Tuesday, 3 March 2015

Indian State Passes Beef Ban Championed by Right-Wing Hindus

MUMBAI, India — The western state of
Maharashtra this week became the first Indian
state to ban the possession and sale of beef,
imposing fines and up to five years in prison for
violations.

The ban, which was passed on Monday, came as
an amendment to a 1972 law prohibiting the
slaughter of cows, which has been expanded to
ban the slaughter of bulls, bullocks and calves.

The slaughter of water buffaloes will still be
allowed under the new law, subject to permission
from the authorities. The populous western state
includes Mumbai, the Indian financial capital.

The Maharashtra Animal Preservation
(Amendment) Bill, championed by right-wing
Hindu organizations, was first passed in 1995
but languished for two decades under a governing coalition between the Indian National Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party. The
Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party won a
clear majority in state elections last October,
after Narendra Modi, the party’s leader, took
office as prime minister in May.

The law, which allows a fine of 10,000 rupees,
about $162, took effect Monday night after
approval from President Pranab Mukherjee.
Maharashtra’s chief minister, Devendra
Fadnavis, gave the president credit and
expressed his thanks over Twitter.

“Our dream of ban on cow slaughter becomes a
reality now,” he wrote.
The move was far less popular with those who
run Mumbai’s restaurants, and some retailers
warned that it would eliminate jobs and send the
price of other meats spiraling upward.

“This is extremely sad to hear,” Glyston Gracias,
brand chef at Smoke House Deli in Mumbai, told
The Indian Express, a daily newspaper. “I will
have to go to another country.”

“A lot of our foreign clientele, such as Japanese
and Europeans, will miss beef on the menu,” he
said. “I will find it difficult to do international
cuisine.”

The protection of cows is a volatile subject in
India, where the animal is revered by the
majority-Hindu population. Nearly all of India’s
states already have legal provisions restricting or
banning cow slaughter. The B.J.P.’s election
manifesto included promises to work toward “the protection and promotion of cow and its progeny.”

As India’s beef trade is largely controlled by
Muslim traders, a religious minority in the
country, the issue has become a point of
contention between the two religious groups, and
it is particularly politicized during elections.

Last month, beef traders in Maharashtra
complained that they were being harassed by
right-wing Hindu groups that were attacking
vehicles transporting cattle to abattoirs, seizing
the animals by force and beating the drivers. In
February, beef traders across the state went on
strike for over a week until the chief minister,
Mr. Fadnavis, assured them protection.

India is a top exporter of meat from buffaloes,
which are more common and less revered in
India than cows. India’s exports of beef,
including buffalo meat, have been rising steadily.

Ahead of the state elections, Satpal Malik, a vice
president of the farmers’ wing of the B.J.P., said
that if elected, the party would “crack down on
beef exports” and “review the subsidy the
government gives for beef or buffalo meat
exports,” according to a report by Reuters.

Reduce Embassy Staff. Venezuela Tells U.S

CARACAS, Venezuela — With diplomatic relations
fraying rapidly between the United States and
Venezuela, the government of President Nicolás
Maduro has given the American Embassy here 15
days to come up with a plan to drastically shrink
its staff, Venezuela’s foreign minister announced
Monday.

Mr. Maduro has repeatedly accused the United
States of supporting a plot to overthrow him, and
on Saturday he announced a series of diplomatic
measures that he said were intended to halt
American meddling.

He said the United States would have to reduce
the number of officials at its embassy to a
number similar to the staff at the Venezuelan
Embassy in Washington. He said there were 100
American officials here and just 17 Venezuelan
officials in Washington, although those numbers
have not been verified by the State Department.

“Regarding the reduction to 17 officials with
which the Embassy of the United States in
Venezuela must operate, they were given 15 days
to present a plan as to the classification and rank
of the officials that will remain,” the foreign
minister, Delcy Rodríguez, said at a news conference.

She said the change was in keeping with “the
reciprocity that should govern relations between
sovereign states.” The United States denies Mr.
Maduro’s claim that it is involved in any plan to
overthrow him, saying he is seeking to deflect
attention from the country’s worsening economic crisis.

Mr. Maduro also said Saturday that Americans
traveling to Venezuela would now need visas to
enter the country and that they would have to
pay a fee equal to what Venezuelans pay for a
visa to the United States.

