DR RAWLINGS; Full Text of What She Wrote

Dr Zanetor Rawlings

This week marks the 23^rdanniversary of the Rwanda genocide and our prayers are with the people of Rwanda whose foundations were shattered and who are still healing from this terrible genocide over two decades later.

The trigger was the assassination of the Presidents of Rwanda and Burundi whose aircraft was shot down after their visit to Arusha, Tanzania to sign a treaty.

An allegation was made in the media regarding who had shot down the aircraft and a call made on the airwaves for people to engage in the genocide, and so began the mass murder.

About 800,000 people were killed in a space of 100 days in 1994. People were hacked and burned to death even when they ran into churches to take refuge.

Tens of thousands of women and girls were raped before their male family members, pregnant women had their wombs cut open and babies removed and killed.

The Rwanda genocide has left a stain on human history which has some of its roots in colonialism and internal oppression and ethnicity, power, profits etc. and is a reminder that even though it might take weeks, months or even a whole generation or more for the overt effects of conflict to manifest, a fallout becomes inevitable unless issues are properly managed.

Intelligence reports from other countries have revealed that news of the impending tragedy was known to the intelligence community and some government leaders.

The point being that there were undercurrents preceding the Rwanda genocide. It did not just occur in a country that did not have any warning signs or indicators of the risks of danger.

The extent to which it went, is perhaps the thing that still horrifies us to this day plus the collective burden of guilt and responsibility as global citizens who through their leaders and  representatives watched on as these atrocities
occurred.

Then of course there were those foreign interest groups who actively participated in the supply of arms or training of militant ethnic groups.

I cannot do a full dissection of the genocide except to mention that when we allow prejudice or criminality to become institutionalized, we are simply setting the scene for conflict in the long run. The dangerous role of inflammatory statements especially in the media cannot be overemphasized.

Delta Forces on rampage in Ghana

RED FLAGS

As Ghanaians, we must not take the peace we have for granted. In all the wars in recent history, there were red flags that signaled the oncoming storm. Omens that were disregarded by those who saw the cumulonimbus clouds and chose to ignore their significance.

If there is one thing every pilot knows and makes it a point to avoid, it is a cumulonimbus cloud. Why? When you see a cumulonimbi- bus cloud, you are pretty much looking at a storm.

I have observed with concern, the unfortunate breakdown in law and order perpetuated by groups calling themselves party supporters. Surely, you must recognise that inflow and order should break- down and violent conflict occurs, you will be contributing not just to the downfall of your own government, but also the country you
belong to.

HORIZON SCANNING

In conflict and crisis management, one talks about horizon scanning as a means of ascertaining one's risks and weakness. To give an analogy, when you fly an aircraft, it is something you do to assess the horizon for signs of danger.

The danger could be a change in weather or another aircraft or other objects in the sky etc. So, horizon scanning in terms of security has the same rationale.

Horizon scanning has indicators that can be used such as social (a large number unemployed youths, internal displacement, ethnic based discrimination), political (excessive political patronage, violation of human rights, indiscipline), economic (widening gap between the socio-economic classes, worsening economic conditions) and military (emergence of armed vigilante groups).

A member of the invincible forces of the NPP

The emergence of lawless groups within our state is a worrying trend, which if not dealt with, will cost us dearly as a people.

One of the primary duties of the state is to ensure that its citizens are secure. To live in a state that is not at war, yet to have such levels of indiscipline and insecurity is a huge indictment on us.

When we talk about good governance, one of the principles is Rule of Law. What is that about? A legal system in place that is enforced impartially, the presence of fundamental human rights (these are entrenched in our constitution), proper law enforcement, an independent judiciary and of course an incorruptible police force. In short, last good governance should ensure the welfare and quality of life of ci u our people.  

Post-election violence has resulted in several conflicts across b the world, and as Ghanaians we may look at other countries and think that we are not like them.

All inter and intra state conflict involves human beings (directly and indirectly), so given that we are all members of the human of race, we too are vulnerable to the same weaknesses that plague all of mankind. And we currently have or the recipe for such situations in existence.

