Ethiopian PM Says State of Emergency Was Warranted

Ethiopia is in a state of crisis. Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn has ordered the government to block social media sites for fear it will incite ethnic conflict and violence. A state of  emergency has been declared after conflicts in regards to the Oromo ethnic group. The Oromo have faced racial discrimination and harassment. They are no longer willing to be subjected to oppression and want equal rights as Ethiopian citizens. This ban on social media could be a way for the government to stop dissent in the East African nation. Ethiopia has faced numerous challenges which include the fall out from the Arab Spring, the contention with Egypt in regards to dam projects, and involvement in Somalia. One question remains which many have feelings of trepidation about. Will the state of emergency remain permanent? This has been done in numerous countries for a ruling group to maintain power indefinitely. What also seems disturbing is the disregard for free speech. Hate speech is deplorable, but to prohibit it endangers free speech itself. Then what exactly could hate speech legally be defined as? This attempted ban on hate speech could silence advocates for human rights and social justice. The TPLF must realize that there is one Ethiopia and the Oromo have the right to contribute to it as much as they do. That means releasing Merera Gudina and allowing the Oromo People's Congress to function in government. If not, Ethiopia will never reach its goals of attaining stability, development, and its place as a continental leader of Africa.     

UN condemns takeover of Gambia's Electoral body by military

President Jammeh only days after electoral defeat has revoked his concession of the office. He is now demanding a recount and the military has now taken over the Electoral Commission. West African leaders have met with President Jammeh to urge him to accept the results. Ellen Sirleaf and Muhammadu Buhari met with the Jammeh on the behalf of ECOWAS nations. The fear is that the situation could lead to civil war spilling into other countries. Simultaneously, the UN condemnation could lead to the authorization of military force by Western powers. President Jammeh's party is also challenging the electoral results in the Supreme Court of Gambia. The UN could have disrupted a peaceful negotiation for the transfer of power. The ECOWAS delegation was attempting to solve an African problem, without having external intervention. Gambia is now being threatened with sanctions. The question that now comes is what will happen if President Jammeh does not leave office?  The possibilities are not pleasant prospects. There could be scenarios similar to Ivory Coast or Libya. This is only the beginning of a long struggle. Only time will tell where it might lead.     

Taiwan, Trump, and China

Donald Trump broke standard diplomatic protocol by contacting Taiwanese president Tsai Ing-wen. This violates the 1979 agreement in which the US severed diplomatic relations with Taiwan in exchange for normal relations. These actions by Donald Trump not only show a lack of finesse in international relations, but a pugnacious nature in relation to China. This has been seen by China as a provocation. The country has already become suspicious of the Asia pivot of the Obama administration, which has been seen as encirclement. There is growing tension among the US and China. Disagreements over trade, interventions, and general attitudes toward international law are rife. Donald Trump has he transitions to the office of US president has found in China a convenient scapegoat. During the campaign he constant stated that "Japan and China are ripping us off." This resonated with working class whites who have been squeezed out of the labor market, due to the changes brought on by globalization. The manufacturing jobs and production centers have been outsourced overseas to developing nations. China is not the only country in which these jobs go, but much of the anger is directed at this country. The reason is based around sinophobia and racism. The United States and China are edging closer to open hostility and conflict. The United States wants to remain the sole superpower and targets nations that could be potential competitors. The United States could be possibly preparing for a direct confrontation with China, with the Taiwan's assistance. This process may not be immediate, but a gradual one over a number of years. A Donald Trump presidency lacking skill could quickly escalate a volatile situation. Directing American frustration away from internal problems by hate is a method used to ease pressure off a presidential administration. This becomes even more dangerous with a Taiwanese president that does not want to negotiate with Beijing.  
       Taiwan and China are still stuck in a conflict that was part of the Cold War. China during the 20th century was undergoing major revolutions. The first was the 1911 push for a democratic system under Sun Yat-sen. The Republic of China was fragile and was later challenged by the warlords. They only way they could be defeated was by the force of the Chinese Communist Party and the Kuomingtang. The year 1927 saw an end to the control of the warlords, but China then was plunged into civil war. Chiang Kai-shek established a government having authoritarian control. Mao Zedong wanted to remove this government and establish a communist state. Kai-shek wanted to eliminate the communists and have absolute control of  China. His defense policy was focused so much on the CCP that he ignored the threat that came from the Japanese Empire. Manchuria was invaded in 1931 and full scale war broke out in 1937. The Chinese Civil war was merely interrupted and with the defeat of imperial Japan the CCP and the Kuomingtang could not reconcile. Ultimately, Mao Zedong was triumphant driving Kai-shek to Taiwan. Ever since 1949 Taiwan and China have been enemies. The administration of Ma Ying-jeou was seeking dialogue with the mainland. Meetings with president Xi Jingping  appeared as if a new era could emerge. However, with the election Tsai Ing-wen the policy is gradually being reversed. The Democratic Progressive Party has a platform that is pro-independence and prefers not to have dialogue with the People's Republic of China.

