EUROGET DE-INVEST: Speaks Out on 9 Hospitals

Kwaku Agyemang Manu, Minister of Health

In 2007, Euroget De-Invest s.a (EDI) of Egypt, an Egyptian investment company, with special expertise in structuring and arranging project finance and investment initiatives, entered Ghana and prospected for social infrastructure projects, specifically hospitals. The project involves construction of nine (9) state of the art fully functional hospitals including a 500 bed military hospital, 2 regional hospitals at Wa and Kumasi, and six (6) district hospitals at Salaga, Twifo Praso, Madina (Now at Atomic/Kwabenya), Konongo, Nsawkaw and Tepa. The 9 hospitals involves the Ministries of Health (8 hospitals) and Defence (1 Military hospital in Kumasi)

Euroget De-Invest successfully went through the regulatory processes and duly procured the contract, after processing the same through the various Ministries, Cabinet and Parliamentary approvals in 2008. Further, commercial and supplier credit agreements were signed in 2008. The Value for money audit on the contract was conducted by Crown Agents of UK and successfully concluded in 2009. Consequently, the Turnkey EPC contract for the 9 hospitals amounting to US$519.00 million was finalized in 2010. The Turnkey EPC contract is being financed by a supplier’s credit facility, secured by promissory notes issued by the Ministry of Finance (MOF).

The supplier credit facility is arranged on concessional terms, providing sufficient financial savings for the Republic of Ghana. The supplier’s credit facility, signed between Ministry of Finance and Euroget De-Invest s.a. contains the terms and conditions for the concessional funding. The supplier credit facility and its terms and conditions are being implemented, monitored and available at the Ministry of Finance. All payments under the contract are made in accordance with the agreed terms of the Supplier’s Credit agreement.

Subsequent to the value for money (VFM) audit in 2009, the commercial contract with the Ministries of Health and Defence were finally concluded in 2010, pending various conditions precedent for effectiveness. Various pre-conditions to the effectiveness of the commercial contract and supplier’s credit agreement have been strenuously pursued. These pre-conditions include; the issuance of agreed Promissory Notes in accordance with the agreement, which was obtained in February 2012 and legal opinion of the Attorney General in April 2012, signifying full effectiveness of supplier credit facility. Other pre-conditions for commercial contract with the Ministries of Health and Defence included the release of lands and grant of access to sites for the hospitals, which were obtained on various dates, the last release being in 2014, and grant of final tax exemption by Parliament in December 2016.

The execution of the hospitals project, scheduled in two phases and commenced at different dates, are at various stages of completion. The expected commissioning dates for the 9 hospitals are between July 2017 and April 2018, which are well within the contractual delivery period.

On this note, distinguished members of the press are invited to visit the various sites to avail yourselves of the progress on the work.

Editorial

KOREA

The threats by the United States of America to attack the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea have not in any way contributed to the restoration of peace on the Korean peninsula.

Indeed these threats have worsened tensions in South –East Asia and pushed South Korea and the DPRK to the brink of war.

There cannot be any doubt about the fact that the proliferation of nuclear weapons is a major threat to world peace and security.

However, we cannot accept the current situation in which some countries are allowed to make and keep nuclear weapons while others are attacked for doing the same thing.

In our view all countries of the world including Russia and the United States of America need to get rid of all their nuclear weapons.

A nuclear weapon in any hand is dangerous for the world.

The threats of attack on the DPRK will not make the world a more peaceful place.

Local News:

Bond saga: Minority deceiving public? 

Ken Ofori Atta, Minister of Finance

By Ibrahim Alhassan

A deputy Finance Minister Abena Osei Asare is accusing the minority of deception over claims of conflict of interest against her boss Ken Ofori-Atta.

The minority at a press briefing on Tuesday, April 18, 2017 cited the finance minister for conflict of interest and lack of transparency in the issuance of $2.25 billion 15-year bond.

Government issued 15 and 7-year bonds with a coupon rate of 19.75%, raising a total amount of USD1.13 billion. The Finance Ministry additionally raised cedi equivalent of USD1.12 billion in five and 10-year bonds through a tap arrangement. Former deputy finance Minister Casely Ato Forson at the press conference asserted Franklin Templeton Investment limited which acquired about 95% of the domestic bond floated earlier this month has a direct relationship with Mr. Ofori-Atta.

“In an unaudited semi-annual report of Franklyn Templeton Investment limited dated 31st December, 2016; Honourable Trevor G. Trefgarne was named as one of the five board of Directors of the firm. He was also described as the chairman of Enterprise Group Limited in the report.

Enterprise Group has 10 Board of Directors. Principal among them are Mr Keli Gadzekpo, Group Chief Executive of Enterprise Group; Dr Angela Ofori Atta, wife of Finance Minister Hon. Ken Ofori Atta who doubles as Director of Enterprise Insurance, a subsidiary of Enterprise Group.

“Enterprise Group also has Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Hon. Gloria Akuffo and Dr Angela Ofori Atta as non-executive members of the firm. Hon Gloria Akuffo is/was Director of Enterprise Life, a subsidiary of Enterprise Group (it is not clear whether she has resigned or not).

“It is now emerging that a firm that Hon Trevor G. Trefgarne works as a member of Board of Directors took substantial position in the April 3, 2017, bond issued by the Finance Minister. As noted, information that is now available in the public domain appears to indicate that Hon. Trevor G. Trefgarne is not just Board Chairman of Enterprise insurance Limited, a company owned partially by the current Finance Minister’s company, Data Bank Limited.

“Hon. Trevor G. Trefgarne is also a Director of Franklyn Templeton which is the main participant in the recent Bond issuance. Putting these apparent facts together, we have reason to believe that there is a relational interest between our Finance Minister and Trevor G. Trefgarne which creates a potential lack of transparency and conflict of interest,” the minority said.

The minority is calling a parliamentary probe into the deal.

The NDC MPs are threatening to drag the finance Minister to the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) if their quest to get the Legislature to look into the deal fails.

“Furthermore, we also intend to exercise the option of filing a report/petition with the Financial Services Authority of the U.S.A to investigate Franklyn Templeton. We also wish to point out that this Bond issue is clearly an international economic/business transaction within the meaning of article 181 (5) of the Constitution.

Therefore, we expected that the bond issuance would have been brought to parliament for approval”.

However, speaking to Starr News, a deputy Finance Minister Abena Osei Asare refuted claims of the minority explaining the previous administration dealt with the investor in question. “What the minority is seeking to do is just throwing dust into the public eyes. There are more important issues that we need to discuss. —This Franklin Templeton Investor that they are talking about, we’ve been doing business, Ghana has been doing business with them for more than 10 years now so I honestly don’t see what they are talking about”.

The Atiwa East MP also challenged claims the deal was shrouded in secrecy arguing the one day used in floating the bonds is a normal practice.

She stressed: “There is an issuance calendar which comes every quarter that will tell you the number of bonds that is going to take place in a particular quarter. So this is nothing new, they knew about it. They said that the period was just one day, my brother usually it’s two days but it’s happened before that these bonds are done in a day, there is nothing wrong with that, this is nothing out of the ordinary. It wasn’t done in secrecy, there is not conflict of interest here and they are free to do whatever they want to do. But I believe that in their quest to come to power, they shouldn’t destroy this country through some of these things. This is an investor you have worked with before; over 10 years. This investor bought 3.5 billion of your bonds so this is nothing new”.

