---

" the Russians and other G8 leaders are also believed to have preferred South African President...Read the full article.

---

How can you reasonably discuss energy security without including Nigeria the largest exporter of petroleum in Africa or the 2nd largest economy for that matter? Oh yes, at least we know our standing when it come to these Russians now...they are not any different from their western cousins, the only difference of course is that they make no pretences about it. The next generation of Nigerian leaders are taking notes...we know our friends.

P.S: Who cares about this discussion club anyway? OBJ should stop flying our jet around for nothing..the cost of aviation fuel is going through the roof.

---

Thanks Busanga, point adopted.
And someone tinks the Russians do not care about Baba. Or are you not aware that they have been following the news in Nigeria?

1. Putin and his colleagues do not want to take responsibility for putting our 'tokunbo' aircraft on a long haul and endangering the life of our president

2. Since we have been shouting that we need to develop our country with our resources, they have saved us the cost of aviation fuel from Lagos to Russia to invest in something worthwhile.

3 They are also aware that handover is 9months away. They dont want to saddle Baba with new agreements that would give him an excuse to sit back and work out modalities for its execution. Rather, they need him to concentrate on how he will hand over. Poor Baba, he has too much on his hands.

4. I think the key issue is the Israel Arab conflict. We havent heard of any Nigerian killed in the over 30years of skirmishes starting from the 7day war. (wow! Nigerians must be great immigrants and survivors). So pardon them if our presence and input is not necessary. Moreso, our President is known to be a bit flippant, so they dont wich for him to make caustic remarks that can ignite a World War III. Safer at home than in Russia.

Really, the G8 loves Nigeria!

---

I am a little dubious about the motivation behind this peice by Mr. Akande. This is the second time he has brought up this issue about the President and the G8 "snub".

Is the peice to tell us that the Russian hosts are "hostile" to the African "noise" that was the last G8 meeting and do not want Africa or it's issues to be the centrepeice of this particular meeting? Is it to convince us that our president is now an international pariah because of the much trumpeted TTA? Everything is now convolutedly connected to the TTA and this seems to join that ever lenghtening conspiracy theorising and speculative agendarism that has taken root in our polity. They are quite absurd when critiqued against the obvious facts in some cases.

- The G8 meeting agenda is set in the main by the hosts and Putin and his people have their own ideas of what is important to their own interests at this time.
Since all other non-G8 leaders attend by invitation, is is not grandiose to assume that the president of Nigeria gets an automatic spot at the conference?
- It appears our president's previous invitations were based on his official capacities as AU and/or NEPAD etc chairmanship rather in than his personal capacity.
- He is not the current AU chairperson and NEPAD does not appear to be "hot" on the Russians agenda therefore it is arguable whether our president needs to attend.
- As for democratic intentions or lack of, I do not believe Mr. Putin or the Russians are in any position to hold a moral high ground so that is a non-starter and a very superficial line of reasoning.
- As for the invitation of the South African president, I believe that apart from "head in the sand Nigerian commentators", it has always been clear what the west's heirachical relationship with African nations has been. We can speculate as to why he is invited this time but that is all it is speculation or at best we have an educated guess.

Finally, we do not know if our president is interested in attending this particular G8 meeting. He may have achieved his objectives actively fraternising with these group in the past and moved on from there? Can we not be speculative along that line of reasoning or is that too much to ask? Why must the "negative" be the attractive line of reasoning?

I believe that it high time we put aside our personal, policy or political differences with the president and report facts as we have them rather than interprete them to validate our biases or opinions? Let opinions be opinion and the facts be the fact. Mixing them up is simply mischievious or at best pseudo-idealism.

Incredulous

---

@ Incredulous
Apparently you have chosen to interprete the news in an optimistic way from Akande's if you like "pessimistic" stance. Both of you may not be wrong. You just happen to see the world and events through different prisms. Nevertheless, we cannot ignore what we see around us or we may choose to give the rather ominous clouds the best slant possible, which is what I think you have done. Reports such as this(below) are not encouraging no matter how you wish to spin it.

---

Nigerian loses bid for UN committee seat
By Our Correspondent
Published: Tuesday, 18 Jul 2006
Citing poor human rights records against her country, a Nigerian, Mrs. Saudatu Mahdi, has been denied a seat on the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

Mahdi, the executive director of the Women Rights Advancement and Protection Agency, was one of the 23 experts that applied for a seat on CEDAW, which has the mandate to monitor states‘ compliance with the convention.