                   

We have just had an election which resulted in a massive defeat li- of one party, so people are still 0 as going through emotions of angered depression, denial and everything else;

 • Then, in the last four months, a- people have been assaulted, dismissed, asked to resign, etc;

• There are several groups de that have taken the law into their n- own hands;

         

.There has been a lot of ethnic politics that is still ongoing;
 

• There are armed groups who prior to the election were told that the, the security forces were not to be trusted, and now that t the elections he are over these armed groups are ns still in the 'system' and expecting is to be compensated for the roles they played;

                   

• There is a lot of media hype around the galamsey issue and a few statements have been made is on the floor of parliament (and we It? know that several of these people m- are armed and have been known of to kill).

 • An act of contempt was committed against one of our courts only a few days ago (an assault of one of the arms of government, the judiciary.)

• There have been several inflammatory remarks made on various media platforms;

• There has been media attention on the Legislative arm of government in the light of recent allegations and the public opinion of the legislature has been severely affected.

• Fuel prices have fluctuated and transport fares have gone up.

• The value of the cedi has dropped.

• The public has seen a record number of ministers and deputy ministers being appointed. In short, there is still a lot of tension in the 'system'.

RISK FACTORS

In medical terms, we call those risk factors for a disease and the more risk factors you have, the more likely you are to get that particular disease.

In other words, all these issues I have highlighted, in isolation might not mean much but the cumulative effect of all these re- ally provide that atmosphere for a small spark that under normal circumstances would amount to naught, but in the dry grass in the blaring heat could become a bushfire.

When the Kokomba-Nanumba war began, the story that reached us was that it was an 'akomfem' that started it. Well, the only reasons a war can be started by a small bird is when there is an underlying current; when there is tension and air some level of conflict in existence.

So, let us learn from our fellow African nations and from our own history of internal conflicts and pay heed to the under-currents and deal with them properly in order to de-escalate the situation we currently have on our hands.

Liberia, Sierra Leone, La Cote d'Ivoire, Somalia, Rwanda, Burundi amongst others all had a semblance of peace at some point And all of these also had the red flags of impending danger. The reality is that we think it will never happen to us, until it does.

First They Came by Pastor
Martin Niemoller

"First they came for the Communists, And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist, Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not it Jew Then they came for me And there was no one left to speak out for me."

Let us not accept the current state of lawlessness that is permeating the very fabric of our society and say it is one party against the other, because when violent conflicts occur, everyone is a potential victim regardless of background, political affiliation or ideology, religion and so on. Let us not be reticent as the 'snowball' effect gains momentum and magnitude before our very eyes.

It is time for the relevant state institutions to take the necessary measures to restore law and order and to protect the citizens of this dear nation of ours.

Let us stand together as a people, unified by our nationality and sense of belonging to condemn these acts of lawlessness and criminality.

By Dr. Zanetor Agyemang-Rawlings

Editorial

SALUTE FOR AMANDZEBA AND CO

The decision of Ghanaian superstars Amandzeba and Dr Knii Lante Blankson to initiate the musical concert dubbed “African Voices for Palestine” is highly commendable.

It is perhaps the clearest indication that African musicians are still keenly concerned about the liberation of colonised people from the tentacles of occupation, oppression and exploitation.

Over the last five decades and more the people of Palestine have been subjected to very harsh colonial occupation, their lands have been stolen, their people have been imprisoned without justification and many of them remain in exile.

Only recently close to 2000 Palestinians prisoners started a hunger strike to protest inhuman conditions.

As happened towards the end of the apartheid regime in South Africa, people from all over the world are expressing their solidarity with the Palestinian people in different ways.

“African Voices For Palestine” is one of such expressions and we commend all the African musicians who will take part in the concert for their commitment to freedom.

Local Story:

‘Protests against choice of President is constitutional violation’

Hajia Alima Mahama, Local Government Minister

By Regina Benneh

Alhaji Mohammed Kwaku Doku, the former Asunafo North Municipal Chief Executive, has reminded Ghanaians that the 1992 constitution gives the President sole Prerogative to appoint Metropolitan, Municipal and District Chief Executives (MMDCEs).

He therefore emphasised that any group of persons, individuals or political parties that agitated or protested against the choice of President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo in the appointment of the MMDCEs breached the constitution and threatened national security.