Mr. Maduro’s anti-Washington language was
tamped down for several weeks after the
surprise diplomatic opening between the United
States and Cuba, a close ally of the Caracas
government.

But last month, as pressure grew on Mr. Maduro
to address the country’s many economic ills, he
once again stepped up accusations against the
United States.

For the U.S. and China, a Test of Diplomacy on South Sudan

A United Nations camp for displaced people in Bentiu,
South Sudan, where civil war has forced two million people from their homes. Peace talks are underway, but are not seen as promising.

UNITED NATIONS — The United States may have
midwifed the birth of South Sudan , the world’s
youngest nation. But China has quickly become
among its most important patrons, building its
roads and pumping its oil.

Now, more than a year after South Sudan’s
leaders plunged their country into a nasty civil
war, the nation has become something of a test of
diplomacy between the United States and China,
raising the question: Can Washington and
Beijing turn their mutual interests in South
Sudan into a shared strategy to stop the bloodshed?

To pressure the warring sides toward peace, the
United States has circulated a draft Security
Council resolution, dangling the threat of
sanctions and setting up the possibility of an
arms embargo somewhere down the road. The
measure could come up for a vote as early as Tuesday.

China, which has long espoused a policy of not
interfering in its partners’ domestic affairs, has
not revealed its hand. The Chinese foreign
minister, Wang Yi, signaled to diplomats here last
week that his government could be persuaded to back appropriate punitive measures against South Sudan.   

The Chinese ambassador to the United Nations, Liu Jieyi, then publicly questioned the “logic” of proposing sanctions while the two sides are talking. China could
abstain from voting on Tuesday and let the measure pass.

Peace talks — funded by both Beijing and Washington — are underway in Ethiopia this week between factions loyal to President Salva Kiir and his rival former Vice President Riek Machar. Yet prospects for a breakthrough by a Thursday deadline set by the mediators appear slim. Mr. Kiir, for his part, has refused to show up.

So far, neither Washington nor Beijing has advanced a comprehensive strategy to stop the civil war. Both nations have been hesitant to substantially defang the kingpins of the war, including imposing an arms embargo or limiting how oil revenues might be used to fund the conflict. Both measures are among the
recommendations of a recent International Crisis Group report on South Sudan.

“The ability of the United States and China to work toward a common strategy for peace in South Sudan is a test case for their ability to work together on the continent and beyond,” said Casie Copeland, the Crisis Group’s South Sudan expert. She described both countries as “sort of walking in a circle.”

That is not for a lack of interest — or even because of opposing interests. Although China and the United States have stubbornly been on opposing sides of the issue of Darfur, the long-suffering Sudanese region, the
two superpowers share a lot of common ground on South Sudan.

China has strong economic stakes in the country; the United States is heavily invested politically.

They both have an interest in restoring stability to the country and avoiding disruptions to its oil flow. Both capitals have also opted to go slowly. Obama administration officials have deep emotional ties to South Sudan, and so far they have resisted taking any steps, like an arms embargo, that would weaken the government in Juba. As the administration’s former South Sudan envoy, Princeton Lyman, put it this week,
“The position is hardening in the administration, but it has taken a while.”

All the while, fighting between forces loyal to Mr. Kiir, an ethnic Dinka, and Mr. Machar, an ethnic Nuer, has killed tens of thousands, displaced two million people, brought the country to brink of famine and left a trail of rape and killing. The United Nations children’s agency last week said school children had been conscripted by a militia loyal to Mr. Kiir’s forces.

The United States and China have vastly different
histories there. The United States championed its
independence from Sudan, whose president, Omar al-Bashir, it loathed, and whom it referred to the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide in Darfur.

China, by contrast, was one of Mr. Bashir’s most
important allies — and still is. But when South Sudan split off, it took vast amounts of oil with it, so China soon courted the new government in Juba and kept its stake in the oil fields.

That helps explains why China has taken an
unusually active role, considering its traditional policy of noninterference. It has dispatched its own soldiers to the United Nations peacekeeping mission there and
persuaded the Security Council to include a most unusual mandate for the mission: Peacekeepers there are tasked with protecting not just civilians, but also the country’s oil installations, which have been attacked. China has also stopped shipping arms to the government in Juba.

