Anonymous

America’s story might be that of killing three birds with one stone if analysed keenly. The prevailing world view is that the American hegemony on the world stage is speedily waning. Some analysts predict that the end of Russian invasion of Ukraine might coincidentally bring the US empire to its knees because of the heavy financial support they frequently provide to Ukraine if Ukraine doesn’t win. American financial, military and humanitarian aid to the Eastern European country has increased abundantly to the tune of $50 billion in the last eight months. This has been seen to tremendously increase inflation and have a pernicious effect on the general cost of living in the country. The unpleasant prediction comes on the backdrop of numerous falls of various empires being instigated by high cost living, inflation and similar deleterious conditions which unfortunately plague America today. Pessimistic analysts continuously predict that this might be another messy falling of a great world power. Empires like the Soviet Union and the French under Louis fell mostly due to high cost of prices and high inflation compounded by mismanagement of the economy. However,this might not be case with the United States due to a number of factors; democracy, extreme levels of nationalism and craftiness of American leaders. Emphasis should also be placed on the fact that we live in a different time compared to the old-fashioned world during the french revolution and the fall of other empires.

America’s leaders and foreign policy makers were markedly aware of the threats that faced their place in the world dominance. They singled out the rise of China as the main threat followed, Putin’s Russia and a united Europe. Other parts of Asia, Africa and Latin America are still at a distant past in terms of economic and military strength and posed no significant threat to Uncle Sam’s land, for now. To solve two of these threat involved a risky fete of poking a nuclear powered bear. Russia’s nuclear arsenal exceeds the US, albeit narrowly. As of 2022, Russia possesses the largest stockpile of nuclear warheads in the world amounting to a total of 5,977; the second-largest stockpile is the United States’ 5,428 warheads. The tactics used by the USA comes directly from the CIA playbook, orchestrating a coup to oust the pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 and replacing him with a US puppet. To make matter worse,the US increased its footprint in Ukraine, Russian neighbour something which is unacceptable to any Russian leader. Why is Ukraine a red line for Russia? Ukraine lies in the North European plain which encompasses large parts of Poland, Germany, France, Belgium, Netherlands and nearly all of Ukraine among other countries. Attacks towards Russia from this direction are virtually impossible to defend against because there’s no place to fallback to. It is just a flatland which stretches endlessly for miles. Any power including the US attacking Russia from this direction will certainly achieve great success. Everything done by the US from 2014 coup to the alleged biolabs was to provoke Russia to a war so that it might curtail its development and maybe defeat it completely. It is always a long game and there’s always certain more than meets the eye.

Next step was the involvement of all the major powers in the war and gaining support of all nations against aggression. This might not have been achieved fully due to the fact that the US already have a number of enemies acquired from the past. China, India,Iran, Venezuela and a number of of Asian, African and Latin American countries stayed away from condemning Russia or directly supported Russia. However, incorporating the European union in supporting Ukraine means that the United States succeeded in coercing one threat against the other. After the war,both European nations and Russia might be wrecked economically and damaged significantly. The same history might be repeating itself just like after the second world war. The economy of Europe has been successfully ruined by the US after coercing them to wean off Russian gas and oil and to consequently buy from the US, although the US sells four times higher than the Russians. Wrecking European economy is already counted as a success,the war might weaken Russia and leave US without a worthy adversary except China. Restrictions against Chinese import of semiconductor equipment and components from USA might do the trick since China has not fully mastered the technology. China seems to be giving the US sleepless nights. It’s a game of thrones.

Cracks are gradually beginning to appear between the US and its allies. The Germans and French have realized that they may be real losers in this war. While the top leadership of the European union is trying to restrict interactions with China,the German chancellor Olaf Scholz has officially confirmed that he will be leading an entourage of a trade delegation to Beijing in December. This might have tremendous repercussions in the already frosty relationships in EU. Another crack slowly appearing is the rift between France and Germany when it comes to Russian gas price caps. They seem not to agree on the way forward after several meetings. Failure to agree on time may spell doom for EU countries during the coming winter. Countries may have to be forced to go it independently. Lastly, the French president Emmanuel Macron has publicly accused the US of charging the EU exorbitant prices for its liquefied natural gas. This has consequently raised the prices of gas high in their countries causing unrest among citizens. These cracks might be a problem for the US in the long run and might deter it from achieving its overambitious goals.

