, and protest rallies.

The executions, hailed by the larger segment of a perceptibly docile and liberal civil society, where necessary in terms of fear and punishment, only serve a quick fix and good optics, are by no means the answer to the problem. A day after the Peshawar incident, the initial bail and then rejection of the 2008 Mumbai attacks suspect Zia-ur-Rehman Lakhvi is proof that the criminal and overall justice system needs urgent and critical review and reform, as well as security of the judges. The need is for a stronger and independent judicial system, where neither judges nor witnesses need to fear for their lives; the justice system must be based on a purely professional, unbiased and balanced platform. Secondly, the entire security sector needs to be strengthened and though the risk of militarising the police by itself carries severe repercussions, stakeholders need to work this fine balance. One clarity that has emerged from this horrific massacre is that there are no good or bad Taliban; and secondly, as a nation Pakistan is at war; and thus, extraordinary measures need to be undertaken to confront the enemy.

Within hours of the Peshawar tragedy, the military high command visited Kabul and consulted the ANA and the ISAF high command regarding actions against TTP Chief Mullah Fazlullah and his militiamen hiding in Afghan territory. The Afghan side responded positively and the reciprocal visit by two military commanders to Rawalpindi affirms the support pledged. This is certainly a major success, as for once, neither Afghan nor Pakistani territory will be friendly and safe for terrorists. Secondly, the political government is also no longer considering North Waziristan or a specific territory as a troubled spot, but expanding its focus countrywide. The national action plan initially finalised eight proposals (later twenty) that touched upon: strengthening and restructuring the NACTA; the urgent need to reform the criminal justice system; the establishment of military courts in the FATA; the establishment of special courts and rapid reaction forces; repatriation of Afghan nationals; the registration of religious seminaries and their code of conduct was suggested. Channels of communication, information, propaganda and monetary resources of terrorist outfits should be monitored and chocked. Furthermore, the curricula and text books need to be revised and extremist narratives need to be neutralised. The misinterpretation of Quranic teachings, mosques and the hadith needs to be countered and corrected. A comprehensive and country wide de-weaponistion drive is one of the first measures to be undertaken.

Though the civil society’s reaction and populist demand for unleashing ultimate fury and revenge is a natural outpouring of the anguish the entire nation feels, one must not forget that similar provocations had resulted in a reluctant Pervez Musharraf laying siege to Lal Masjid – resulting in the death of a large number of children and young girls. The conflict equilibrium completely tilted and transformed as a result, with terrorism intensifying and expanding out of proportion.

One must not discount the numerous non-combatants getting killed by terrorists, as part of collateral – victims of aerial bombing or drone strikes. They all are equally precious and worthy as the children martyred at the Peshawar army school, who through their sacrifice, have hopefully opened the eyes of all those who harbored fantasies about terrorists’ intentions and possible utility as assets. The aforementioned measures in terms of security and law enforcement; political action; discontinuing support of all kinds; and economic, societal, educational and above all judicial actions to counter violent extremist elements can by no means be proposed and implemented overnight. Nor can the menace be wished away.

Already, retaliatory targeted attacks are testimony of the terrorists’ tenacity. Ideally led by the political government, however, where knee jerk responses formulated in an emotionally charged frame of mind cannot bring about change, and this tragedy, instead of becoming yet another collectable for the hurt locker, must become a turning point.

Otherwise, as one killer, after killing all the children in his range, asked his commander over the phone as to what to do next, once the enemy has killed all our children, there would be nothing left to save.

Eviction of Maasai Continues in Loliondo, Tanzania

Madeline McGill

Violence between the Tanzanian government and the Maasai people of Loliondo has continued to mount in the face of their eviction from ancestral lands on the Western Serengeti.

Since February 12, 2015, Tanzanian government forces have begun forcibly evicting Maasai from their homes, burning houses to the ground, injuring civilians, and leaving women and children without shelter or protection.

The land in question is a 1500 square kilometer area that has been disputed for over 20 years. The Maasai indisputably first occupied the land, but in 2009 the Tanzanian government called this into question due to the land being desirable to the Ortello Business Company (OBC), a hunting company from UAE interested in hunting and trapping in the wildlife in the area.

Thanks to grassroots activism and international pressure, the government was mostly unsuccessful in their eviction. However, they have since returned to the same Maasai lands. A Maasai source’s analysis has found that the eviction is the combined efforts between Tanzania National Parks Authority (TANAPA), Police, and the OBC.

Following February 12’s violent encounter, the police, said to be 67 in number, have installed a camp next to the bomas (homestead) to control the Maasai from resettling after their homesteads are burnt.

As of February 14, over 114 bomas have been burnt to the ground and 3,000 people have been left without shelter, food and protection. Women and children have taken shelter under trees, where 3 women have delivered without medical attention. Other damaged valuables include skins for sleeping and 120 goats, essential for providing nourishment.