Source: Starrfmonline

‘Planting for Food and Jobs’ short-term approach

Edward Kareweh, General Secretary, GAWU

By Jonas Nyabor

The General Secretary of the General Agricultural Workers Union (GAWU), Edward Kareweh, has cast doubt on the ability of government’s proposed ‘Planting for Food and Job’ program to address the many challenges in the agricultural sector.

According to him, the program is just a “stop-gap” measure which will have short-lived benefits.

Speaking on the Citi Breakfast Show, Mr. Kareweh said the approach by government does not tackle the underlying problems within the sector.

“It takes more than we are just seeing. These measures government is taking; I’ll call them stop gap measures. They are not permanent solution measures. They are not going to take us far. But we can get results within the short-term and then we will all be happy that we have implemented policies and come with results, but these are short-term measures. We need long-term measures.”

“Do we know how much it will cost the government to import fertilizer into this country? Are we thinking about building a fertilizer factory in this country? And how long will it take us?” he quizzed.

He lamented that, the government’s plan of importing fertilizer and improved seeds for distribution to the beneficiary farmers will not help the local economy.

“The unfortunate thing is that, we are going to import seeds, we are importing fertilizer, much of the money will simply go into importing all these things when in actual fact, if they were produced in this country, certainly the multiplier effect of it will be so great. One would not say what we are doing today will not bring benefits, they will bring benefits, but they will be short-lived,” he said.

He further said the elements of the program by the NPP government was not a novelty, especially with the provision of farm inputs and subsidized cost of fertilizer, which he said successive governments have also done without achieving the desired results.

He however urged the NPP government to make considerations for long-term solutions to ensure that relevant gains are made in the agricultural sector.

Planting for Food and Jobs program will fail if… – Peasant Farmers

By Jonas Nyabor

The Peasant Farmers Association of Ghana, has noted that, the government’s flagship programme for the agricultural sector, Planting for Food and Jobs, will fail if it is not properly restructured to target more small scale farmers, instead of large scale farmers.

According to the Association, government among other things has selected the wrong beneficiaries who will eventually collapse the programme.

President Nana Akufo-Addo is expected to officially launch the program on Wednesday, April 19, 2017, but the Association has said that its assessment of the current plan for the project indicates that it is likely to fail.

The Programme Officer for the Association, Charles Kwowe Nyaaba, in a Citi News interview said the current plan excludes over 70% of peasant farmers.

“The target beneficiaries in the first place are wrong. They are targeting the large-scale farmers, and not small scale farmers, but we all know that the farmer population in Ghana, we have over 80% being small-scale farmers… The approach of recruiting extension service personnel to help in the programme is wrong. If you go to the Ministry of Agriculture at the district level, you have the extension officers there who are not able to visit farming communities because of lack of logistics. You leave all these people hanging there and you say you are bringing National Service personnel to train them to go and train the farmers. At the end of the day, if you don’t take care, they would rather go and be learning from the farmers and that is not going to give us the impact that we are looking for,” he said.

Charles Kwowe Nyaaba added that, most rural farmers will be discouraged by government’s directive that beneficiaries of the programme deposit some amount of money into a bank account.

“We are also saying that, before you benefit from the facility, government is subsidizing 50% and the farmers will pay the initial amount of the 25% and those farmers are supposed to deposit the money in a rural bank, then after that you take the chip and go, before you’ll be allowed to benefit from the facility”, he emphasized.

According to him, most farmers live in very remote communities and that makes it difficult for them to access banks for such transactions.

“It is no surprise that business people are capitalizing on the sale of these facilities at a higher price, since majority of these farmers live in the rural areas and would not like to travel thus far to the banking facilities in order to benefit from these facilities. “We are also saying that before you benefit from the facility, government is subsidizing 50% and the farmers will pay the initial amount of the 25% and those farmers are supposed to deposit the money in a rural bank, then after that you take the chip and go, before you’ll be allowed to benefit from the facility”, he emphasized.

The NPP government has said that it intends to revolutionize agriculture in the country by introducing the programme which it said will create more than 750,000 jobs.

The programme, according to the government, would also motivate farmers to grow staple foods such as maize, millet, and beans. Interested farmers are to be provided with free seedlings among other agricultural inputs and agro-chemicals such as fertilizer at reduced prices.

President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo is expected to launch the national ‘Planting for Food and Job programme’ at Goaso, capital of the Asunafo Municipality in the Brong-Ahafo Region.

Source: citifmonline

Akufo-Addo has dismissed 14,000 workers in 100 days - Minority

James Avedzi Klutse

By Enoch Darfah Frimpong 

The parliamentary caucus of the opposition National Democratic Congress has assessed the first 100 days of the Akufo-Addo led government and said it has been full of wasteful expenditure and ‘wahala’.

To them, unless there was a divine intervention from God in the affairs of the nation, Ghana would be heading into a ditch under President Akufo-Addo.

“We ask the almighty God for divine intervention in the affairs of this station. Awurade begye steer no,” the deputy minority leader, Mr James Klutse Avedzi said at a press conference in Parliament House on Tuesday.

He said it has been 100 days of “broken promises, gross incompetence, shameful plagiarism by the president, proceed on leave and dismissal of over 14,000 workers from the national service, cocoa board, police training recruits, nurses, teachers and local government staff.

“It has been 100 days of hardships, deceit, wasteful expenditure on presidential swearing in ceremonies in Accra and Kyebi, wasteful expenditure on Ghana@60 celebrations, terrorism by Invincible Forces, Delta Forces and all the hidden partisan vigilante forces."

Flanked by other members in leadership of the minority, Mr Avedzi said it has been 100 days of "unprecedented bribery and conflict of interest in high places."

He pointed to the Ameri deal which government claims it was reviewing and said there has been conflict of interest in handling it.

Mr Avedzi said the 110 ministers appointed by President Akufo-Addo was a “wahala”

“Yes there is no end in sight… in our part we shall offer the needed support and criticise constructively with the view to spearheading the ailing Akufo-Addo government in order that they do not roll back the clock of progress started by the NDC."

"Ghana cannot wait for four years of recklessness, violence, lawlessness, insecurity, incompetence, hardship and bribery in high places. Mr President, listen to the plea of most well-meaning Ghanaians and drastically prone down the size of your government now," the minority said. 

Foreign News

Britain:

Jeremy Corbyn – A Silver Lining in the Trump Era 

By Asad Latif Palijo

In a welcome move earlier this week, UK PM Theresa May announced snap general elections on 8 June 2017- a full 3 years earlier than the original 2020 polls. On the face of it, this decision was taken to rally the parliament behind the complicated Brexit talks. The June polls would see a new government in place just before the round of talks scheduled later this year to finalise the messy divorce with the European Union after the shock 2016 Brexit vote.

For the pacifists around the world this brings forward favourable prospects of a Corbyn-led Labour government- a flicker of light in an era of Trump’s darkness.

Since the fateful Atlantic Charter signed between Churchill and Roosevelt in 1941 aboard HMS Prince of Wales, the U.K. has long been the most allied of allies and a junior partner to the US. Together the two nations have launched  unilateral wars and regime changes in the Middle East, Latin America and Africa since World War 2.