There is a high likelihood that the US might miss out on its goals,albeit achieve it partially. Russia might win in the end and annex huge swathes of lands in Ukraine. The coming midterm elections in November may also prove difficult for the democrats because of the high cost of living and inflation which is mostly blamed on their policies. If the democrats fail then Ukraine will be a lost cause. But then the US government should not beat themselves so hard. They should rejoice in the idea that the goals are already partially achieved. The EU is wrecked, Russia is slowed through the war and China might also find it hard without a reliable semiconductor industry. They should however take important lessons from history. No empire that exists can exist forever.

Crucial lessons can be learnt from Russian president Vlamir Putin and Chinese president Xi Jinping. One common thing about these leaders is their love for their own people. Sometimes one can put all the prevalent prejudice aside and amply acknowledge what they have achieved for their people. After befittingly removing millions out poverty within a short span of time,China now seriously focuses on building a formidable army which will rival all the other powers. It still baffles western leaders and scholars how China achieved so much yet so fast. Russia on the other side is still a world leader in production of most agricultural products such as fertilizers, grains and tractors. It’s the closest to self-sustanance a country can ever be. Although they have their own flaws too since no one is perfect,to their people they are noble. This can be reciprocated in many African countries with a view of empowering their people and regions. African people are as industrious and remarkably innovative as any other people in the world. Where then is the problem? Why does Africa always lags behind?And is it that is needed to haul them completely out of their pitiful and dire situation?

As I have repeatedly said before,what African countries need are benevolent dictators and a patriot population with a view of developing their countries. This is what Dambisa Moyo also advocates for in her book,Dead Aid. These coupled with a strong sense of nationalism might come in handy in helping Africans to take their right place in the world politics. Xi Jinping once said that a people cannot depend on another race to save them. Africa doesn’t need to play a subservient role in the world. Nobody wants to play a second fiddle. The history of Europe in their most formative eras,is full of repressive and despotic authoritarianism which propelled them to prosperity. Their benevolence supported slavery and expedition which was instrumental in their sudden rise in unprecedented prominence. The “from rags to riches” story might only come by for Africa if this kind of leadership is positively embraced. Rwanda has been consistently praised by many after they turned around what is widely regarded as a bleak past into a promising future. Their economy is growing rapidly and cohesion among various communities is strong. How did they achieve all this within two decades? The answer lies with their president Paul Kagame. Western media, institutions and leaders regard him with the same view as that of a dictator but Rwandese citizens know how much he has turned the situation around. The same cannot be said of other countries struggling to give democracy a place in their midst. Others which are vehemently trying to impose democracy are marred with corruption, tribalism and nepotism. A good example is Kenya where the fledgling democracy has not been of any help to millions who struggle to eke out a decent living with all odds against them. Corruption is rife in every sector of the economy. It will be better to ask Africans themselves at the lower rungs of the society where most of them are, what they will prefer,a democracy or economic stability with authoritarian leader at the top? Research has shown that countries with authoritarianism in the African continent are doing better than those with an illusion of democracy.

History teaches us that benevolent dictators will at some point change and be bad like Mobutu Ssese Seko. He started out very promising but ended up very corrupt and cruel. However,it is important to note that there are many other malignant factors which also played a big role in altering his behavior. Many Kenyans will argue that life was better during the 24 year rule of president Moi than the last three democratically elected leaders although he was autocratic during the latter parts of his reign. Things were rosy and employment opportunities abounded. Unless when the tail end of his rule during the onset of democracy is factored in. Many state corporations were privatized and thousands lost their jobs. Corruption became a culture. I would argue that with democracy corruption gained a foothold and became prominent. This process was created and masterminded by the international Financial organizations like the world bank and the IMF. It was never the same again. Countries with benevolent dictators are doing so well than those with a nascent democracy. My message is clear. I’m not trying to demonize democracy. The developed world did not just wake up one day and right there they had democracy. It was a painstaking process passing through the other forms of governance such as communism to reach where they are. Actually, democracy was something of an accident. They were not searching for it. So,to put it into a context,there are innumerable processes a continent should go through before reaching the democracy stop. Skipping any of these might prove to be deleterious to a people or a country as can be vividly witnessed in Africa. It is a form of soul searching. The analogy of a child might come perfect for this case. No child can born and instantly run. They have to go through a lot of sitting, crawling and so on. Democracy comes by itself once a country has reached economic emancipation and empowerment without which it is just an illusion. For now Africa needs leaders like Kagame who are labeled as dictatorial.

