Friday, 18 February 2022

Putin


President Putin sent shock waves round the world when he amassed more than 100,000 troops armed to the teeth to surround Ukraine. Beyond his penchant to bully Ukraine and threaten its sovereignty, many of the experts in foreign affairs are yet to unravel the motive behind the build-up of arms and personnel. Was it for fear of Ukraine joining NATO? An online publication reports a former CIA chief, Don Hoffman, as saying: ‘’First of all, NATO membership is a fig leaf. It’s a red herring. Everyone knows Ukraine isn’t joining NATO anytime soon. It takes unanimous consent; France and Germany won’t give that. Putin uses that as a convenient way to frame the narrative for his disinformation propaganda. NATO is a defensive alliance but it represents anything that scares him.’’ Another expert, Chris Miller who is a former US Acting Secretary of Defence does not see the threat as deep-seated in the psyche of Russians. He believes it has some domestic undertones and calculation. He says: “…that is, that the Russians might seek to invade and occupy the portion of Ukraine that would connect Russia via land to Crimea, which Moscow annexed in 2014 and which contains a critical Russian naval base and port on the Black Sea. I think he’s just going to keep pushing until someone stands up against him, just like the playground.”

Some others think Putin is trying to reaffirm regional dominance and reassert regional influence in the place such that Russia can exercise veto over Ukraine’s foreign policy. It was also to raise tensions so as to squeeze concessions from the United States. The latter on the other hand sees the Russian action as reawakening old rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, and so Russia went full blast militarizing Ukraine with 11 amphibious ships and submarines and 130,000 troops. From the point of view of some other scholars a gas pipeline from Germany to Russia which is called Nord Stream 2 is the issue; it is the cause of the tension. The United States sees the collaboration as a threat capable of weakening its dominant influence in Western Europe in particular. Germans are eagerly expecting the gas supply to quickly come on stream, convinced that it would be cost effective for them. The energy would be cleaner and cheaper. Reports say once the German regulatory authority issues final certification, the supply would start.

It is seen in parts of Western Europe that the United States is opposed to the budding friendship between Germany and Russia. The chummy relationship in the reading of experts would redefine economic, military and social architecture in Western Europe. When there is economic boom in Europe it would affect the value of the Dollar thus considerably whittling down the United States influence in the region. United States panics as its influence on pristine allies is slipping off its fingers. It is, therefore, goading Russia to invade Ukraine and sour the relationship and the gas supply would be put on hold. It is believed it is an orchestration of an alarm to the American public that war was imminent in that region.

An enlightening commentary, authored by Mike Whitney, says: “The Ukraine crisis has nothing to do with Ukraine. It is about Germany and, in particular, a pipeline that connects Germany to Russia…” He adds: “In a world where Germany and Russia are friends and trading partners, there is no need for expensive US-made weapons and missile systems, and no need for NATO. There is also no need to transact energy deals in US Dollars or to stockpile US Treasuries to balance accounts. Transactions between business partners can be conducted in their own currency which is bound to precipitate a sharp decline in the value of the dollar and dramatic shift in economic power.”

The hype and worry, of Russia invading Ukraine in American Establishment does not appear would wane soon as the issue is not seen by the United States as a drive in search of economic opportunities and advantages for one of its allies, Germany. Not even by acclaimed diplomat extra-ordinary, Henry Kissinger who sees the issue other than from the American lenses. Russia, too, lent itself to a war cry with the massive militarization of Ukraine. Kissinger says: “Public discussion on Ukraine is all about confrontation. But do we know where we are going? In my life, I have seen four wars begun with great enthusiasm and public support, all of which we did not know how to end and from three of which we withdrew unilaterally. The test of policy is how it ends and not how it begins. Far too often, the Ukrainian issue is posed as a showdown: whether Ukraine joins the East or the West. But if Ukraine is to survive and thrive, it must not be either side’s outpost against the other—it should function as a bridge between them.”

What is clear looking at the issue critically is economic interest whether on the part of America or Germany. The United States finds it unsettling that one of its major allies is forging an economic union with Russia which has unwittingly chosen the time to flex its muscles and bare its teeth over Ukraine disguised as military drills. The heavy weaponry displayed was intimidating. Indeed, even the relief that Russia had ordered its troops back to the barracks was giving way to despair as an American official reported that about 7,000 more troops had been added to the 130,000 pack that are stationed at the Ukraine border. The claim by Putin is false, he said. For the United States, in addition to the economic factor, the possibility of it losing influence and its invincibility over Europe is destabilisng to put it mildly. The security council permanent members are undermining United Nations, its appropriate that United Nations should have a standing force. As its now, the sovereignty of Ukraine as a state is undermined and purveyor of the impunity ,Russian government is winning. Like l said, no single bullet would be fired by Russia,Ukraine does not want war either. We must redefined the power of the five security council permanent members.

Olufemi Aduwo

Permanent Representative ,

Centre for Convention on Democratic lntegrity [ CCDI},

A non-governmental organisation in Consultative Status with ECOSOC/United Nations.

www.ccdiltd.org

+238087047173

Wednesday, 16 February 2022

THE UNITED NATION’s VITAL ROLE IN AFGNANISTAN

On December 22, 2021, the UN Security Council voted unanimously to allow for more humanitarian assistance to reach vulnerable Afghans, while preventing the abuse of these funds by their Taliban rulers. With more than half of Afghanistan’s 39 million citizens, afflicted by drought, disease, and decades of war, depending upon critical life-saving aid to survive the harsh winter months, the decision to carve out an exception in UN sanctions against the ruling regime is timely.

At the same time, addressing the underlying political, cultural, and socioeconomic challenges that continue to fuel widespread deprivation, violence, and corruption in Afghanistan requires a strategy and targeted investments in development and peace building too. Fortunately, these are also areas where the UN maintains a decades-long track record in Afghanistan (including from 1996-2001, the last period of Taliban rule) and elsewhere.
Moreover, the Security Council’s recent request to Secretary-General António Guterres to provide strategic and operational recommendations on the future of the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA), by January 31, 2022, offers an opportunity to adapt the world body to the country’s fast-changing political, security, social, and economic context.

To channel fresh ideas and critical observations in advance of the Secretary-General’s presented proposals to the Security Council on Wednesday, January 26 and subsequent UNAMA mandate review in March, the Centre for Convention On Democratic lntegrity [CCDI} arrived at several, time-sensitive recommendations elaborated upon in our brief submitted to Secretary General of United Nations on Monday 14th Febuary ,titled  a new policy brief, A Step-by-Step Roadmap for Action on Afghanistan: What the United Nations and International Community Can and Should Do:

First, the United Nations should aid in negotiating some conditionalities put forward by Western powers. Whilst a step-by-step roadmap for cooperation is needed, vital life-saving humanitarian aid should never be made conditional on the Taliban taking certain actions.
Given the acute differences between the Taliban and the international community, diverse mechanisms are needed for addressing distinct humanitarian and non-humanitarian issues alike. Both sides have made opposing demands that essentially negate one another, while the needs of millions of innocent, vulnerable Afghans continue to grow.

In direct immediate support of malnutrition, urgent health services, and other kinds of emergency, life-saving support detailed in a new Humanitarian Response Plan, donor countries should take careful heed of the UN’s largest ever humanitarian appeal for a  single country  announced on 11 January 2022, requesting more than USD $5 billion this year for Afghanistan.

This follows from the USD 1.2 billion pledged by nearly 100 countries at a United Nations Secretary-General convened ministerial, on 13 September 2021 in Geneva, as well as subsequent additional pledges of humanitarian aid through international organisations, such as the World Food Program and UNDP, by South Korea,France and Norway. Second, there is a need to remain focused on the intersections of humanitarian, developmental, and peace challenges, rather than roll-out humanitarian-only models of response in Afghanistan. To advance more integrated approaches that break down the traditional siloes of the international aid system in responding to the Afghan crisis, the humanitarian-development-peace nexus offers a powerful framework.

The United Nations and other actors have implemented Triple Nexus programming in Afghanistan in recent years, including refugee return and reintegration, asset creation, and social safety net programming. The world body can play a vital role as a convening power and knowledge broker, facilitating local-international and whole-of-society dialogue on how to adapt nexus programming concepts and approaches in the uncharted territories of Afghanistan’s fast evolving and highly challenging operating environment.

As bilateral aid likely recedes among most major donors, the UN could also serve as a chief oversight body and conduit of international assistance through multiple emergency trust funds. In doing so, it will provide de facto international development coordination assistance, with an eye to maintaining for all Afghan citizens the delivery of basic public services in such critical areas as healthcare, education, and power generation.

The world body is also well-placed to support the new lslamic Development Bank humanitarian trust fund and food security program for Afghanistan, announced on December 19, 2021 at a gathering of thirty Organisation of Islamic Cooperation foreign ministers and deputy foreign ministers in Islamabad.

Third, durable peace in Afghanistan can only be reached through high-level political will that is best expressed through an empowered mandate and sufficient resources for UNAMA (ideally led by a Muslim diplomat with the gravitas and skills demonstrated by the UN trouble-shooter Lakhdar Brahimi).

For the UN to be truly catalytic, it is vital that it is entrusted with a comprehensive mandate to perform its full suite of well-known and field-tested functions, including in the areas of reconciliation, development coordination, and humanitarian action. To  get beyond the blame game and build trust between the Taliban and other Afghan parties, the world body must be allowed to provide its good offices and other peaceful settlement of dispute tools to resuscitate an intra-Afghan dialogue toward reconciliation and political reform.

At the same time, the Afghan Future Thought Forum chaired by Fatima Gailani continues to be the only independent platform that brings together influential and diverse Afghan stakeholders (men and women), including Taliban and former government officials, to produce practical solutions for long-term peace and recovery in Afghanistan. These can be done and it must be done.

Olufemi Aduwo 
Permanent Representative of
CCDI to ECOSOC/United Nations

NB: Centre For Convention On Democratic is nongovernmental organisation operates and registered in Nigeria and Maryland-United States with consultative status of United Nations.