Mahdi told our correspondent on Monday that her failure to get elected was not unconnected with the interference by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minster of Justice, Chief Bayo Ojo (SAN), in the running of the National Human Rights Commission as well as the abysmal human rights record of Nigeria, which she said, had been attracting criticisms within and outside the shore.

It was learnt that while most voters admired her for her expertise, they rebuffed her efforts to lobby them, saying they would support the candidacy of any West African country, other than that of Nigeria.

Reason: The recent arraignment of two journalists in Nigeria for sedition and the re-deployment of Bukhari Bello, who was hitherto the Executive Secretary of the National Human Rights Commission.

In the long run, a protest vote saw Dorcas Ama Frema Coker-Appiah of Ghana emerge in her the Nigerian‘s place as one of the 12 experts elected to serve on the CEDAW Committee.

181 of 183 States parties to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women participated in the election, which was held on June 23, this year.

Nigeria is a state party to the convention.

The successful candidates include Ferdous Ara Begum (Bangladesh), Meriem Belmihoub-Zerdani ( Algeria), Saisuree Chutikul ( Thailand), Dorcas Ama Frema Coker-Appiah ( Ghana), Cornelis Flinterman ( Netherlands), Naela Gabr Mohamed Gabre Ali ( Egypt), Ruth Halperin-Kaddari ( Israel), Violeta Neubauer ( Slovenia), Pramila Patten ( Mauritius), Fumiko Saiga ( Japan), Hazel Gumede Shelton ( South Africa) and Dubravka Šimonoviæ ( Croatia).

They will begin four-year terms on 1 January 2007, and will replace the 12 experts whose terms will expire on 31 December 2006.

Meanwhile, the Kenyan National Human Rights Commission has condemned the re-deployment of Bukhari Bello from the National Human Rights Commission , saying it smacked of undue interference by government into the activities of the commission.

In a statement signed by the Chairman of the Kenyan Commission, Maina Kaai and made available to The Guardian, it expressed concern that Nigeria risked losing all the tremendous achievements she had recorded in recent times.

The statement reads, ”The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights is concerned by reports of the purported redeployment of Mr. Bukhari Bello from his position as the Executive Secretary of the Nigerian National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).

As a member of the coordinating committee of African National Human Rights Institutions, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights is further concerned that one of Africa‘s emerging democracies would jeopardize its hard earned credentials by engaging in acts that would erode the value intended in the establishment of National Human Rights Institutions.

The principles behind National Human Rights Institutions as watchdogs over the Executive and other arms of Government are so important and the Executive must not be seen to compromise the effectiveness and independence of NHRIs. The UN Paris principles for the operations of National Human Rights Institutions further require that these bodies be de-linked in all their operations from the Executive.

As a member of the newly elected United Nations Human Rights Council, Nigeria is expected to provide leadership to other African countries in matters of human rights. Election to the new council comes with the expectation that the Government will refrain from courses of action, which would be construed as eroding the independence and effectiveness of National Institutions.

We therefore believe that the international concern raised by Mr. Bello‘s sacking will be resolved amicably through dialogue and in a manner that does not compromise the independence of the National Commission on Human Rights in Nigeria. It is also our hope that the current impasse will be resolved expeditiously in a manner which ultimately vindicates Nigeria‘s role as model for emerging democracies in the rest of our continent”.

Similarly, the Sierra Leone Human Rights Community has called on President Olusegun Obasanjo to reinstate Bello to his office as the Executive Secretary of the NHRC.

A letter addressed to Obasanjo and signed by the Executive Director, Forum of Conscience and Valnora Edwin, the Coordinator, Forum of Conscience said, ”The actions of the Minister to ‘redeploy‘ the executive secretary of the commission is therefore an indication of government interference with an institution that should enjoy absolute independence and be able to carry out its judicious functions without fear of government reprisals.

”His Excellency, We would also want to state that given Nigeria‘s status and leadership role in Africa and particularly in the sub-region, Nigeria should therefore stand out as an example of a free and democratic society capable of providing hope to our collective effort to build a Human Right culture in Africa.”

source: PUNCH 18/07/2006

---

Don't you get that sense of de javu? Could it be that we are going from (pariah to) darling to pariah with these powerful nations all over again? Feels that way.