In 1907, after consolidating a lot of power silently,then president of the United States Theodore Roosevelt sent out a fleet to circumnavigate the world. The fleet which came to be widely recognized as the great white fleet was sent out to showcase the rise of a new empire. The new empire was the United States of America. It tentatively arrived at the world after decades of tedious struggle to consolidate all the power in most of the Americas. The fleet had 14500 personnel and 16 battleships. To say the least,the great white fleet mission was a resounding success returning to the US in 1909. It transversed all the oceans including the Pacific, Atlantic and the Indian ocean. Its policies and methodologies were reminiscent of carrot and stick. Just as Roosevelt used to say, it’s better to speak less and have a long stick. Carrot and stick is a mixture of force with a tincture of diplomacy. Those who were too rigid to be coerced were shown the stick and so in 1909 USA emerged from the shadows as a world power.

I brought this up to jog your memory about the prevailing situation of. Just the other day, North Korea launched a medium range missile across the North of Japan. The world was rattled and rightly so considering the provocative nuclear saber-rattling currently taking place between Russia and the US. It really worried the US and its allies in the region like South Korea and Japan. The response was conducting military drills in the South China sea. Drawing an anology from the US story,it is clear that this posturing was just like a little advertising campaign. North Korea was simply announcing their arrival at the world stage as a nuclear power. They were announcing their arrival as a power or force to recon with and what is a better way to announce than by launching a missile across Japan-a US ally. Those worried about escalation should calm their nerves. The announcement was a one off event and it’s clear that the message was resistance because of their nuclear ambitions. North Korea is among the most sanctioned countries in the world due to their nuclear ambitions. Despite all the propaganda campaigns against them and the economic sanctions,they still reached their goal. The other missiles launched were in retaliation to the US conducting military drills together with Japan and South Korea. Of course they were not across Japanese territory.

The distance reached by the missile was as terrifying as the direction of it’s trajectory. The intercontinental ballistic missile might reach USA when launched inside North Korea. This fete the other powers never thought North Korea might reach. North Korea might be a dictator but their military capacity will grant mutual respect from other powers. They might not be at the same level with the others but their nuclear capacity cannot be taken for granted. They will be revered by others. This is the way to go for the downtrodden countries. Their missile launch across Japan will have no peace-threatening implications.

Foreign media reporting of Africa depicts the continent as being the center of some kind of power struggle between foreign countries. Some say that Russia is ousting France from it’s former colonies while others beg USA to fill gap left by France so that it’s not filled by Russia. This biased view is selfish and discriminates against Africans. It presents Africa as timid, foolish and naive and needs decisions to be made for them by others. It is a patronizing attitude towards Africa just as it was during slavery and colonialism. The coups and counter-coups in Mali,Chad and Burkina Faso are seen as influenced by Russian propaganda and has Russian footprints all over them. Is it true that Africans cannot make their own choices in the 21st century? Is this the reason why the US Congress has to pass a bill to restrict African interaction with Russia through threats? Is this why the European union has stopped the construction of a pipeline from Tanzania to Uganda? It is true media channels still view Africa as that small child that needs to be guided and constantly shown the way. This patronizing characteristic of developed countries to Africa is quite worrying. It’s some sort of cold war 2.0.

This applies to all media be it Russia,China,Europe or the US. Their efforts are directed towards events happening in Africa with a predetermined opinion which passes to them as the truth. An article asking US to increase its presence in west Africa to counter Russian impact tells more about the colonisation mentality of the writer than about the situation in the ground. It emphasizes the fact that Africa is still firmly in the grip of the colonizing power and the purported independence was just a sham. It was a blindfold to the people. An illusion that you are free but in the real sense no one is free. How can Africa develop when media is used to portray is as some battle field for great powers? Although occurrences like the war in Ukraine have been basically cementing the cold war mentality,the media biased portrayal of Africa has made it worse. They have been the driving force for the narrative.

The biasness does not stop with the cold war. It has been a system put in place to eternally degrade the status of the continent. The collective reference to Africa in bad light about tragedies occuring in single countries has deepened the negativity. Famine in the Horn of Africa or instability in Mali is referred to as Africa while negative news in parts of Europe are classified with the specific location it emanates from. The overall effect is a mental picture in the minds of many depicting Africa as the dark continent and proliferation of racial abuse and attacks towards black people in Europe, Russia and Asia. Racism continues to become a menace and the media unwittingly strengthens it through biased portrayal. Negative news in Africa area greatly exaggerated and given much of the airtime. Some would argue that it is needed to solicit aid and immediate response to the tragedy in question. But has that really happened? No one particular country wants to help to put these tragedies out once and for all. It is not that these issues cannot be dealt with with finality. The financial implications are huge and must be maintained. The aid industry is booming.