Mr Doku, who is a former President of the National Association of Local Government (NALAG), told the Ghana News Agency (GNA) in an interview in Sunyani that it was the various MMDAs that had the right to either endorse or reject the President nominees.

Chapter 20 Article 243 of the constitution says “there shall be a District Chief Executive for every district who shall be appointed by the President with approval of not less than two thirds majority of members of the Assembly present at meeting”.

Mr Doku, however asked political parties to stay away from interfering in the approval of the President’s nominees by the various Assemblies and appealed to the police administration to ensure that adequate security was provided during the confirmations.

He observed that because of alleged threats of lives and unnecessary intimidations, some Assembly members had failed to participate in the confirmation of the MMDCEs.

GNA

The Future of Our Children: Jeremy Corbyn’s Speech on Education Policy

Jeremy Corbyn

By Jeremy Corbyn

On the same day that Theresa May did a catastrophically inept interview on the Andrew Marr show (evading questions, robotic repetition of her ridiculous “strong and stable” mantra, refusing to admit that nurses relying on food banks to survive is wrong, trying to whitewash the ongoing Tory electoral fraud investigations …) Jeremy Corbyn received a standing ovation from hundreds of head teachers for his speech about Labour’s education policy.

The mainstream press will give Corbyn’s speech minimal publicity, and hardly any of the scant coverage that does appear will frame the speech in terms of the rousing ovation that it received.

That’s why I’m providing a transcript of the speech so you can judge it for yourself.

***

[Introductions] …

It is a great honour to address you, leaders of one of the most important professions in our society, those who look after the education, the wellbeing, and the future of our children.

That is why Labour is making our children’s education one of the cornerstones of our General Election campaign.

The choice in this election could not be clearer – and it’s not the re-run of the EU referendum that the Prime Minister wants it to be.

Britain needs a government for the many not the few – one that’s ready to invest in our economy and public services. But the Conservatives have demonstrated that cannot be them, preferring to give the richest and largest corporations tax hand-outs worth tens of billions.

The NHS and social care have been pushed into a state of emergency. Housebuilding has fallen to its lowest peacetime rate since the 1920s. Schools across the country face real terms cuts in funding per pupil, and class sizes are rising – while those young people who want to go to university face huge debts.

There is no greater responsibility than ensuring our children get the education that they deserve. I know this, you know this, parents up and down this country know this. But it is clear that this Conservative Government has its focus elsewhere.

The NAHT has correctly pointed out that this election is make or break time for our children’s education system.

As all of you will know, the National Audit Office confirms that schools are facing a cut of three billion pounds in real terms by 2020, the first real terms cut in education budgets in a generation.

This is an absolutely staggering figure and shows the need for a complete change of direction in how the government of this country treats our schools.

And we have to ask ourselves: is this how we want to treat the education system of our children? Is this how Britain’s children deserve to be treated?

Do our children deserve to be held back by a chronic shortage of teachers?

Do our children deserve to be crammed into schools like sardines?

Do our children deserve to be taught by teachers whose morale is at an all-time low?

Not by any fault of the teachers, they are the people who also bear the burden of government cuts, but the fault of governments who fail to recognise the importance of investing in the lives of children, and those who teach and support them, up and down this country.

That is why we must value teachers, because if we don’t we lose them. And you know better than anyone there is a recruitment crisis and that crisis will be made even worse if we don’t secure the rights of EU nationals.

Last year 5,000 teachers from EU countries qualified to teach here and there are thousands more working to teach our children. So that’s why, as Keir Starmer set out this week, a Labour government will guarantee the rights of EU nationals living here.

And if we lose teachers, we lose subjects, we narrow the horizons of young people. So that’s why I passionately believe in an Arts Pupil Premium so that every primary school child will benefit from a £160 million cash boost to help pupils learn to play instruments, learn drama and dance and have “regular access” to theatres, galleries or museums in their local areas.

And yet, while all this is happening, while funding to our children’s education is cut, multinational corporations have received multi-billion pound tax giveaways.

How can it be right that money is being siphoned straight out of our children’s schools and directly into the pockets of the super-rich?

We have to be clear, once and for all, that enough is enough.