Very few people are aware of the clandestine coup that the two allies brought in Persian gulf that essentially paved the way for war, famine and destruction in our part of the world Long before the more famous Afghan Jehad wars.

The year 1953 saw the Iranian nationalist government of Dr. Mosaddeq toppled by the US/UK as recently confirmed by the declassified NSA documents. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB435/

The documents declassified under freedom of information laws, describe in detail how the US – with British help – engineered the coup, codenamed TPAJAX by the CIA and Operation Boot by Britain’s MI6.

This western intervention in a sovereign nation was done to protect western oil interests in Iran by installing a puppet Monarchy. This became the classic modus operandi for western allies who wished to protect their strategic resources in blatant disregard to international law and national sovereignty of countries. The UN quickly became a rubber stamp for these unilateral acts of aggression.

In Iran, people eventually rose up that would later see the puritans leverage the situation to their advantage in installing a religious regime. Ultimately in a zero sum game the Ayatullahs really hurt the Persian heritage of tolerance and Sufism founded on the poetry of Hafiz, Rufi and Jami. To imagine that it was all started for petrodollars makes mockery of human rights slogans of the west.

This Persian coup, together with the installation of the House of Saud in the Arabian Peninsula by MI6 British agent Lawerence of Arabia brought together the unholy nexus of war, oil and construction economy that has ever since intervened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and now Syria.

With Theresa May’s announcement of snap polls, for the first time in decades , there appears from among this theatre of war in an era of mutually assured destruction (MAD) , a silver lining in the form of Jeremy Corbyn, the first anti-war leader of a major political party in the entire western world.

Given Trumps penchant for war as demonstrated by Syrian strikes conducted over cake & biscuits, the need for Corbyn’s pacifism suddenly brings a ray of hope – a possibility of a more just global order.

Widely considered an outsider to the power corridors, Jeremy Corbyn’s rise to the mantle of Labour Party in 2015 is a story of rare determination. Within a year of his rise, his own party rebelled against him, forcing Corbyn to seek re election to the leadership. However, the labour voters – disenchanted with Blair-Brown-Miliband troika of putting themselves before the socialist ideals of the Labour Party – came out in an even stronger numbers to give Corbyn a comfortable majority.

During his parliamentary career stretching over 32 years, Mr Corbyn has been the most uncompromising MP in the Commons – defying party orders more than 500 times, marching with rival parties against the Labour government and even calling for an uprising against British troops over its excesses overseas. He is famous for splitting with his second wife following a row over their son’s education – Corbyn wanted public schooling for his son to set a precedence for other parliamentarians. He began his career rallying for the anti-apartheid movement and was even jailed several times.

But it is his anti war stance that speaks volumes of his courage and determination. During the wag the dog years of Blair-led Labour government, Corbyn went against his own party and voted against Iraq intervention. This anti apartheid veteran had the experience of injustice, war and racism in the latter half of the 20th century.

One hopes the British people will seize the opportunity to redeem themselves. For centuries their country was involved in colonialisation and intervention in sovereign government since the wild Wild West days of the East India company.

The world deserves better , the world deserves Corbyn.

The original source of this article is Global Research

Venezuela

Maduro: Venezuela demands respect

In his weekly television program “Los Domingos con Maduro” the Venezuelan President declared that the differences between Venezuela’s branches of government had been overcome. Photo: AVN

By Redacción Internacional

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, demanded respect for his country this April 2, and criticized the interventionist attempts of certain nations that have allied with Venezuela’s domestic extreme right to destabilize the government.

According to AVN, Maduro condemned unpatriotic sectors who, through the media war, present to the world “a caricature, a manipulated deformation of what Venezuela is, which like any country has its problems and resolves them peacefully, constitutionally.”

Faced with the tense situation in the country, on the evening of March 31, and into the early hours of April 1, Venezuela’s National Security Council met, presided by Maduro, which according to the constitution is the highest consultational body responsible for the planning and orientation of state power.

In a statement, read by Executive Vice President Tarek El Aissami, the Council called on the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) to review decisions no. 155 and 156, with the objective of maintaining constitutional stability.

Issued by the TSJ the previous week, both rulings sought to preserve the rule of law, in the face of those factions that seek to disregard the legal system and violate the national sovereignty of the Caribbean nation, especially within the National Assembly, which continues to be in a state of contempt of the judicial branch.

TSJ President, Maikel Moreno, indicated that the call of the Security Council was heard, and a statement was later issued on the court’s website clarifying important aspects of the past rulings.

The suspension of lawmaker’s parliamentary immunity was annulled, as well as the section referring to the Constitutional Chamber assuming determined functions of the National Assembly.

Following the Security Council meeting, President Maduro declared that the differences between the branches of state of the South American nation had been overcome, as teleSUR reported.

The ruling ratified that the Constitutional Chamber of the TSJ is “the competent body for the control of the constitutionality of the acts issued by any branch of national state power,” as well as “the resolution of conflicts between branches.”

Also expressed was the “rejection of any intervention that attempts against the independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and self-determination” of the Bolivarian Republic.

Statement by the Federation of Cuban Women regarding Venezuela

By Granma 

The Organization of American States (OAS), the very same that in 1962 expelled Cuba, and commits innumerable acts of treachery against the people to satisfy imperialist machinations, has once again assumed an antidemocratic stance, in violation of its own principles. The servile, unscrupulous behavior of its Secretary General Luis Almagro, who abides completely with the callous interests of the empire, in his attempt to apply the organization’s Democratic Charter against the sister Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, is a clear example. 

It is unacceptable that in the 21st century, in the name of democracy, the peoples’ right to sovereignty and self-determination be violated. It is shameful to promote interference in the internal affairs of countries, and far from speaking out against constant human rights abuses on the continent; against the criminalization of protests by social movements; femicide, which sees hundreds of women killed every day; and instead of consolidating the unity of Our America and working together to make the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace - adopted by CELAC in January 2014 - a reality, acts of destabilization are being undertaken against the Bolivarian Revolution and its President Nicolás Maduro.

Venezuela is not alone, we accompany the country in its struggle, and we recognize the greatness of its revolution and the humanist and solidary legacy of Comandante Hugo Chávez. We stand in defense of the country’s emancipatory social project, faithful followers of those who wrote and continue to write the true history of Latin America and the Caribbean. 

We Cuban women, witnesses to similar attacks against our own Revolution, side with the brave, the patriots, those who do not beg on their knees for slices of power and money. From the land of Mariana, Martí, Celia, Vilma, Fidel and Raúl, we declare our unconditional support and solidarity with the Venezuelan government, people, its heroic women, beneficiaries and protagonists of a profound social revolution, and to its President Nicolás Maduro Moros.

The Federation of Cuban Women 

CUBA:

The children who found 3,300 euros… and returned them

Adrian (l), lesniel (c) and Mailol with parent

By Ronald Suárez Rivas 

 It had started to get dark and they were coming home, like every afternoon, from soccer class. It was Friday and they were likely making plans for the weekend when, very close to the sidewalk, on a pile of balusters from a half-built house, two objects caught their attention.

The first was a map and on top of it, a wallet with lots, and lots of money.