For a long time I have been flabbergasted by foreign media analysis of Africa situations. They jump to conclusions without second thoughts. They always know what is best for African countries and their population even though some have never set foot on the continent. Their analysts are comfortably tucked in their offices in New York,Paris, London or Moscow discussing events happening thousands of miles away. They purport to have unquestionable accuracy on these matters. When Kenyan elections were peaceful earlier this year,the media were disappointed as there was no news for them. Why don’t they also broadcast the positive information about the continent? The same energy and effort employed when broadcasting negative news from Africa should also be put in place when transmitting positive news. It is because of foreign media that most foreigners who have never visited Africa will think of wars, epidemics, famine, malnutrition and wildlife when questioned about their knowledge of the continent. Is that all? Is Africa that much desolate? Are there no beautiful aspects of this continent? Nonetheless, until the lions learn to write, history will always glorify the hunter.

Ukrainian population, army and government as well as their benevolent allies in the west have been tremendously buoyed up by their large gains in the battlefield in Donbass. Battlefield morale is running very high and even the very pessimistic lot are positive though to a lesser degree. Since the onset of the Russian Military operations,it is the first time Ukraine have gained something worthwhile the entire struggle. Russian troops have consistently pushed them back all through. But since the staging of a referendum vote in Eastern Ukraine regions of Kherson, Zaporizhzhia Lugansk and Donetsk, Ukraine have achieved considerable gains. The mood in the Ukrainian camp has dramatically changed from pensive to exhilaration in a short span of time while that of the Russian has taken a turn for the worse. The turn of events in the battlefield has been disconcerting if not demoralizing for the general Russian population and their government. The military might of Russia and the weak military establishment of Ukraine has been compared to that of biblical story of Goliath and David. Expectations were that Russia would take a short time to vanquish the Ukrainian army and take control of Ukraine. That has not come to pass. On the contrary, Russia is being pushed back. The superior weapons from western allies might have been significant in turning the tide and balancing the military power but other factors might have also contribute sufficiently. However, it’s doubtful whether this state of euphoria in the Ukrainian army ranks will last.

Credit was given to the Russian military power when they began to rapidly conquer Ukrainian territory immediately after the battle tanks started rolling nto Ukrainian territory. Town after town and one village after another fell to the Russians. Many thought that after a short while all of Ukraine will be fall, however, that’s not the case. Predictions were even made that Kiev will fall in three days. Ukrainian army through their much publicized counteroffensive,have been taking back large swathes of land,one village after another. Towns like Lyman are also falling. Can this be because of superior western weapons? They arrived late after Russia had started taking portions of Ukrainian territory. They might be the magic trick but not only them. Another important factor is the terrain. I’m simply baffled by how most of the pro-Russian and pro-Ukraine factions have forgotten this factor. It is one of the main reasons why Putin invaded Ukraine in the first place. The terrain is flat and defending it is very difficult. There is no natural landscape to fall back to,no hills or mountains. When Russian troops first invaded Eastern Ukraine, Ukrainian army had to pull back because of the vulnerable state of the land. The same thing is happening currently. Russian troops have to fall back or face massive losses in the battlefield. Vocabulary like encirclement are coming up thanks to the terrain. Troops have to leave in fear of being encircled. Defending eastern Ukraine is proving virtually impossible. It depends on supplies, superior military power and maybe morale of the troops.

Military analysts are hellbent on spewing propaganda on television without taking into account the real issues taking place in the battlefield. Terrain is very important and should be not be ignored. Terrain influences almost all battles. It is one of the reasons why the fight against terrorists in the Sahel is dragging out for so long. The terrain is ragged and they have mastered it exceptionally well. A good example of terrain dictating the course of a war is the Afghanistan invasion by both the Soviet Union and the United States. Soviet Union spent ten years in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989 spending trillions of dollars and achieving practically nothing. At last,they had to shamefully withdraw defeated. The failure of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan is one of the factors that led to it’s fall. The US followed in 2001 and finally orchestrating a chaotic withdrawal criticized far and wide after two decades. Afghanistan people with no superior weapons defeated two world powers thanks to the support of the terrain. This is what is happening in Ukraine. The terrain supports whoever is attacking making it difficult to those defending.