Following the two injured Maasai youth on Feburary 12, another young man was severely injured by police forces and has been hospitalized. Two more men have also been beaten and are being treated from home.

Further violence is expected, as a Maasai source states that this state-sponsored destruction is expected to continue through February 17th, when the regional commissioner for the Arusha region will be visiting the area with the chief park warden from the Serengeti.

Several immediate actions are recommended in the wake of these incidents in Loliondo:

Food provisions are needed for the starving population - especially children. With the removal of livestock, children are unable to obtain milk. From interviews and visible observation, suffering is evident. Food is needed, including infant packages, risk, cooking fat, and other essentials.

Tents, Turubali, or some form of shelter are needed to protect children from the cold. The interviews of a Maasai source have shown over 200 children sleeping under trees at night. Any effort made by Maasai women to construct temporary housing is met by them being burned again.

A campaign is needed to halt the burning and destruction from now until the 17th when senior officials will be visiting the area. The Maasai have been holding meetings strategizing on this upcoming visit.
 

The Maasai will not leave the land as they are being directed. A Maasai elder told a journalist, “We have decided to die here, and our graves will be used by the coming generation to stand for their rights. We have left Serengeti for our government, we are not claiming it now, but there comes a time when we will be forced to ask the British government of our agreement… Am asking my government to leave us in our land before we migrate to Serengeti.”

Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism Launches Native American Trails Website

Asia Alsgaard

The Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism (MOTT) has a variety of themed historical programs ranging from ones that trace the state’s history in the Civil War to another that delineates the plethora of historic lighthouses spotting the Massachusetts coastline. However, their newest program is unique. The Massachusetts Native American Trails website is not merely written about Native peoples, but is written by Native people themselves.

Native American Trails is a recently released online resource aimed at providing a succinct source of information on the history of the Native tribes in Massachusetts, the associated historical and natural sites, as well as on current events by the Native American tribes in the Massachusetts area. There is information, not just on sites such as the Aptucxet Trading Post Museum, the site of the first trading house built in 1627 by the Plymouth Colony where the pilgrims traded with the native tribe, but also on natural sites such as Bash Bish Falls.  Bash Bish Falls, a 200-foot falls associated with the woman Bash Bish who, according to Native American legend, was sentenced to death here only to disappear into thin air. If someone is looking for a more personal experience, the site also provides information on Native American-guided tours of Plymouth as well as about current native events that are open for anyone to attend, complete with accompanying information on proper protocol at Powwows and related events.

The idea was initiated by MOTT after receiving feedback from tourists who lamented the lack of available resources for those interested in finding and learning more about the Native American history of Massachusetts. MOTT reached out to Dr. Jean Forward for assistance, a professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who has been working with Native tribes in the state for over 30 years. She began collaborating with John Peters, the director of the Massachusetts Commission on Indian Affairs, on how best to formulate the tourism program. They ultimately decided on an online, rather than physical “trail,” that would act as a resource for interested educators and tourists. In a discussion with Cultural Survival, Dr. Forward noted how, “tourism acts as an excellent opportunity to educate people.” In order to educate, the website would contain tourist information, but also act as a central source of information on Massachusetts tribes in the area.

MOTT took it one step further, deciding that rather than just constructing the site themselves, the website would be a collaborative effort with the Native tribes to present the information they wanted in their own words. The ultimate goal was that the tribes themselves would maintain their own portion of the website. Jean Forward commented on how “in general, 95% of what you see is written by non-Native people. We felt it was important to have Native people in control of the information [on the website].”

The Creative Economy Initiative Fund grant covered the expense of travel and allowed visits with the Aquinnah Wampanoag, the Mashpee Wampanoag, and Nipmuc Nations, the three tribes that would ultimately be linked to the website. MOTT felt it was important to approach the project on the terms of the Native Americans involved in the process, taking the time to travel to them.

Because of the number of moving parts involved, the process was a slow one, taking over a year and a half to complete. According to a soon to be published article by Virginia McLaurin, a graduate student at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, the project required constant collaboration between the busy schedules of Native leaders, university professors, undergraduate and graduate student volunteers making just finding a time to meet challenging. Once a meeting was established, an effort was made to find out what information each tribe wished to have displayed on the website. In many cases, the tribes already had an operational website that could be linked to. However, it was still necessary to make the main website easy-to-update while simultaneously instructing the tribes on how to take over their own sites. In some cases, such as with the video of Hawk Henries, a Nipmuck flute player, or in other cases where a tribe wished to present more extensive information, the tribe was fit with undergraduate and graduate volunteers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who were able to help with the display of ideas or information.

Despite the time intensive nature of the project, the end result is a product that combines information from a variety of sources, including information regarding the Native tribes, as well as links to the North American Indian Center of Boston, Aptucxet Trading Post Museum, and the Massachusetts Center for Native American Awareness.

Not only does this website provide a valuable resource for educators and tourists within Massachusetts, but it was a unique opportunity for the tribes involved as well. Dr. Forward says, “Everyone was excited and receptive. We were approaching tribes to give them something instead of taking something away.” Historically, interactions between the Native and non-native peoples of Massachusetts have been characterized by diseases, conversion, dispossession, and relocation. Native people in Massachusetts are more than their history and they continue to have an active presence within the commonwealth. The Native American Trail website is an attempt to present their past while showing they are involved in shaping our futures.

As put by John Peters and written about by Faye Alkiewicz, “[The website] gives the general population information on who we [Native Americans] are, what we do.” The hope is that this can help to deconstruct some of the misconceptions surrounding Native Americans that still exist today. In an interview with Fran Fifis, Paula Peters, a member of the Mashpee Wampanoag, mentioned some of the misconceptions that accompany many visitors to Plimoth Plantation, where a construction exists of a 17th century Wampanoag village with all Native re-enactors. As put by Peters, “We have a unique opportunity here because of our history to teach the public about our culture and dispel the myths.” The Massachusetts Native American Trail Website is a major contribution to this effort, allowing a succinct site for presenting accurate information by the Native tribes themselves. Unfortunately, Massachusetts is not the only state to struggle with Native misconceptions and misinformation, but Dr. Forward hopes that in the future the site can become a “model that other states can use to educate and do tourism with.”

Follow this link to check out the Massachusetts Native American Trails website:www.massnativetrails.com

First Nations #ShutDownCanada Demanding Justice

Emily Sanders

In what promised to be the most widespread protest by First Nations in Canada since Idle No More, Indigenous peoples staged a massive boycott intended to temporarily freeze the nation’s economy. At least twenty-two scheduled rallies, peaceful protests and events were held in various counties, communities and cities around Canada including Vancouver and Toronto on Friday February 13, 2015, in order to spread knowledge and educate passersby of the violations committed against Indigenous Peoples in Canada and demand justice. The purpose of these events was to further the legacy of Indigenous resistance against the violence and robbed autonomy tribes have suffered since colonialists began their reign of subjugation.

Participants in the nationwide protest #ShutDownCanada want to inform the public about numerous incidents of institutionalized racism and cultural genocide committed by the Canadian police forces and government. The issues covered include land dispossession, disproportionate homelessness of native peoples, and numerous causes of environmental destruction such as the tar sands, pipelines, fracking, mining and energy developments like the Site C mega-dam, which drastically affect the traditional livelihoods of Indigenous peoples. “This government blatantly oppresses Indigenous peoples in a calculated effort to create dysfunction within communities to maintain control of the land and exploitation of natural resources,” reads the #ShutDownCanada Facebook event page. The event aims to prevent further cultural disintegration and the fracturing of Indigenous communities, the goals of a corrupt democracy where “systematic racism and structural violence are connected to the needs of this illegal colonial state to maintain control of the land for exploitation.”

Canadian communities and grassroots organizations were called upon to blockade their local railways, ports or highways on Friday with the goal of paralyzing the Canadian economy for a day and demanding attention towards these issues. Protestors also hope to draw attention to the devastating consequences of unconsented development projects on native land, such as severe disruption of ecosystems and the Dene way of life invoked by the expansion of tar sands extraction, the public health crisis spurred by the byproducts of this development, the loss of exported jobs as a result of pipeline construction, the destruction of the wild salmon habitat and unconsented fish farming in native waters, and issued grants for open pit mining despite the outcome of the Tshilqot’in Supreme Court decision. The Facebook page reminds readers that, not dissimilar to the tactics of “biological warfare” used in colonial times to steal land from Indigenous peoples, the crippling effects of unsustainable resource use destroy a way of life that is crucial to Indigenous resistance and survival on their traditional land.

The dramatic over-representation of Indigenous peoples in Canada’s prison system was also a focus of attention. In 2013, the correctional investigator for Canada reported during a news conference in Ottawa that there is “no deputy commissioner dedicated solely to and responsible for aboriginal programs, planning, implementation and results. And worst of all, no progress in closing the large gaps in correctional outcomes between aboriginal and non-aboriginal inmates.” Despite that Indigenous peoples make up only four percent of the population in Canada, “in federal prisons nearly one in four is Metis, Inuit, or First Nations.” First Peoples Worldwide reported in 2014 that Aboriginal women represent 33 percent of all women imprisoned, a number that has increased 90% in the past decade.