Throughout this General Election campaign, we will be making absolutely clear our commitment to build a country for the many, and not just the few.

A vital part of that will be creating an education system that provides for every child regardless of their background, or their parents’ income.

Labour will introduce a National Education Service, ensuring excellent learning opportunities for all from early years to adult education.

What we need now – and what you as teaching professionals need now – are concrete answers and concrete solutions to the problems that our education system is facing.

That is why Labour has set out a plan to help give every young person the best start in life possible, by introducing universal free school meals for pupils at primary schools. It’s a policy that is fully costed, and will be paid for by introducing VAT on private school fees.

There are clear educational benefits to providing universal free school meals. It boosts the attainment and level of education of our children. We know that these early formative years are the most important in a child’s education and we have a duty to provide for our children the best we possibly can throughout that period.

It’s a policy that demonstrates how a Labour government would care for the many, and not just the few.

We will ensure that every single child receives a healthy and nutritious meal which will not only boost children’s productivity in the classroom but also helps to ensure their personal wellbeing, no matter what their background.

Children eating together is a great start in life.

So not only will the policy help children throughout their time in education, it will also help teachers who will see the benefits of improved concentration and improved attainment in the classroom.

And it will help parents who will not only save money but will have the peace of mind in knowing that their child is getting a healthy school meal during the day

Investing in the health of our nation’s children, is investing in our nation’s future.

If we are to truly place value on our children’s education, we must also place value on the teachers, head teachers and other school staff who deliver that education.

We must put an end to the continual attacks on the teaching profession, end the downward pressure on pay and conditions, the constant undermining of morale and the erosion of standards that means we have more unqualified teachers than ever in our classrooms.

That’s why, as part of the comprehensive programme Labour has set out today to strengthen rights at work and end the race to the bottom in the jobs market, we have confirmed a Labour government will lift the cap on public sector pay.

It cannot be right that those who provide our vital public services have their pay squeezed year after year. Britain’s public service employees deserve a pay rise.

And we must give the teaching profession the recognition it deserves, not only in terms of pay, but also in terms of status in our society.

We need to listen to you, the teaching professionals, on how you believe schools can be improved and respect the huge wealth of talent and knowledge that lies in the teaching profession as a whole.

I have always believed that the people who know how to a job best are those who do it day in day out. We must start listening to parents, teachers and head teachers: you are the people who know how schools should be run and you are the people who best understand the needs of our children.

That is why Labour has taken our lead from the NAHT – and from the other teachers’ unions – when we set out in no uncertain terms our opposition to the expansion of grammar schools in this country.

Not only does the mass introduction of segregation in our education system not help the overwhelming majority of this country’s children, it also returns us to what are frankly Victorian notions of education based on a narrow curriculum.

The task is clear: we must build an education system that suits the needs of our children and the opportunities they will have in the jobs market of tomorrow.

And if we are to build an economy worthy of the 21st century, we need a schools system that looks forwards, and not backwards to the failed models of the past.

We must recognise that every single child in this country has talents and every single child deserves the chance to flourish and thrive to their maximum potential in whichever field suits them best.

But our children’s schools do not exist in a vacuum. I am always in awe of the local head teachers I work with. Like thousands of children, I have learned so much from them.

And what I admire most is their commitment – not just to managing their schools and to educating our children – but the multi-faceted demands of the children in their community: their housing issues, immigration problems, their mental health. You are the heart of your communities.

You are part of a wider care system and you need the other parts of that system to work effectively alongside you, youth services, the NHS and social care.

Support for schools by these services is essential to promote pupil wellbeing. The duty to directly address pupils’ mental health needs ultimately rests with the social and care services.

No school should be asked to fund health and social care services from the school budget. That is why Labour has pledged to address the chronic underfunding for social care and the NHS.

As you all know schools are most effective as places of learning when they work together with high quality social care and health services to meet the needs of all students but especially those who are most vulnerable.

One in ten children and young people in this country suffer from a mental health condition and 75 percent of adult mental health problems are found to begin before the age of 18.

We must prioritise the mental wellbeing of our children. This is the least they deserve.

It is vital that we enable early intervention and provide support when problems first emerge but to do this we must build an education system that integrates social and health care.