The course of the war is pretty much predictable. It will be a tag-of-war like battle until one party gives up,is defeated or peace is reached through diplomatic means. The stock of weapons available for both parties will also be important. Any army running out of weapons will be disadvantaged and might lose. The Ukrainian people and their allies should celebrate courteously lest they be disappointed in the end. Winning a battle is not the same as winning a war. One might win a single battle but still loose the war.

To understand Russia’s reason for their military operations currently ongoing in Ukraine,it is crucial to go back to the history of the Soviet Union and the cold war. Trying to attach meaning to it using current events only without the past will render it insignificant. When the Soviet Union fell completely on 25 December 1991,the once mighty bear disintegrated into twelve small states with minority Russian speaking community except Russia which is majorly inhabited by ethnic Russians. Agreements were made between Russia and North Atlantic Treaty organization (NATO) that the organization will not move “an inch”to the east. This was to ensure that Russia’s security is guaranteed. However promises were broken and NATO gobbled up most of the Slavic nations like Poland and ended up on Russia’s doorstep. Soviet leaders after the fall of Soviet Union have always considered this NATO expansion as an existential threat to the Russian population and the Russian nation. However, the west, European union and NATO didn’t not take in consideration these complaints. Many diplomats and political scholar have insisted that Ukraine was being led towards an armed conflict with Russia by the west. At last in 2014 hostilities flared in Ukraine as Russian tanks rolled in.

The 2014 war and the consequent annexation of Crimea was mainly influenced by the increased sway of Ukraine towards the west and the increased presence of America footprint in the country. Russia has blamed the US of building biolabs in Ukraine and training Ukrainian armed forces. After the coup,a more pro-western leader,Petro Poroshenko was elected to replace the ousted pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych. Russian was alarmed at the prevailing events at that time which they promptly accused the west of staging. Other countries bordering Russia moving towards NATO was to some extent allowed but Ukraine was strategic. Ukraine could not be allowed to go towards that direction. First,let it be known that USA and Russia have always been sworn enemies since the days of the cold war 1.0 since another one,2.0 has just began. Ukraine taking a hard stance on Russia and embracing the west could definitely deny Russia access to the only warm water port in the Black Sea which is Sevastopol. Most of Russia’s ports freeze most parts of the year and this is always a disadvantage to their naval ambitions. A little agitation of the majority ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine did the trick for the Kremlin. They had to intervene in the guise of protecting the Russian population in Donbass. Their main goal was to take control of Crimea and hence the crucial Sevastopol port. At the end of the operation, Crimea was annexed and access to Sevastopol was guaranteed. The Russian naval presence in Sevastopol has steadily increased since 2014. It now belongs to the Russian Black Sea fleet. Sevastopol port is very important for Russia for various reasons and they are not willing to let it be accessed by the west. To Putin who is a staunch nationalist, security of Russia must be guaranteed and the west especially USA must be kept at bay. It is worthy of attention when he promises to use any means possible to protect Russia from existential threat including nuclear weapons. He means it. Putin’s nationalist leanings is one of reasons why he blames Gorbachev for the fall of the Soviet Union. He didn’t even attend his funeral.

Nonetheless,the west didn’t get the message which was all the while transparent. Russia didn’t fancy their presence in Ukraine. The arrogant style of western countries continued unperturbed by the looming danger. The last mistake was trying to admit Ukraine to NATO and saying it in public. Russia had had enough. Their patience simply ran out and all the red lines had been crossed. They had to act and thus on February Putin announced a special military in Ukraine much to the consternation of European nations and the USA. Or maybe they feigned annoyance since they had it coming. Tanks rolled through the border and artillery fire rented the air for months on end. So if you ask me, the west knew this was coming a long time ago. Any major power on the world stage will act violently to anything it considers existential threat. The definition of existential threat will however vary from country to country. An example is the USA during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 when the world was at the brink of a nuclear war. To Russia, this was an existential threat. The collective West knew exactly what was happening and what they were doing. They provoked Russia for their selfish reasons which nobody knows. This war might be benefiting them while it is deleterious to rest of humanity. The world is now close to a nuclear war than any time else in history.

