DANGER: Professor Emi-Reynolds Warns Against Sliding Windows

Professor Emi Reynolds

By Emmanuel Kwame Amoh

The Acting Director General of the Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NRA), Professor Geoffrey Emi-Reynolds, has advised Ghanaians to return to the use of louvers as windows to avoid the effects of concentration of radiation.

Prof. Emi-Reynolds says the rise in the use of sliding windows as part of new building technology could contribute to the build-up of radioactive particles emitted from the use of gadgets such as microwaves, mobile phones and refrigerators at homes.

He gave this advice at a media workshop aimed at creating awareness on radiation, its uses and benefits as well as its harmful effects among the media.

Prof Emi-Reynolds lamented the recent phenomenon of many Ghanaian houses being completely sealed with little ventilation. He says though air-conditioners are meant for the tropical region, especially for buildings with sliding windows, radiations emitted from various gadgets at homes do get concentrated as a result of the enclosed buildings.

He challenged Ghanaians to allow the free flow of air by going for louvers as windows. The Director of the Radiological Applications Department of the Authority, Abdel Razak Awudu, took participants of the workshop through radiation and its effects. He mentioned shielding, reduction in time and increase in distance as three major ways of reducing the harmful effects of radiation.

For instance, he recommended the use of ear pieces of mobile phones as the best in cases where users will have a long phone talk. The workshop took media personnel through the regulation regime in Ghana Legal officer Ebenezer Appiah Opare took participants through some of the nuclear regulations under the Nuclear Regulatory Act, Act 895. He mentioned safety, security and safeguards as the effective ways of implementing the regulations.

Source: 3news.com

Editorial

STOP THE WAR

The demand by President Donald Trump that South Korea should pay as much as US $1billion for the THAAD missiles the US has deployed in the country is the clearest indication that war on the Korean peninsula would not be cheap.

If the THAAD missiles alone would cost US$1billion, then what will be the cost of all the other weapons which would be poured into that useless war?

This expenditure is against the backdrop of growing inequality and a decline in access to social services in South Korea.

In our view, war on the Korean peninsula would not serve the interests of the Korean people who would die in their hundreds of thousands.

The Korean people like all people all over the world deserve peace and friends of Kore around the world have a responsibility to join the campaign for a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

Local Story:

Minister Renews Commitment

Ken Ofori Atta

By Godwill Arthur-Mensah/ Linda Baah

The Minister of Finance, Mr Ken Ofori-Atta, has given the assurance that the Government would collaborate with the relevant stakeholders in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

He said Ghana had proved to be a critical player throughout the negotiations of the SDGs adding that since their adoption she had remained committed to their implementation and monitoring.

Mr Ofori-Atta said this in a speech read on his behalf at Ghana's Data Roadmap Forum in Accra.

The forum aims at identifying data gaps and aligning national priorities towards achieving the United Nations Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.

The Minister said: ‘‘Ghana has remained committed to the goals, therefore, an SDGs Implementation Coordinating Committee has been established with representation from the Ghana Statistical Service, civil society organisations, the private sector and academia in realising the targets’’.

He said the Committee had been working to align the SDGs to national and regional economic priorities and galvanise support towards achieving the goals.

The Minister said the goals were underpinned by the commitment to peace and justice in all countries.

He said key among the goals were ending poverty and hunger, gender equality, recognising the equality of all people, clean water and energy and commitment to responsible consumption.

He said Ghana, through the Statistical Service, had been actively looking for new ideas and innovations externally to meet the data challenges of the goals.

He said the country had joined a global network for harnessing resources for meeting the SDGs and expressed optimism that the global partners would work towards meeting the target by 2030.

Dr Claire Melamed, the Executive Director of the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data, said data was key infrastructure for social programmes, therefore, for any society to progress there was the need to know more about the world around it and get new data sources.

She said the forum would enable data actors across the globe to share their experiences and opportunities in realising their goals.

Dr Melamed noted that Ghana had been a leader in the SDGs and, thus, had shown commitment and energy in realising them.

The two-day event brought together delegations from Kenya, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Denmark and the United States of America.

There were other delegations from some state institutions that were directly involved in data gathering and some civil society organisations across the country.

GNA         

AFRICA:                        

Africa and France: Marine Le Pen or Emmanuel Macron?

President Elect Macron with Le Pen

By Herbert Ekwe-Ekwe

For the French president and policy of francophonie Africa, from de Gaulle in 1958 to Hollande in 2017, all members of the French establishment, the operational plaque for action in the Elysée palace has been: invade, intimidate, manipulate, install, antagonise, ingratiate, indemnify, expropriate, invade, intimidate. Nothing in this election will change that – only Africans can.

Charles de Gaulle, Brazzaville, 1944: “Self-government [restoration-of-African-independence] must be rejected – even in the more distant future”.

François Mitterand, Paris, 1998: “Without Africa, France will have no history in the 21st century”.

Jacques Chirac, Paris, 2008: “[W]ithout Africa, France will slide down into the rank of a third [world] power”.

Jacques Godfrain, head of French foreign ministry, Paris, 1998: “A little country, with a small amount of strength, we can move a planet because [of our] … relations with 15 or 20 African countries”.