Members of the United Urban Warrior Society held a protest in the intersection of highways 17 and 6, with its Manitoulin and North Shore organizer Isadore Pangowish voicing her concerns as the traffic halted for five minutes each hour. Among these were Bill C-51, an Anti-Terrorism Act that would heighten the power of Canada’s intelligence agency and allow the RCMP the ability to make excessive arrests based on fears of terror attacks that “may” happen, as opposed to attacks that “will” happen. “What we are doing right now, this will be illegal,” said Pangowish of the picketing.

Perhaps the most prominent issue that this and all #ShutDownCanada protests demand to see addressed is the lack of justice and inquiry into over 2,000 cases of missing or murdered Indigenous women. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has dismissed cries for investigation into these crimes by claiming that the issue “is not on their radar.” The delegitimizing of Indigenous women’s safety by the Canadian government and police forces reared its head at the protest itself: Audrey Siegl was injured during the action when an officer bumped her with his shoulder as he walked by, thrusting her hand drum into her face. “A VPD shoved Shannon & Savannah aside, and as he marched forward, looked right at me as he shoved my drum into my face with his shoulder. We three women were standing still, drumming n singing. He could have gone around instead of using aggression to intentionally intimidate and harm three unarmed and passive women,” Siegl posted on her Facebook page. Siegl, a Vancouver COPE Council Candidate and Musqueam First Nation activist, has mentioned plans to press charges.

Indigenous protestors want the public to know that all of the issues addressed by #ShutDownCanada, including a history of excessive police involvement and force deployed during peaceful demonstrations to which Siegl’s assault can be added, fall under the umbrella of one underlying fact: that “the system has failed us all miserably.”

Kenyan Government Manipulates Courts to Dispossess the Maasai of Their Lands

B.R. Ole Koissaba

After realizing that the Maasai living in Nakuru County have vowed not to move from their ancestral lands to give room for geothermal extraction, the Kenyan government has reverted to the old ways of using the legal system to ensure that the Maasai not only lose the land but will also not be given a fair hearing in land cases they have filed. This is the case when the High Court in Nakuru ruled that the Maasai have no legal right to occupy the land and therefore dismissed the case with costs. Kedong Ranch has been the home of many Indigenous Maasai communities and has from time immemorial been used as wet seasons grazing area for the Maasai people. During the colonial period, and despite having been claimed by the colonialists, many Maasai families continued to live on the land. On attainment of independence and in the quest of the Kenyatta government to grab land, the land in question was transferred to several personalities in government without consulting the local Maasai communities. The said land has over time changed hands and has been a conflict area pitting the Maasai who are the original owners of the land against those that who claim they bought the land through land buying companies.

As pastoralists, the Maasai have been misunderstood and their way of life stereotyped by the so called mainstream communities. They have been referred to as backward, uncivilized, primitive and an embarrassment to development. Such has made marginalization, exclusion discrimination and dispossession legitimate in Government policy making circles. This has a left of suffering among the pastoralists and minorities contrary to Article 5 of the African Charter which states that every individual shall have the right to respect for the dignity inherent in human being and Article 19, which states that all peoples shall be equal, enjoy the same respect.  This discrimination and domination threatens the continuation of their culture that gives them identity and sense of belonging and deprives them opportunities for self- expression in matters affecting their own development.

In making the ruling, the court out rightly exhibited ignorance of both the history of occupancy of the suit land which is not only historically Maasai land but also part of the land that was reserved for explicit use and ownership by the Maasai during the 1904/1911. In justifying the ruling, the judge displayed the existing prejudices against pastoralism by stating that “since the Maasai are nomadic pastoralists, it is impossible for them to have been in one place for such a period as twelve years continuously.” This is the highest degree of ignorance an institution that is expected to not only to know, understand but it is expected to interpret the law in a manner that recognizes and appreciates the diversity of the citizens of Kenya. In the view of many observers, this is the extension of selective justice that has always been used to marginalize and dispossess many Indigenous communities. According submissions by Maa Civil Society and submitted to then Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission by the Maasai who live in Nakuru County, most of the parcels were registered in 1997 long after the Maasai settled on the disputed land. The court also ignored all established facts that that the Maasai live communally and therefore using the size and location of the settlements does not warrant the delineation of other Indigenous practices that the Maasai practice and should that the Maasai should not be seen as the aggressor.