The American-drafted resolution would impose travel bans and asset freezes on individuals who threaten the peace and security of South Sudan, including those who are accused of committing serious rights abuses, using child soldiers, and attacking United Nations personnel. It would set up a committee to evaluate who should fall on the sanctions list. The measure would raise the possibility of an arms embargo further in the future.

Crucial to the effectiveness of these measures are South Sudan’s neighbors, including Uganda and Ethiopia, which have ties to the rival parties. Only if the countries in the region agree to punitive measures, like sanctions and an arms embargo, Mr. Lyman pointed out, will China give its consent on the Council.

Asked why it has taken so long to propose a draft
resolution on the Security Council, an American official said: “There are a lot of actors in this situation. We’ve been waiting for the right moment.”

The official spoke on the condition of anonymity
because of diplomatic protocol. “Everyone is sort of rowing in the same direction,” he added. A wild card is what to do about the potential war crimes committed by both sides in the conflict.

The African Union has completed its own investigation into human rights abuses, but refused to make it public while peace talks are continuing. The United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, has urged the
organization to release it.

United Nations investigators have chronicled a litany of horrors since fighting broke out in December 2013. “In Juba, I met people whose whole families have been executed, primarily due to their ethnicity, and women and girls who were taken as sex slaves after their husbands were killed,” the United Nations assistant secretary general for human rights, Ivan Simonovic, told the Council last week, urging the panel to ensure accountability for the victims.

The next question will be whether China or the
United States agrees to send its friends to the
dock.

Nemtsov funeral: Slain Russian opposition leader laid to rest, mourners queue to pay respects

Thousands of people, including prominent
Russian and foreign politicians and
activists, have pay their last respects to
Boris Nemtsov - an opposition leader, who
was assassinated in Moscow last week.

People stood in a kilometer-long queue to
get to the memorial service, which took
place in the Sakharov Center in Moscow.
Not all were able to get inside.

From there Nemtsov’s coffin was taken to
the Troekurovskoye cemetery, where about
600 people attended the funeral, Interfax
estimates.

Merkel says to push for freedom of expression in Russia

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday she would push Russia to guarantee the freedom of expression after what she described as the serious and sad murder of Kremlin critic Boris Nemtsov.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday she would push Russia to guarantee the freedom of expression after what she described as the serious and sad murder of Kremlin critic Boris Nemtsov.

"We expect everything to be done to clear up this murder. I hope and we will make clear that we want those people who think differently in Russia to have a chance to articulate their thoughts - though I know it is anything but easy,"

Merkel told reporters at a news conference with the
president of Mongolia.

Cross River Presents Election Materials to the Blind.

Cross River Resident Electoral Commissioner, Dr Sylvester Okey-Ezeani has presented election material items to the visually impaired persons in the State.

The Items presented was in line with the Abuja demand by the people living with Disabilities to the Electoral umpire in November 2014 and Cross River State is the first to give such materials out to the Persons Living with Disabilities (PWDs).

Items Given includes 100 copies of Accreditation/Voting Procedure manual, 13 Frequently asked questions brochures, 140 wrong and Right Voting Guides,100 copies of Voting Offences and Penalty and 142 Copies of General Election Dates among others.

Speaking during the presentations at INEC Office, Calabar, the State Resident Electoral Commissioner said it was part of the promise made by the Chairman in ensuring that People Living with disabilities were giving adequate informations and guide before and during the polls.

"It is the commission desire that you make adequate use of these materials as part of the effort of INEC to give the people with visually impaired persons to have sense of belonging on the electoral processes "he said.

Dr Joseph Agba, Cross River State President of visually Impaired ?Person who was full of appreciation to the commission said in the past, INEC have not consider their plight just as he said many other government Organisations and agencies does not put the interest of the visually impaired persons into congnisance in particular and People living with the Disability in General in all their activities.

"This is the first time any public office will be distributing materials like this and it's a good development, many people organized workshops and ?seminars without considering the plight of the visually impaired.
"I'm going to give this information directly including students in the university ?"he said.

The stakeholders meeting facilitated by Human and
Organisational Resources Development Centre (HORDC) in partnership with Disability Policy and Advocacy Initiative (DPAI)had in November 2014 requested ?for blind and partially sighted persons from INEC, election/voting materials (ballot papers) produced in Braille or tactile formats; blind and partially sighted persons are allowed to come with a person of their choice to assist them; electoral officials are properly trained to provide necessary assistance
to blind and partially sighted persons among others.

Special Reports - If i have a vote in the 2015 Nigerian elections..

In 28 days Nigerians will be selecting their leaders for the next four years. I and millions of Diaspora Nigerians will not be voting even though we contribute billions of dollars to the economy, in fact we contribute more to the economy than over three quarters of Nigerian states contribute. It is another case of taxation without representation. But this will
be a subject for another day and time.

Before I jump into what I would do with my vote let me say what I will not do. I will not vote for General Muhammadu Buhari (GMB) and here are my reasons:

1. He overthrew a popularly elected civilian president. He
became a dictator. He did not respect the people’s choice and voice. He is now preaching that something had happened to him on his way to Damascus where he was going to persecute Christians (politicians). And that spirit of democracy caught up with him and told him to go there and preach democracy. This Thomas is in doubt. I still ask “is this not Saul of Tarsus?”

2. GMB does not have experience working in a civilian
setting. He should have started as a governor and learned how to work with legislators before trying for the presidency. Aso Rock should not be the place for in the job training (OJT). Especially when his vice is as, or more inexperienced, as he. His VP has not run any important thing such as a university, large business or a corporation. His political experience is merely a rookie politician. His management experience extends only to managing a parish church in a very small denomination.

3. GMB’s military career is not distinguished. We know who commanded which division, who was Chief of Staff, who was in charge of Logistics, intelligence, ordinance, training, etc. during the civil war. What was GMB’s role during the most difficult time in Nigeria? Did he not just wear well ironed khaki and drove fancy cars at HQ?

4. He has had a stint as a head of state. What is the legacy from that era other than that Nigerians stood in line to board buses? What infrastructure was started (don’t mind completed as he was not there long enough), which educational institutions was started, what policy initiatives came from then, which rehabilitation efforts of the Biafrans do we associate with him? His two-year tenure does not resonate.

5. I feel that this is GMB’s second coup. The difference
between the last time when they used enlisted Nigerian
troops to overthrow President Shagari and now is that he is using terrorists. GMB has not condemned the insurgency (he made awkward attempts at Chatham House) but it was too little and too late.

6. I am not convinced that GMB is healthy enough for the job. If he can take a two-week vacation in the last months of the election it suggests either ill health or laziness. Neither is good for a Head of State or Government. Or that he is entitled to rule and that Nigerians must honor his aspiration.

7. Has GMB written anything such as his political manifesto where he explained his philosophy of government, economic management, and social philosophy of even ordinary beliefs? Are they published in peer reviewed journals or even in daily
newspapers? Has he ever done any research? How
intellectually sturdy is Buhari?

8. GMB seems to me as a man who is another man’s man. His first presidential action was the appointment of his vice. GMB thinks that the best Nigerian after him is Mr. Osibanjo, a man he never met until just a couple of weeks before his appointment and a god son of Tinubu. This suggests that GMB would not be making his own decisions. Nigerians want their elected officers to be in charge.

9. GMB’s incompetence is best manifested by the way he handled his educational qualification when it became an issue. He went and swore an oath that turned out to be lying under oath, he scrambled to submit papers that even now has not fully answered or settled the debate. Where does this matter stand to date?

10. GMB is associated with the emergence of
Sharia Courts. Why has he not made his stand on religion clearer knowing the religion is an issue in Nigeria polity? Why is he not going to churches to allay the fears of Christians?

Ten points seem enough.

I will not vote for Buhari. Ok. Who will I vote for? I will vote for the reelection of President Goodluck Ebere Jonathan (GEJ). I will do so holding my nose. It will not be an enthusiastic vote but the better of two evils.

a. GEJ has held the country together despite many
difficulties.

b. The economy is growing at 7% one of the fastest growth rates in the world thanks, to Ms. Okonjo -Iweala and her team.

c. The press is freer than it used to be.

d. He built 12 more universities although I do not think it is the right thing to do.

e. He has managed to work with the legislature which is a difficult balancing act.

f. I HOPE he will develop a stronger backbone next time
around.

g. He is not a dictator and never was one.

h. I hope he will confront BH more strongly if he has no
elections to face.

i. I hope he will help Nigeria build strong institutions that would make corruption less rampant than it is now.

j. I hope that the Diaspora Nigerians will get the vote next time around.

I do not have a vote and this is a pity.

By.
Benjamin Obiajulu Aduba.