For the first time since the 1958 founding of the French 5th Republic by Charles de Gaulle, two supposedly outside politicians not from the alternate “right” (spectrum of Gaullist republicans) and “left” (socialists) parties of the country’s political establishment have won the stipulated first round of the recent French presidential election. Marine Le Pen of the front national and Emmanuel Macron of the en marche! (not totally an “outsider”, having been economy minister in the outgoing, unpopular Hollande government, quitting in August 2016 to form his so-called centrist movement) will now go on to contest for the decisive second round in a fortnight.

Tenor

Despite the tenor of the epigraphs (above) that illustrate, definitively, the role of Africa in France and French life, Africa hardly features as a substantive subject in French elections, not least last Sunday’s. Apart from the course and consequences of non-EU immigration in the country and tangentially Islamist terrorism which is viewed more as one in a range of manifestations of the aftermath of its history with the Middle East/Islamist world, French politicians, irrespective of ideological/political leanings do not find France’s relationship with Africa any contentious. Whatever may be differences in the “vision” of the future of France between Le Pen and Marcon, for instance, in the wake of the tumultuous “anti”-establishment aftermath of the poll, both accept the salient formulations encapsulated in each of the epigraphs on Africa and France, beginning with the founder of their 5th Republic, a right-wing politician, and including that of the respected socialist Mitterrand.

Equally, the duo Nicholas Sarkozy (“right”) and François Hollande (“left”) illustrate this trend. Even though Sarkozy belongs to the so-called establishment right, his thinking on Africa (see, for instance, his infamous Dakar, Sénégal, address to students, academics, state officials, and specially invited members of the public at the Cheikh Anta Diop University, 2007, “The unofficial English translation of Sarkozy’s speech”, africaResource, 13 October 2007) is more gratuitously racist and dehumanising than anything Le Pen or indeed Jean-Marie Le Pen, her father, founder of front national, both members of the “non-establishment right”, have said or written on this very subject.

What is precisely at stake here, for the French state, is that incorporated in the provisions of the 1958 5th Republic conceptualisation, following the humiliating defeat and collapse of its “French Indo-China” in 1954, its age-long French-occupied African states and peoples, a total of 22 countries, become effectively la terres richesse – wealthlands, to serve France and the French in perpetuity.

Plaque


This is why the French have such a supercilious antagonism to any conceivable notion of African restoration-of-independence and sovereignty (see Herbert Ekwe-Ekwe, “‘African American son’, US foreign policy and Africa”, Pambazuka News, 7 April 2016). This is the background to Gary Busch’s excellent study in which these countries which France still controls, occupies, calls “francophonie”, “deposit the equivalent of 85% of their annual reserves in [dedicated Paris] accounts as a matter of post-[conquest] agreements and have never been given an accounting on how much the French are holding on their behalf, in what these funds been invested, and what profit or loss there have been” (Gary Busch, “Africans pay for the bullets the French use to kill them”, nigeriavillagesquare, 29 July 2011).

This is why the French military has invaded this African enclave 53 times since 1960 (“‘African American son’, US foreign policy and Africa” ). 

Such invasions provide the French the opportunity to directly manipulate local political trends in line with their strategic objectives, install new client regimes, if need be, and expand the parameters of expropriation of critical resources even further as unabashedly vocalised by many a sitting president in Paris wishes. For the French president and policy of “francophonie” Africa, from de Gaulle in 1958 to Hollande in 2017, all members of the French establishment, the operational plaque for action in the Elysée palace has been: invade, intimidate, manipulate, install, antagonise, ingratiate, indemnify, expropriate, invade, intimidate...

This plaque awaits either Le Pen or Macron, “non-members of the French establishment”, to implement as usual as it has been in the past 59 years, irrespective of which of them wins the 7 May second presidential poll. Except, of course, African peoples in the 22 states bring this staggering expropriation and indescribable servitude to a screeching halt.

“Francophonie”-exit: freedom



The first move of the Africa “francophonie”-exit from this debilitating conundrum couldn’t be more predictable: do not transfer your hard-earned revenues, the “85 per cent”, not one euro, to that dedicated Paris bank account. This transfer must stop at once, now. One mustn’t ever be a party to their own subjugation. The African publics in Bujumbura, Yamoussoukro, Dakar, Bamako, Ouagadougou, Ndjamena, Buea, Douala, Brazzaville, Kinshasa, St Louis, Bangui, Lome, Younde, Cotonou, Abidjan, Touba... should at once embark on consultations with their varying state officials to work out the parameters of implementing this great freedom movement and other interlocking features in each and every space of this occupied hemisphere.

“Liberté, égalité, fraternité” must surely be for all…

Source: Pambazuka News

IN THE ARMY OF THE LORD

By Henry Makori

Kenya’s military has been inside Somalia ostensibly pursuing al-Shabaab militants since 2011 as part of the US-led ‘war on terror’. No one knows when the mission will end or its cost. There is little discussion about the war among Kenyans. Government updates are impossible to verify. The public is generally assumed to be in support of the invasion – even when in reality they are so ignorant of what is going on to really care.

Some parents in Kenya would pay a hefty bribe or use their secret networks of influence to have their son enlisted with Kenya Defence Forces. And then the family turns up at their church to offer special prayers of thanksgiving to God for the “miracle breakthrough” of their son’s employment. Jobs are scarce in Kenya. More prayers are offered when the son passes out as a KDF soldier.

Thereafter the son is dispatched to Somalia to fight in the misguided war against Al-Shabaab under the African Union Mission, AMISOM. The family stays awake most nights praying for his safety – and for quick victory of KDF over Al-Shabaab, in the Mighty Name of Jesus!

Meanwhile they enjoy the monies their son is paid by the “international community”. Europe and America are clever enough not to deploy their troops to such an extremely dangerous place as Somalia; but they can pay any government that is stupid and greedy enough to send its sons to die in a war they will never win.

You see, it is called the Military-Industrial-Complex. Military supplies are a top export of Europe and America. And the companies engaged in military contracting are owned by the who’s-who in the top echelons of power. In other words for Europe and America, war is good business.

So our Kenyan son is with AMISOM somewhere in the deserts of Somalia. We are there with him in prayers, day and night. One day, he goes out with a crazed company of soldiers who storm a village, murder all the men, rape every woman and girl they find before butchering them. They shoot at everything that moves, including terrified crawling little children, and burn everything down to ashes. Then the soldiers stagger back to camp with looted gunny bags of charcoal and sugar, singing circumcision songs.

In Nairobi, the KDF Spokesman tweets gleefully that our soldiers killed 127 Al-Shabaab militants in an overnight attack at a key camp. Of course no details are furnished. This is a security issue. We accept what we are told. And so the “good news” quickly spreads out to the ends of the Earth. The parents of our son sing, “Hallelujiah! No one is like unto Our God! Ebenezer!”

Days later, Al-Shabaab overrun an AMISOM camp in retaliation. They massacre hundreds of soldiers, whose number is never revealed. This is a security issue, we are reminded. The soldiers were caught utterly flatfooted while boozing and reciting Swahili lyrics to some local girls who somehow wandered into the camp.

Our son is among the dead.

At the funeral service KDF top dogs speak highly of the young man’s courage and love for Kenya and of his special dedication to the Somali people, especially the poor women and children who are victims of Al-Shabaab. He gave his life for a stable and prosperous Somalia. The parents eulogise their son:

“We loved you, but God loved you more. All is well. Your reward awaits you in Heaven. Till we meet again in glory.”

And all the people say: “Aaameeen!"

* Henry Makori is an editor with Pambazuka News.

Source: Pambazuka

What the world needs to know about Western Sahara

Western Sahara

By Amira Ali

For more than 40 years, Morocco has forcefully and illegally occupied Western Sahara despite provisions of international law that recognize the country’s sovereignty. The suffering but resolute Saharawi people, especially the younger generation, are getting impatient with endless colonialism. African people and all who value human dignity and freedom must stand up in solidarity with Western Sahara by demanding an end to Moroccan occupation.

In 1975, Morocco, under King Hassan II, invaded Western Sahara; and since, the Sahrawi people — female-dominated society of Arab and Berber descent — have been in an unflagging resistance struggle, committed to self-determination without exception. Today, Western Sahara remains the African continent’s (overtly) occupied territory — a Moroccan colony.

The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (a full member of the African Union) is governed by the Polisario Front (a national liberation movement), and controls about 20% of Western Sahara while claiming sovereignty over the entire territory.

The Sahrawi people (Sahrawi is an Arabic word for Ṣaḥrā’ meaning desert), despite decades of struggle against colonization and several failed efforts of conflict resolution and decolonization, continue to live ambiguously. Second to Palestine, the Sahrawi people (regarded as some of the most courageous and principled people) are the longest suffering group of refugees in the world — more than 165,000 Sahrawi people have been living in refugee camps since 1976.

A protracted state of affair, Morocco, “sponsored and protected by the French,” ceaselessly carries on its occupation, impinging on the Sahrawi’s rightful independence. Insisting on “autonomy within the Kingdom of Morocco” and struggling to control its neighboring country, it continues to avoid any referendum or agreement, preventing the possibility of any wide-ranging and durable political settlement. Morocco’s defiance toward the Sahrawi people’s call for self-determination is further highlighted in its absence from the African Union 668th meeting on the situation in Western Sahara held on 20 May 2017.

Four decades later and after fifty-four years of failed attempts to fully decolonize Western Sahara, the way forward remains uncertain. The Kingdom of Morocco remains unbending with its colonial program, all while the Sahrawi people resiliently stand their ground, affirming, “no political solution would be accepted unless it gives justice,” and justice would mean “Morocco withdrawing from Western Sahara and respecting Western Sahara’s borders.”

To learn more about the situation in Western Sahara — the shape and state of Western Sahara’s resistance struggle, Morocco’s recent interests to rejoin the African Union and its further intentions in Western Sahara, the illegal exploration and plundering of the territory’s natural resources, and the impasse in the peace process — we spoke with Malainin Lakhal, a journalist and advocate of Western Sahara.

How long has Western Sahara been in a resistance struggle with attempts to decolonize and gain its independence?

Lakhal: Western Sahara has always been a target of European colonial attempts of invasion since the 15^thCentury, or maybe even prior, because of its strategic position for the old European merchant movements. During various periods, the Sahrawi population fought against many attempts of invasions by the Portuguese, the British, the Dutch, French and the Spanish. After the notorious Berlin Conference of 1884-85 that launched the Partition of Africa, Spain was “awarded” Western Sahara (that included what is now known as the Southern zone of Morocco). But from day one, the Sahrawi resistance, though small, scattered and not really aware of the danger of colonization, started attacking the Spanish (few) positions on the coasts of Western Sahara. So it can rightly be said that the Sahrawi resistance against colonialism officially started in 1885-86.

In modern history, a prominent Sahrawi political leader, Martyr Mohamed Sidi Brahim Basiri, formed the Sahrawi politically organized resistance in 1966-67. He was a Sahrawi who studied political science and journalism in Morocco, Cairo and Damascus, prior to returning to his country to start a political party for the liberation of Western Sahara (The Vanguard Movement for the Liberation of Saguia El Hamra & Rio De Oro). Between 1967 and 1970, this political movement adopted peaceful means of struggle against the Spanish colonization, but in 1970 the Spanish colonial authorities harshly oppressed a popular uprising organized by this movement in the capital city of Western Sahara, El Aaiun, killing dozens of civilians and imprisoning the majority of the leadership of the movement including Mohamed Sidi Brahim Basiri. To this day, the Spanish government refuses to reveal the truth about what happened to Basiri, though we have testimonies from some of the survivors who state that he was cowardly assassinated by his torturers because he refused to surrender or compromise with the colonial power.

This blow to peaceful resistance pushed hundreds of Sahrawis, including Sahrawi students (in the universities of Morocco, Mauritania, Algeria, Spain and elsewhere), former militants in various armed resistance groups, victims of the Spanish oppression and the remaining militants of the recently crashed Vanguard movement to join forces and form groups of secret political organizations that would unite on 10 May 1973 to constitute the Frente Popular de Liberación de Saguia-El-Hamra y Rio de Oro (Frente POLISARIO- Popular Front for the Liberation of the Saguia-El-Hamra and Rio de Oro).

But this time, the new political organization adopted armed struggle. It learned from the experience of the Vanguard movement that the colonizer only understands the voice of fire and iron, as Polisario’s anthem stresses. The armed struggle against Spain officially started on 20 March 1973. So this is a very brief chronology of the commencement of the Sahrawi resistance against colonialism.

How committed are the Sahrawi people (today) to carry on the fight for self-determination?

Lakhal: Just try to imagine how committed a people that have been resisting colonization since 1884 to date must be, refusing to be swallowed by Spain first and now Morocco. The Sahrawi people are so committed to their cause that they have refused, at least for the last 41 years, to submit to the Moroccan attempts to impose a colonial fait accompli on them. For 41 years, Sahrawis have chosen to live as political exiles in refugee camps, in a very harsh part of the planet (in terms of weather conditions) and face all sorts of sufferings, rather than surrender to the Moroccan colonial will. 

Thousands of Sahrawis have been victims of forced disappearances, illegal imprisonments, iniquitous trials, summary executions, and all sorts of colonial oppressive methods, but they still continue with the struggle, participation and demonstrations. They still loudly say: “We are not Moroccans! We want our freedom back!”

What is the driving force behind Morocco’s occupation of Western Sahara?

Lakhal: There are various and complicated motives behind the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara. One, Morocco is a very poor country (in terms of natural resources) with a big population (over 35 millions), while Western Sahara is very rich in all sorts of renewable and non-renewable resources.

Two, geographically speaking, half of Morocco’s territory is completely useless because of Mountains and arid regions. The only useful regions are the coastal ones while the entire zone in the middle, the far North, and South of Morocco are difficult to live in because of mountains. So, Western Sahara presents a big and wide-open territorial expansion for Morocco.

Third reason is the outcome of the expansionist dogma of the kingdom. Morocco has historically been a chain of kingdoms that varied in territorial sovereignty. Absolutely none of them have ever ruled or owned Western Sahara. In fact, their Southern borders have been some 300 to 400 km far from the current Northern border of Western Sahara. But, most of these kingdoms, and especially the actual family, have always had expansionist tendencies and territorial ambitions and claims in all the neighboring countries (Algeria, Mauritania and Spain). It should be recalled here that the Moroccan King tried to invade parts of Algeria (the famous Sands War in October 1963) a few months after Algiers gained its independence. The kingdom also refused, for nine years, to recognize the independence of Mauritania.

Four, the crucial reason that ignited the late King Hassan II’s decision to invade Western Sahara in 1975 was nothing less than fear of his army, after he was a victim of two dangerous military coups in July 1971 and August 1972. In fact, the rule of Hassan II, who can be considered the real builder of the modern Moroccan Kingdom, has been threatened by more than 20 political or military coups, according to recent reports by Moroccan press. The king needed to find a way to get rid of his army by keeping it busy with a colonial adventure in Western Sahara, and at the same time try to impose a colonial fait accompli and exploit the rich neighboring territory.

Five, most of us often forget that the Moroccan Kingdom and the current monarchy is and has been the protégé of France since 1912. In fact, the throne of this family was threatened by various Moroccan revolutions since 1911. The Moroccan people were then criticizing the complicity of the ruling family with the French colonial power. The Moroccan elite even dethroned one of the grandfathers of the current king, who immediately handed over the country to France for protection. This is why France didn’t colonize Morocco; rather, it was a protectorate. It was France that built the roots and bases of the modern Moroccan monarchy. Morocco was and is still a country under the political, economic and even cultural influence of France.

Six, within this same plot of complicity with the West, it was the duty of Morocco to never let the newly independent and revolutionary state of Algeria become a dominant power in North Africa. This is one of the geo-strategic reasons France supports the Moroccan invasion followed by the occupation of Western Sahara. To this date, the French political class has never been able to overcome the chock of total independence of Algeria from the French colonial empire. And, by the way, the politics of what is well known as the France-Afrique is still dominating huge parts of our continent, and many French-speaking countries are still under the influence and authority of Paris.

These are, more or less, some of the main motives for the Moroccan invasion and occupation of Western Sahara. This occupation not only hinders my people’s emancipation and prosperity but it also hinders all the efforts and dreams of the North African states to join forces and form a strong and unified region (within the African Union). Knowing that if North Africa really unified it can compete with the South European countries, and become even more developed given that we have everything in the eight countries of North Africa (Morocco, Algeria, Sahrawi Republic, Mauritania, Tunis, Libya and Egypt). But of course, France and the West will never let us unite, neither in North Africa nor the continent as a whole.

How much of the 266,000 square kilometers (130,000 sq. m) of Western Sahara’s surface area does the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic control?

Lakhal: The Sahrawi Republic controls a liberated zone of more than 90,000 sq.km (East and South of the Moroccan military separation wall); the remaining 176,000 sq.km are under Moroccan military occupation.

A lot of people including Moroccans often say as an argument that we cannot be a state because our territory is small and our people do not make up a million (around 600.000 Sahrawis all over the world, maybe more). Worldwide, the territory of Western Sahara is bigger than 180 sovereign states and dependencies. In terms of population, we are bigger than 74 sovereign states and dependencies. So, I see no relevance to that argument of size or population.

The Polisario Front, the leading front of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), is considered “a legitimate government in exile.” What does that mean in real terms?

Lakhal: The Polisario Front is in fact considered the legitimate political representative of the people of Western Sahara (UN’s General Assembly’s resolution 34/37 of 1979). As a liberation movement, Polisario represents the Sahrawis in the UN and in all European countries. It is the official interlocutor and negotiating party in the UN facing Morocco as the colonial party in the conflict.

But on 27 February 1976, to avoid the administrative and political vacuum, Spain was going to create by its unilateral withdrawal from Western Sahara, the Polisario Front, as a unique representative of the Sahrawi people, decided to constitute and proclaim the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic as the legitimate and sovereign government in Western Sahara. After that, the Sahrawi Republic became the government and official authority running the country. The state has a semi-presidential system with a president, a prime minister and a fully operational government. It has a parliament composed of elected representatives. It has an independent judiciary with various levels of courts, and all the ministries and institutions. Same as any African country.

In fact, and though the Sahrawi population (administrated by the SADR) are still in exile, the administrations and institutions of SADR are far advanced in democracy. For example, the Sahrawi Republic in exile succeeded to raise the level of literacy since the eighties and nineties from around 10% to 90%. Violence against women is almost insignificant; women participation in political spaces and public life is very high. The women dominate positions of leadership at the local and administrative levels, and in sectors of education and health.

So to sum-up, the Polisario Front and the Sahrawi Republic are succeeding in governing a country despite the fact that they’re fighting against colonization and do not have full access to the resources of the country. The Sahrawi people have managed, for more than 40 years, to operate the only refugee camp in the world administered and organized by refugees themselves.

What is the current situation on the ground? How long have the Sahrawi people been living in refugee camps? How are the camps managed and who funds them?

Lakhal: The Sahrawi people have been living in refugee camps since 1976. The Sahrawi Republic and its different ministries and institutions manage the camps. There are currently six camps — one administrative camp and five camps where the majority of the refugee population settle. Each of the five camps has a governor, with an administration where all ministries and institutions are represented as directorates. Each of the five camps is sectioned into 6 to 7 dairas (like municipalities), and each daira is parted into 4 hay (neighborhoods). The government has police services, courts, and the necessary directorates to serve the citizens. And the camps have hospitals, schools, and other administrations like any other country in the world. The only difference is, these are refugee camps.

Politically speaking, every four years the population votes to elect its representatives in parliament and the highest political bodies of the Polisario. Also, there are active civil society groups in the camps. There are many sectoral unions and NGOs that cover various sectors of civil society. The Sahrawis usually say they’ve had 40 years of preparation. Since they’ve built all their institutions in exile, once the country gains its freedom, they only have to take what they’ve already built and implant it in the country, with full access to their country’s resources.

Currently, everyday survival of Sahrawi refugees is dependent on international aid, which is not sufficient (the Sahrawi refugees only receive the minimum emergency aid though their case is ongoing for more than 40 years now). But, because this aid is not sufficient the refugees are creating small businesses and operating private services to assist their families (informal and sub-economies).

How does the younger generation, especially those who were born and raised in the camps, view their socio-political condition, and how do they respond to it?

Lakhal: The Sahrawi youth is now in a serious state of unrest because of the long period of passive struggle in the country. Since 1991, they see nothing progressing. Morocco is still colonizing and oppressing our brothers in the occupied zones. The UN is moving nowhere with the point at issue; we are still waiting for its promise of organizing a referendum that never comes. The international community is only attentive to war zones and bloody conflicts, and time is running out. Babies who were born in 1991 when the UN intervened and brokered the Settlement Plan are now 26 years old. So, I can understand their unrest and anxiety.

This situation creates a generation that wants the leadership to resume war, to end the colonization. They see, and they are somehow , that Morocco and the so-called international community only listen to the sounds of guns. Yet, they are very active in various social movements in the camps and internationally. They are struggling now though… in human rights, unions, universities, in the streets of the occupied zones, etc.

The older Sahrawi generation fear for the day when their patience ends. No one can predict what would happen then; personally, I think it will be violent.

In 1984, Morocco withdrew from the AU after the organization accepted the membership of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. Since, Morocco refused to join the AU unless membership of SADR was revoked. Earlier this year, Morocco was admitted back into the AU with reports indicating that 30 out of 54 African Heads of State voted in favor of its re-admittance. What triggered Morocco’s interest to rejoin the AU? What do you think influenced the shift in political position?

Lakhal: In my humble opinion, those African states who supported the admission of Morocco, no matter what their reasons are, made a historical mistake that the African Union will pay for the coming 5 to 10 years. The admission of Morocco into the AU is very similar to the deliberate injection of dangerously cancerous cells in an already weak body.

We will soon see what Morocco’s next moves are.

I said it before and I’ll repeat: Morocco will do its best to stop the African Union from supporting the decolonization of the remaining occupied zones of SADR. If it fails to achieve that goal, then Rabat will create divisions in the AU thanks to its influence on many French-speaking member states. It absolutely has no problem wrecking all of what we’ve achieved so far. In fact, Morocco has always created parallel bodies and institutions that compete with the OAU/AU. So, why do you think Rabat would care about the unity of Africa? It wouldn’t.

I strongly believe that the Moroccan change of strategy and application to join the AU without putting conditions on revoking SADR’s membership is a strategy built and plotted by France to contain the AU, which has become an important player in the international arena. We will hear many who say this is just another conspiracy theory. My response to people who say so is: go back and read our history. Who killed Sankara, and why? That’s just one example out of many. How does France still control the economies and politics of more than 14 countries through an unjust colonial pact? Rebelling against them will result in coups, wars and civil wars as well as direct intervention. The French army never left Africa; it is still present in many countries, and even in many African military staffs.

As for how many countries accepted the admission of Morocco, the numbers are not accurate at all. It was an open discussion that ended up with a sort of agreement between supporters and those who were suspicious about the Moroccan move. But in the end, the majority said that Morocco is an African state and should be admitted so as to deal with its occupation of Western Sahara in-house. We will see where this argument will lead, though, personally, I know that Morocco is a bandit state that has never respected or honored its commitments in the UN and elsewhere.

What does Morocco’s re-admittance (allegedly by a majority vote, without an excoriation) into the African Union — without ratifying the Constitutive Act — mean to the Sahrawi people and their struggle for self-determination? How are the people responding to the splintering and contradictory messages? And what may this do to ongoing efforts of promoting continental integration?

Lakhal: Morocco signed and ratified the AU Constitutive Act without a single condition or reservation. In fact, the AU made it clear in its contacts with Morocco before the January 2017 Summit stressing that if it wants to join the organization it must ratify the Constitutive Act with no comment, conditions or reservation. Morocco will have to deal with its contradictions since it has adhered to the AU Constitutive Act that clearly stipulates in its objective: “b)- Defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its Member States.” And the AU will have to deal with Morocco about defending the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Sahrawi Republic, which is a founding member state.

More significantly, there are 16 relevant principles of the Union enshrined in the Constitutive Act. And I stress Principles, not just any articles but the very foundation of the Union. Morocco is violating 7 of these Principles, just by being the occupying power in Western Sahara.

We will therefore wait and see how the AU will deal with Morocco on all the violations, knowing that the Sahrawi Republic has complete right to ask for the intervention of the Union to resolve the issue, in accordance with the African Union Principles.

As for the Sahrawi people’s reaction to the admission of Morocco to AU, there were different views. There are some who felt really sad to see such a colonial and brutal regime admitted in our continental organization. Others are saying that the admission is an opportunity to put Morocco in the corner and face our officials directly in the AU meetings. So, in general, a lot of Sahrawis and non-Sahrawi followers of the issue see the Moroccan adherence to the AU as a legal and political recognition of the Sahrawi Republic. No matter how Moroccans may try to deny it, they are sitting as members in the same organization that our Republic founded with other African Nations.

Efforts to find a solution and/ or facilitate resolution to the conflict have failed in the past, and most recently reached an impasse. Do you believe the UN and/ or the AU have the political will to apply pressure on Morocco in order to protect Western Sahara’s integrity as a non-self-governing territory, and more importantly to move toward an agreement for the referendum of Western Sahara?

Lakhal: The only resolution that has been implemented is the resolution 690 of 1991, which approved the OAU/UN Settlement Plan “for the organization and the supervision, by the UN in cooperation with the OAU, of a referendum for self-determination of the people of Western Sahara”. The same resolution also decided, “to establish a UN Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO),” and resolution 725, which confirmed these same decisions.

The process of implementation found a lot of ups and downs. It was always due to the Moroccan colonial authorities’ delays, rejections of previous agreements, violations of agreements, etc. And unfortunately, no one can do anything to this bandit state! Why? Because it’s powerfully and unconditionally protected by the French veto.

Now, I do not know if the UN and AU have the political will and consensus to not necessarily exercise pressure, but to apply international law. We’re not asking the AU to put pressures on Morocco, we just want it to respect, implement, and apply all the principles and objectives of the Constitutive Act and the different AU instruments like: “The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights,” and other principles that are applicable.

Africans have invested time, energy, and resources for the last 60 years to come up with all these laws, conventions, and brilliantly elaborated principles. It’s now time to implement them. This is what the Sahrawis are asking for.

Same thing goes for the UN. If you read all the treaties, conventions and legal instruments adopted by the UN, you will say that all the problems of humanity can be resolved. But no! They are not. Not because those instruments are bad — absolutely not. It’s because we have few powerful states that play the role of bully against other nations, and hinder the implementation of laws, unless it suits their interests and the interests of their protégées.

Besides Morocco, which countries, institutions, and/ or corporations are benefiting (profiting) from Western Sahara’s occupation through the illegal exploration and exploitation of the territory’s natural resources?

Lakhal: I do not want to say everyone except Sahrawis, but it seems to be the truth. The main countries that exploit and benefit from the occupation of Western Sahara are Morocco of course, but also France and Spain. There are lots of other so-called democratic states that also benefit from making business with Morocco, especially in the exploitation of our natural resources. The countries, sometimes represented by multinational companies or national firms are: Australia, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Colombia, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Netherlands, Greece, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Mauritania, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey and UK, among others.

These countries whose firms are still operating inside the occupied zones of Western Sahara, with the help of the colonial power, are exploiting our fisheries, our phosphate, sand, salt, and exploring for oil, gas, diamond, gold, iron and many other resources. For more information on these companies, you can access interesting stories and data here: www.wsrw.org.

Can you give us examples of how these countries (and companies) are threatening and/ or suspending the independence of the Sahrawi people through their exploitative operation?

Lakhal: These companies are all signing contracts with a bloody colonial power to exploit the resources of a colonized nation. Just like the Moroccan regime, they are simply thieves and criminals wearing nice suits. This is how we see them. We absolutely have no respect for these companies; they are feeding their clients blood resources.

These activities are fueling and providing the Moroccan colonial regime with money to keep the occupation ongoing. We are talking about billions yearly. Meanwhile, for the last 40 years, we’ve had thousands of Sahrawi refugees who can barely survive on some $25 million of aid, which is often cut or delayed. So basically, those countries through their companies plunder billions of profit from our resources, and hardly contribute to the humanitarian aid, despite the few thousands that they give and see themselves as doing us a favor. Can you imagine this dishonesty?

Same thing for the Moroccan regime. It’s profiting from the exploitation of our resources, making billions every year. It has built nothing in the occupied territory. During the 41 years of occupation, Morocco didn’t build a single university in the whole territory, no single theatre, no single economic sector or factory that would help in at least the employment of the Sahrawi people under occupation. For example, the unemployment rates in the occupied zones of Western Sahara are higher than those in the Moroccan cities. Our students are targeted, harassed, imprisoned, tortured, and even killed by the police. The Sahrawi women are the main targets of the ill-treatment of Moroccan police. And still we hear some misled African brothers and sisters say that Morocco is an African country. Well, yes, Moroccan peoples are Africans, but the Moroccan regime is just a puppet regime, a proxy of the French colonial greed in Africa. The Moroccan regime is not and has never been African. It has never served Africa. It has always served the French France-Afrique policy in the continent. That is what it really is.

Thus far, soft power has been applied to end the colonial occupation over Western Sahara. Do you think it’s time for hard power? What do you recommend the AU, international bodies, civil society organizations, and the African states do to unlock the deadlock in the peace process and actualize complete decolonization of the Western Sahara territory?

Lakhal: I am not a big fan of violence. I have always called, in my actions, my writings and my interaction with my compatriots, for peaceful and well-targeted activism. I believe that soft power is a very strong weapon to achieve goals. It only needs a widely spread, worldwide backing to achieve results.

And in Western Sahara, we’ve come a long way from having completely no voice in the international arena to becoming a sort of hot topic on the table in the UN, EU, AU and other international entities. Our activists, civil society organizations, and official diplomacy have done a lot to make the issues well known internationally. But we still need more visibility in Africa. We need to have African popular and official support as it was once granted to the ANC and South African freedom fighters. That is what will make our case even hotter.

On the other hand, I cannot blame the Sahrawis who see the resumption of armed struggle as a solution. They are in a way right that the colonial powers only recognize power. Through history we know that the colonialist never gives up its greed and violence, not until the last moment. It’s a pity. If you just go back in history, in Africa, you’ll see the price many African nations have had to pay for their freedom.

So in the end, if the Sahrawis decide to resume war with all the legitimate and internationally recognized methods including armed struggle, it will be in total accordance with their legitimate right in order to gain their freedom.

What I recommend to international bodies is to quickly and urgently intervene to impose and enforce international law in Western Sahara, and give justice to the Sahrawi people who have been suffering from foreign intervention for the past 133 years. It is not a simple political dispute, as some would like it to appear (especially Morocco and a few French-speaking and Arab countries). It’s a struggle for freedom. It’s a nation’s fight for its right to be, live freely and independently on its rightful land. It’s a nation’s struggle for dignity and national sovereignty. And no political solution would be accepted unless it gives justice to this nation. Morocco should simply withdraw from our country and respect its borders. That’s the only reasonable and just solution we would accept.

Based on the name Sahrawi “Arab” Democratic People, do the Sahrawi people identify themselves as Arabs or African, or both? What is the historical link and/ or significance behind adopting the “Arab” identity?

Lakhal: The Sahrawi people are a mixture of Amazigh, African, Arab, and even European (Spanish in particular) intermingled through centuries of inter-marriage. So the Republic was named Sahrawi (which is the bigger ethnic umbrella that all Sahrawis identify with), while Arab is a more political inclination that stems from the influence the Arab revolutions of the seventies had on the founding fathers of the Sahrawi revolution; in addition to the feeling of belonging to the Islamic/Arab world.

Concretely, we feel more African than Arab due to all the suffering and enmity we’ve faced from the Arab world. Except for Algeria, Libya under Gadhafi, Syria, and South Yemen, all the remaining Arab countries militarily and financially supported Morocco in its invasion and colonization of our country.

What are the next steps for Western Sahara and its people?

Lakhal: I see two main scenarios in the future.

The first scenario: Sahrawis resume war against the Moroccans. The war will disturb all the existing plans in the region. I can see the Moroccan regime fall and collapse due to a strong possibility of a revolution in the North of Morocco.

The second: The Sahrawis decide to keep up and scale up their peaceful resistance. The AU will be a very hot scene where Sahrawis and Moroccans will be confronting each other, just like in the early eighties. And hopefully (and why not), the UN and AU will finally succeed in implementing the law and justice in Western Sahara.

FRANCE:

Unusual love story of French presidential Candidate       

Emmanuel Macron and Brigitte Trogneux

By Chris Kitching

Emmanuel Macron has defeated the far-right candidate Marine Le Pen in the May 7 showdown for the French presidency, and the country has had perhaps its most unexpected first lady ever.

Macron's wife, Brigitte Trogneux, was his drama teacher in high school and is 25 years his senior. He's 39, she's 64.

He was just 16 when he vowed to marry Trogneux - a married mum-of-three at the time - and his parents even tried to put a stop to the schoolboy love affair, according to a new book.

The unusual love story has captivated French tabloids and magazines, and emerged as a major storyline during Macron's rapid rise towards the Elysee Palace, with both husband and wife hitting back at critics.

Throughout the campaign Macron, an independent centrist, and Trogneux were photographed embracing and kissing, including during Sunday night's celebration after he advanced to the May 7 run-off election against Le Pen .

Macron, who quit the Socialist Party to run for president and founded the party En Marche! in April last year, has repeatedly paid tribute to his wife and told his supporters she would play a major role as France's first lady if he's elected.

The May-December romance blossomed as Trogneux taught Macron when he was a 15-year-old student at a Jesuit college in Amiens.

A new book says he defied orders from his parents to end the romance and his father ordered Trogneux to stay away from his son until he reached 18.

A tearful Trogneux, then known as Brigitte Auziere (her married name), replied: "I cannot promise you anything."

Last year she told a French documentary that he wasn't like the other teenagers in her classes, BBC News reported.

She recalled how he proposed writing a play together, adding: "I didn’t think it would go very far.

"I thought he would get bored. We wrote, and little by little I was totally overcome by the intelligence of this boy.”

At 16, Macron's parents sent him to Paris to continue his studies but he vowed to marry Trogneux, who was around 40.

Trogneux told the documentary: “We’d call each other all the time and spend hours on the phone.

"Bit by bit, he defeated all my resistance, in an amazing way, with patience.”

The relationship continued after he left for Paris, became an adult and graduated from university, and eventually moved into investment banking, although it was unclear when the romance became a full-blown love affair.

Trogneux joined him in Paris and the couple married in 2007 - she did not take his name - after she divorced her first husband. The pair have not had any children together.

New details about their romance emerged in journalist Anne Fulda's timely book, "Emannuel Macron: A Perfect Young Man".

She interviewed Macron, Trogneux and both of his parents, and said they were shocked when they found out he was pursuing his teacher.

Macron's mother was quoted as saying: "We couldn't believe it. What is clear is that when Emmanuel met Brigitte we couldn't just say: 'That's great!'"

She later confronted Trogneux saying: "Don't you see. You've had your life. But he won't have children with you."

Fulda said Macron's parents have since accepted the relationship and his mother has since described her as "adorable".

In the book, Trogneux was discreet about the origins of the affair.

She was quoted as saying: "Nobody will ever know at what moment our story became a love story. That belongs to us. That is our secret."

Macron, who could become France's youngest ever president, hit back at critics, saying: "Nobody would call it unusual if the age difference was reversed. People find it difficult to accept something that is sincere and unique."

Fulda said the couple once avoided publicity but that changed once Macron started running for president. She told BBC News: "He wants to give the idea that, if he was able to seduce a woman 24 years his senior and a mother of three children, in a small provincial town... despite opprobrium and mockery, he can conquer France in the same way."

In November 2016, Macron declared that he would run in the election under the banner of En Marche! , a centrist political movement he founded in April 2016.