Coincidentally the ruling was made on the heels of a visit by the World Bank Panel and the representatives from the European Union who visited the affected communities to assess compliance to safeguards. Fearing that the dispute will affect the expansion of geothermal projects that have now stalled for over six months and loss of investors, the government resorted to use the court to dismiss the Maasai cases in order to portray compliance to no conflicts exist on the said land.  To the Maasai the visit by the World Bank and other investors in the geothermal extraction, this was their remedy of the last resort because of the vested interests that the industry has and the recent grants and concessions that the government awarded to multi-nationals to invest in geothermal extraction. The Maasai are hoping that the World Bank Inspection Panel report will not only unearth  the degree suffering, torture and infringement of human rights by KenGen and the investors have wrought on the Maasai but will give recommendation for further investments with a human face. Reminiscence of the famous Maasai case of 1913 commonly referred to in legal circles as Ol-Njogo (Ole Nchoko) case, the cases have already been decided through executive orders that they should all be terminated to pave way for investors and other non-Maasai to be settled or paid off through government coffers to allow for the geothermal extraction

In the past, efforts to move the Maasai have been met by resistance that sometimes resulted into violence and destruction of property. One of the greatest un-doings of these projects is the lack of consultation with the local pastoralist Maasai communities who live off the land where these prospects are located. According to local elders, ever since the beginning of the exploration processes, they have been repeatedly forced to move to adjacent lands only for them to be moved again, when a new project phase is initiated. This is done without any due consideration that the Maasai depend on the land and that every move has a direct impact on their survival because it reduces grazing land for their livestock, their mainstay.

The Maasai in Narasha, Kedong, Satellite, and Namuncha are afraid that the government has a bigger plot to move them from their ancestral land to give room for new settlers who bought the land through land buying companies from central Kenya which were formed after independence to buy land despite the full knowledge by government officials that land was historically Maasai land and the Maasai have continuously used the land for grazing. The fears are as a result of a visit by the Kenya Parliamentary Committee on land on February 14, a planned visit by the president to inaugurate one of the power plants this month which coincides with the day that another Maasai case will be heard in the same court, and a big plan to acquire more land to build an industrial park as well as suspected involvement of Maasai politicians who are said to be beneficiaries from proceeds and contracts from the project. The Maasai have since appealed the court ruling and are awaiting for the hearing. The Maasai are also asking to be treated like other Kenyan communities who live in parcels of land country wide where the government is buying land to resettle them. There is a clear pattern of selective process where certain communities are given preference as opposed to the inhuman and forceful processes that the government is using on the Maasai. To The plight of the Maasai land appropriation has lately received international attention after a campaigns by international human rights organizations raised the red flag.

While the Maasai have repeatedly expressed that they are not against the generation of power within the land that they claim, they are demanding adequate consultation and the adherence of the Free Prior and Informed Consent as well as adequate compensation commensurate to their psychological, social, economic loses. It is also their recommendation that all current and prospecting investors embrace the engagement of local Maasai experts’ in future environmental, social, health, and economic assessments in order to avoid future conflicts.

In a show of defiance, the Maasai communicated their firm stand not to give in to any demands by either the government of those who are claiming to have titles to the Parliamentary Land Committee that visited the area on 13/2/2013. Given previous experiences on Maasai land claims, there is certain fear that there might be violence perpetrated by government through forced evictions. It is therefore the plea of the Maasai to the President, of the Republic of Kenya to intervene in forestalling an eminent confrontation and possible loss of life and property arising from the proposed evictions. It is also the prayer of the Maasai people living in the areas earmarked for geothermal extraction that the companies that were granted concessions refrain from using the police to extract them from their ancestral lands.

Kenya Devolution On Right Track

H.E. Andreas Peschke

Devolution is at the core of Kenya’s transition and reform agenda towards a prosperous nation and one of the most significant political reforms since independence. It is an important part of the implementation of the constitution and crucial for achieving the objectives of Kenya's Vision 2030. It brings participation and service delivery closer to the people and will contribute to fostering growth, prosperity and equity.

As development partners, we would like to again congratulate Kenya for embarking on such a broad and ambitious structural change process and for making rapid progress. If we look around the country, devolution is progressing and succeeding.  New county governments have been established, functions have been devolved, significant financial resources have been transferred and public services have been provided in all 47 counties.

However, expectations remain very high, and we all know that the road ahead of devolution will continue to be challenging and long. Some challenges need the attention of all of us in order to make devolution a success story, especially the need to:

*strengthen intergovernmental relations and coordination through, for example, a clearer definition of the roles and functions of the various institutions,

*improve public financial management and the oversight mechanisms at county level,

*strengthen the capacity of all county institutions, so as to ensure transparency, good governance and an efficient delivery of services to the citizen,

*ensure that County Governments establish appropriate fora and mechanisms for active participation – and consultation – with key stakeholders at county level, including civil society and private sector.

The pre-Development Partnership Forum (DPF) that took place on the 5th of February chaired by the principal secretary of the National Treasury, Dr. Kamau Thugge, identified some key recommendations for the DPF. Capacity development for devolution, fiscal decentralization and the coordination between the Government of Kenya, the Council of Governors and development partners have been at the center of the discussion. Development partners hope that we can agree today to the identified key recommendations and commitments for follow-up.