Improving the way our society deals with mental health is a particular concern of mine because I am passionate to see opportunities for all.

That’s why I have been so impressed by the work so many of you do for children with special needs and how good special needs co-ordinators can liberate children from what has sometimes been a lifetime of exclusion.

That focus on the individual child is what drives our determination to reduce class sizes. We know that half a million children have been landed in super-size classes of 31 pupils or more.

This government is failing on education on its own terms. The Prime Minister herself has said that super-sized classes are proof of a school system in crisis. So then why is it allowed to continue?

Why are our children’s schools, not getting the funding that they deserve? This is a choice. And it is the wrong choice. The cut to schools funding is also a breach of their manifesto the Conservatives’ pledge to protect schools funding.

Labour will ensure schools have the resources they need.

I’m afraid I can’t give you a sneak preview of the full Labour manifesto today but be assured if it’s a choice between a tax giveaway to the largest corporations paying the lowest rates of tax in the developed world or funding for our schools. Labour will make very different choices from the Conservatives.

We have already started to set some of that out not just our free schools meals policy.

And our commitment to reintroduce the Educational Maintenance Allowance for college students from lower incomes.

We are also committed to restoring maintenance grants for university students so that no one is held back from realising their ambitions and so that every schoolchild knows that the options of further and higher Education are available to them.

We must not be ashamed to value education, for education’s own sake.

Schools should exist to get the very best from our children, to give them the best start in life, to enable them to succeed in whichever walk of life they chose.

Whereas Theresa May’s government has repeatedly cut resources and staffing we will invest in our children’s futures because they deserve nothing less.

The excuses from the government come thick and fast. They’ve blamed teachers for not working hard enough, they’ve diverted funds to their vanity projects. £138.5 million wasted on schools that have closed, partially closed or never opened in the first place.

We will not bring back a system that blamed children and parents for not passing the eleven plus and getting into a grammar school.

They blame everybody else, to divert attention from their own damaging failures. They need head teachers to tell them, own up, take responsibility and say sorry.

Labour will give schools the funding that our children deserve, the funding that teachers and headteachers deserve and the investment that our country and our economy deserves.

This election can be the chance for a fresh start, with a Labour government that will invest to create shared prosperity, protect our public services and build a fairer Britain.

A Labour government will work with you, we will give schools the funding the need and we will ensure you and your staff get the respect and resources you need.

We have a duty to our children and we will meet it.

Thank you.

[Standing ovation]

‘Macron candidate of fear’

French President Elect, Emmanuel Macron

Following Macron’s win, famous Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek lashed out at the French president-elect, saying he “stands for the worst of Europe” and “is the candidate of fear of Le Pen,” He also noted that neither candidate had a “positive vision.”

The outspoken philosopher and cultural critic said, while he was not happy with either of the French run-off candidates’ visions, those who voted against Macron were the “only true hope” for France, as they represent the people “who didn’t succumb to this liberal blackmail [of] ‘Now things are serious. Let’s all unite behind Macron.’”

“They said: ‘No. Sorry. Whatever that is, we’re not ready to play this game – the fascist threat and the politics, which feeds this fascist threat,’” Zizek said.

In Zizek’s view, this so-called “blackmail” included a recent La Liberation cover, which featured the headline, “Do whatever you want, but vote Macron.”

“Isn’t this the very essence of what worldwide is becoming today? You have all the freedom you want if you make the right choice. This is the very formula of why our democracy is becoming more and more meaningless,” he said, adding that it appears to be the media that is making choices for the people.

However, Zizek’s biggest issue with both candidates was that neither had a “positive vision” of the state of affairs in France, and both eventually became candidates of “fear.”

“Marine Le Pen was, obviously, the candidate of fear – fear about immigrants, foreign threat, financial capitalism and so on. But Macron was also a candidate of fear – fear of Le Pen. Macron won not because of what he is, but because he was anti-Le Pen,” Zizek said.

The problem is bigger than that, the philosopher added, concluding that the “European political elite is no longer able to rule properly,” and changes are urgently needed.