“When we opened it and saw what was inside, we ran to my house and asked my mother what we should do with it,” recalls Maikol Eduardo Rodríguez Correa (11 years old), who of the three children lived closest to the discovery spot.

After checking inside the wallet and noting that in total it contained thirty-three 100 euro bills, a plane ticket, a document that looked like a driver’s license, and the passport of a German national, his parents’ response was categorical: everything had to be returned to the owner.

“We sat the three of them down in the living room and began to talk with them about all the values that should be instilled at home and in school, selflessness, modesty, humility,” explains Maikol’s father, Eddy Rodríguez.

“We also explained that the wallet belonged to someone who was just passing through our country, and that surely he was desperate, without money, without his documents, so we had to hand it in, and all three understood,” adds Maikol’s mother, Sandra Correa.

First, she accompanied the three children to the local immigration office, but as it was already late, there was no official there to speak to. The security guard suggested they go to the local police station.

“The officer on duty took a statement, and kept the wallet to locate the tourist. When we returned home, we explained to the parents of the other children what had happened, and they agreed that we were right to have acted as we did,” says Sandra.

The next day, she returned to the police station to meet the man who, with tears in his eyes, was still not over the shock of recovering his belongings.

“He was very emotional, and told me in English that he couldn’t explain how he felt, that it was incredible that children of that age had found such a large amount of money and decided to give it back.

“When he left the police station, he asked for our address and came to the house to meet the children. He told us that he would have liked to spend more time with them, but that he had to go.

“Alongside him was his family. His daughter, who didn’t speak Spanish either, expressed her gratitude for the gesture in English, and for the way in which we have raised our children,” Sandra adds.

Unfortunately, no photos were taken during the meeting, nor was there any exchange of addresses or emails to allow us to contact this German tourist and discover his version of events, but police in Viñales confirmed that it all occurred just as Eddy, Sandra and the children told us.

Several days later, on thinking about what happened, the family from Pinar del Río continues to believe that they acted correctly.

“There are people who criticize us, and tell us that we should have taken that money, but we don’t regret it at all.

“We come from a modest family, but with a lot of dignity, and those are the values we pass on to our children.”

Lesniel Alejandro Ramos Machín and Adrián Bosmenier León, the other two children who, together with Maikol, found the wallet, are also certain they did the right thing, and although, just like anyone else, there are many material things they would like to have, they note “You don’t touch what isn’t yours.”

All three children are in the sixth grade at the Eduardo García Delgado School in Viñales, and after school they play soccer at the local stadium. For now, their biggest dream is to one day become great athletes, although they may well change their minds over time. Whichever path they take in the future, these children who found a wallet containing 3,300 euros and returned it, will surely grow up to be good men.

REDUCE TAX: Telcos And Others Tell Government

Vice President Mahamoud Bawumia

Telecoms operators and other corporate organisations are kicking against the 5% National Fiscal Stabilisation Levy and have appealed to the new government to scrap it from its first budget.

Opposition to the tax stems from the argument that it has outlived its purpose and is now hurting the bottomline of businesses.

President John Dramani Mahama's government introduced the NFSL on July 15, 2013 to help reduce Ghana’s growing deficit. It was pegged at five per cent of the accounting profits of specified companies and institutions.

The categories of companies selected to pay this special tax include telecom service providers, banks,  (excluding rural and community banks) non-banking financial institutions, insurance companies, breweries, inspection and valuation companies, companies providing mining support services, as well as shipping lines, maritime and airport terminals.

The levy was expected to last for 18 months (ending January 2015) however the companies are still paying the tax.

Moreover, the new Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta has promised to get rid of all "nuisance taxes" in the country, and the payers of the NFSL expect that it will be included because it is a nuisance.

"We expect the new Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta to announce in this year's budget that the NFSL is finally out," one telco CEO said.

Ken Ofori Atta, Minister of Finance

Meanwhile, months ago, CEO of MTN Ghana, Ebenezer Twum Asante, said when the NFSL was introduced, the selected organizations were happy to pay because it was to help stabilize the economy.

He noted that on two previous occasions, the issue of waiving it was mentioned in the former president's state of the nation address but no action was taken and so the affected companies continue to pay.

"But we continue to do so at the expense of our own reinvestments and payment of dividends to our shareholders so we believe it is time for the government to start a discussion on how to wave it," he said.

Ebenezer Asante said the NFSL has overrun the period set for it to last for, and because the affected companies did not expect it to go beyond 18 months, it is now beginning to impact plans for expansion and more reinvestments.

"We were expecting the government to wave it latest by this year so that we can go back to our mandatory taxes, duties, and levies which we are very happy to continue paying," he said.

The MTN boss said telcos and other corporate institutions will continue to engage government on this matter and other related matters to ensure the best for the country.

Editorial

A PROMISE INDEED!

Yes, it is true!

The New Patriotic Party (NPP) in opposition made heavy weather out of the fact that taxes in Ghana are relatively high and promised to reduce them significantly.

Normally, it is alright to insist that all the promises which the NPP made must be fulfilled especially when spokespersons of the Party created the impression that they knew the state of the economy better than the sitting government.

However, all Ghanaians can see and know that any drastic reduction in taxes now would have very drastic and negative effect on the national economy.

Ghana does not simply generate enough revenue to pay public sector wages and to invest in social and economic development.

We urge those who are clamouring for substantial tax reductions to please cool down.

After all, we all knew that the promises were without substance.

Mawerehene Pushes For Gold Refinery In Ashanti Region 

By Farida Shaibu

The Mawerehene for the Asantehene, Baffour Hyeaman Brantuo, has advocated for a gold refinery in the Ashanti Region to help in processing the gold before it is exported.

According to him, this will bring more revenue into the country, and also create jobs, instead of the current system where gold is exported in its raw state.

At a press conference in Kumasi on Sunday, Baffour Brantuo said he was hopeful that the one-district, one-factory initiative by government would make this idea a reality as he cited Tepa as his ideal location.

“It is our belief that if the gold in Asanteman is not exported raw but refined, one can be sure that there will be a lot of benefits to the people of the region and I am working with the Tepahene to set up a refinery in Tepa.”

“I know that once we refine our gold, the source of gold will become important and for that reason, if your source is not a legal source, you cannot send gold for refinement and then for export. There is a lot of work to be created with this idea of one-district, one-factory. It is part of the agenda that is in this new city,” the Mawerehene said.

Ghana has mined gold for decades, but has failed to add value to the raw material, as the commodity is exported and refined outside, and sold back to Ghanaians at high cost.

The country has also failed to develop areas where the minerals are mined, despite the huge taxes government earns from the mining firms.

Some Observations on Production and Productivity

Jeremy Corbyn

By Edgar Hardcastle

In the August issue reference was made to the comparative slowness with which industrial productivity increases. (See “This Age of Plenty.”) As that statement runs counter to a widespread belief, it will be worthwhile setting out some of the relevant factors in order to justify the conclusion arrived at.

First of all, let us look at the claims made by those who believe that we have entered into an age of astounding productivity, an “age of plenty.”

