WARNING! Why Ghana should Not Sign The IEPA

Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama

Any decision on the Interim Economic Partnership Agreement (IEPA) will trigger a range of effects on different actors. But the overall effect will be that Ghana will be worse off if it signs the Interim EPA  agreement.. This is because the costs of signing the agreement far outweigh the benefits of signing the Trade deal. At the same time, what can be saved from not signing can be used to meet the problem posed by not signing it. The other way round is not possible.

A. Benefits of Signing the IEPAs/Costs of Not signing IEPA

In the absence of the IEPA, 70% of Ghana's current export to the European Union (EU) market will enter duty free. Of the reaming 30% which will face duties, the most important in terms of trade volumes and values are: tuna, (facing 18-20% duties); fruits and vegetables (2-8%) and cocoa butter and paste (4-6%). If Ghana signs the IEPAs, these products will continue to enjoy preferential market access, and not pay the relevant duties.

But if the EPAs are not signed, then, 'based on United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) and South Centre's calculations, and based on their current export volumes, these companies will pay a maximum combined import duties to the European Union of a tune of $52 million  annually.

In addition, by the account of the companies themselves, a maximum of about 4, 000- 4,5000 jobs will be threatened.

B. Cost of Signing/Benefits of Not signing IEPA.

By contrast to the above, signing of the EPAs will trigger the following range of costs.

a) Imports effects on Domestic and Regional Market

The signing of the agreement will open up the market to about 80% to imported goods from European Union. Since most of these European goods enjoy better conditions of production, they will out-compete domestic products which are either similar or substitutable. Even though there is an attempt to protect some domestic sectors through an sensitive list, this list is neither coherent or rigorous. So most of the sectors supposedly protected will suffer anyway.

According to MOTI's own figures, these sectors that will be most likely affected are the most dynamic and innovative future industries, like pharmaceuticals; high-value added, like plywood, veneer, etc, as compared to lumber; which combined to be the most job-creating sectors.

These are also sectors that don't export to Europe, but rely on the domestic and regional market. Signing the IEPAs will destroy their domestic market. In addition, since the IEPA is bilateral, it will have the effect of blocking them out of the most important regional markets like Nigeria, which don't have the IEPA. And the full EPA, will open the regional market to competition, affecting them. These include pharmaceutical companies, wood products, wire weavers, plastic, pasta etc.

Jobs: From MOTI's analysis, the job losses in this already beleaguered manufacturing sector be a minimum of 43,000 direct jobs, with related indirect jobs across the economy escalating even further. This excludes means of livelihood in agriculture, etc.

b) Tariff Revenue

Signing the IEPA will cost government tariff revenue to the tune of $150million (according to MOTI) and $374 million (according to the United Nations and the South Centre) annually forgone on European imports. Thus not signing the IEPAs will save the country this amount.

c) Policy Space

The signing of the IEPAs will take away the use of tariff as a policy tool. Due to World Trade Organisation rules, performance and domestic content requirements related to goods have become strictly circumscribed, (in key instances prohibited outright) leaving tariffs and the price mechanism as the tool of choice for promoting domestic content and local procurement objectives (outside investment rules).

In addition, under the IEPA, export taxes which are also prohibited under the EPA. This could be used to make raw materials available for domestic use. A key example is the policy of scrap metal which is used to make the material available for local use.

Also funding of the EDIF and other similar initiatives from import duties will also be proscribed.

Furthermore, there is the issue of Most Favoured Nation (MFN) which basically bars Ghana from entering into any trade agreement with a third party. The rational of this clause in the agreement is to secure the interest of the EU and deprives Ghana the opportunity to enter any trade agreement with other developing countries such as China, India or Brazil.

d) Regional mechanisms and economic and political space.

ECOWAS region is an economic space. Most of the domestic job-creating industries export mainly or even to the regional market. Going it alone and signing the IEPA will attract retaliation from players which want to protect their market, e.g. Nigeria. There is also the budding regional financial, services, and infrastructure market that Ghanaian companies can tap into. It will also undermine common political solutions to common economic problems.

C. RECOMMENDATION

1.         Ghana should not sign the IEPA.

2.         To meet the challenges of the three export sectors which will face the combined duty of $52million, Government can raise the money out of its saving of $372 in tariff revenue to support such industries while they diversify their market. A significant number of countries are doing this, as confidential acts, including Namibia which is helping its beef sector diversify while holding signature of the IEPA at bay.