Although her presidency is still in  its infancy, evidence suggest a more aggressive stance. There have been indications that under president Tsai Ing-wen is building up the armed forces. She has according to The South China Morning Post  requested reforms to the defense ministry to draft in January of 2017. President Ing-wen has claimed that there are both internal and external inefficiencies that plague the Taiwanese military. Speaking at a military drill her emphasis she claimed was not directed at China. The attempt to make this appear as defensive rather than offensive does not deceive the public. It has been common knowledge that relations continue to be strained between Taiwan and China. Military experts in Taiwan have claimed that their army is weak relative to the strength of the People's Liberation Army. These fears of a Chinese invasion seem to be paranoid, but there is an element of truth. Mao did make an attempt to strike at Taiwan in 1958. Then there was the Taiwan Strait missile crisis of 1995- 1996. These incidents have built mistrust between Taiwan and China. A military build-up or belligerence will never be a solution. This could encourage not only confrontation, but other Asian nations to start build-ups of their own. Japan already wants to discard its pacifist constitution and the Shinzo Abe government was a program of militarization. North Korea reacting from US actions in Asia continues to pursue a nuclear weapons program. Vietnam concerned about the growing power of China would also respond. 

Taiwan appears to want to assert its independence. The reality is that has been independent in a de-facto sense in relation to the mainland. President Tsai Ing-wen has articulated that the army must perform better as a fighting force. There have been accidents during military drills, which may explain these statements that were given back in August of 2016. There could be attempts in the future to establish a formal break away from mainland China. There is also a strong desire to upgrade military equipment. Taiwan buys most of its weapons and equipment from the United States. The United States also agreed to a $1.8 billion arms deal with Taiwan. This decision  by the Obama administration made sense if he wanted his Asia pivot to be a success. Other nations in Asia were courted including Australia, Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines, which is morphing into an anti-China coalition. The deteriorating relations with the mainland could be politically helpful to Tsai Ing-wen. Issues such as political appointments, the missile firing incidents, and labor protests are challenges. China could be a unifying for among the public and deflect attention away from government failures. Tsai Ing-wen won the election with a landslide, but public support is dissipating . The reason she was elected is that Taiwanese were fearful that closer relations with China would mean the loss of sovereignty. Ma-Ying Jeou  was seen as representing big business and having closer connections to the mainland. The general view is that these changes would not benefit Taiwanese as a whole. Working conditions and lay off compensation are contentious issues. Although there are admirable goals like improving the lives of aboriginal Taiwanese and pension reform these will not  be  accomplished under a government that is military focused.  While nations retain the right to defend themselves from aggression, these measures seem to be provocative in behavior. 