Let me also take this opportunity to emphasize the strong commitment of development partners to actively supporting Kenya in the implementation of devolution. Development partners are currently providing funding for devolution support programs of over USD 100 million in addition to their ongoing sector programs. Unfortunately, too much of this funding is often delayed due to institutional and procedural delays or inefficient communication. So, let us also agree today that we will prioritize and accelerate the implementation of these programs.

Uganda: Success Need Not Dig a Grave for Museveni

Morrison Rwakakamba

In a September 2011 thoughtful essay; “Gravedigger problem: How Museveni’s very success is creating conditions for his fall,” Andrew Mwenda resurrected an old debate. He opined thus; “Museveni has always argued that the problem with “pre-capitalist” societies is that political struggle tends to get polarized along “unprincipled” lines of religion, tribe or even clan. The counterpoint to this, Museveni has always held that in capitalist societies, politics is polarized around “principled” issues of an economic nature; wages, prices and public policies. His stated objective was to transform Ugandan politics from a contest over identity (religion, tribe and clan) into a contest over “real issues” that impact the lives of people; things like trade policy, fiscal policy, foreign exchange policy etc.”

Mwenda argued that President Museveni’s transformative politics have produced new social forces; “traders and vendors, bureaucrats and politicians, students and industrialists, Twitterati and Facebookers, thieves and saints, money making churches and money losing ones; and it has produced the Red Pepper. All these groups are now competing for space in the new Uganda. The old religious, ethnic and clan groups have not gone away, but they are dying, rapidly becoming a thing of the past, yet Museveni is still stuck with them.”

I clearly don’t dispute the power of modern day ‘principled’ organizing. But by plainly faulting Museveni for sticking with “pre-capitalist” groups that organize around identity, Mwenda falls into the same trap of one-dimensional analysis, that absurdly views traditions, cultural identities and networks in past tense.

These networks are alive and kicking, mediating the lives of millions of Ugandans every day. To view them in fossilised terms and pre-reason is inaccurate, intellectually flabby and patronising, and fails to grasp complex and often contradictory realities that give meaning to and shape the thinking of many people in Uganda today.

Mwenda’s articulation in support of Museveni’s ideological thoughts while faulting his actions fails to contextualize Museveni on prevailing ground working conditions. I think that over the years, Museveni has become more pragmatic. He now realises that pre-capitalist societies’ tendencies are not all necessarily backward and archaic. What he has not learnt is how to leverage the good in these ‘pre-capitalist’ networks beyond politics and harness them as platforms for transformational information, capital mobilization and wealth creation.

A pragmatic shift would grasp the opportunity in traditional forms of reference and organizing, even as they are mediated and evolve by changes. If Museveni had embraced this view, he would not view, for example, Facebook and Twitter social platforms as displacing ‘pre-capitalist’ networks such as ethnic or religious identities, but instead as powerful networks that engage people. By not appointing Facebookers and Twitterati into his cabinet, Museveni missed a powerful opportunity to keep up with emerging manifestations of change.

Identity based movements of course have potential dangers. They can turn essentialist, and breed discrimination and extremism.  The 1994 genocide in Rwanda is a reminder of what can go horribly wrong. Religious and ethnic extremism engineered by opportunistic leaders and elites also drove post-independence Uganda into unforgettable bloodshed. Yet identity cannot simply be wished away. And they have not only been negative. In a number of cases, they have promoted alternative economies and livelihoods that we can learn from and harness.

Take the success in business of the Uganda Asian community. This group has a way of scouting business opportunities for each other. They are also keen, especially when it comes to deployment of social sanctions to enforce business ethics within their merchant community. They also have unrivalled pedigree for frugality. For sure, not all Ugandan Asians are successful business people, and among them there are no doubt those who struggle. But that does not wash away the lessons that one can learn from the successes; we can learn something from their ability to organise using and moving beyond identity.

The Ayimara, one of the largest Andean ethnic groups scattered across South America, has similarly organised for success. The Ayimara are a sophisticated informal international network of kin and a highly developed commercial circuit involving truck drivers, custom policemen, border smugglers, wholesale dealers and retailers. These networks and circuits are based on and controlled by more or less visible ethnic lineages that constitute a ‘parallel’ structure to the formal – national and international - market which has been able to carve out a rather powerful and autonomous economic space in which indigenous practices and values are often reconciled with advanced economic know-how.

For example, in 2009 the National Electoral Court (CNE) of Bolivia was in a crisis, failing to raise 1000 generators needed for electronic registration of voters in rural areas. After heated pondering, state agents chanced on an Ayimara woman electronics dealer in La Paz market, the lady used her Ayimara network to deliver 1000 generators in two days! Nico Tassi, in his unpublished paper “The Other Side of the Market: Indigenous Economies in the Global Arena” argues that while the State may not like Ayimara’s informality, from their own perspective, it helps the Ayimara reduce business costs associated with government bureaucracy, and deal with control of market information and managing competition from multinational capital, often subsided by governments. I am not saying that the Ugandan state should establish economic models based on the Asian or Ayimaras, but that the basis of success here, past and present, even as it evolves, is worth reflection.