The American group who call themselves “Technocrats” claim that the output per head of the workers in industry has increased thousands of times within a comparatively short period. Then Mr. J. L. Hodgson, author of “The Great God Waste” (see review in July SOCIALIST STANDARD), claimed in a broadcast talk delivered on April 17th, 1934 (obtainable from Mr. Hodgson at Eggington, Beds., at 2d. a copy), that “we have devised machines which speed up output per man of such things and processes as shoes, flour, pig-iron, bricks, ploughing and reaping, from fifty to three thousand times.”

In “The Great God Waste,” Mr. Hodgson tells us that the tractor and combined harvester and thresher “have during the last fifteen years increased the daily output of the wheatfield worker by some seventy fold&38221; (page 10); and that his experience has revealed to him “a vast and continuous increase in both industrial efficiency and in actual productive capacity” (page 9). These two statements appear in a section headed “Our Immense Potential Productivity.”

Mr. H. Norman Smith, prospective Labour Candidate for Faversham, writing in Forward (August 11th), claims, in complete seriousness, that mechanical progress has gone so far in the direction of increasing output per head that we are within measurable distance of “one immense robot factory, employing no workmen at all,” which “can deliver an unending stream of all the goods mankind needs.”

Black-shirted Sir Oswald Mosley, ever greedy to appropriate the more spectacular theories of his former Labour Party associates, now shares this “age of plenty" notion with his green-shirted Douglasite opponents. In his “Greater Britain” (1934 edition, page 61) he says that “Science, Invention, Technique, have recently increased the power to produce out of the range of all previous experience.”

There is no need to multiply instances, they abound in the journals published by the Technocrats, the Douglasites, the Mosleyites, the I.L.P. and the Labour Party. (The Communists, at least in Great Britain, have taken a sounder line on this question, due perhaps to Russian industrial experience.)

Now let us indicate what would be some of the results if these astounding increases of productivity had occurred.

First, it is obvious that if the output of each worker increased enormously, then a given number of workers would produce an enormously greater total output. On the other hand, if the total output were not increased, then the number of workers needed to produce the former total output would be enormously decreased.

By applying that test to industry we can at once dispose of one group of believers in an “age of plenty,” viz., the group that believes this enormous increase of productivity has actually been utilised in industry, in the direction, not of decreasing the number of workers, but of enormously increasing the total product. They can be shown to be wrong, because no such enormous increase has taken place. In Great Britain several reliable inquiries agree that only a very moderate increase in total output occurs year by year.

For example, in 1928 The Economist published “A British Index of National Prosperity,” by Mr. G. D. Rokeling, with a commendatory preface by Sir Josiah Stamp. Mr. Rokeling estimated the annual changes in the amount of “real national income” per head of the population. It is a little difficult to explain briefly what “real national income” meant in this connection, but roughly it represented the amount (not the value) of production of all kinds during each year. Although the final index included also income from abroad, and income from abroad had increased very rapidly, Mr Rokeling showed that the “real national income” per head of the population in 1927 was only four per cent, greater than it was in 1920, while in the intervening “crisis” years, 1921 to 1923, it was actually very much less than in 1920. Mr. Rokeling later extended the index to the year 1929, by which year there had been an increase to eight per cent, above the level of 1920, giving a total increase of only eight per cent, in nine years.

A second set of figures to support the view here put forward, is provided by the London and Cambridge Economic Service, which compiles an index of the “physical volume of production,” covering all the chief groups of manufacture, mining, food production, etc. This index at its peak (end of 1929) reached to only fifteen per cent, above the level of 1924. It then declined in 1932 to a point nearly twenty-five per cent, below the level of 1924, and did not reach the 1924 level again until 1934. (See Royal Economic Society September Reports on Economic Conditions. Memorandum No. 46, April, 1934.)

Estimates compiled by the Board of Trade, and others, give a similar picture. Our first conclusion is, therefore, that even during a period of more or less continuous expansion of production and sales, such as that from 1924 to 1929, the total output of industry increased by only a small percentage; in the above instance an average of two per cent, or three per cent, a year. (At certain periods, and in other countries, a somewhat larger increase has been estimated, but still of a quite moderate size. Some American figures suggest an increase of factory productivity of about five per cent, a year.)

Is Labour Still Needed in Production?

We now come to the second line of defence of the believers in an “Age of Plenty.” The Technocrats, and others, say that productivity per head increases, but not the total volume of production, because fewer and fewer workers are being employed in production. Thus one of the Technocrats, Mr. W. W. Parrish (New Outlook, New York, November and December, 1932), claimed that “man-hours per unit of product and the labour cost per unit have dropped in recent years to levels approaching zero.”

Mr. Norman Smith says (Forward, August 4th, 1934) that “mechanical invention steadily reduces the number of man-hours in production,” so much so in fact that, as we have already seen, Mr. Smith is contemplating the idea of wealth production by machines without workers. He wants the Labour Party to consider dropping its name because there isn’t any “labour” any more, while the Douglasites try to make our flesh creep with threats that 'soon' (how soon, nobody knows; Major Douglas has been playing fat-boy for at least twenty years and his “theories” are a century or more old), all the workers, except a mere handful, will be unemployed.

The Census of Production Figures (Board of Trade Journal, February 16th, 1933) are a complete answer to this superficial view of industry. Those figures show that between 1924 and 1930 the total number of persons employed in factory trades, building and contracting, and mines and quarries, did decline, but not by the vast numbers assumed by the Technocrats and others. The decline was from 6,411,000 to 6,013,600, a total decline of only 397,400, or six per cent: an average of less than one per cent, a year.

The same Board of Trade inquiry shows that in the six years the total volume of manufactured goods decreased by two per cent., while the number of workers in manufacturing industries alone declined by about five-and-a-half per cent.

Again, the Ministry of Labour Gazette, in December, 1933, published figures showing the number of insured workers actually in employment, divided into separate groups according to industry. For the whole group of manufacturing industries the number employed in June, 1933 (in spite of the depression and consequent low output), was within one per cent. of the number at June, 1923. (The number of workers in transport, distribution, building, etc., and also the number of workers in all insured trades increased between 1923 and 1933.)

Perhaps the most convincing disproof of the theory of rapid displacement of workers can be gained by examining an industry - the boot industry - in which, according to these theorists, some of the most striking mechanical developments have occurred. Attack, organ of the green-shirt Douglasites (June, 1934), for example, gave figures purporting to show a vast increase in productivity in the manufacture of boots and shoes. Yet when we look at the number of workers employed in this industry we find that between 1923 and 1933 the decline was actually less than two per cent. (Ministry of Labour Gazette, December, 1933.)

It will take more than two per cent, in ten years to set the Douglasite Thames on fire.

Or take agriculture, the industry in which, so Mr. Hodgson believes, the productivity of wheat-field workers has increased seventy-fold. Between 1923 and 1933 the number of persons employed in agriculture decreased from 772,387 to 715,100?a decrease of seven-and-a-half per cent, in ten years, less than one per cent, a year. (Statistical Abstract, 1934, page 259.)

Before leaving this question of the development of labour, it is interesting to notice how easily the careless use of figures can mislead. At the Conference of the Boot and Shoe Operatives’ Union, on May 21st, 1934, the census of production figures were given quite accurately and legitimate conclusions drawn from them. Several newspapers and propaganda journals, however, seized upon the figures and presented them as proof of the great increase in productivity. Actually the figures pointed to an increase of productivity per worker of less than three per cent, a year, from twenty-two pairs a week in 1924 to twenty-six pairs in 1930.