          The complexities of Asian politics and diplomacy require a leader with a greater understanding of history and geography. Donald Trump has no comprehensive foreign policy. He won the 2016 election not describing it or giving lucid answers. His followers do not care about the intricacies of international affairs. Donald Trump's understanding of the world is limited. Based on his contradictory and sometimes false statements an image emerges. Trump sees China as an enemy, even though relations were established under the Nixon administration. The circumstances were not that the US saw the error in its behavior acting belligerent to China, but that it was losing the war in Vietnam. China being a supporter of the North Vietnamese, had much influence. The reason North Vietnam was not invaded with ground troops was the fear of Chinese reaction. President Nixon thought he could win the war by negotiation with China and simultaneously during combat over to the South Vietnamese army. This was a failure and America was driven from Indochina. China moved closer to the United States when relations deteriorated with the Soviet Union. The Sino-Soviet split had major international implications. The communist world became divided. After the death of Mao, China moved toward a free market system. Deng Xiaoping instituted these reforms, which had negative consequences. Inequality in terms of income increased and political reforms did not advance . This was ironic considering the manufacturing sector was successful. This is the root of America's growing enmity towards China. The outsourcing of manufacturing jobs has been blamed on China. Trump has repeated this fabrication as a candidate and president elect. Outsourcing is the product of neoliberal capitalism. Donald Trump's companies have benefited from this at the cost of American workers, yet working class whites cannot comprehend this. They voted for him in the rust belt and economically depressed areas of the United States. Whites of significant financial means were supportive of his anti-regulation stance. Donald Trump instead of formulating policy has presented China as well as immigration as the route of America's problems. It is no secret he hold racial hatred and this is just one more group he targets. The United States has a long history of anti-Asian racism. The Chinese were subject to discrimination and violence when arriving to the United States. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was designed to stop Chinese emigration to the US. Chinese laborers then as well as now were blamed for economic struggle. Donald Trump articulates a modern day nativist racism. It extends beyond just excluding a group, but demonizing an entire country and its people. 

      China is today the world's second largest economy and a world power. This has made countries such as Japan, Taiwan,  Vietnam, and South Korea nervous. The United States has utilized this fear to its advantage. There is a narrative developing which presents China with ambitions for global dominance. This is not the case. China's policies in Africa disprove any plans for mass empire. There are business contacts between Zimbabwe, Zambia, South Africa, Chad, Sudan, and South Sudan. There never demands for military bases or the adaption of Chinese political ideology. The US and its Western allies demand that all governments be liberal democracies, based on their form of governance. The US continues to build this narrative of an expanding China, but the reality is America is intruding in the Pacific. 

The Obama administration's pivot to Asia has created a hostile atmosphere. If one examine the location of US bases and installations it appears as if China is being encircled. US analysts claim that this is not directed at China, but North Korea. This does not seem plausible, due to the fact that the South Korean military seems equally capable of  fighting North Korea. Japan could respond if such a conflict were to erupt. North Korea's military strength is not equivalent to the US. However, the United States presents this nation as a major danger and threat. These bases are not a response to a nuclear North Korea, because the arsenal they attempt to build will never be on the same level as the United States and China. The United States is trying to stop and rival competitors in global influence. Japan also wants to challenge China. It is doing so by reaching out to African nations. Japan also wants to build up its military for as the Shinzo Abe government claims, peace keeping missions. These new policies are not directed at keeping peace, but preparing for confrontation. The mistrust of China has led Asian nations to side with the United States which is transforming into an zone of influence. President Xi Jingping unlike his other Asian neighbors does not have a problem associating with Russia. The response to a more aggressive US has caused closer ties between China and Russia. The South China Sea dispute has caused China to reassess certain security measures. Increasing US presence in the Pacific and the expansion of NATO in Europe will cause Russia and China to have even deeper military relations as well. The world is gradually being divided into rival alliance systems, which could result in mass global conflict. The contact  with Taiwan made by Donald Trump could be seen as a provocation. Taiwan could be used in a proxy war against China in a Donald Trump presidency. The only problem is that their military is not at an equivalent strength. There also could be the prospect of a US led coalition against China. This would require that Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, and the Philippines participate. This possible plan would also have complications, seeing as the Rodrigo Duterte presidency wants to close US bases. The country is gradually aligning with China and Russia. China has become more defensive with feelings of trepidation their country will be the next target of regime change. 