“I already quoted Didier Eribon [French author and philosopher], who said : ‘A vote for Macron today, is a vote for Marine Le Pen four years in the future.’ We’re just caught in this vicious circle. Macron means business as usual. But it’s precisely this business as usual that will give new strength to Marine Le Pen. It takes time. She can wait. One election, two elections, three. In the end, she may win,” he said.

Curbing the issue of ‘white’ supremacy

Kwame Nkrumah, Kojo Botsio, Che Guevara with two others in Ghana opposed white supremacy

By Priscilla S. Djentuh

Let no one romanticised the issue, white supremacy has a checkered history of bloodshed and cold blooded atrocities unimaginable.

It also tells the story of the varied wars of liberation fought by our brave ancestors whose focus was a liberated Africa for their life time as well as posterity These stories have been told with pride, identity and a sense of belonging by historians and teachers in various books that can be found in major libraries and the classrooms.

The transatlantic trade started in Africa by the Europeans from the early 15th century and the end of 19th century.

It was gold from the great empires of West Africa; Ghana, Mali and Songhai that elicited the means for the economic take-off of Europe in the 13th and 14th centuries and stimulated the curiosity of Europeans in western Africa.

The trade resulted in the devastation of the continent and the capturing of Africans as slaves who contributed to the growth and wealth of Europe and America.

“The unequal relationship that was gradually created as a consequence of the enslavement of Africans was justified by the ideology of racism - the notion that Africans were naturally inferior to Europeans,” says BBC website on African history.

It is worth mentioning that Africa had since before the arrival of the Europeans enslaved one another through “servicing’’ at the chief palace, captives for war and labour among others for selfish gains.

The ideology of the inferiority of the black skin to the superiority of the white skin had always been a seed sowed in the mind-set of society through erring interpretation of history till date.

I believe obedience and submissiveness rendered to the white lords through the trans-Atlantic slave trade as well as hurling of threatening abuses, torture and stigmatisation by the white Lords, birthed timidity as well as loss of self-confidence on the part of those enslaved.

Amilcar Cabral smash the concept of white supremacy

Consequently, even after decades of independence from colonial rule, majority of Africans still rely on the ideology of white supremacy no matter the unfortunate financial status of the whites or the poor circumstances surrounding where they reside.

“The white skin will always remain superior over the black skin”.

The blackman tend to endure both physical, emotional and verbal abuses from foreign employers but may be quick to betray fellow black natives for lesser offences.

I had seen a white man by-pass a queue of black people in a bank, and instead of an official politely asking him to join the queue, she rather smiled and attended to him first. Why? Perhaps, the ideology of him being better than those waiting in the queue has been planted deeply.

As such, a white man can walk into any office, circumvent a group of people waiting for appointment, and the receptionist, after introducing himself, would send him directly to her boss’ office.

The way forward:

The unemployment rate in Africa including Ghana cannot be overemphasised. Foreign investors had taken part of the opportunity to create jobs around the continent to solve the social problems that goes with lack of income especially among the youth.

The African continent needs to focus on creating sustainable jobs for its citizens through identification of talents and sponsoring as well as regarding the value of their inputs.

President Akufo Addo, please give dignity to the Ghanaian people

It is about time we take the discernment of humanity very serious. Being human means treating your fellow as much as yourself in a humane manner no matter the circumstances surrounding such, and making effort to correct or boycott any inhumane treatment.

21st century means dynamically doing things differently and better than was before, for the advancement of humanity in a humanely way.

Let us respect individual differences and promote our self-dignity by doing away with wrong ideologies that conflicts with our wellbeing.

We cannot afford to carry the issue of white supremacy besides black inferiority into a more knowledgeable, technological and comprehensive era of our time to oppress the very people who aids in the improvement of our everyday lives.

Let us create jobs, employ each other, building relationships and friendship. By so doing we might be indirectly curbing the issue of supremacy and inferiority drastically from the continent.

Let us address each other as human and not as a black or white-that is divisive!.

GNA

France: A Nation’s Conscience and the Question of Terror

Macron and Le Pen

By Adeyinka Makinde

The French presidential election contested by Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen provided analysts with much to ponder over the direction offered by two candidates who were presenting themselves to the electorate as non-establishment outsiders.