In any case, the preferences which the exporters currently enjoy, and which will be protected with the IEPA are being eroded, and will be very little by the end of the Doha round negotiations in WTO. So most Ghanaian exporters have to diversify in the long-term, and become competitive outside preferences.

3. What is more, not signing the IEPAs, the government will also save the domestic sector, jobs, future policy space, etc, which are practically priceless.

Source: Policy Brief by Third World Network.

Editorial

PLEASE LISTEN

There are indications that the Mahama administration is heading for a clash with the Trades Union Congress over the recent increases in utility tariffs.

This confrontation if it should happen will take a very long time to heal and Government will be worse off for it.

 It is important for Government to recognize that the TUC has been most co-operative with Government over the last 10 years or more.

This spirit of co-operation needs not be abused and it ought to be natured in the overall interest of working people.

 The Insight urges Government to listen to the cries of organized labour.

 If the Mahama administration fails to listen it will pay a very high price.

We hope that the Government will take our advice seriously.

Is Ghana’s Economy Heating Up?

Minister of Finance Seth Tekper

Asks Margaret Jackson

Suddenly, Ghana is besieged with cash flow or liquidity problem. There is talk everywhere about this situation. Whilst the country has not been able to meet its revenue targets, its overall expenditure on the other hand keeps growing, which has thrown the country’s 2013 budget out of gear.

At a recently held Meet-the-Press, Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, Seth Terkper, stated that Ghana’s expected revenue of GH¢14.15 billion fell to GH¢11.9 billion, which represents a whopping shortfall of GH¢2.2 billion (16%) at the end of the second quarter.

This year has experienced the removal of subsidies on fuel and other utilities to help narrow the fiscal hole. In addition, government has widened the tax net to include other areas which previously were ignored. There have also been deep cuts in government expenditure to help balance the budget.

But all these interventions have not helped that much as the country continues to experience liquidity problem, which is being felt everywhere. The economy has become front and centre with even market women taking the centre stage in talking in earnest about rising cost of goods and services.

The government has attributed the problem to the rising wage bill which represents about 72 percent of the country’s total income in addition to the non-disbursement of certain grants by Ghana’s Development Partners for this year.

As a result of these problems, we have recently seen the price hike of electricity and water by the Electricity Corporation of Ghana and Ghana Water Company respectively which has created uproar in many quarters.

Prices of sachet water, public transport fares, fish and other basic foods on the market have all gone up. The issue of unpaid salaries to nurses at the Korle Bu Teaching Hospital for the past 20 months has also not escaped the radar, whilst there have been series of industrial agitations and strikes coming from the corridors of teachers and doctors.

All these are pointers that the country’s economy is definitely heating up. Indeed if your income cannot match your expenditure, then you are in deep trouble. The situation even becomes worse when the Development Partners who tend to fund more than 50 percent of the country’s budget are not disbursing funds due to disagreements over the country’s rising expenditure which is more than 70 percent of the budget.

With Ghana being cuffed with the accolade as a lower middle income country, the situation even becomes more unsolidified because conventional loans and grants which previously flowed to the country have now become more difficult to tap into.

Ghana now stand at a crossroad as far as putting the economy back on track is concerned. It is gratifying that Seth Terkper has been able to identify the key ingredients that have negatively affected the budget for the past two quarters. But the government has to do more since time is not on its side.

The issues that have to be resolved with the country’s Development Partners in order to get the promised grants flowing as quickly as possible have to be done quickly since the heating economy is being felt everywhere. And whenever a country’s economy heats up, it does not bode well for the sitting government.

Fiscal discipline is another way to go. You don’t spend what you don’t have. Therefore, the government must ensure that the country’s expenditure bucket does not balloon beyond what has been budgeted for. Ghana is noted for swelling up its expenditure bucket year after year. I am yet to hear of a single year since independence whereby we have been able to balance our budget without any negative variance between income and expenditure. If we take a deep peek back, no past government will escape this fiscal indiscipline. This has been the bane of the country.

It is therefore time to spend within our projections. It does not help the country if we continue to spend more than our projections and then try to justify it. This will not cut it if we resort to this kind of financial indiscipline every year.

We always jump on the neck of government when something goes wrong with the economy, but we hardly blame companies and individuals who have become perpetual artful tax dodgers. If Ghanaians have been faithful and truthful with their tax obligations, there will not be any need for the government to rely on the benevolence of Development Partners for crumbs every year.

Even though the government has expanded the tax scope, there are miles and miles of holes still to cover. In Ghana today many of the big, medium and small scale businesses do not honour their tax obligations, yet it is these same businesses who have always been shouting on top of their voices against government. It is time some drastic measures are adopted in order to compel those businesses who have been dodging the payment of taxes to do so. If Ghana can get at least 50 to 60 percent of businesses to honour their tax obligations, government will not go begging year after year.

We have big leakages at the country’s ports of entry, whereby custom officers collude with importers to cheat the country big time. Imported goods are under-invoiced by some paid custom officers leading the country to lose millions of cedis every month at the ports of entry. Even with the establishment of the Special Tax Force by the Presidency to curtail such collusions, some custom officers have developed new ways to go around the tax force.

We have tens of thousands of sellers all over the country who do not pay any taxes. Just interview some of the sellers on the streets especially those selling phone cards and you will be amazed to hear how much they make every week. Some are able to make more than GH¢1,500 every week, yet they pay nothing in terms of taxes, but leave piles of refuse on the streets for the government to clean up.

Some tax collectors from the metropolis and districts are known to have their own tickets and receipts books which they issue to traders and pocket the proceeds. This is an age old problem that needs fresh eyes. We cannot continue to cry about shortfalls in revenue if we refuse to address such gaping issues.

If you miss your forecast by 2-5 points, you can be forgiven, but if you miss your forecast for the first two quarters of the year by a whopping 16 points, then there is a serious problem on hand. The Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning has a lot of explanation to do as to why they missed the forecast by a whopping GH¢2.2 billion, which has led to a deep negative variance between income as compared to expenditure. Something is definitely wrong with the projections made.

Economic forecast is a serious business that is why analysts always make sure that they are very conservative with their numbers or projections.  You do not want to miss the forecast by a large percentage points to give room for so many whys. That is the reason why Seth Terkper has a lot of explanation to give. And with economic or financial forecasts you do not wait for six long months to come out when your numbers are not tweaking right. You have every right to do a re-forecast if you realize down the road that your numbers are off. Waiting for two quarters is too long a time.

The country’s Economic Advisors have to take a closer look at the forecast made by the finance ministry. It will be a huge embarrassment if the advisors do not “taste” the numbers being projected before being finalized.

 The economic heat is on, whether you like it or not. But it will take the collective efforts of all Ghanaians to steer the economy from the current stormy weather. The wastage in the public sector which takes more than 70 percent of the country’s budget is too huge.

Thousands of workers are being paid every month for doing practically nothing. These workers are not difficult to find in the ministries and other public institutions. We have instances whereby there are too many secretaries in the ministries. Apart from the ministers, all the directors and other notables have secretaries, messengers and drivers who are too many to count and they are all charged at the end of the month to the public purse.

If government is looking to cut down on wastage in the public sector it must be bold enough to cut down on the huge employment in the public sector. Workers who are paid for doing nothing must be pruned from the public sector to save the government some money.

These are some of the issues that have to engage the attention of Ghanaians when they discuss issues concerning the economy. We had doctors who laid down their tools for well over a month this year and then rushed to the banks to collect their salaries at the end of the month. Nobody raised issues over this, and imagine the uproar if government had dared to withhold the salaries for the period. If you don’t work for something, you don’t get paid!

 We have reached a point whereby the government should bring stakeholders together to brainstorm on the heating up of the economy. It should not be all talk, but concrete steps have to be taken stabilize the economy, because when the economy heats up we all feel it since we all “Dey inside”. 

CHIEF JUSTICE DRAGGED TO COURT

Chief Justice Georgina Wood

By Christian Kpesese

The Adansihemaa, Nana Kwantwiwaa Apomaa II has filed a Writ of Summons asking the Kumasi High Court, Human Rights Division to place an injunction on the Chief Justice, Mrs Georgina Theodora Wood restraining her from transferring a case involving the Adansihemaa and two others verses the Asantehene,Otumfuo Osei Tutu to another judge.

 The writ cites possible bias against the plaintiffs should the order of the Chief Justice be granted for the transfer of Suit No.HRC 20/2013.

In a statement of claim backed by an Affidavit, Nana Kwantwiwaa Apomaa II, Adansihemaa the first plaintiff acting on authority and consent of the 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs, Opanin Kwabena Kusi and Opanin Yaw Amponsah respectively, argued that the defendant, her Lordship, the Chief Justice lacked the competence to make the Transfer Order since she does so in utter contempt of and gross abuse of the powers vested in her by the Constitution as the Chief Justice of Ghana.

The action of the Chief Justice, the plaintiffs observed was contrary to the common law and against statutory and Constitutional prohibitions in Article 296 (a) and (b). Provisions that outlaw arbitrariness and capriciousness of public officers like the Chief Justice.

According to them, the defendant acted most unfairly and most unreasonably without due process and without first hearing from the presiding Justice of the High Court and the lawyer involved.

They alleged that, the transfer is being done to accommodate the dictates of the Asantehene as a satisfaction of the symbiotic relationship between the defendant and Manhyia even though the action was jaundiced.

The Plaintiffs were convinced that, the current judge adjudicating the case is the right person to see the case to its logical conclusion hence are against any unlawful and unjustifiable move by the Chief Justice to transfer the case to another Justice or court to satisfy the dictates of the Asantehene and Manhyia.

They prayed the court to uphold the supremacy of the constitution which is sacrosanct.

How long will the Earth live?

By Irina Shlionskaya

Even if life on this planet does not cease as a result of a global climate disaster, a nuclear war or a collision with an asteroid, sooner or later the world must end. In 1.75 billion years, the Earth could become uninhabitable under the influence of cosmic processes, experts believe.  

A star of an average mass similar to the Sun is in a state of the hydrogen cycle for most of its life. When it burns its entire stock of hydrogen fuel and hydrogen in its core turns into helium, thermonuclear burning of hydrogen   continues in the periphery. At this time, the luminosity of the object increases, its outer layers expand and the surface temperature goes down. The size of the star increases by about 100 times, and it becomes a red giant. It stays in this phase significantly less time than in the hydrogen stage - a few millions of years.

Finally, the resulting helium nucleus cannot withstand its own weight and begins to shrink. If the object is sufficiently massive, the increase in temperature may cause transformation of helium into heavier elements, sequentially to carbon, oxygen, silicon and iron. For the stars of average weight this period may last billions of years. For our planet hour "X" may come in a time period between 1.75 to 3.25 billion years. By the time the Sun will warm up and increase in volume. The Earth will subsequently fall out of the so-called habitable zone.

It is believed that a mandatory feature of a habitable zone is water. This means that the planet must be placed at a distance from its mother star that would ensure that the water is present in liquid form. By the indicated time Earth's oceans will evaporate. But even before that the conditions necessary for the development of complex life forms, including the human race, will disappear.

At the same time, a planet's location in the habitable zone does not mean that complex life forms will be found there. On planet Earth, first simplest cells appeared about 4 - 3.8 billion years ago, whereas insects only 450 - 410 million years ago, dinosaurs - 225 million years, flowering plants - 140 - 135 million years ago, and humans in their present form only 400 - 225 thousand years ago. That is, the emergence of intelligent life has required almost 75 percent of the time allotted to the Earth. Scientists believe that if a planet stayed in the habitable zone for no more than a million years, we should not be looking for living organisms there.

The development of life is influenced by other factors. For example, planets may be too large or, on the contrary, too small; the presence of a mixture of atmospheric gases on them may be unfavorable for life; and finally, there may be no atmosphere at all. Experts say that if we were to arbitrarily take any planet from the habitable zone, it would be far more likely that there is no life on it, at least in the usual forms.

A team of researchers from the University of East Anglia (UK) led by Andrew Rushby decided to base their calculations on the amount of time a planet spends in the habitable zone. They took into account the current understanding of the evolution of stars involved in the so-called main sequence. The more massive the star is, the shorter is its life cycle.

Toward the end of their existence, planets become hotter and grow in size. As a result, the zone of habitability shifts. On planets that are potentially habitable it gets too hot, and the life is dying, but there are favorable conditions on planets whose surface was a cold and dry desert.

Rushby and his colleagues "tested" the model they created on Earth, Mars and other planets of the seven different star systems. It turned out that the Earth can survive for 7.79 billion years (4.5 billion have already passed), and it will spend 6.29 billion years in the habitable zone.

Interestingly, for the rest of the planets the age range was very large. For example, Kepler-22 is to live for 4.3-6.1 billion years, while Gliese 581 d will live 42.4-54.72 billion years. That is, the latter will survive with favorable conditions for life ten times longer than our solar system.

Sooner or later we will certainly face the issue of resettlement of humans to other celestial bodies. The most realistic option today is Mars. First, it is the closest planet to us, and second, it will remain in the habitability zone for another six billion years. As for the next closest to the earth planet suitable for life, according to experts, it should be sought within ten light years away from the Earth. However, so far it has not been discovered.

U.N. Denies Its Troops Brought Cholera To Haiti

UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon

 By G. Dunkel

The United Nations took 15 months to contemplate a claim that a cholera epidemic, which killed more than 8,600 Haitians and sickened over 680,000, was caused by the U.N.’s “peacekeeping” force, Minustah, dumping excrement into the Meye River. The pollution eventually worked its way into the water supplies that millions of Haitians use for drinking, washing, agriculture and bathing.

Haiti had no recorded cases of cholera for two centuries before the outbreak, which began in 2010. This was shortly after U.N. troops, some of whom came from other countries where cholera is widespread, were stationed there.

On Feb. 21, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called Haitian President Michael Martelly to tell him that the U.N. was not going to “receive” the complaint — it was going to use its “sovereign immunity” to reject it. The choice of words was ironic. Haitians lack immunity to the disease precisely because their country had been cholera-free.

Martelly, who has had Washington’s support since he went along with the U.S. ousting of the popular president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, in 2004, did not file the claim and in fact opposed it. It was the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti, together with the Bureau des Avocats Internationaux, that filed this claim with an internal U.N. office.

The Associated Press, Al-Jazeera and YouTube postings from Haiti have amply documented the dumping. A DNA analysis made by a U.S. doctor specializing in cholera, Daniele Lantagne, showed that the strain in Haiti is genetically nearly identical to cholera in a South Asian country where the U.N. soldiers had lived. (BBC, Oct. 22, 2012)

The U.N.’s insistence that its fault wasn’t clearly established was the diplomatic equivalent of saying its excrement smells like roses.

The Haitian people and their leaders two centuries ago shocked the racist world surrounding them by defeating the mighty French army and driving their French slave masters out. 

They then built a nation using their own language of Creole, along with a literature, economy and culture that suited their history and needs. Ever since, imperialists of all stripes have maligned, misrepresented and distorted what happens in Haiti, along with mounting direct economic, political, diplomatic and military assaults.

The U.N. is obviously hoping that Haiti’s undeserved reputation as a “poor, failed, dilapidated state” will mitigate the anger created by its refusal to compensate the victims of its carelessness.

The Minustah troops gave an international cover to imperialist occupation, replacing U.S., Canadian and French soldiers there. If the veil provided by the U.N. were lifted, it would reveal the real interests these imperialist powers have in Haiti, its strategic position and economic resources.

The imperialists have used Haitian counterrevolutionaries, from the coup plotters against the independence hero, Jean-Jacques Dessalines, to the more modern Duvaliers, father and son, to try to re-establish their domination.

It is easy to see how the U.S. regards the Duvaliers as compared to Aristide, the progressive former president of Haiti. In 1986, while the Haitian people were rebelling against the Duvalier tyranny, the U.S. Air Force allowed Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier to drive his BMW onto a cargo plane, which delivered it and him to the French Riviera.

In 2004, President Aristide and his spouse were kidnapped by U.S. Special Forces, who forced them onto a U.S. plane and deposited them in the Central African Republic.

It took seven years of mass protests before Aristide was allowed back.

When Duvalier Jr. returned to Haiti in 2011, he used travel documents issued by the Haitian Consulate in Paris and wound up being charged on human rights violations committed during his rule from 1971 to 1986.

But after Martelly, a longtime Duvalier supporter, was inaugurated in August of 2011, all the serious charges against Duvalier were dropped on a variety of pretexts.

Martelly even granted Duvalier a diplomatic passport as a former president, and then tried to indict Aristide this January on charges widely considered bogus. (Haïti-Liberté. Jan. 11)

Mass pressure forced Martelly’s government to drop the charges against Aristide. Popular anger against impunity for Duvalier Jr. finally grew so strong that a tumultuous, angry hearing on charges against him was held on Feb. 28.

Even under foreign occupation and a reactionary president, the Haitian people are still demanding justice.

Kikwete Beats War Drums 

Jakaya Kikwete

By Giles Muhame,

Last Thursday’s speech came as Tanzania’s relations with Malawi over the ownership of Lake Nyasa, which is known as Lake Malawi in the neighboring country, continued to deteriorate.

Tanzania has also not been at good terms with Rwanda over allegations that Kikwete’s government supports the DRC-based FDLR militia, a group that draws its fighters and leaders from perpetrators of the 1994 genocide.

Kikwete made the remarks during the country’s heroes day celebrations. He laid a wreath on the monument built to remember soldiers who died in the 1978/9 war that toppled the regime of Idi Amin in Uganda.

Backed by several exiled Ugandan fighters, Tanzania under then President Julius Nyerere managed to cross Kagera before seizing Kampala.

Since then, Tanzania has not participated in any major military operation, with observers questioning its ability to confront and defeat war-experienced countries such as Rwanda.

Rwanda fought for several years in DRC and actively participated in the toppling of President Mobutu.

It also hunted down and decimated over 90 percent of FDLR militia which attempted a comeback through Northern Rwanda. The country’s forces have also participated in peacekeeping missions in Darfur, Haiti among other countries.

But Kikwete appears determined to raise hopes among his countrymen that Tanzanian forces can take on Malawi and even Rwanda in case of any eventuality.

Anyone who tries to provoke our country will face consequences. Our country is safe and the army is strong and ready to defend our country, said Kikwete without directly mentioning Malawi or Rwanda.

We will not allow anyone to mess with our country, or try to take away our territory. We will deal with them just as we dealt with [former Ugandan ruler Idi] Amin, he added.

Kikwete’s warmongering came against the backdrop of Malawian President Joyce Banda’s speech early this month that her government was not ready for any interim deal on the border dispute until the wrangle over sovereignty is amicably settled.

She further clearly stated that her government would not accept any deal of the Lake’s usage until the matter is resolved.

Malawi and Rwanda are yet to respond to Kikwete’s remarks.

Lake Malawi dispute

The geographic name of the lake is disputed. Malawi claims that it is named Lake Malawi, whereas other countries bordering on the lake, such as Mozambique and Tanzania, claim that the name is Lake Nyasa. The origin of the dispute over the name has its background in geopolitical disputes that began before the independence of Malawi was achieved in 1964, when the territory had been known as Nyasaland.

Further complications emerged for political reasons during the 1960s, when President Hastings Banda of Malawi became the only African leader to establish diplomatic relations with the white-ruled country of South Africa.

This recognition of the South African regime was fiercely repudiated by almost all other African leaders, including President Julius Nyerere of Tanzania.

This contrasting in policies toward South Africa gave some more impetus to disputes between Malawi and Tanzania, especially concerning the name of the lake itself — the water boundary between the two countries.

The partition of the lake’s surface area between Malawi and Tanzania is under dispute. Tanzania claims that the international border runs through the middle of the lake.

On the other hand, Malawi claims the whole of the surface of this lake that is not in Mozambique, including the waters that are next to the shoreline of Tanzania.

Both sides cite the Heligoland Treaty of 1890 between Great Britain and Germany concerning the border. A wrinkle in this dispute occurred when the British colonial government, just after they had captured Tanganyika from Germany, placed all of the waters of the lake under a single jurisdiction, that of the territory of Nyasaland, without a separate administration for the Tanganyika portion of the surface. Later in colonial times two jurisdictions were established.

In 1954 an agreement was signed between the British and the Portuguese making the middle of the lake their boundary with the exception of Chisamulo Island and Lokoma Island which were kept by the British and are now part of Malawi.

The dispute came to a head in 1967 when Tanzania officially protested to Malawi, however nothing was settled.

Occasional flare-ups of conflict occurred during the 1990s, and also sometimes in the 21st century, have impacted fishing rights, particularly those of Tanzanian fishermen who reside on the lakeshore, and who have occasionally been accused of fishing in Malawian waters. In 2012, Malawi’s oil exploration initiative brought the issue to the fore, with Tanzania demanding that exploration cease until the dispute was settled.

US spy regime cheating public

By Harry J. Bentham

When receiving the Sam Adams Award recently, whistleblower Edward Snowden reaffirmed that the US spy regime is nothing but a tyranny. For those who still have doubts about the significance of Snowden’s disclosures, it is important to listen closely to recent words from Snowden and any other political comments he may later offer in justification of his contributions to freedom and democracy.

The criminal spy regime, Snowden acknowledges, gives immunity to officials who tell lies to the public but will “stop at nothing” to enforce a truly twisted sense of justice that vilifies and punishes people who make sacrifices in the cause of transparency and truth. No-one can trust a known liar. No one can take the risk of trusting the so-called authority of this violent spy regime that makes every effort to bully any heroic behavior while protecting cowardice and a worthless fascist value system that exists to coddle tyrants and extend their lives. 

What has been happening as a consequence of the marriage of spy technology and regime unaccountability in the US is a paralyzing loss of legitimacy that no system can survive. To have any claim to be able to administer justice, states cannot profess to believe might is right or that small individuals must be vilified in place of a greater authority simply because the latter has the ability to spread intimidation, torture, death and compliance. 

The greatest examples of moral behavior have been found in the work of individuals who suffered for their faith, including religious saints and modern activists like Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela, rather than in hideous concentrations of faceless power and impunity like the US spy regime. Snowden is exceptional enough to morally eclipse governments, not simply because of the significance of his actions, but because of his own moral character. That is affirmed in his decision to make sacrifices for what he knew to be true. 

The opposite moral extreme of Snowden’s behavior is found in the lives of the infamous war criminals Bush and Blair, who cower behind security guards and corrupt elites because they know it isn’t worth dying for the worthless lies that will be with them to their very sad graves. It cannot be doubted that lives of cowardice, lying and the shirking of consequences deserve to be loathed by us all as disgusting and unjustifiable. 

Some have framed the issue of the NSA spying scandal as illustrating a dilemma between privacy and security, but this swallows the propaganda poison assuming the spy regime is living in a time of emergency. Every fascist regime has always pushed people to have this assumption. Attempting to push the situation to a “state of emergency” of sorts, with talk of security, is evidence that the spy regime is only concerned about justifying totalitarian excesses and depicting everyone as an intolerable threat to itself. 

Talk of security means the US spy regime is desperately trying to mend its image in the wake of the spying revelations, by suggesting the spy regime is really a “sheep in wolf’s clothing” and ought to be trusted yet again. The truth, however, is clear: it is the wool that has been removed from our eyes by Snowden, and the wolf behind that wool is very conspicuous. 

What is threatening the security of the public is the unjustifiable policy in regions like the Middle East that has never been adequately explained to the public, and gets Western states involved in wars that are not their concern. Taking the public for sheep, and consistently making policy against their interests with no adequate justification, the spy regime and its allies cannot possibly have any democratic credentials left. 

Top actions of existential importance to the Western public, such as going to war or violating rights, are taken by rulers without any consideration of what the public actually finds to be conscionable. Decisions are made by cabals who are convinced that the public are too sheepish to understand what is in their own interests, and these cabals believe it is their right as democratic “representatives” to risk their constituents’ lives in unconscionable wars and reckless flirtations with terrorism that they would never risk their own lives for. 

The best description of what Snowden discovered is a tyranny. Artistotle considered a tyranny to be a regime in which the laws are made to protect the interests of the people making those laws, rather than protecting the public. In a system where the law protects lying officials and persecutes people who make conscientious choices to speak the truth, we ought to have little doubt that the label of tyranny applies. 

The US spy regime has lost any democratic justification because it has violated the trust of the people it claimed to protect. By supervising populations both domestic and abroad in a truly patronizing and tyrannical fashion, the spy regime proved that it is no real democracy and uses that word only to cynically offer power to self-indulgent tyrants who cheated their way into supposedly representing people. The only reason a domestic spy program’s existence would be kept unknown to the public is to violate the trust of the public, escape any need to ask for consent, and avoid having to face the victims. 

The top threat to the public of the Western world is the increasing concentration of evil at the hearts of governments. They are the forces of tyranny, intolerance and the forcing of innocent people against their will. These three are strongly evident in the crimes of the spy regime. 

It is more and more apparent that the US regime and its allies have no principles worth defending, and simply hide behind their technology to brutalize their opponents. No satisfactory justification for the violation of the trust of the public and their privacy has been given, and it is certain that anything less than the death of the spy regime is unacceptable to democracy. 

The once-powerful myth of the US fighting against tyranny around the world is no longer believable. Global tyranny and evil are concentrated in the US spy regime, in its lack of concern for the security of its own public or the freedom of the world.