      It is not an exaggeration to say that the situation is precarious. There is a US president elect who is unprepared and unqualified for office. A de-facto  independent island that desires to assert  itself militarily, which caused ire in Beijing. President Obama made a mistake of increasing US military presence in Asia-Pacific. The conservative administration will continue to expand upon this, which could lead to war. This war would not only involve the US and China. It would escalate to include their allies. Combined with the rhetoric coming from Trump and his racist associates, this could become one of the worst conflagrations of the 21st century. The problem with US foreign policy is that it functions on an antiquated world view. It assumes that the world shall be unipolar, rather than multipolar in terms of international relations. The United States continues to engage in warfare against nations that disagree with its foreign policies or commit acts of sabotage against one's that resist. Now the US is on a collision course with a nation that is essential to the global economy. As relations continue to deteriorate, a global war seems inevitable. The only hope is that US debt to China will act as a form of leverage. The US and Chinese economy is too interconnected to risk a full scale war. However, with growing sinophobia and racism in the United States this may not prevent possible incidents. Donald Trump once said that it was better for Asian nations to obtain nuclear weapons and be responsible for their own security. Trump also stated that the US should leave NATO . These are mere promises, which will not be fulfilled in for or possibly eight years. Trump's policies in Asia could either teeter toward military intervention or inactivity. It is certain that Taiwan will begin to play a role in developments to come.          

               

Further Reading 

"Tsai Urges Army to Perform Better." TODAYonline. Today, 26 Aug. 2016. Web. 12 Dec. 2016. <http://www.todayonline.com/chinaindia/china/tsai-urges-army-perform-better>.

"Taiwan's Tsai Ing-wen Orders Revamp of Military Strategy, Weapons Upgrade." South China Morning Post. South China Morning Post, 25 Aug. 2016. Web. 12 Dec. 2016. <http://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/2008856/taiwans-president-orders-revamp-military-strategy>.

     

Thomas Sankara on Revolutionaries

Gambia's President Jammeh concedes defeat

President Yahya Jammeh  in power since 1994 has been defeated at the polls. This is significant for a president who once said "he would rule for a billion years." Jammeh has stated he will not contest the results and that the opposition candidate had won. This change comes as a number of  longtime African leaders have either been deposed internally or their nations invaded. Blaise Compore, Hosni Mubarak, Zine el Abidine Ben Ali, Francois Bozize, and Muammar Qaddafi are leaders no longer in power. It appears that Jammeh wants a smooth transition,  but rarely do regimes that have lasted so long disappear quietly. The fear of ethnic conflict may be a factor in his recent decisions. However, this does not mean ethnic conflict or civil unrest is completely avoided. There could be Jammeh supporters who may not accept the electoral results and take up arms. A post-Jammeh Gambia could become unstable, if the new administration does not make adjustments. The possibility of political factionalism is high and there is a level of tension. The bigger question remains is if the president elect Adama Burrow can meet the needs of Gambian citizens. He has promised free education and healthcare including an end to the persecution of political opposition. These promises may not be delivered considering the poor economic conditions and high unemployment rate. 

UN warns of increased rights violations in South Sudan, calls for sanctions

The balkanization of South Sudan continues as the situation is becoming a civil war. The United Nations now wants to impose sanctions on the young nation. Yasmin Sooka chairperson of the UN Commission on Human Rights proposed an arms embargo and targeted sanctions. The South Sudanese government has stated that sanctions would be counter productive in the mist of Neur and Dinka ethnic tension combined with political factionalism. The peace agreement must be implemented, but this can only happen if both parties accept  the terms and conditions. The UN Commission has pressured the AU to establish a committee to prosecute those responsible for violence. They want evidence gathered from 2013 to present when the conflict broke out. The problem with this process is it is a world body prosecuting African leaders. If Africans committed crimes against other Africans it should African nations that punish them not the ICC or UN. Ethiopia has contributed to mediation efforts, but has not bee given support by the UN. If action is to be taken it should be not in a cautious manner to prevent further destabilization. The possible effects could resonate in Uganda, Chad, the Darfur region, Kenya, and the African Central Republic.