---

I believe that it high time we put aside our personal, policy or political differences with the president and report facts as we have them rather than interprete them to validate our biases or opinions? Let opinions be opinion and the facts be the fact. Mixing them up is simply mischievious or at best pseudo-idealism.

---

Perhaps, but it is even harder to practise what you preach because you have done exactly what you berate Akande for. You have interpreted the facts (which is that the President was not invited to the meeting) to suit your bias which is something we all do unconsciously sometimes. I do not think there is any dishonesty here as all Akande has done is render an opinion albeit spiced with his rationale just like you have done.

Suffice it to say that I agree with Akande but also see the validity of your point of view. So 1-1.

Aluta!

Gwobezentashi

---

This is Mr Laolu Akande's Democratic Putin's Russia in the Opinion of the Washinton Post

'Democracy,' Russian-Style
A definition George Orwell might have liked
Tuesday, July 18, 2006; Page A18


A FEW MONTHS ago it looked as though the subject of the Group of Eight summit in Russia would be Russia itself. Under the leadership of President Vladimir Putin, Russia has retreated from the democratic ideals to which it aspired when it was invited into the G-8; in a speech in May in Lithuania, Vice President Cheney took aim at this backsliding, accusing Mr. Putin's government of unfairly restricting citizens' rights. But during the three days of summitry that ended yesterday, the attempts to call Mr. Putin to account were limited -- and Mr. Putin batted them away with contempt.

President Bush raised the subject of Russian politics deferentially. "There will be a Russian-style democracy," he conceded, borrowing from the Kremlin's talking points; "I don't expect Russia to look like the United States." British Prime Minister Tony Blair took the same approach, saying he would raise the question of democracy "without wrecking the hotel room." But this gentlemanly style did not appeal to Mr. Putin. When Mr. Bush recommended democratic reform for Russia, Mr. Putin went for the jugular: "We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq," he said. When questioned about Russia's rampant corruption, Mr. Putin suggested that the British were the experts, and he invoked a campaign finance scandal that has tainted Mr. Blair.

If this is how Mr. Putin behaves when the eyes of the world are upon him, the coming months look bleak. Russia's leader has already squashed the independent media. He has emasculated the powers of Russia's parliament and the independence of its judiciary. He has abolished regional democracy, replacing elected governors with Kremlin appointees. Anyone who challenges Mr. Putin's authority faces semi-legal harassment: tax inspections, lawsuits, regulatory restrictions on efforts to open offices or hold meetings.

This is not enough for Mr. Putin, however. Writing on the opposite page Saturday, Masha Lipman called attention to electoral "reform" that has consolidated the dominance of the United Russia party, whose only policy is to support the Kremlin. One reform measure equips the Kremlin with more than 60 pretexts to exclude unwanted candidates or parties from elections; another allows "early voting," a practice that permits ballot boxes to be brought to voters in places unobserved by election monitors -- a well-known recipe for rigging elections. There is less and less prospect, in other words, that Russia's presidential election in 2008 will approximate an open or fair competition. When Mr. Bush talks of a "Russian-style democracy," we trust he means something better than this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701297.html?referrer=email

---

@ Gwobezentashi

I appreciate your contribution to this issue and especially in reference to my previous contribution.

Am I an "optimist" when it concerns the issues facing our nation? I don't know but I believe that we can rise above the lowest common denominators that have come to characterise most things about us as a nation-state.
I believe that only when we begin to individually raise the level of the "game" in our discourse, critique, opposition, and participation will be begin to see a shift in the collective psyche.

Opinions are just that opinions. What bothers me is when opinion or the interprepetation of the facts is proferred as the fact - that is disingenuous.

"Finally, we do not know if our president is interested in attending this particular G8 meeting. He may have achieved his objectives actively fraternising with these group in the past and moved on from there? Can we not be speculative along that line of reasoning or is that too much to ask? Why must the "negative" be the attractive line of reasoning?"

The above quote is from my previous contribution. It was just meant to be an additional perspective/interpretation and not proferred as fact since I could not be absolutely certain why the invitation was not extended. My point was simply that while the facts could be interpreted differently couldn't we move away from the tendency to "negativise" and go for balance by putting all perspectives on the table then declare our opinion/commentary to be just that and not "dress" them up as facts!

I totally abhor the increasing prevalence of spin in a society where transparency has never been our forte? That is one of the great failings of our present leadership. It's preference for obfuscation many at times causes defeat to be snatched from the mouth of victory.

I am also grateful for your attachment of the peice about Nigeria's bid for a place on the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). I was going to find away to paste the version from the Nigerian Tribune (18-07-2006) on the NVS but I am glad you have done so. Mucho gracias!

While it is a thing of regret vis a vis our international profile and the competence of Mrs. Mahdi, I have my reservation on the chief reason proffered. If the reason was simply "the human rights record" of the present government then why does the Committee have representatives of the following nations (see Tribune article on Nigeriaworld 18-07-2006) - China, Algeria, Egypt, Cuba, China, Zimbabawe - on it? Are the human rights records of these countries better than ours? I deliberately picked these countries out because I am reasonably certain about the press records of human rights problems in them.

I am not a blind optimist, I grew up in Nigeria and have family still residing at home and working to have a life with no government or other "connections" to lean on. I strongly believe that we can rise above the morass that our leadership have chosen to wallow in but those of us who know better ought to come to equity with the same standards we demand of the leadership - uprightness, fortrightness and integrity lest we will be no better than they.

I chose the pseudonym "Incredulous" because I am still dubious as to our collective commitment - the whole is only as good as the good of the individual parts. I may not be pessimistic but I am not naively optimistic either.

By the way have you read the Tribune peice today on the latest conspiracy theory soon to overtake us all - INTERIM GOVT LIKELY From OLAWALE RASHEED and AYODELE ADESANMI, Nigerian Tribune
Tuesday, July 18, 2006. The inanity of most of our political class knows no end. Maybe we are witnessing the culling of the class that has mis-led and strangle-held the nation and this is the dance macabre! Where do we actually begin?

Anyway, thank you and all those "rising" folks out there who see the issues and call the spade what it is.

As you always sign off, Aluta Continua.

Incredulous

---

It is good for OBJ to have a taste of such snubbery. His TTA program cost the nation an untold amount of lost resources and momentum.

Putin, like OBJ, cannot be credited with outstanding democratic values. Nevertheless, OBJ would have lifted his game tremendously if he had chosen to walk in the massive footsteps of Mandela. All men and women of high-standing appealed to OBJ to follow suit, but he turned down those pleas until the National Assembly woke up from their slumber to ditch him.

---

@ Incredulous

The Interim Government "idea" as reported in the Tribune has been rumbling away recently at the heart of political discourse and can only be assumed to be part of the yet to be forgotten TTA. Call it Plan C if you like as Plan B is in play at the moment with all manner of candidates sprouting from all corners if only to muddy the water. As with Plan A, these manouevres are non starters and will be defeated, the old man had better start packing. The greatest joke of all is the claim that he was never interested in an extension of his tenure. Who is he zooming? Is it not interesting that 10months to its end, this government does not look like a government on its way out? He needs to take lessons from IBB, the author of the original ING script. It won't work. It can't work!

Again I have difficulty in faulting your analysis of the human rights situation vis a vis the UN committee but I dare say that our government seems to be regressing on the tangible progress it made at its inception, at least in respect of freedoms of expression, assembly, worship etc. One would have considered Odi and Zaki Biam as very bad stains on an improving record but the recent attacks on the media and opposition suggests a throwback to the dark days of arbitrary military rule which is very worrying indeed. The increasingly rambo like posture of law enforcement agents(who cower in the face of marauding armed robbers) against the citizens who must remain innocent until deemed otherwise by a competent court is inconsistent with living in a democratic environment. Unfortunately, this sort of posture appears endorsed at the strategic levels which can only lead to a generally brutalised psyche and a violent spiral.


Aluta!


Gwobezentashi

---

I heard about this ING thing too, apparently baba tried to sell the idea to IBB!
Anyway I know that baba does not want to leave Aso Rock come 2007, he is afraid of the unknown...has stepped on too many toes....... so he is trying everything including declaring a state of emergency if necessary to stay put till '09.

Nigerians we need to be vigilant things are happening in that country and not much is been said.............