Incidentally, as the Technocrats have been responsible for much of the nonsense written about productivity, it is as well to remember that their figures have been discredited. When The Economist (London, March 18th, 1933) reviewed Raymond’s “What is Technocracy?” they agreed with his conclusion that the Technocrats’ figures were “wildly inaccurate,” and their researches “worthless.”

Does Waste Increase?

Some of the “Age of Plenty” warriors have still a third line of defence. Productivity does increase very rapidly, they say, but this is offset by a colossal wastage. Mr. J. L. Hodgson claims that “wealth and amenities do not increase one-tenth as fast as they would do if the hidden leaks could be discovered and stopped.” (”Great God Waste,” page 14.)

He went on to say that the effect of these “leaks” more than doubled during a period of a few months last year.

Now before looking for the fallacy in this argument, let us be clear about two distinct ways in which it could operate: (a) in industry itself, and (b) outside industry.

The first assumption (increased waste in industry itself) would work out as follows: Great increases in output per head assumed in each industry, but instead of sacking the redundant workers, or increasing the total output of industry, the employer allows (or is deceived into allowing) the redundant workers to be carried as “passengers” Thus the increased output per head of some of the workers would be offset by the fact that the rest of the workers idled away their time doing nothing. Now that would be one way of explaining how an increase in productivity per head could be offset by a growing “wastage” inside industry, and to some slight and temporary extent it may actually happen. In general, however, nothing of the kind is permitted to occur. Employers do not allow their workers to spend the day amusing themselves.

To be quite fair to Mr. Hodgson, he at least does not offer this as an explanation of the way in which the total output of industry fails to reflect a supposed increase in output per head. He would no doubt agree with us that if a boot manufacturer found that he could turn out as many boots with only one-tenth of the men (and assuming that he could not multiply his sales by ten) he would promptly sack the other nine-tenths.

We all know that the employers and their managers and foremen, and the scientific “sweaters≵ who form so-called industrial-psychology organisations, never cease to seek out ways of economising and increasing efficiency, and reducing staff.

Mr. Hodgson says that he has had much firsthand experience of one aspect of this economising process, and he readily admits that, so far from there being an increase in waste inside industry there is a constant decrease.

In order then to support the theory that an enormous increase in output per head is offset by an enormous increase of wastage, we must seek this wastage outside industry, not inside.

Mr. Hodgson tries to do this. He mentions many obvious instances of “wastage” (known to , Socialists for generations), such as unemployment, destruction of goods, war, advertising, etc., and out of this he constructs his theory of “leaks” which result in wealth increasing only one-tenth as fast as it otherwise would do.

Unfortunately, Mr. Hodgson does not show in full how he arrives at his estimate of the total amount of “wastage,” and when he does give details he exhibits a carelessness which does not encourage us to accept the rest of his estimate with any confidence.

On page 20, for example, he says that unemployment is three millions, plus another million temporarily stopped; being unaware apparently that the first figure already includes those temporarily stopped.

However, that is by the way. The main point is that even if Mr. Hodgson’s estimates of the volume of wastage were accurate they are not what is required to prove his case. His theory of a constant nullification of rapidly increasing productivity in industry, demands not merely evidence of large waste outside industry, but of rapidly increasing waste. He does not supply this and does not even attempt to do so in spite of being challenged several times on the point.

He has not done so for the very good reason that he cannot. No such enormous increase in wastage occurs. Both that and the alleged enormous increase in industrial productivity are myths.

It is probable that during a period of capitalist expansion following a crisis, “wastage” both inside and outside industry decreases as a whole, owing to the decrease of unemployment which is one of the largest components of the latter kind of “waste.”

We may sum up our analysis by saying that productivity per head of the workers in any established industry, and the total output of industry as a whole, are increased by inventions, machinery and new processes, but only at a comparatively slow rate.

In conclusion, it may be noticed that these “high-productivity,” “age of plenty,” “production without labour” theories, are typical by-products of each capitalist depression, born of crisis out of ignorance; just as the contrary nonsense of the Malthusians has its heyday during each period of capitalist expansion, when we are asked to gaze on the horrid prospect of famine through population increasing faster than our means of subsistence.

CUBA WANTS BETTER RELATIONS WITH US

Josefina Vildal

By Iramsy Peraza Forte 

Cuba has reaffirmed its willingness to continue working to improve relations with the United States and build ties of peaceful co-existence and mutual benefit, during the fifth Bilateral Commission meeting, held in Havana. 

Speaking to the press, Josefina Vidal, director general for the United States at Cuba’s Ministry of Foreign Relations and head of the island’s delegation to the Commission, stated that the country is willing to identify new opportunities and work to build a different kind of relationship with the U.S. - a civilized one based on respect, without making any kind of concession or renouncing principles to which the island is committed. 

According to Vidal, during the meeting the Cuban delegation explained that the reestablishment of diplomatic relations, opening of embassies, and development of cooperation ties in distinct areas benefit the two countries and reflect the interests of both parties. 

“We also spoke about how developing relations in the economic-trade sphere could benefit the two countries, an issue in which we have only taken initial steps, given that we still face a very restrictive framework, from the point of view of the regulations which prevail in the United States,” she added.

Economic-trade relations can only be expanded if the blockade is lifted, which would create important opportunities to develop these ties, stated Vidal.

She went on to note that Cuba and its government hope that the new U.S. administration will not only take into account the results of the Bilateral Commission over the past 15 months, but also those achieved since rapprochement began following the December 17, 2014 announcements, a process supported by the majority of Cuban and U.S. citizens, including most Cubans living in the U.S., and the vast majority of countries around the world. 

Vidal also confirmed that an ambitious work agenda - which will require a concerted effort by both parties in order to achieve the desired results and resolve certain pending issues – was drawn up during the meeting, this time presided by Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Mari Carmen Aponte.

We intend to conclude discussions on the majority of key issues we have been negotiating with the government of Barack Obama, by January, noted Vidal.

In this sense she highlighted that work is underway to finalize negotiations and sign 12 new cooperation agreements in spheres such as seismology; meteorology; protected land areas; sea pollution caused by oil spills; the application and enforcement of the law; search and rescue operations; and delimitation of the Dona Oriental in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Vidal noted that the next high level visits, holding of work groups - set to take place over the coming weeks and focusing on issues featuring in the Economic Bilateral Dialogue which began in September, such as regulatory matters, energy, trade and investment, and intellectual property - and technical encounters on aviation, and between Cuba’s border troops and the U.S. Coastguard, were all established during the meeting. 

She also stressed the Cuban delegation’s insistence that, despite positive measures taken by the U.S. government, these continue to be of a limited scope, while the persistence of the blockade has significantly impacted the country’s trade and economy. “The lifting of the blockade is vital if Cuba and the United States are to have normal relations,” she stated. 

The Cuban diplomat reported that the island’s delegation repeated its call for the territory illegally occupied by the U.S. Naval base in Guantánamo to be returned, and an end to existing interventionist policies which harm Cuban sovereignty, in order to advance on the path toward the normalization of relations. 

