The Need For Nuclear Disarmament

Pin It Now!

The world has witnessed different levels of wars between countries and regions and the use of arms and munitions of different sorts from time immemorial. The climax of all this came when the atomic bomb was used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War.

The threat posed by certain countries during the First and Second World Wars has led several countries into looking for more deadly ways to protect themselves against invasion by their neighbours or by known powerful nations. This quest for protection against both real and imaginary enemies has led to the birth of deadly weapons of war – Atomic bomb, nuclear bomb, E-bomb, Hydrogen bomb, minor explosives, intercontinental ballistic missives, scud missiles, B52 bomber jets, Hawk, Missile launchers, nuclear submarine, Frigates, warships, biological weapons, nerve gas, etc.

The interesting part of the whole scenario is that all the above-mentioned weapons are fashioned to destroy the human organism and not animals. Why on earth should nations dedicate so much time, resources, money and energy researching things that would be used to outdo one another? America alone possesses over 5,000 nuclear warheads. Russia, Britain, France, Australia, China all in one way or the other have their own stockpiles. Recently other countries like Pakistan, India, North Korea, etc have all joined the nuclear nations list. Iran, Syria and others yet to be determined are already threatening to do same.

What are the dangers?
Nuclear proliferation poses much problems and threat than the world may anticipate. Some of the reasons why continual research into nuclear production is dangerous include:
1. Hunger and starvation: The world is wallowing in economic recession that has made many people die of hunger and starvation (though these problems have always been around). Arms productions have indirectly contributed to worsen the situation. Since 2003 America has spent over $200b fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; North Korea keeps testing weapons upon weapons while their citizens (North Koreans) wallow in abject poverty and are crossing their national borders into South Korea and China in their thousand to look for greener pasture. The money spent on weapons worldwide is enough to put food on the tables of the world’s poor masses who die of hunger daily. Hunger and starvation may get worse unless we channel these resources into agriculture and food production.
2. Increase in Illiteracy: The annual budgets of nations reflect how widespread this fear of insecurity has gone. Countries are allocating as much as 30-50% of their annual budgets to maintain their armed forces whereas a miserly less than 10% are given to education. This money used for research into weapons of mass destruction should be channeled into developing human resources and awarding scholarships to the less privileged to enable them acquire education.
3. Massive human destruction: the use of the Atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the death of close to 300,000 people with several others maimed for life; and years later, congenital abnormalities attributable to the effects of the bomb still continued to occur. These weapons kill in their thousands and I am sure that whenever they are used thousands of human lives would be wasted – lives that God holds in sanctity. How about the conscience of the person who launches the weapons? Do you think such person would ever be happy with himself whenever he remembers the lives he sent to their early graves in the course of fighting?
4. Accidental explosion: I am sure the world still remembers the effect of the accidental explosion that happened years ago in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) where hundreds of innocent lives were wasted. Only recently there was also another weapons explosion in Russia. What is the guarantee that stockpiling the bombs would not one day lead to similar horrifying and devastating experience? The bomb explosion in a military barracks in Lagos, Nigeria is still fresh in our minds: we know how many people lost their lives as a result of that incidence. We remember the case of accidental loading of six nuclear warheads into a jet and were flown across some states in the United States recently. If there had been an accident what would be the result?
5. Terrorism: In this era of terrorism where people are threatening to annihilate countries and religions what happens should these blood thirsty persons lay their hands on nuclear weapons? Your guess is as good as mine.
6. More conflicts: Whosoever has something that others don’t have would always look for an opportunity to exhibit his superiority. The reason the world went after Iraq was because of the fear they might be possessing biological weapons. Now that North Korea has developed nuclear technology, we see them showing their arrogance from time to time, even thinking of shooting missile from their country to reach the United States of America.

The world should think of what to do to completely stop further proliferation of these deadly weapons which some countries are using to foil conflicts in other regions and making billions of dollars from them. The recent nuclear summit in the USA may have discussed the way forward and may have also applauded their efforts, but I think a lot more need be done to make the world live in relative peace and harmony and stop living in mutual suspicion.

Connection Between African Leadership And Poverty

Pin It Now!

Poverty is a world wide problem which affects a substantial population of the world but which is more prevalent in Africa. A huge chunk of the world’s wealth is in the hands of a selected few. Of all the factors that have contributed to poverty, leadership seems to be the worst and we are going to look at how that directly or indirectly affects the African continent.

The world has produced notable leaders who helped to shape the course of history and affect the lives of the governed positively. These leaders had the interest of the people at heart before they went into office and as such they put the masses first before self, making sure that the people enjoyed the dividends of governance. Such notable world leaders include George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, and Mahatma Gandhi, to mention a few. Of all the leaders Africa had ever had, Nelson Mandela is the only one who is qualified to be counted among the world greats.

Most of the African leaders are not qualified to be called leaders because they don’t have the interest of the masses at heart: they came into politics for personal gains. They see politics as a place of investment where you put in everything you have saved to get into office and then steal everything the country has in order to reimburse yourself for what you lost during campaigns, and also save as much as you can for the future of your family, not minding what happens to the rest populace.

