FG To US Congressman Marino: You Are Poorly Informed About Nigeria

THE NEWS

The Federal Government has described as sadly out of tune with reality the published letter from US Congressman Tom Marino to Secretary of State John Kerry, asking the US to withhold security assistance to Nigeria on the strength of some imaginary infraction by the Buhari Administration.

In a statement issued in Abuja on Sunday, the Minister of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, said Congressman Marino was poorly informed about the issues he commented on, wondering why he did not take the pains to get first hand information from the US Embassy in Nigeria or any other credible source before engaging in what is nothing but a ‘propaganda of his own imagination’.

The Minister said by asking the US to refrain from selling warplanes and other military equipment to Nigeria based on a faulty premise, the Congressman has demonstrated a poor understanding of global security issues.

‘’Insecurity anywhere is insecurity everywhere. Had Congressman Marino understood this, he would not have made the kind of call he made concerning the US security assistance to Nigeria. The Boko Haram insurgency that Nigeria has decisively dealt with under President Muhammadu Buhari is not just a Nigerian problem but a regional and international crisis,’’ he said.

Alhaji Mohammed said Congressman Marino definitely did not have Nigeria in mind when he wrote that the US should withhold security assistance to Nigeria until President Buhari ‘demonstrates a commitment to inclusive government and the most basic tenets of democracy: freedom to assemble and freedom of speech’.

”An Administration that operates purely on the basis of respect for the rule of law and a strict adherence to constitutional order is not one to deny the citizens of their constitutionally-guaranteed rights. This Administration therefore does not need the goading of Congressman Marino or anyone for that matter to do what is right.

”Concerning running an inclusive government, had Congressman Marino done his home work before dispatching his letter, he would have realized that no part of the country is left out in the distribution of political appointments, for example, or in the appointment of Ministers, which was done in accordance with the Constitution that mandates that the President must appoint at least one minister from each of the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory.

”Had the Congressman sought information from credible sources before engaging in a flight of fancy, he would have been presented with a comprehensive information on the appointment of CEOs for Federal Government’s parastatals, agencies and commissions that shows that the appointments were almost evenly matched along the line of the six geo-political zones in the country: With the North West having 51, North Central 46, North East 45, South East 41, South West 45 and South South 45,’’ he said. ‘’The Congressman may wish to note that each geo-political zone comprises 6 states, with the exception of North West (7) and South East (5).’’

The Minister described Congressman Marino’s description of the Administration’s anti-corruption efforts as ‘selective’ as a tired argument that clearly shows that the US lawmaker must have appended his signature to someone’s concocted line.

”That line was invented by those seeking to cause an unnecessary distraction from the Administration’s anti-corruption efforts, and it has been roundly rejected. Congressman Marino’s decision to exhume the dead postulation without an iota of proof is a reflection of whose side he has taken in the ongoing efforts to rid Nigeria of corrupt elements. Needless to say that the anti-corruption battle will continue unhindered, irrespective of whose ox is gored. And in this fight, only the guilty needs be afraid,’’ he said.

Alhaji Mohammed said Nigeria is delighted that US Secretary of State John Kerry, to whom the Congressman addressed his letter, is more knowledgeable, better briefed and definitely more hands on concerning Nigerian issues

Nigerian Military: Some Officers Selling Arms To Boko Haram

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

MAIDUGURI, NIGERIA (AP) — Nigeria’s military says some officers are selling arms and ammunition to Boko Haram, indicating the corruption bedeviling the country’s fight against the Islamic extremists continues despite government efforts to halt graft.

The admission comes three weeks after the Nigerian army said a military tribunal is trying 16 officers and troops accused of offenses related to the fight against Boko Haram, including the theft and sale of ammunition.

Maj. Gen. Lucky Irabor, the theater commander in northeastern Nigeria, told a news conference on Thursday that military authorities have confirmed that some soldiers were selling arms and ammunition to Boko Haram. He called it a betrayal of the Nigerian people. He gave no more details.


President Muhammadu Buhari has blamed corruption for the deaths of thousands in the seven-year Islamic uprising that has killed more than 20,000. Children who escaped Boko Haram are dying of starvation in refugee camps in the northeast, where the government is investigating the alleged theft of food aid.