She went on to state that the delegations undertook a positive assessment of the results of the fourth Bilateral Commission, held in Washington on September 3, highlighting the high level visits made by both parties; the adoption of a new agreement in the field of health (Memorandum of Understanding for Collaboration in the Area of Cancer Control); resumption of regular flights to Havana from the U.S.; the holding of technical encounters on air space and aviation security, health, environmental protection, and hydrography; as well as others linked to the application and enforcement of the law, and talks on issues of bilateral and multilateral interest, such as human rights, and the non-proliferation of weapons and disarmament. 

Vidal noted that both parties recognized the usefulness of the Commission, created in August 2015, during U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit to Cuba, which has resulted in the signing of 12 cooperation agreements on issues of mutual interest and 24 high level visits. 

Finally, the Cuban diplomat highlighted that the island is continuing to see a sustained increase in arrivals of U.S. citizens, with just over 208,000 having visited Cuba by the end of October 2016, representing an increase of 68% as compared to the same period last year.

Meanwhile, 248,000 Cubans residing in the U.S. traveled to the island between January and October of 2016, an increase of 4%, she noted. 

Vidal also reported that over 1,200 cultural, scientific, academic, and sporting exchanges have taken place from January through October, this year, representing an increase of 12% as compared to 2015

Philippines’ Duterte Seeks Peace?

Rodrigo Duterte

By Marjorie Cohn

Filipino President Duterte oversaw a brutal anti-drug campaign but is now seeking peace with leftist revolutionaries and rejecting U.S. pressure for more counterinsurgency warfare, writes Marjorie Cohn.

In April 2016, Rodrigo Duterte won the Philippine presidential election by a landslide, with more than 6 million votes. He openly declared that he was the nation’s first Left president, calling himself a socialist but not a communist. So far, his regime has been controversial, to put it mildly.

The U.S. press has focused on Duterte’s vicious war on drugs that  claimed upwards of 2,000 lives and led to the incarceration of tens of thousands of people. His decision to allow former Filipino dictator Ferdinand Marcos’s burial in the National Cemetery of the Heroes also has drawn the ire of those who recall Marcos’s brutal two-decade regime that killed more than 3,000, tortured tens of thousands, and stole $10 billion from the Philippines.

But, significantly, Duterte is engaging with revolutionary forces in the peace process that aims to end 47 years of armed struggle against the repressive Filipino government. And Duterte has taken actions that, for the first time, challenge the longstanding military and economic power of the United States in the Philippines.

Peace Process With Opposition

Since 1969, a civil war has been raging in the Philippines. The roots of the armed conflict can be traced to the colonial and neocolonial domination of the Philippines by the Spanish, then U.S. imperialism, feudal exploitation by big landlords and capitalist interests, as well as widespread bureaucratic corruption. After Duterte’s election, he cited peace as a top priority of his administration, vowing to engage in peace negotiations with the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP).

According to JustPeacePH, an international platform that supports the Philippine peace process and takes its name from its Internet site, “justpeace.ph,” “The daily, systematic and systemic injustice experienced by the people drive them to desire and seek fundamental changes in society through various means. But because the forces against fundamental social change use all means including the instruments and violence of the state to defend the status quo, many Filipinos over many generations have embraced armed struggle to overthrow the ruling system.”

The NDFP “is the alliance of progressive forces seeking to bring about fundamental change in the existing social system in the Philippines through armed revolution,” JustPeacePH states in its Primer on Just and Lasting Peace in the Philippines. The NDFP alliance includes trade unions, peasants, youth, women, national minorities, teachers, health workers, religious clergy, the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), and the New People’s Army.

Duterte’s Peace Initiative

Two rounds of peace negotiations have already occurred since Duterte took office, with a third scheduled for January 2017 in Oslo, Norway.

In May, Duterte declared he would release all political prisoners, which number more than 400, through a presidential declaration of amnesty, provided both houses of congress approve. Nineteen NDFP consultants, who have been involved in the revolutionary movement for years, have already been released.

Duterte offered four cabinet positions to the CPP, but they declined, stating there must first be a comprehensive peace agreement. The CPP, however, recommended a veteran peasant leader who was appointed Secretary of Agrarian Reform and a veteran academic activist leader who was named secretary of social welfare and development.

“These are major appointments,” Luis Jalandoni, NDFP’s Senior Adviser on the Peace Negotiating Panel, told me at a recent conference of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers in Lisbon, Portugal.

NDFP has a people’s army and organs of political power with mass organizations in 71 out of the 81 provinces in the country, Jalandoni said. He noted that landlessness and poverty afflict the 100 million people in the Philippines.

“The NDFP insists on addressing the roots of the armed conflict in order to achieve a just and lasting peace,” Jalandoni said.

The demands in the peace talks are: Release of all political prisoners; Land reform for the peasantry (70% of the population); National industrialization to develop the economy using available human and natural resources; Protect the environment and ancestral lands of the indigenous peoples; and Philippine national sovereignty and abrogation of all unequal treaties with the United States.

Challenging U.S. Power

U.S. domination and interference in the Philippines date back to 1898, when the United States annexed the Philippines. The U.S. continued to exercise colonial rule over the country until 1946, when the Philippines gained its independence although the United States retained many military installations there and the Filipino economy maintained its dependence on the U.S.

With U.S. assistance, Marcos ruled the Philippines with an iron fist from 1965 through 1986, under martial law from 1972 to 1981. In 2002, the Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo government developed Oplan Bayanihan, a counterinsurgency program modeled on U.S. strategies. After 9/11, the Bush administration gave Arroyo $100 million to fund that campaign in the Philippines.

Oplan Bayanihan led to large numbers of extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, torture and cruel treatment. Many civilians, including children, have been killed. Philippine military and paramilitary death squads murdered hundreds of members of progressive organizations. Communities and leaders opposed to large-scale and invasive mining have been targeted. Even ordinary people with no political affiliation have not escaped the government’s reign of terror.

From 2001 to 2010, the U.S. government provided more than $507 in military assistance to the Philippine government, facilitating tremendous repression.

Between 2010 and 2015, the Philippine police, military and paramilitary forces perpetrated extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, torture, illegal arrests and forced evacuation, many to enable extraction by mining companies.

The 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, which President Barack Obama negotiated with Duterte’s predecessor, gave U.S. troops the right to prolonged deployment in the Philippines. The agreement is widely seen in the Philippines as a threat to the country’s sovereignty.

In September 2016, Duterte declared, “I am not a fan of the Americans … Filipinos should be first before everybody else.” He added, “In our relations to the world, the Philippines will pursue an independent foreign policy. I repeat: The Philippines will pursue an independent foreign policy.”

The United States has not apologized for all the atrocities it committed against the Filipino people, Duterte said. Responding to U.S. criticism of the Philippines for its human rights violations, he stated, “Why are you Americans killing the black people there, shooting them down when they are already on the ground.”

Duterte promised to end joint military maneuvers with U.S. forces and expel the hundreds of U.S. troops currently stationed in the Philippines. He also expressed his intention to end bilateral agreements concluded by his predecessor with the United States and reverse permission for the United States’ use of five Philippine military bases.

“I will break up with America,” Duterte said. “I would rather go to Russia and to China.” He vowed to rescind joint patrols with U.S. and Filipino forces against Chinese expansion in the disputed South China Sea. Indeed, Duterte recently traveled to China and secured valuable fishing rights for Filipinos in the South China Sea.

Hope for Peace Prospects

In an unprecedented development, both the government and the opposition declared unilateral ceasefires in August. But there are still problems with the government’s ceasefire, says Jalandoni, as Duterte doesn’t have full control of the military. The military and paramilitary forces, which are protected by the military, have engaged in several violations that imperil the ceasefire, he said.

“There is high optimism that the peace talks will prosper under the presidency of Duterte,” according to JustPeacePH. “Unlike past presidents who harbor strong anti-communist bias, Duterte seems capable of rethinking the government’s peace strategy since he claims to be a socialist.”

Opposition forces are not uncritical of the excesses in Duterte’s war on drugs. The CPP declared the campaign is becoming anti-people and anti-democratic. Due process must be respected, human rights must be upheld; the drug users and small drug dealers, who come from poverty, require rehabilitation and care, the CPP maintains.

“Understandably, Duterte’s war on drugs and other crimes is given more coverage by the global media,” JustPeacePH wrote in its primer. “But Duterte’s aim to establish a lasting peace in the provinces deserves even more attention as this strikes at the root causes of the problem of illegal drugs and related crimes.”

Jalandoni said, “Duterte is not a saint but he stands for an independent foreign policy. His stand against the United States is respected and has received a lot of support.”

The NDFP, Jalandoni noted, says that “if there are threats against Duterte by U.S. imperialism, the Left will be a reliable ally to him,” adding, “He is the first president to stand up to the United States.”

Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, and deputy secretary general of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. She is a member of the International Legal Assistance Team that advises the National Democratic Front of the Philippines on human rights and humanitarian law in their peace negotiations. Her most recent book is Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues. Visit her website at http://marjoriecohn.com/ and follow her on Twitter @marjoriecohn.

The original source of this article is Consortium News

Cairo & Riyadh standoff – political displacement and the new axis of resistance

Abdel Fatah al-Sisi (R) and King Salman of Saudi Arabia

By Catherine Shakdam 

Just when you thought the MENA region could not churn out any more crises... This time two giants are locking horns over conflicting geopolitical ambitions, or rather, Saudi Arabia might have overstepped one boundary too many against Egypt.

With so many eyes locked in on Aleppo, much of Cairo and Riyadh’s belligerent political foreplay has gone largely unnoticed, labelled by most as unimportant in comparison to the Syrian furore. 

Without taking anything away from the breath-taking advances the Syrian Army has accomplished against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) in Aleppo – a victory we know will change the course of the war forever, and firmly assert Syria as a grand pillar of resistance against the insanity of covert western imperialism, Egypt’s growing ire towards the kingdom could lead to a tectonic political shift of such magnitude that it could spell the end of all Persian Gulf monarchies. And just like that, the ghost of President Gamal Abdel Nasser is coming back to haunt Riyadh's golden palaces.

Call it poetic justice if you like, but there is a certain irony to Saudi Arabia’s mounting arrogance, since every move it has played towards expanding its gravitas in the region has in fact diminished its relevance... and bled its coffers dry.

Yes, undeniably, the kingdom is still wealthy, but like any other nation, its core power lies in its ability to coerce others to its will. And, if Riyadh has played its chequebook like a violin, the war in Yemen and mounting dissent within the ranks of its political and military coalition have taken much wind out of Saudi Arabia’s political sails.

As it turns out, the Saudi lobby might have overestimated its traction.

It all began in April 2016, when Egypt was still keen to assuage Riyadh’s concerns over its political choices in exchange for a healthy injection of cash into its stressed economy. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s infatuation with King Salman would be short lived though, being far more motivated by money than ideology.

Saudi Arabia’s core power is tied to its wealth, not its ability to inspire nations.

But back to Egypt.

In exchange for a series of lucrative contracts and promised diplomatic support, Egypt agreed to transfer some of its territorial integrity to the kingdom by ceding control over two of its islands: Tiran and Sanafir. Located at the southern entry to the Gulf of Aqaba, where both Israel and Jordan maintain important ports, the islands are of great geopolitical importance, so much so in fact that Tel Aviv has long coveted them for itself.

Egyptians were not exactly pleased. In fact, news of the deal ignited an impassioned debate on the legality of the move, since Egyptian territorial integrity is the cornerstone of the Egyptian Constitution.

Taking to social media to express outrage, Hamdeen Sabahi, once a presidential hopeful (2014), denounced the planned handover, saying it went against the Egyptian Constitution which prohibits ceding territory. As he called for a complete withdrawal of the agreement, Sabahi implied Riyadh was taking advantage of Egypt’s economic vulnerability to play empire-building.

Egypt was angry – so angry that Sisi had to concede a parliamentary review. Saudi Arabia’s deal was dead in the water before it could take its first breath.

This one incident has now metamorphosed into a full-blown spat, as each party has raised its fists in defiance, keen to remind the other just how mighty they can be if pushed too far.

And so the dance began!

The first real blow came when Egypt voted this October in favor of Russia’s draft proposal on Syria to the United Nations Security Council, thus directly positioning itself against Saudi Arabia and its ambition to see Syrian President Bashar Assad fall from power. In an analysis for al-Monitor, Khalid Hassan wrote: “The draft was unacceptable to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which seeks to depose the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and which viewed Egypt’s vote for the resolution as a deviation from the Arab position.”

Riyadh responded in kind this November when it froze all oil imports to Egypt. Reuters reported: “Saudi Arabia has informed Egypt that shipments of oil products expected under a $23 billion aid deal have been halted indefinitely, suggesting a deepening rift between the Arab world's richest country and its most populous.”

Note that Riyadh’s snub came as Egyptian Oil Minister Tarek El Molla was rumored to have scheduled a visit to Iran, as part of an economic and energy broadening effort.

Whether Egyptian officials will break bread with their Iranian counterparts in the near future or not is irrelevant. What matters are long-term political alignments, and if anything, the past few months have proven that Cairo and Riyadh sit on very different political tables altogether. As for Iran, experience has proven that for every misstep the Kingdom has taken, Tehran’s traction has amplified tenfold. When one needs only to sit still to grow in strength, the impatient tend to miscalculate.

Although a reconciliation with Egypt is still possible, Saudi Arabia’s latest stunt in the Horn of Africa is likely to further aggravate grievances, and awaken Egypt’s national anger.

Earlier this December, news broke that Saudi Arabia would open a military base in Djibouti. The Egyptians were not amused.

The New Arab quoted an official Egyptian source as saying: “Cairo is totally against the deal because it considers Djibouti to be under the Egyptian sphere of influence and because its location is important for national security... This move goes against the generally accepted customs between Arab countries as the area has a direct influence on the passage of ships towards the Suez Canal. If Saudi Arabia wants to ensure that Iran does not take control of the area, that is understandable – however, this must take place with Egyptian oversight and permission.”

But why is the Horn of Africa so crucial to Egypt’s national security? One word: water.

A dispute over access to water resources in the region would ignite an existential struggle which would explode the MENA and feed dangerous fires given Africa’s recent descent into radicalism. Nigeria comes to mind.

I will say this: the kingdom’s belligerence will only further strengthen those resistance movements which have emerged across the MENA, each in reaction to both imperialism and Wahhabism. 

How long before those different movements merged into one to tumble al-Saud’s house, and like dominoes those monarchies fall...