One wonders how identity-based groups and alliances such as Bika bya Buganda can think and act beyond Engabi, Empologoma, etc and avoid extremism and adjunct social tensions. What would it take for Nkoba za Mbogo, Basoga Nsete, Bahororo of Mpororo, Banyari of Rwanyambari, and Bakimbiri of Nyeibingo to enhance economic wellbeing?

In the Uganda body politic, we veer towards self-defeating cynicism. How can we move from cynicism to optimism? By learning from those who have succeeded? The Ugandan sense of generosity is of legion; witness the wedding meetings many of us attend, where people are willing to contribute because marriage is an important cultural ritual or other interests. What if we met to mobilize venture funds or business startup capital?

Nigeria: Agents of Communal Decline

Andrew A. Moemeka

Reading through the fundamental principles and the demands of communalism, one is wont to wonder why anyone in his/her right mind should have anything bad to say about it, let alone want it discarded. Respect, love, orderliness, unity, humility, service, hospitality, honesty and good neighborliness are values that all human beings cherish. But under the rugged individualistic atmosphere of modern Nigeria, such values are very scarce. Many of us want respect, love, service and fulfillment for ourselves, but are not ready and willing to grant the same to others.  In public, we shout and plead for unity, honesty, orderliness, and love of neighbour only to turn round and quietly and stealthily, not only support but actively engage in actions that openly contradict those ethical values; we do nothing to put into practice what would make the ethical values possible in public life or to encourage their application in our own lives.

The “escape from the tyranny of tradition” referred to above, implies freedom to be oneself, and rights to do what one wants. But true freedom is not personal; it is individual. And it is not the absence of restraints, but the willing obligation to, or acceptance of, an end that is socially beneficial.  This is what Magesa (1997: p. 74) was referring to when he said that freedom is what enables a person to be fully what he or she is. But he failed to take into account the warning by L.P Jacks seventy-two years earlier (1924: p.42) that  --

The value of rights…is strictly contingent on their subsequent development into duties.  Unless this development takes place the rights which the citizen has won are a social danger, for they are apt to become a means in his hand for exercising over others the tyranny from which he has escaped himself.

Two major sets of factors would appear to have created the environment for the devaluation of the significance of communal principles in the lives of majority of Nigerians. The first is the greed of Nigerians – both leaders and the led and the insouciant and exploitative attitude of the powerful towards the fate of the nation, and their carefree attitude and behavior towards the suffering of majority of the citizens. Platitudes and Words which come from lips and not from the heart do not bring about positive change; they are the seed of negative and reverse change which inevitably deadens the spirit of the citizenry. The second factor which has a number of causes and concomitants is the selfish exercise of the right to what many people erroneously see as freedom, and the morbid desire of the majority to get-rich-quick, at all costs. 

Let us take the second first. As a result of education, exposure to the world through the mass media, and the absence of effective leadership and guidance, the power of elders to advice and guide the young on desires, responsibility, relationships, and expectation has been badly, if not completely, eroded.  These days, rarely does a son or daughter need the permission of parents to go out, to decide whom to marry, or to get married; neither is he/she willing to listen to honest advise about temperance, self-control, and family honour. The exercise of such selfishly-based freedoms or rights have now created very dangerous social ills that are rattling the socio-cultural foundation of the nation  – spousal abuse, adultery, separation, divorce, broken homes, abandoned children, destitution, prostitution, rape, teenage pregnancy, and so on.  But the desire for false ‘freedom’ is so strong that some of the social ills that were seen as abominations in the past are now being justified.  

The exposure made possible through travels and by the mass media has also created negative empathy – empathy in a socio-economic vacuum. When a people begins to desire what they cannot afford; when they spend their time plotting out how to get what they want, in an environment in which they have nothing tangible to honestly satisfy those wants, the aspiration raised by empathy soon turns to frustration.  The consequences of this has been with us since the late 60’s – armed robbery, political jobbery, deceit, large-scale cheating, exploitation, bribery and corruption, economic sabotage, organized chaos, importation of fake goods and drugs, and now – insecurity and terrorism.  

For many, if not most Nigerians, it does not matter, any more, the source of one’s wealth; what is important is “making it rich.” The end, indeed, is justifying the means! It is not that there is no corruption in other parts of the world.  But in such other places, Corruption is a drop in an ocean of Honesty. In Nigeria, Honesty is a drop in an ocean of Corruption. People have come to instinctively expect the anti-social behaviors mentioned above; in fact the behaviors have become the order of the day. The adverse effect of such anti-social behaviors has become so pervasive and damaging to the moral fabric, social and economic life of the nation that there is now a quiet but insistent cry for a return to authentic communalistic principles. That cry is silently loud!!

But there is no letting down the guard by those bent on making it rich and getting the satisfaction they want through any dishonest means possible. There is a strong feeling that those who caution moderation and honesty, and a return to communalistic principles are seen as the weaklings of society – those who cannot fight their way through.  The momentum is on the side of the ‘optimists.’ Their statements and their actions bulk large, and are imbued with implicit and explicit approval of modern tendencies. Care for the aged is seen as parental weapon to impede the economic progress of their children. Help to fellow community members and contributions (both financial and manual) for the development of the community are seen as unnecessary burden to prop-up the ‘indolent’ and create undeserved opportunity for the ‘lazy’ ones.  Religion is seen as irrelevant to life; its only function, they claim, is to instill fear into the young in order to subject them to the control of the older generation. Children find pleasure in saving-up for the expected burial ceremony of their aged parents rather than give part of that saving to these parents for feeding and fairly comfortable living condition while they are still alive. Moral, ethical and communalistic points raised by the so-called pessimists are treated as dead on-arrival and as unproductive beliefs that carry disturbing resonance. The so-called pessimists are accused of talking too loud for the people to listen. This is why we have concluded elsewhere (Moemeka, 1998:) that –

Today, the division between those standing firm in favor of the fundamental principles of communalism and those who oppose most of such principles is very clear. They use very contradictory communication codes, communicate on different arenas of the social environment, and have opposing views on what constitutes the “good” and for whom.

Under authentic communalism, the moral legitimation of government and leadership depended to a large extent on  the capacity of the leader to listen and to act on the basis of ‘the good of the community’, He was required to lead, not to rule; he depended on his lieutants for advice and guidance, that always reflected the will of the community.  Therefore, the leader’s true exercise of the right to enforcement of law and social order was basically an exercise that depended on listening.  But under the selfish environment of the new carefree order, most leaders hear the people but do not listen to them.

As has been noted above, communal bonds and their cultural base become weak and loose when leaders live lives that are less than exemplary. The morbid selfishness of most of Nigerian leaders serves as example for the public to follow. It is therefore not a surprise that the behavior and activities of leaders have poisoned the entire fabric of society. It is assumed (and rightly, too) that every leader should have two basic forms of responsibilities.  The first is the responsibility for the conscientious and ethical use of the powers entrusted to him. The second and, perhaps, more important responsibility is that of upholding values that are community-enhancing and citizen-empowering, and ensuring an environment in which individuals can pursue honest and sincere interests that build up their self-worth. 

These basic responsibilities have not been taken up seriously by most National leaders – Presidents, Ministers, and government officials, leaders in industry and commerce, even by most religious leaders.  What conspicuously exist almost everywhere are examples from these leaders that implicitly as well as explicitly approve of selfishness, dishonesty, disregard of law and order, fraudulent practices and freedom seen as the “right” to do anything one wants, any time, any where, irrespective of who is hurt or what damage is done to the image of the nation.

“A selfish person,” says Melvin Rader, (1964) “will deliberately choose his own lesser good in preference to the greater good of another person (or of the community) simply because it is his own good.” Is it any wonder that Nigeria, after more than half a century of independence, and with enormous financial resources, has much less to show economically, politically and socially than she would have if honesty and the good of the nation had been the guiding principles of those in power?  With a broken heart one is wont to ask: where is the once-thriving Nigerian Railways, the once-thriving Nigeria Airways, or the once famous Ogba Palm Oil Estate/Institute?  Indonesia came to us to learn about palm oil production and palm produce and went home with some seedlings; today she is a thriving palm produce exporter. Where is Nigeria? And where have our Ground-nut export, our Cotton production, and our Rubber Industry gone? 

Need one talk about the damage contractors and the powers that award contracts have done to the socio-economic life of the nation! Here, corruption is a given.  It is here that the devastating impact of corruption on national development is conspicuously evident.The impact of corruption is also evident but covertly in the deteriorating physical and academic condition of our universities!! Our premier universities of the sixties and seventies are today almost shadows of what they were – suffering from financial handicaps, overcrowded classroom, and very uncomfortable levels of student/lecturer ratio. Yet, they are dolling out more than ten-to-fifteen times the number of First Class degrees they did award in their hay-days. No longer is a distinction made between the best students and the best of the best students, which used to be the distinction between 1st Class and 2nd Class Upper Division degrees. And the newer universities have refused to be left out of this First Class degree rat-race. University education which was once directed towards Intellectual Certitude is now mostly for University Certificate. And students like it! Do we really need more evidence to show to what extent morbid selfishness has openly and forcefully put a strangle-hold on the nation’s image and progress?