The problem of treasury looting, oppression, tyranny, insensitivity and intolerance for political opponents has remained the same amongst African leaders from the East to West, North and South. The kind of selfish leadership style they adopt has left virtually all African countries impoverished. Check the records of Late President Omar Bongo of Gabon, Late Idiami Dada of Uganda, Ibrahim Babangida of Nigeria, Late Sani Abacha of Nigeria, Late Gnasimgbe Eyadema of Togo, Frederick Chiluba of Zambia, Late Samuel Doe of Liberia, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Omar Al-Bashir of Sudan, etc and what do they have in common? I am sure you know it.

Leaders who have no deliberate plan to move their countries forward cannot make any positive impact on the lives of the governed. In the western world attempts are made to educate the people so they could be well developed and become useful to the country but here it seems that the less the people are educated the better for their leaders who want them to remain ignorant and never be aware of their rights so they would not stand up to defend their rights when trampled upon. When leaders make up their minds either by omission or by commission that their people should never be developed what do you expect? Poverty, systemic failures, illiteracy, hunger, diseases, backwardness, infrastructural decay and stagnancy would continue to be the lot of the people except leadership styles change positively.

The Return of President Umaru Musa Yar'adua

Pin It Now!

President Umaru Musa Yar’adua left Nigeria on the 23rd of November 2009 for medical attention in Saudi Arabia and returned back to the country exactly 93 days later. But his period of absence from the presidential seat brought series of debates that almost tore the country apart.

Today the president is back in the country, what next? Has he been truly certified medically fit to continue in office as enshrined in section 144 of the 1999 constitution or is this a political game by the North to make sure power did not shift from their zone to the South-South? The president had maintained 92 days of silence and evasiveness but while the presidential delegation were on their way to Saudi Arabia as the last resort to ascertain whether or not he was truly fit to continue in office he suddenly sneaked into the country from his medical sojourn without the prior knowledge of his cabinet; not even his vice. Do you think things should be done this way min this 21st century? Is this how things are done in America, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, etc where the leaders are accountable to their citizenry? If not so, why is it always the opposite when it comes to Africa?

The Saudi authorities did everything to prevent the National Assembly members, the governors, and everyone that mattered from seeing our president as though the president were in captivity. If the president is strong enough to return to Nigeria today it means he was strong enough to at least say ‘hello’ to his ministers and lawmakers who had visited him few days earlier. One thing is not clear to me; why this ‘sneaking out and sneaking in’ of the president? The president belongs to all Nigerians and of course they have the right to know what is happening to him because the day he was elected into office he ceased to be the property of the North and became Nigerian property. This act of re-colonization of our country by a developing country like Saudi Arabia shows how helpless Nigeria has truly become. I do not in any way blame the Saudi authorities for treating us with levity; I blame our people who have refused to develop, otherwise why should we be going to Saudi Arabia for medical treatment?

Now that Mr. President has come back to his country what lessons did he learn from this situation? Is he thinking of reshaping the health sector of his country to look better than that of Saudi Arabia, or is he thinking of how to go back and enjoy the standard health facilities in Saudi next time he needs medical care? His actions and attitude toward our health sector would determine whether president has truly learnt any lessons from his health challenges. Mr. President should also remember that health care is part of his seven point agenda.

Lessons From The Coup in Niger republic

Pin It Now!

Niger republic is one of the landlocked countries in West Africa. It is located on the Northern border of Nigeria, and it’s a member state of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).

Niger has enjoyed democracy for sometime now until the incumbent president Mamadou Tandja was forcefully removed from office through a military coup d’etat. Tandja has ruled the country for two consecutive tenures and instead of stepping down at the end of his second tenure he decided to alter the country’s constitution to pave way for his third tenure bid. This drew condemnation from everyone, including the ECOWAS and the African Union, but typical of most African leaders Mamadou Tandja cared less about the consequences of his action and refused to shift grounds. ECOWAS reacted swiftly by suspending Niger from her fold.

Tandja rode on, crushing all oppositions and protesters who dared raise their voices against his illegal constitutional alteration. He held tenaciously unto the reins of power. He had managed the economy of the landlocked country without accountability. Niger happens to be one of the few countries in the world that are endowed with Uranium, a mineral useful for nuclear fuel/nuclear weapons. The mining of this natural endowment has not reflected positively on the lives of the citizenry.

However, the military junta struck, ceased power and took Mamadou Tandja hostage. Surprisingly, the people we thought should condemn the coup d’etat rose up in its support. Why did they do so? They felt it was better for the military to come and salvage the situation than for President Tandja to set a bad precedent for their nascent democracy.

Few days before the coup the ECOWAS newly elected chairman, the acting president of Nigeria, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan had declared that ECOWAS would have zero tolerance for coup in the Sub-region. Now that the ‘Khaki boys’ have taken over power in Niger will ECOWAS live to its threat or will it be forced to eat its words? How do they intend to rescue the democratic structures in that country? It looks like they may be compelled to tolerate the military junta and negotiate with them to conduct a credible election as soon as possible.

This situation would have been averted were it not for the greedinesss of the president. African leaders should learn to be up and doing so that the political instability and incessant coups in the continent would be a thing of the past, especially now that military regime is no longer a fashion in other parts of the world.