Many would say that my opinions are baseless and Russia is the aggressor. Yes, Russia is the aggressor but it is also important to know their way of thinking. The west has been rash and made emotional decisions which have had a blowback effect on their countries. The numerous sanctions placed without thorough and logical thinking have been harmful to the entire world. Prices of energy and grains mainly skyrocketed due to sanctions. The executive director of United Nations world food program,David Beasley,recently said during an interview that he doesn’t care what the world leaders think about Russia,all he wants is Russian fertilizer to move on the market. He further warned that if not the world will face chaos. Anyway,why does Russia want Ukraine so bad? The answer is simple -geographical location. Ukraine forms part of the great northern Europe plains. Russia is always exposed and vulnerable to attacks through this region. It’s a flat land with no barriers like mountains,hills or deserts. Throughout history, Russia has been attacked multiple times from this direction. It is indefensible. With the threat of NATO encroachment, Russia is exposed now more than ever. Actions had to be taken. The main aim of the special military operations is push Ukraine back to the buffer zone surrounded by mountains. This buffer zone may be able to help Moscow during external attacks. This is not the same with other NATO members like Poland and Lithuania or members about to join the organization like Sweden and Finland. It is pretty clear that Russia will in the long run annex the eastern part of Ukraine but what is not clear is whether Ukraine will exist after the war. The Kremlin will want to have the buffer zone in Ukraine to protect them against attacks from the west.

What is quite baffling is the United States reaction to all these. Sanctions after sanctions are being rolled in consistently. It is either they are playing a much larger game here or they are openly admitting that they know nothing about political history of both Russia and the US. Of course they know. They are just playing a bigger economic and political game here. Trying to kill two birds with one stone. Ukraine as a nation is just a pawn caught between two aggressive superpowers. All these events are part of the wrong choices their leaders made and they are paying for it. Not even the Russian population in Ukraine is important. They are part of the pawn game. All Russian populations in other former Soviet nations are pawns in a game to used when need arises. The main question however remains to be answered, what will happen after the war? Will Ukraine still exist?or will the world be turned into smithereens by nuclear weapons? No one knows the future.

Over the decades after attaining independence from their colonial masters, African countries have been widely known for coups and counter-coups. Out of 214 attempted coups,106 have been successful. This is a huge percentage of the global total of 486 coups since 1950s. This data was collected by Powell and Thyne’s data. However, it’s charming to know that in the past decades such cases have been on the decline and Africa has been experiencing less and less coups. This enticing trajectory might come to a premature end. The number of coups is on the rise again on the continent over the past few years. Countries like Chad,Mali, Guinea and Burkina Faso have recently experienced coups in the last three to two years. Burkina Faso and Mali have even experienced multiple coups in a short span of time. Experts have been left to ponder what the cause of the increased number of coups might be. With each passing day fears are increasing that majority of African nations might return to the past years of extreme anarchy characterised by instability,chaos,lack of democracy and economic as well as social degradation. Some factors are however certain. The economic situation of these countries experiencing coups is dire and they are mostly concentrated in West Africa and Central Africa. They coups can however spread to other parts as time progresses. These might give the experts a hint of what really happening or a place to begin with.

The last one in close succession of coups is a counter coup in Burkina Faso. The junta leader,Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba who ousted the elected president Roch Kaboré back in January has been consequently removed from power by the thirty four year old Ibrahim Traore. The coup took place on 30th September in the capital Ouagadougou. Damiba is a lieutenant colonel in the army while Traore is a captain. It might seem like some sort of karma since Lt col Damiba has been accused of the same issues he accused the ousted former president Kaboré-the security issue which has been an Achilles heel for the stability and development of the Central Africa country. The country has been battling the Islamic jihadist of Al-Qaeda and ISIS since late nineties. The situation has only deteriorated and the army has lost approximately fifty percent of the country to the insurgents. The new junta leader Traore will be taking over as the new leader of the transition government. He is young and might be inexperienced in matters politics and running of the country. However,the army and civilian support him and the direction the country will take only waits to be seen. He takes charge at a time when the nascent nation is faced by multifaceted crises compounded by the continuous conflict. Humanitarian crisis due to hunger and the ongoing conflict being at the top of the otherwise long list.

Surprisingly, during the riots in the aftermath of the coup,the protesters were seen to be carrying both the Burkinabe flags and the Russian flags. This has opened a very big Pandora box and triggered outpouring of conflicting opinions. During the riots,the French embassy was also vandalized and there are unconfirmed reports on social media that it might have been burned to the ground. The protesters welcomed Russia to come to their rescue. It’s not clear whether Russia got the message. Most of the former colonies of France are moving away from it’s control in west Africa. They blame the colonial power for years of mismanagement of their country and supporting the insurgents. Anti-French sentiments have been spreading rapidly across borders from Mali, to Chad,to Niger and Burkina Faso. Intermittent demonstrations against the French have been witnessed in most of these countries and is spreading to others too. My opinion is that it will continue to spread until all the former colonies of France get rid of France. It’s taking the same approach as the infamous Arab spring in 2011. French policies to it’s former colonies which might be termed as “colonies”still because nothing much has changed are repressive and leaves these countries almost destitute. It’s akin to a yoke. This is why almost all the former french colonies are poor and embroiled in neverending conflicts. I can name a few like Haiti, Syria,Mali and even Burkina Faso. The new junta leaders now have the luxury of choosing who their partners will be. The citizens have spoken and will be keen on the steps the new leaders will take. Will they continue to cooperate with France and move towards Russia? The ball is now in their court.

Curtains come down on the controversial referendum organized by the pro-Russian separatists in Kherson, Zaporizhzhia Lugansk and Donetsk today. The divisive referendum was slated for the period from 23-27 September and supported by the Kremlin. What actually remains is the strenuous counting of ballot which is also expected to end soon. The controversy of the referendum is reinforced by the ambiguity of both democracy and the international law under United Nations charter. While democracy asserts that a people of any nation are free to make the crucial decisions of where to belong, international law stipulates that no nation can arbitrarily annex another member’s territory. The lucid confusion here is which decree to use in the case of a conflict like this conflict. However,it should be made clear that the Moscow through its leader, Vladimir Putin has time and again outrightly rejected the mandate of the united nations terming it as poorly constituted and held prisoner by the Western powers. He has vocally called for the reconstitution of the global body to encompass every nation and to give them same treatment. This would certainly clear the air of the fundamental edict Russia employs. It’s definitely democracy. One chooses what fits for him. This is why referendum was organized in a region where a quarter of it’s population are ethnic Russians. There have been claims that the ethnic Russians living in Donbass have been subjected to violence and oppression since the coup in 2014.

The west, however,has completely rejected such referendum and termed it all sorts of obscenities. They have referred to it as a sham and a fake process by a dictator trying to subjugate another country. Funnily, while these accusations rendered virtually on all the western media airwaves, the separatists regions continued with their referendum unperturbed except by a few intermittent shelling. With the end of the five day voting period and the beginning of tallying taking place,the world now waits with baited breath to know what direction this will go. Some say the results are already obvious and Russia will annex the region further leading to escalation. This has caused widespread fear, uncertainty and anxiety among people in Europe. The anxiety is even felt greatly by the regions where the voting just ended and the entire Europe considering that Putin recently threatened to use nuclear weapons if Russia is provoked. Europeans are afraid that another war-a new kind of war -might break out in the middle of the continent,a nuclear war. Nuclear war can cause a lot of distraction both to physical environment and different aspects of the entire world. The last time nuclear weapons were used was in 1945 towards the end of the second world war when the USA bombed two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The devastation and destruction left behind is still vivid in people’s memory and no one would want such a thing to repeat. The next time the world came close but fortunately the worst was averted. This was during the Cuban missile crisis. What the future holds only time will tell.

Taking significant lessons from the annexation of Crimea back in 2014,it should be the same playbook only that this time round it will be on a massive scale. Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Lugansk and Donetsk consist of around eighteen percent of Ukraine and constitute a massive amount of it’s GDP. Because of the fear of launching a nuclear war in Europe,the allies of Ukraine will take cautious steps on how to handle the already frightening situation. The appeasement policy used before the second world war might come in handy again. The west and the United States might let Russia to take what it has to avert any chance of escalating the situation further. In this war, Russia cannot lose and will not accept defeat so it is only right that careful steps are put in place early on to avoid the disconcerting situation. Putin seems to be an egomaniac who will do everything in his power to protect his bloated ego. So far as it is, Ukraine should just forget about the annexed regions and move on. More war will only cause the entire Ukrainian nation to be rubbed off the face of the earth. I know most people won’t agree with me but I’ll urge them to think logically and stop being influenced by emotions. There’s no way that either Europe, facing financial crisis or America, where Biden’s rating are dramatically going down is going to come to the rescue of Ukraine at this point. It’s a point of no return for Putin. Furthermore, Europe is already facing a lot domestically and with the unprecedented situation during this coming winter,it might prudent to say that Putin has outfoxed them. The best they can do is back without biting.

The paradox of our time is the division in a united entity. As world leaders gather in New York for the seventy seventh session of the United Nations General Assembly, one thing is apparent,there are cracks in the assembly of nations. The united nations is no longer united. Notwithstanding,the cracks have been gradually appearing but since no satisfactory efforts were put in place,the gap has become extremely large and almost irreparable. A divided house will definitely fall. Some of the divisions include global north and global south divide,war in Ukraine and the issues between Russia, China and the United States of America.

The first major split is that of Russia and the collective West including the United States of America. This disconcerting rift has been widening significantly since the Russian special military in Ukraine which began in February. The west not only condemned the Russian Federation for what they referred to as unprovoked war but also imposed punitive sanctions against the Putin regime. As expected Russia followed swiftly with counter measures like sanctions and considerably reducing energy exports to the European union. This war will be one of the main topics of discussion at UNGA which the Russian Federation president Vlamir Putin has boycotted. Putin has been calling persistently for the creation of a new body to rival the west controlled United Nations.

Speaking at the assembly,the chairman of the African Union, Senegalese president Macky Sall, reiterated the need to solve the conflict amicably and come to a speedy end. He intoned about the rift between the global north and global south stating that the north had neglected their counterparts in the south. Lack of a seat in security council,lack of funding for climate change measures,lack of food aid to African states are some of the issues widening the gap between the two. Most African nations decided not to support either of the conflicting parties,on the contrary,they advocated for peaceful negotiations,this even after being cajoled to take a side by both parties. How these splits are going to unravel in the future waits to be seen.Macky Sall further added that Africans were tired of being the playing field of the notorious cold war between the West and the East.

Two more strategic world leaders missing from the global assembly are Indian prime minister Narendra Modi and China’s Xi Jinping. China,India and Russia only sent a delegation at a time when their leaders presence would have been sentimental. It’s a time when the world is faced by a myriad of problems which require collective effort such as climate crisis, high cost of fuel and global inflation. All the three countries are among the top countries with high population and colossal economies and they are also members of the BRICS organization. Shock waves and fears across the political world as the future seems gloomy. There maybe some unrelated and coincidental reasons for their missing but just last week all three were bundled up together in Samarkand for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. It seems far-fetched but pessimists will insist that a new power is being formed to challenge the hegemony of the west.

Climate change has been the focal point of major big political organization conferences such as the united nations and infinite summits. It will obviously take center stage at the United Nations General Assembly this week following extreme weather patterns currently battering different parts of the world simultaneously. Monsoon floods in Pakistan, drought in the Horn of Africa, hurricanes in the Caribbean and Japan as well as wildfires all over Europe are just a few examples of the dreaded wrath of climate. However, much has been said consistently in various high level meetings but little has actually been achieved. It’s high time we sit down and be honest with ourselves and know where we are getting it wrong.

Adam Smith,a great economist and author of The Wealth of Nations says in his book that greed is good and that by becoming richer one benefits everyone while supporting capitalism and free markets. This kind of greed Adam talked about has been a double edged sword for the human race. In the rat race to outdo everyone else,man has invented some harmful commodities such as plastics which actually have a severe impact on the environment. This is just one example of fly in the ointment for free markets. Most governments banned the use of plastics while factories are still operational. How will it ever end? With plastic around and fossil fuels being used on a large scale more harm is being done even as the alarm bells ring. The need to save our planet is there but the urge to profit overpowers it. The fight to save our planet is just a mirage since our commitment to it is below par. People always want to be seen as doing something while in the real sense doing absolutely nothing. Leaders go to summits discuss for weeks but come up with no viable solutions while the problem persists and worsens.

When I say that the spirit is willing but the body is weak I mean it. The Kenyan government banned the use of plastics but in the markets they are in abundance. Every shopping center has them in large quantities,in fact the banning was on paper. The united nations and the European union stopped African countries from exploiting their fossil fuels in a step towards curbing the fossil fuel emissions into the atmosphere while buying the same from Russia. When Russia at last cut off most of it’s supply of gas and oil to the European countries, their leaders came tumbling over each other in a race to acquire African resources for their own countries. What sort of hypocrisy is that. It feels like all the measures were put in place for African nations to stop them from using the abundant resources for their development. This simply shows that the self appointed”moral” leaders of the west are much more concerned about their profits and development than the real issues of climate change. African countries have been pressured time and again to cut their own emissions and invest more in climate change measures while it is interesting to note that African emissions only amount to 1.5% of the total global emissions. John Kerry was the last leader in a long line of leaders to remind Africans to cut down their emissions. The hypocrisy is top notch. Trying to do something which you actually don’t believe in in virtually impossible.

World leaders should have less and less conferences and summits and more and more real interventions. Too much talk and no actions while climate tragedies continue to wreak havoc. It’s time to do what you say lest climate change will be like the long well-intentioned but badly implemented vision for a utopian Africa.