A soldier on the frontline of the fight told The Associated Press that his brigade commander is among officers standing trial at the court-martial in this northeastern city, which is being held in secret. He said the army is investigating what happened to 21 anti-aircraft guns assigned this year to his artillery brigade. He said they only received one gun. The soldier spoke on condition of anonymity because he feared he would lose his job.

In addition, a slew of retired and current military officers are being investigated for diverting hundreds of millions of dollars budgeted to help curb the Islamic uprising. Among them is Alex Badeh, a four-star general whom Buhari fired from his post as chief of defense staff. Witnesses have told a Federal High Court that Badeh stole the equivalent of $24 million budgeted for salaries in 2013 and built a shopping mall in Abuja, the capital.

Civil society groups are demanding the investigation of the current chief of army staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai, for allegedly buying with cash two properties worth $1.5 million in Dubai. Buratai has said he bought the property on installment with savings.

Before Buhari took power, soldiers told the AP they were forced into battle with just 30 bullets each and no food rations. They said Boko Haram was better armed and that their officers were stealing parts of their salaries and allowances. Many ran away when the extremists attacked, allowing Boko Haram to take control of a large swath of northeastern Nigeria in 2014.

Under Buhari, a former military dictator, a multinational force has retaken most towns but Boko Haram remains active outside urban areas, carrying out hit-and-run attacks, suicide bombings and abductions of women and girls.

Associated Press writer Ibrahim Abdulaziz contributed to this report from Yola, Nigeria.

What If Germany Had Never Declared War On The United States During World War II?

BY ROBERT FARLEY

NATIONAL INTEREST

SEPTEMBER 2, 2016

Scholars and analysts have long wondered whether this represented one of the great “what-ifs” of World War II; could the Germans have kept the United States out of the war, or at least undercut popular support for fighting in the European Theater, by declining to join the Japanese offensive?

Was the decision to declare war on the United States, effectively relieving the Roosevelt administration of the responsibility of mobilizing American sentiment for war in Europe, among Hitler’s greatest blunders?

Probably not. Washington and Berlin agreed that war was inevitable; the only question was who would fire the first shots.

At War:

The United States and Germany were at war in all but name well before December 1941. Since early 1941 (at least) the United States had shipped war material and economic goods to the United Kingdom, enabling the British government to carry on with the war. American soldiers, sailors, and airmen served in the British armed forces, albeit not in great numbers. And in the late summer of 1941, the United States effectively found itself at war in the Battle of the Atlantic. The Greer Incident, in which a U.S. destroyer tangled with a German U-boat, served to bring the conflict into sharp focus.

The Fireside Chat delivered  by President Roosevelt on September 11, 1941 made clear that the United States was already virtually at war with Germany:

“Upon our naval and air patrol -- now operating in large number over a vast expanse of the Atlantic Ocean -- falls the duty of maintaining the American policy of freedom of the seas -- now. That means, very simply, very clearly, that our patrolling vessels and planes will protect all merchant ships -- not only American ships but ships of any flag -- engaged in commerce in our defensive waters. They will protect them from submarines; they will protect them from surface raiders.

It is no act of war on our part when we decide to protect the seas that are vital to American defense. The aggression is not ours. Ours is solely defense.

But let this warning be clear. From now on, if German or Italian vessels of war enter the waters, the protection of which is necessary for American defense, they do so at their own peril.”

This declaration did not simply apply to U.S. territorial waters. The United States would escort convoys filled with military equipment to Europe with surface ships and anti-submarine craft, firing at will against any German submarines, ships or planes that they encountered.

Moreover, even U.S. ground forces had begun to participate in the war. In early July 1941, the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps, with Navy support, began deploying to Iceland. The Americans relieved British and Canadian troops who had invaded the island a year earlier.

Why?

In the long run, Hitler (and the rest of the German government) believed that confrontation with the United States was virtually inevitable. The U.S. had intervened in 1917 on behalf of Russia, France, and the United Kingdom; it was almost certain to do so again. U.S. behavior in 1941 reaffirmed this belief. Starting the war on German terms, before the U.S. was prepared to effectively defend itself, was the consensus position within the German political and military elite.

And so Germany declared war on the United States not out of a fit of pique, but rather because it believed that the United States was already effectively a belligerent, and that wider operations against the U.S. would help win the war. In particular, the Axis declaration of war enabled an operation that the Germans believed was key to driving Britain out of the conflict; a concerted submarine attack against U.S. commercial shipping. Although the Kriegsmarine had targeted U.S. vessels in the months and years before Pearl Harbor, it radically stepped up operations in the first months of 1942, launching a major effort just off the U.S. Atlantic seaboard.

The German tactics were devastatingly effective against a U.S. military that lacked good tactics, equipment, and procedures for fighting the U-boats. For their part, British military and political authorities worried that the German offensive might work, destroying enough shipping to cut Britain’s lifeline to North America. The Royal Navy and Royal Air Force quickly dispatched advisors to the United States in an effort to staunch the bleeding, but 1942 nevertheless proved the most devastating year of the war for shipping losses. Overall, Operation Drumbeat proved far more successful for the Axis than the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

But What If…

If, despite all this, Germany and Italy had somehow managed to avoid an open declaration of war against the United States, conflict would have continued in the North Atlantic. The U.S. would have continued to supply Britain and the Soviet Union with war material, potentially with somewhat more secure lines of supply, especially if the Germans continued to avoid attacks along the Atlantic seaboard.

In the real war, U.S. air, naval, and ground forces made their first decisive contribution in the Mediterranean. Plenty of analysts, now and then, have questioned the strategic logic of the Mediterranean campaign, but in the long run it helped beat U.S. ground and air forces into shape. If the U.S. had maintained formal neutrality, Operation Torch (the invasion of North Africa) might never have happened, and progress in the Med would have come much more slowly.

U.S. participation in the Combined Bomber Offensive (CBO), designed to destroy German industry and morale and drive the Third Reich from the war, might also have developed more slowly. Given the limited impact and immense cost of the CBO in its early stages, however, it’s unclear how much of a net impact on the tides of war that this would have made.

A reduced U.S. combat commitment in the Atlantic could have led to a greater effort in the Pacific, although it’s difficult to see what impact that would have made in the first year of the war. Over time, the U.S. built up an enormous advantage over the Japanese; this would have happened even more quickly with a smaller commitment to Europe. Still, the overwhelming superiority that the U.S. exhibited in 1944 depended on technology, training, and the availability of ships that remained on the slipways in 1942. Schemes to step up the fight in China or in Southeast Asia suffered from immeasurable logistical problems, which the U.S. could not solve until 1944 in any case.

Both Hitler and Roosevelt believed that war was inevitable, and they were both probably right. Restraining the war machine in December of 1941 might have bought some additional time for Germany in the Med and (possibly) in the skies, but would have forced the Kriegsmarine to forego an offensive that it believed could win the war. And in the end, the Americans likely would have joined the conflict anyway, perhaps with less experience, but with greater overall preparation to make a decisive commitment.

Robert Farley, a frequent contributor to TNI, is author of The Battleship Book. He serves as a Senior Lecturer at the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky. His work includes military doctrine, national security, and maritime affairs. He blogs at Lawyers, Guns and Money and Information Dissemination and The Diplomat.

Image: The U.S. Navy battleship USS Massachusetts seen from the after deck of USS Alabama, January 1943. Wikimedia Commons/U.S. Navy

NIGERIA: Economic Recession: Banks, Insurance Firms Slash Workers’ Salaries

By Dayo Oketola, Nike Popoola, ‘Nonye Ben-Nwankwo, Fisayo Falodi, Gbenro Adeoye, Tunde Ajaja, and Jesusegun Alagbe

PUNCH, NIGERIA

NIGERIA (PUNCH) -- Hit by the current economic recession in the country, most money deposit banks and insurance firms have slashed their workers’ salaries by between 20 and 50 per cent.

Investigations by Saturday PUNCH revealed that Diamond Bank Plc, Heritage Bank Plc, Zenith Bank Plc, First Bank Plc and Wema Bank Plc have reduced their workers’ salaries as of August 31, 2016. This has also been confirmed by management sources and workers in the affected banks.

While Diamond Bank was said to have slashed salaries by 30 per cent, Heritage by 30 per cent, First Bank and Wema Bank workers’ salaries were slashed by 20 per cent each.

It was learnt that the banks tied the decision to cut salaries to workers’ ability to meet deposit targets, which have become unrealistically high in recent time. Hence, workers who failed to meet their targets had their salaries slashed.

Investigations also revealed that some insurance companies have extended the targets of premium generation to their employees.

Before, the marketing departments of the underwriting firms and insurance agents were responsible for generating premium for the companies.

Due to the economic crisis in the country, many insurance firms increased the targets for their marketing departments’ workers with threats of not paying them salaries if they failed to meet it (targets). As such, insurance workers who failed to meet their premium targets, according to industry sources, also had their salaries slashed.

An insurance employee, who spoke to one of our correspondents, said, “Before, it was only the marketers that they used to give targets to. Now, some of us also have targets ranging between N40, 000 and N100, 000 monthly and our promotion and salaries are tied to our performance.”

A Zenith Bank worker, who simply identified herself as Nkem, confirmed the slash in salaries.

Nkem said she resumed work after her annual vacation only to discover that she didn’t get the same salary that she had always received.

Similarly, another Zenith Bank employee, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told one of our correspondents that there was eight per cent cut in their salaries, beginning from August.

The source said the reason given by the bank was that the workers had not been paying the correct tax, hence, the bank had to start the deduction to regularise the tax payable.

On the fear that some workers could be sacked, the source said such fear had always been there, but the current one was beyond description.

He said, “The problem now is that there has not been any promotion since last year, which seems strange.”

An employee of First Bank, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he had been sleeping and waking up in worry in the past two weeks due to fear of being sacked.

The banker, who just got married in Lagos, said workers had received an email from the bank’s Managing Director about a “new development soon.”

He said, “We have been receiving hints of more lay-offs due to the economic recession in the country, which has deeply affected the banking sector. Some employees lost their jobs two months ago. We also learned that another set of people will be laid off between September and October.”

Saturday PUNCH learnt that Ecobank has yet to slash its workers’ salaries, but there is apprehension among the bank’s employees that their pay might be slashed any moment from now.

One of the bank’s senior members of staff, who preferred to be addressed as Handsome Guy, said it had become a tradition among Nigeria’s banks to be imitating one another’s policies, especially those affecting workers’ welfare.

A worker with First Bank Plc, who simply identified himself as Jimson, confirmed to one of our correspondents on Thursday that most bank workers now go to work with the fear that they could be sacked anytime.

“There is perpetual fear in all banks. Every category of workers in the banks is affected by the economic crisis,” he said.

He, however, noted that some bank workers had been resigning and travelling abroad, especially the United States and Canada, to avoid being sacked.

Jimson said, “One of my colleagues just resigned last month because of the fear of losing his job and travelled to the U.S to seek greener pastures. But those who are not interested in leaving Nigeria have devised many means to survive the harsh economy should their letters of sacking come anytime. They are setting up small scale businesses.

“The most common ones are laundry services and restaurants which require capital outlay of N500, 000.

“The academically-sound ones among them have been moving to private universities to take appointments there. The problem is on the high side now. There is perpetual fear among bank workers that they can be fired at anytime.”

The National Union of Banks, Insurance and Financial Institutions’ Employees confirmed the development in the banks to Saturday PUNCH.

NUBIFIE Secretary General, Mohammad Sheick, said the issue had become a serious concern to the union.

Sheick said, “There is apprehension in the banking sector. Recently, there was mass sacking by banks and the Federal Government directed that those who were sacked during that period should be recalled.

“We have had about two meetings with the Federal Ministry of Labour on the issue and we are hopefully looking at the possibility of the ministry calling us to another meeting so that we can have an understanding on how to respond to the emerging issues like economic recession and other factors that are affecting the operations of banks.

“Even before the economic recession, the banks have always responded to any policy of the government negatively. The first thing that came to the mind of the banks’ management, which the union has always disagreed with, is to lay off workers.

“They (banks) have to think outside the box and objectively. If they want to cut cost or reduce certain expenditure because of certain government’s policy, then the reality is that they should know where they should direct their attention.

“I can volunteer to say that the thing that eats deep into banks profit and loss is nothing other than the kind of lifestyle of the management staff of the banks. For example, the monthly salary of one executive director is more than the salaries of 100 workers. This is apart from other privileges and perks attached to him as an executive director.”

The Head, Corporate Communications, First Bank, Mr. Babatunde Lasaki, denied that the lender cut its employees’ salaries.

In a response to an emailed question, he said, “This is totally incorrect and unfounded. First Bank staff salaries, allowances and bonuses are being fully paid as and when due.”

The spokesperson of Zenith Bank, Mr. Akin Olaniyan, could not be reached on the telephone. Text message and email questions sent to him were not responded to.

The spokesperson, Diamond Bank, Mike Omeife, denied that the bank had cut the salaries of some of its workers.

The Director-General, Nigerian Insurers Association, Mr. Sunday Thomas, said everybody is a marketer in the insurance firms because they need the premium to operate all the departments.

“It will not be out of order for the companies to give employees targets except the target is unrealistic,” he said.

However, economists said the high deposit targets and the attendant fear by bank and insurance workers could be a strategy by the two industries to survive the current economic reality in the country.

A renowned Economist and Managing Director, Cocosheen Nigeria Limited, Ikeja, Lagos State, Mr. Henry Boyo, agreed that such a measure could be a strategy by banks to remain in business.

He said, “Every sector in the country is affected by the economic crisis, not only the banks. For instance, if a company asks you to pick between being sacked and your salary being reduced, I think most people would prefer the latter option. This could be what is happening.”

Another Lagos-based economist, Dr. Babatunde Abrahams, predicts the mass sacking of workers in banks and insurance firms going by the latest development.

He said, “If anyone has been watching economic trends for a while in the country, you will discover that the sacking of workers is inevitable. Banks trade with customers’ deposits, but I can tell you that very few people have money in banks in this harsh economic period.”

Early Voting Already: Trump Chances May Hinge On Non-Whites

BY HOPE YEN

ASSOCIATED PRESS

A cyclist rides past a sign directing voters to a primary election voting station early, in Phoenix. Early voting kicks off next week in North Carolina, the first in a two-month run of voting through key swing states where non-whites and young adults could give one of the presidential campaigns a decisive advantage before Election Day.


WASHINGTON (AP) — Two months before Election Day, early voting kicks off next week in North Carolina, the first in a run of key states where minority voters and young adults who cast ballots in advance could give one of the White House contenders a decisive advantage.

For Donald Trump, it's a major test of whether his recent outreach to non-white groups is translating into votes. In the increasingly diverse battleground states of North Carolina, Colorado, Florida, Nevada, Arizona and Georgia — all must-win states for Trump, except Colorado — it's minorities in particular who can tip the scales.

Early voters are expected to make up between 50 to 75 percent or more of all ballots in the six states, based on 2012 figures. That's compared to a national average of 35 percent, up from 22 percent in 2004, according to election data compiled by The Associated Press.

Mail-in ballots are popular among older, white Republicans, and party officials are betting they can bank plenty of their votes. But in several swing states, Hispanics, blacks and first-time voters typically have been more likely than whites to cast ballots early — and cast them for Democrats. Therein lies the challenge for team Trump.

Says Marlon Marshall, Hillary Clinton's director of state campaigns and political engagement: "We can't say this will be locked up with early voting, but it can absolutely make a huge difference." "Every early voter we get is one less person we need to mobilize on Election Day," he says.

The Trump campaign says it is taking early voting very seriously — with 133 field offices and plans to add 24 more. The campaign is also leaning heavily on the Republican National Committee to identify reliable white Republican voters in battlegrounds to mail in absentee ballots and keep his numbers up.

Trump also has vaguely urged supporters to volunteer as "election observers" to root out what he says is Democratic voter fraud. He made that assertion after courts rejected a voter ID law in several states, including North Carolina, citing a risk of disenfranchising the poor, minorities or young people who were less likely to have acceptable IDs — and who are more likely to vote Democratic.

The Republicans' get-out-the-vote effort is still significantly behind Clinton's, which, by contrast, is more than double the size of Trump's and rivals Barack Obama's massive 2012 operation. "A campaign with a superior voting operation can make a difference, and right now Donald Trump has shown little sign of organization," said Ryan Williams, a former senior staffer to Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign. He pointed to Trump's hire just last week of a national field director. At this point in 2012, Williams said, the Romney campaign had a fully staffed field team working intensely with the national party to help identify likely voters, organize turnout events, register voters and knock on doors.

National Republican officials say they now have 1,000 paid staffers and 5,000-plus trained organizers and other volunteers in 11 states assigned to help mobilize voters for both Trump and down-ballot GOP candidates. Heavy focus will be on boosting absentee mail-in balloting in Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Iowa, using the party's own massive data analytics program.

The Clinton campaign has more than 250 field offices in nine states compared to Trump's 133 nationwide, though Trump adviser Karen Giorno says his number will increase, especially in Florida. The Clinton team declined to reveal personnel details, but the 2012 mobilization involved thousands of paid staffers — including 500 in Florida alone — and 50,000-some trained organizers and other volunteers, according to Jen O'Malley Dillon, Obama's top field director in 2012 and now a senior adviser to the Democratic National Committee.

Republican officials stress that a main goal in 2016 will be to avoid deep early vote deficits, explaining that most Republicans are "habitual" Election Day voters In all, 37 states and the District of Columbia will allow voters to cast ballots by mail or at polling sites before Nov. 8. In mid to late October, a host of states launch in-person early voting, favored by non-whites and young adults who largely back Democrats. The most ardent supporters tend to vote first, and a key test will come in the remaining weeks.

Put in place last spring, the Clinton ground game relies on a massive voter file to help track both committed supporters and persuadable voters. Volunteers fan out to make their pitches and keep prospective voters informed of deadlines, polling locations and how to request absentee ballots. With new voter ID laws or other restrictions set to be in place in 15 states, a "voter protection team" of lawyers also is working with county officials in North Carolina, Florida, Nevada and Colorado.

In Obama's historic 2008 race, he ran up such big early voting advantages in four battlegrounds — Colorado, Florida, Iowa and North Carolina — that his rival, John McCain, couldn't catch up, despite winning the Election Day vote in those states, according to AP data.

AP's Election Research and Quality Control Group in New York and AP reporter Bill Barrow in Miami contributed to this report.

On Twitter follow Hope Yen at https://twitter.com/hopeyen1

Brazil's President Rousseff Ousted From Office By Senate

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Brazil's President Michel Temer gives the thumbs up before taking the presidential oath at the National Congress, in Brasilia, Brazil, Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2016. Temer was sworn in as Brazil's new leader following the ouster of President Dilma Rousseff.

BRASILIA, BRAZIL (AP) — Brazil's Senate on Wednesday voted to remove President Dilma Rousseff from office, the culmination of a yearlong fight that paralyzed Latin America's largest nation and exposed deep rifts among its people on everything from race relations to social spending.

While Rousseff's ouster was widely expected, the decision was a key chapter in a colossal political struggle that is far from over. Her vice president-turned-nemesis, Michel Temer, was immediately sworn in as president with Rousseff's allies vowing to fight her removal.

Rousseff was Brazil's first female president, with a storied career that includes a stint as a Marxist guerrilla jailed and tortured in the 1970s during the country's dictatorship. She was accused of breaking fiscal laws in her management of the federal budget.

"The Senate has found that the president of the federal republic of Brazil, Dilma Vana Rousseff, committed crimes in breaking fiscal laws," said Chief Justice Ricardo Lewandowski, who presided over the trial.

Opposition lawmakers, who made clear early on the only solution was getting her out of office, argued that the maneuvers masked yawning deficits from high spending and ultimately exacerbated the recession in a nation that had long enjoyed darling status among emerging economies.

Nonsense, Rousseff countered time and again, proclaiming her innocence up to the end. Previous presidents used similar accounting techniques, she noted, saying the push to remove her was a bloodless coup d'etat by elites fuming over the populist polices of her Workers' Party the last 13 years.

The opposition needed 54 of the 81 senators to vote in favor for her to be removed. They got many more, winning in a landslide of sorts, 61-20. "Today is the day that 61 men, many of them charged and corrupt, threw 54 million Brazilian votes in the garbage," Rousseff tweeted minutes after the decision.

Rousseff won re-election in 2014, garnering more than 54 million votes. In a second Senate vote about 30 minutes later, Rousseff won a minor victory as a measure to ban her from public office for eight years failed. The 42-36 vote fell short of the 54 votes needed for passage.

In the background of the entire fight was a wide-ranging investigation into billions of dollars in kickbacks at state oil company Petrobras. The two-year probe has led to the jailing of dozens of top businessmen and politicians from across the political spectrum, and threatens many of the same lawmakers who voted to remove Rousseff.

Rousseff argued that many opponents just wanted her out of the way so they could save their own skins by tampering with the investigation, which Rousseff had refused to do. Many lawmakers and Brazilians nationwide, meanwhile, blamed Rousseff for the graft even though she has never been personally implicated. They argued that she had to know, as many of the alleged bribes happened while her party was in power.

Rousseff's removal creates many questions that are not easily answered. Temer will serve out the remainder of her term through 2018. He was expected to address the nation in the evening. But Brazilians have already gotten a taste of Temer's leadership, and they are clearly unimpressed.

In May, Temer took over as interim president after the Senate impeached and suspended Rousseff. The 75-year-old career politician named a Cabinet of all-white men, a decision roundly criticized in a nation that is more than 50 percent nonwhite. Three of his ministers were forced to resign within weeks of taking their jobs because of corruption allegations, which also follow Temer and threaten his hold on power.

When Temer announced the opening of the Olympics on Aug. 5, he was so vociferously booed that he remained out of sight for the remainder of the games. Rousseff's allies have vowed to appeal to the country's highest court. While previous petitions to the court have failed to stop the impeachment process, at the very least legal wrangling will keep the issue front and center.

Late Wednesday night, a group of unhappy Rousseff supporters smashed windows of bank branches, other businesses and a police SUV in the city of Sao Paulo. Anti-riot police tried to quell the demonstration with stun grenades and tear gas.

The decision to remove Rousseff also leaves many question marks over the economy, expected to decline for a second straight year. Temer has promised to pull the country of 200 million people from its recession by tackling reforms that have long been taboo, such as slimming public pensions.

But he has not been able to accomplish much the last three months as interim president, and it remains to be seen whether Congress will be willing to work with him. Several polls have shown that Brazilians prefer new elections to solve the crisis.

For that to happen, however, Temer would have to be removed from office or resign, something he clearly has no intention of doing. Speaking to the nation in televised address Wednesday evening, Temer hit back at Rousseff.

"Putschist is you," he said, referring to Rousseff's accusation that he had led the charge to oust her. "It's you who is breaking the constitution." Temer said he had tasked his Cabinet with pushing forward budget and pension reforms as well as proposals to create jobs.

"From today on, the expectations are much higher for the government. I hope that in these two years and four months, we do what we have declared — put Brazil back on track," he said. Speaking to supporters at the presidential residence, Rousseff promised to mount a strong opposition, but didn't elaborate.

"This coup is against social movements and unions and against those who fight for their rights," she said. "Rights for the young people to make history, rights for the black, indigenous, LGBT and women."

Associated Press writer Mauricio Savarese reported from Brasilia and AP writer Peter Prengaman reported from Rio de Janeiro.

Peter Prengaman on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/peterprengaman

Mauricio Savarese on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/MSavarese

US Set To Destroy Big Chemical Weapon Stockpile

BY DAN ELLIOTT

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Debra Michaels, Chemical Operations Manager demonstrates a gas chromatograph inside a mobile testing lab at the Army's Pueblo Chemical Storage facility in Pueblo, Colo. The lab is used to test the air for leaking mustard agent. Depot commander Lt. Col. Robert C. Wittig looks on at left. On Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2016, the U.S. Army said that it plans to start operating a $4.5 billion plant next week that will destroy the nation's largest remaining stockpile of mustard agent, complying with an international treaty banning chemical weapons.

DENVER (ASSOCIATED PRESS) — The U.S. Army plans to start operating a $4.5 billion plant next week that will destroy the nation's largest remaining stockpile of mustard agent, complying with an international treaty that bans chemical weapons, officials said Wednesday.

The largely automated plant at the military's Pueblo Chemical Depot in southern Colorado will begin destroying about 780,000 chemical-filled artillery shells soon after this weekend, said Greg Mohrman, site manager for the plant. He declined to be specific, citing security concerns and possible last-minute delays.

"We've practiced a lot," Mohrman told The Associated Press. "Next week it gets real." Robots will dismantle the shells, and the plant will use water and bacteria to neutralize the mustard agent, which can maim or kill by damaging skin, the eyes and airways. At full capacity, the facility can destroy an average of 500 shells a day operating around the clock. It's expected to finish in mid-2020.

The plant will start slowly at first and likely won't reach full capacity until early next year, said Rick Holmes, project manager for the Bechtel Corp.-led team that designed and built it. Construction began in 2004, but until now, the Army has been vague about the start date, citing the complexities of building and testing the facility and training the workforce.

The depot has already destroyed 560 shells and bottles of mustard agent that were leaking or had other problems that made them unsuitable for the plant. Those containers were placed in a sealed chamber, torn open with explosive charges and neutralized with chemicals. That system can only destroy four to six shells a day.

Irene Kornelly, chairwoman of a citizens advisory commission that Congress established as a liaison between the public and the plant operators, said her group had no remaining safety concerns. The shells stored at the Pueblo depot contain a combined 2,600 tons of the chemical.

The Army stores an additional 523 tons of mustard and deadly nerve agents at Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky. Blue Grass is expected to start destroying its weapons next year, finishing in 2023. Mustard agent is a thick liquid, not a gas as commonly believed. It has no color and almost no odor, but it got its name because impurities made early versions smell like mustard.

The U.S. acquired 30,600 tons of mustard and nerve agents, but it says it never used them in war. Nearly 90 percent of its original stockpile has already been destroyed, mostly by incineration. The Colorado and Kentucky depots are using chemical neutralization because residents and officials expressed concerns about vapor from incineration.

A 1925 treaty barred the use of chemical weapons after debilitating gas attacks in World War I, and the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention called for eradicating them. But international inspectors say Syria and the Islamic State group used them in 2014 and 2015. The United Nations Security Council met in closed session Tuesday to consider whether to sanction Syria.

Follow Dan Elliott at http://twitter.com/DanElliottAP. His work can be found at http://bigstory.ap.org/content/dan-elliott.

Nigerian In Recession With 'Record' Low Foreign Investment

AFP

AUGUST 31, 2016

ABUJA, NIGERIA (AFP) - Nigeria's economy nosedived into a recession official data revealed Wednesday with oil production hammered by militant attacks on pipelines and foreign investment at a "record" low.

Output in the three months to the end of June was -2.06 percent with the oil sector reporting a double-digit decline following a wave of attacks by rebels in the oil-producing south.

The slowdown was recorded across many sectors in a sign that Africa's largest economy is wrestling with deeper structural issues than just the low price of crude.

Foreign investors, wary of the Nigerian government's controversial currency peg, avoided putting money into the country leading to a "record" decline in capital importation, reported Nigeria's National Bureau of Statistics.

The $647.1 million worth of capital imported into Nigeria in the second quarter represented a "fall of 75.73 per cent" compared to 2015.

"This provisional figure would be the lowest level of capital imported into the economy on record, and would also represent the largest year on year decrease," said the statistics agency.

"There was considerable uncertainty surrounding future exchange rate policy which may have deterred investors," added the statistics agency.

Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari's government finally devalued the naira in June after upholding the currency peg for months, yet experts say the negative impact of the controversial monetary policy will still be felt in months to come.

"It's really, really grim," John Ashbourne, Africa economist at research firm Capital Economics, told AFP.

"I think people underestimated the degree to which the oil sector would contract," said Ashbourne, speaking from London.

"Investors want to see some direction from Buhari, there is a sense that the policies they have implemented so far aren't working," Ashbourne said.

"Nigeria is very dependant on foreign investment to improve the infrastructure and get the economy back on track, we need investor confidence," he said, "people are staying away because they don't have any faith that things are turning around."

This year Nigeria's domestic product could contract by 1.8 per cent, according to the International Monetary Fund.

An Emotional Bill Clinton Eyes Possible Exit From Foundation

JULIE PACE

ASSOCIATED PRESS

AUGUST 30, 2016

WASHINGTON (ASSOCIATED PRESS) — When Bill Clinton told the staff of his global charity he would have to step down if Hillary Clinton won the White House, he was vividly clear about how that felt: Worse than a root canal, he said.

For Clinton, the foundation that bears his name has shaped much of his post-White House legacy, helping transform him from a popular yet scandal-tainted former president into an international philanthropist and humanitarian. But the Clinton Foundation is also the focus of election-year scrutiny — pushed along by Donald Trump — about the Democratic power couple's ability and willingness to separate the organization's wealthy contributors from past and possible future government roles.

The decisions surrounding the foundation's future are the latest chapter in an unprecedented partnership of personal and political ambitions. While political spouses — Hillary Clinton among them — often put aside their own goals, never before has that been required of a former president.

Friends and associates say that while Bill Clinton knows his role in the high-profile charity has to change, settling on how and when he might walk away has been emotional. He's also said to be deeply frustrated with the criticism shadowing his potential exit.

"We're trying to do good things. If there's something wrong with creating jobs and saving lives, I don't know what it is," he said last week. Mark Updegrove, the director of the Lyndon B. Johnson presidential library and author of "Second Acts: Presidential Lives and Legacies After the White House," said that while the foundation has unquestionably done good work around the world, the former president has no choice but to step aside if his wife wins the White House.

"Bill Clinton is smart enough to know that as much as the Clinton Foundation might help to augment his legacy, