On This Day: The Statue of Liberty Arrives in New York Harbor
Today in history (1885), the dismantled Statue of Liberty, a gift of friendship from the people of France to Americans, arrived in New York.
usa
On This Day: The Couple Sentenced to Death for Espionage
Today in history (1951), Julius Rosenberg and Ethel Rosenberg (née Greenglass) were sentenced to death under Section 2 of the Espionage Act of 1917
On This Day: The Largest Suicide in the United States of America
On this day in 1997, an anonymous caller directed police to a mansion outside San Diego where authorities discovered 39 victims of a mass suicide, the largest mass suicide on U.S. soil.
On This Day: Genesis of the USA’s War on Iraq
President George W. Bush announced in a televised address, “At this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger.”
The Afghanistan Fiasco by Tony Alika-Igwebuike.
What we should blame Biden for, and not just him but administrations before him too, is that they funded both players in the new theater of war that’s about to unravel in that region now. ISIS, the Taliban, and everything in between were overtly and covertly funded by the same people to destabilize different governments at different times.
Trump’s Neo-American fascism is close to the tipping point.
As you grow older, you’ll see white men cheat black men every day of your life, but let me tell you something and don’t you forget it—whenever a white man does that to a black man, no matter who he is, how rich he is, or how fine a family he comes from, that white man is trash. ~ Harper Lee Donald Trump’s style and leadership will remain a thesis objective for scholars long after he has left the stage. A few months before he shocked the world with a victory over Hilary Clinton to become the 45th President of the United States, I had read a report of Trump’s response to the tragic massacre in Orlando by Omar Mateen, the radical son of a Muslim refugee. Candidate Trump in his usual manner had condemned the political left while standing in solidarity with the LGBT community. He warned about the dire threat of radical Islam, and further reiterated his initial call for a blanket ban of Muslim immigrants. He said, “When I’m elected, I will suspend immigration from areas of the world where there’s a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies until we fully understand how to end these threats. After a full, long overdue security assessment we will develop a responsible immigration policy that serves the interests and values of America.” After two and a half years in the saddle, Trump has shown no intention of throttling down. Rather he has continued to ramp up the ante with a barrage of unhinged typo infested twitter rants and gusty excoriation of enemies and even allies. Hardly will a day pass by without an offensive statement coming out of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. His recent attack on four congresswomen of colour has been widely condemned and quite rightly so. But like I keep saying, POTUS 45 is a lot smarter than many people think. This new manoeuvre appears to be a well thought out campaign strategy to put the democrats in a spot because his words cannot legally be labelled racist. This perhaps explains why the impeachment motion by Rep. Al Green was roundly defeated by a 332–95 vote. Whatsmore if some equally offensive utterances attributed to those four have been applauded by the same section of the media why would they now be irked? Some would argue that whatever xenophobic statements credited to the ‘squad’ — as they are now known — cannot possibly have the same impact since they are not in the white house but together these four congresswomen command an increasing number of followers that could significantly affect the outcome of the 2020 race. And Donald Trump knows this. However, the truth is that his latest pastime, though a political scheme is not a new phenomenon. It brings with it a nauseous reminiscence of a past when America built different types of walls in a bid to preserve the warped hallucination of white supremacy as I will illustrate presently. Besides the fact that the initial US Congress started work in 1790 by restricting eligibility for naturalisation to the freeborn and the white, immigrants were still pouring into the country for much of the nineteenth century. However, at the peak of the immigration boom in 1921, a certain Calvin Coolidge penned an article which suggested that the teeming number of immigrants was an impediment to national development. Citing elite scientific scholars from the Ivy League, Coolidge who will later become the country’s Vice President argued that “biological laws tell us that certain divergent people will not mix or blend” and that “the dead weight of alien accretion stifles national progress”. Together with some leading academics, the new Vice President sought to rationalise ethnically based racism by propagating the theory that certain immigrant races were biologically immune to diseases that would normally harm others. Asians were especially targeted. Italians, Slavics and even Jews were not spared as media editorials and op-eds ran savage pieces disparaging them as “Asiatic hordes and swines living in vast masses of filth that would kill a white man”. It didn’t take long for Congress to acquiesce and subsequently the Johnson-Reed Act which is perhaps the harshest immigration law in US history was passed. And just like Trump’s recent Muslim ban, immigrants were shut out of America based on their origin. Ever since then racist scholars have deployed dubious anthropology and questionable theories to propound the genetic superiority of the so-called ‘Great Race’. So you see, for the uninitiated, Trump’s political foray into neo American fascism may be as offensive as his wall and immigration policies are unpleasant but they are not dystopian actions that Americans and indeed the world are witnessing for the first time from Washington DC. For all its glittering immigration record, American history is dotted with unsavoury expositions of xenophobic assaults on immigrants, and oftentimes these attacks have been driven by race-based nativism. But then the racists never had a free ride. They have always met a more than capable opposition in the liberals and a robust pushback from Americans both white and coloured. Together these groups struggled and made sacrifices through the civil rights movement that culminated in the passage of several laws in the 1960s. Of particular note is the 1965 Immigration And Nationality Act which abrogated the use of national origin quotas thereby ensuring that the country’s immigration policies made it stronger in diversity as some of the following facts from a recent article in Time Magazine disclose. In the US, 1 in 4 tech companies established from 1995–2005 had an immigrant as either the founder, president, CEO or CTO. Over 70% of the tech workers employed in Silicon Valley are immigrants and over 60% of the 25 biggest US tech companies were founded by immigrants. Apple’s Steve Jobs was the son of a Syrian immigrant and Google’s Sergey Brin is a Russian immigrant who first stepped on US soil with his parents at the tender age of six. In 2017, Fortune listed 500 companies, 43% of which
South Africa needs to box clever in its David versus Goliath duel with Trump
Recent actions by US President Donald Trump’s administration are severely straining relations with South Africa’s new government led by President Cyril Ramaphosa. And relations between the two governments are likely to worsen. The first blow was last month’s threat by Trump’s UN Ambassador Nikki Haley that countries unwilling to tow the US line would be punished. According to a list of the 2017 General Assembly vote counts released in March, South Africa was one of the 10 least supportive countries. It voted with the US only 18% of the time. More recently, Ramaphosa’s expressed disappointment at Trump’s withdrawal from Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran is likely to raise the US president’s ire, especially as South Africa presses ahead with plans to expand trade with Iran. And relations between the two countries could sour further following South Africa’s decision to recall its ambassador to Israel in protest against the killing by the Israeli army of over 50 Palestinians protesting against the relocation of the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. The relocation came after Trump recognised the disputed holy city Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. South Africa has a lot to lose. As the only liberal democracy on the State Department’s list of ten UN members most critical of US policies, it is also the only one that benefits substantially from extensive trade and assistance agreements with the US. Trump’s announcement that South Africa wouldn’t be given exemption from his recent unilateral hikes in tariffs on US imports of steel and aluminium has not yet been linked to its UN voting record. But commentators have raised this possibility. Losing out on the exemption could cost South Africa 7,500 jobs. The impact on the country’s economy could be far worse if Trump moves against South African manufactured products that currently enjoy special access to US markets under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). In my view this threat may be exaggerated. And Trump’s targeting of South Africa would be rightly criticised as an attempt to undermine Ramaphosa’s efforts to reform and revitalise his nation’s troubled democracy and economy. Given the size of the US economy relative to South Africa’s, many will view this as another case of David versus Goliath, with most rooting for David. South Africa’s challenge will be to exploit those conditions and facts that might disarm its more powerful adversary. Several are already evident. Disarming Trump First, the timing of the Trump administration’s actions are happening just as Ramaphosa’s commitment to redress corruption and misrule under his predecessor Jacob Zuma is receiving international recognition and praise. In addition, Ramaphosa is embellishing South Africa’s image in a year-long domestic and international campaign celebrating the 100th anniversary of the birth of the iconic Nelson Mandela. He is pledging fresh and determined efforts to uphold the Mandela legacy. In this spirit, Ramaphosa lobbied and received unanimous African support for South Africa’s bid for another two-year term on the UN Security Council. This is almost certain to be affirmed next month by the UN General Assembly in a vote that’s bound to raise South Africa’s standing internationally. The following month former US president Barack Obama comes to Johannesburg to deliver the annual Mandela lecture. The world will once again be reminded of Mandela’s values and ideals, as well as the contrasts between Trump’s character and that of his predecessor. US President Donald Trump. EPA-EFE/Michael Reynolds Second, it’s worth revisiting the State Department’s UN voting scorecard. The votes show that the mood of the General Assembly has become much more hostile since Trump became president. On the 92 issues that required UN General Assembly votes last year, the US was backed in only 31% of its resolutions – the lowest level of support since 2008. This reflects the fact that Trump’s immediate predecessors tended to be pragmatic. Although for decades majorities in the General Assembly disagreed with the US on issues such as Palestinian rights, and the merits of US military adventures, there was nevertheless cooperation in other areas. But Trump has long been dismissive of the UN and multi-lateralism in general as of little value or importance to the US. Had South Africa voted with the US a few more times it would have joined the league of African states such as Kenya (20%), Ethiopia (21%) and Nigeria (22%). China (22%), Brazil (23%), and India (25%) aren’t much higher. Third, the US claim that it was refusing to exempt South African from the steel and aluminium tariff hikes for “national security” reasons was laughable and might not survive World Trade Organisation scrutiny. South Africa supplies less than 2% of these commodities to the US. Yet the US saw fit to exempt nearly 60% of steel exports from the US’s European and other allies. Fears that Trump may try to abrogate other South Africa preferences that allow imports of manufactured products, notably BMW Series 3 and Mercedes C Class automobiles, with a lot more jobs at stake, are understandable. South Africa should lobby a receptive US Congress to prevent this. Bi-partisan majorities recently renewed duty-free access until 2025, after protracted and successful negotiations with South Africa. South Africa can also draw on Congressional goodwill that so far has resisted Trump’s attempts to cut development assistance to Africa, including SA. And finally, the business community has responded positively to Ramaphosa’s emissaries seeking support for his global campaign to raise USD$100 billion of investments for the country. Standing up to a bully There are many entrenched networks of cooperation between South Africa and the US among sister cities, provinces and states, civic organisations, educational and scientific exchanges, and various cultural and historical ties. They can all help to shield South Africa from Trump’s bullying. Other countries, uncertain about how to respond to Trump, may not have the same means that South Africa has to connect directly and extensively with the American people. But, if Pretoria is willing to stand up to Trump, it might encourage African and other smaller countries to
On Trump’s Muslim ban by Nze Anizor
I neither believe nor accept that religion is the problem of Nigeria or the world. Religion is just a crutch which people, tribes or countries fighting for land, economic or political supremacy use to justify their blood lust. Ban religion and they will locate another crutch quickly. So Islam is violent? Are there no Muslims in South Western Nigeria? Most of the skirmishes between ‘alayes‘ and Hausas or Igbos in Lagos are purely tribal and have nothing whatsoever to do with religion. How come most of the religious violence in Nigeria is located in the Northern part of the country. Are there no Muslims in Gambia, Senegal, etc? Are there no Muslims in the UAE, Iran, etc? In reality, Nigeria is one of the very few places on earth which has a strong central government but still has a problem with violence tied to religion. Islamic violence in Libya, Syria, and Iraq became issues with the breakdown of their central govt. The implication, therefore, is that we really do not have as strong a central govt as we like to pretend. Coming to Trump’s ban, for me it is neither here nor there, especially seeing as it is temporary. Affected countries are free to retaliate if they feel injured enough. I have no doubt the ban won’t last but the inherent message will reverberate for long. A possible advantage is that people who intend to set their country on fire and flee to the USA may have a rethink. Build your country and you won’t care if another man bans you from entering his own country. Build your country and you can thump your nose at Trump and his ban and walls. I won’t mind if he bans Nigerian government officials from entering the USA . Maybe then they will pay the desired attention to responsible governance. I stand with Lolly Daskal. Nze tweets @okenze