Points of demarcation over foreign and domestic policy often posited Macron and Le Pen respectively as  representing “internationalism” versus “nationalism” and of “centrism” against “neo-fascism”.

Elections also provide a platform for grappling with national existential anxieties. The French nation is one which is perennially involved in soul-searching; of presenting a rationale for its nationhood and the ‘mission’ it has within the global community of nations and cultures. Such soul-searching has included periods in history concerned with the ceding of global power and influence to the Anglo-Saxon nations, the experience of defeat and temporary occupation by Germany during World War Two, the loss of empire and more recently the impact on national identity of immigration from non-white and particularly Muslim lands.

One constant in these episodes of national meditation has been the matter of re-asserting pride in La Grande Nation. The restoration of national pride as well as the reassertion of national independence formed the backdrop to President de Gaulle’s resistance to the irresistible rise of the American empire which saw de Gaulle evicting Nato from its original headquarters in Paris, removing France from the military command hierarchy of the United States dominated Nato and maintaining a nuclear deterrence capability independent of America.

But Gallic pride has often blinded its people to facts and realities. For instance, the Gaullist-inspired narrative of the French Resistance having liberated France during the Second World War has been definitively exposed as a myth. It was pride and with the objective of underscoring her nationalist credentials that Marine Le Pen recently claimed that France was not to blame for the round-up and deportation of Jews during that war.

Her statement contradicted the 2009 ruling of a French high court which held France

“responsible for damages caused by actions which did not result from the occupiers’ direct orders, but facilitated deportation from France of people who were victims of anti-Semitic persecution.”

The disconnect between national sentiment and reality continues to the present day.

While many French may wish to perceive themselves as an independent nation only somewhat impeded by obligations imposed by its membership of the European Union, the truth is that France has lost a great deal of control over its foreign policy.

For one, France’s decision under President Nicolas Sarkozy to reintegrate into all structures of Nato in 2009 has effectively put it under direct American influence. Far from representing, as Sarkozy put it, a “strengthening of our sovereignty”,

France’s mutation to a certain kind of vassalage was exposed in the aftermath of the Ukraine crisis.

An American stage-managed coup d’etat on Russia’s border created the conditions for a Russian reaction -the annexation of Crimea- which was interpreted as Russian aggression; an act that warranted the imposition of sanctions.

The imposition of American-directed sanctions under the auspices of the European Union forced France to cancel a multi-billion dollar sale of warships to the Russians. Sanctions have also proved harmful to French agriculture. In early 2017, the former forerunner in the presidential race, Francois Fillion declared the regime of anti-Russian sanctions to be “pointless”.

An exchange between Macron and Le Pen during the recent debate in the forthcoming presidential run-off also provides evidence of an inability on the part of many of the French to be self-critical and to appraise the realities of their subservience to external interests.

When Le Pen accused Macron of being weak in regard to the threat of Jihadists in the midst of the country -vowing that she would make France safer by expelling all foreign suspects- Macron, not unreasonably, responded by noting that a great many terrorists were in fact French and that France needed to examine its own conscience for letting that happen.

Much of the media viewed that as an own goal by Macron which perceived Macron to be making France as responsible for the situation as the terrorists. The public reaction was as unfavourable to Macron as was the reaction to his comments made earlier this year castigating France for its colonial history in Algeria which he described as a “crime against humanity”.

If the French are still resistant to the idea of acknowledging responsibility for facilitating the deportation of Jews and waging brutal wars in their colonial territories to suppress the right to self-determination, they appear equally resistant in present times in acknowledging their part in facilitating the United States-led wars of aggression in the era of the so-called ‘war on terror’.

After taking the lead in protesting the US-led invasion of Iraq which was accomplished under the false pretext of removing Saddam’s supposed weapons of mass destruction, France resumed a role of supporting the United States in a number of ill-fated military adventures which have only served to stir the cause of jihadism.

Sakozy and Gadafi

Even before Sarkozy re-integrated France into Nato’s military command structure, French troops served in Afghanistan. The French air force took the lead in bombing Libya to smithereens, in the process overthrowing Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and creating the circumstance of lawlessness that has allowed the country to be taken over by jihadi-supporting Islamists as well as becoming the staging post for invasions of swarms of migrants heading to parts of Western Europe including France.

The war in Syria has provided the impetus through which the numbers of homegrown Jihadists has expanded as well as enabling an increase in the numbers of European-bound refugees. Yet, many refuse to acknowledge France’s part in this self-inflicted crisis.

The revelation in 2013 by Roland Dumas, France’s former foreign minister, that the war in Syria was the result of an operation which was pre-planned by Western intelligence agencies provides a great deal of illumination.

While France may have been the dominant colonial power in Syria, its interest in overthrowing the secular government of Bashar al-Assad is not readily apparent. If an argument can be made that French policy is based on following the dictates of its ally, the United States, an equally persuasive argument can be made of French policy toward the Middle East being framed by the needs of the state of Israel.

As Dumas related,

“In the region (i.e. the Middle East), it is important to know that this Syrian regime has a very anti-Israeli stance…and I have this from the former Israeli prime minister who told me “we’ll try to get on with our neighbours, but those who don’t agree with us will be destroyed.”

The influential French Jewish umbrella organisation CRIF is implacably opposed to the government of Syria. In 2008 it denounced a decision by then President Sarkozy to invite Assad to National Day celebrations although at a 2012 dinner hosted by the organisation Sarkozy predicted that the regime of Assad would fall. Sarkozy, who would be publically critical of his successor Francois Hollande’s perceived weakness in failing to militarily attack Syria, was alleged to have been inspired to intervene in Libya by the French Zionist media intellectual Bernard-Henri Levy.

It was Levy who, before an audience of the first National Convention of the CRIF in November of 2011, claimed that“it is as a Jew that I participated in the political adventure in Libya. I would not have done it if I had not been Jewish. I wore my flag in fidelity to my name and my loyalty to Zionism and Israel.”

When bombs explode and bullets are fired during episodes of terroristic violence on French soil, anti-Muslim sentiment is ratcheted up while critical commentary related to the policies pursued by the French state which have arguably contributed to the cycle of violence is correspondingly suppressed.

But it was revealed in 2012 that France had funded Syrian rebels. It is clear that the overwhelming majority of militias described as rebel factions in Syria have an Islamist agenda. Many of those militias portrayed as ‘secular’ have close working arrangements with more overtly Islamist ones who in any case have consistently proved to be militarily stronger and in many documented incidents have acquired Western supplied munitions and equipment from other rebel factions whether consensually or by force. In 2014, President Francois Hollande confirmed that France had delivered arms to Syrian rebels.

Mohamed Merah, the alleged perpetrator of terror attacks in Toulouse and Montauban was believed to have been a double agent working for French intelligence. Merah was not the first or last Islamist apparently under the radar of French intelligence who nonetheless managed to leave and re-enter France with relative ease even after travelling to war zones or countries which are hotbeds of jihadist activities.

In November 2015, the Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar al-Jaafri revealed that an attempt made two years earlier by the Syrian government to share the names of French citizens fighting in Syria was rebuffed by the French authorities.

The truth is that France has slavishly followed the United States-led policy of using Islamist insurgents as proxies in overthrowing secular Arab regimes. In doing so, France has been complicit in providing the cover used by the United States to intervene in the affairs of Muslim nations which in turn has provided the circumstances through which many young Muslims have been radicalised into becoming terrorists and jihadist insurgents. These wars have also contributed to an increase in refugees from those affected nations.

The institution of anti-terrorism laws covering state-sanctioned surveillance of citizens as well as the curtailment of freedoms through the evolution of a perpetual state of emergency have arguably effectively brought the republic to an end.

France’s resolute support for intervention in Syria does not come with the promise of any substantive political or economic benefits. While some among the French elite view it as a recolonisation project that will reassert French grandeur in the region, the proceeds to be obtained from the destruction of Syria will be largely acquired by other state actors including Israel which has claims on Syrian territory and is also anxious to profit from economic opportunities in the eastern Mediterranean.

The largely negative response to Emmanuel Macron’s call for the French to examine their conscience once again demonstrates a recurring blind spot in a nation with a historical predilection for self-examination, and the costs to its national interests are all too apparent.

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England.

The original source of this article is Adeyinka Makinde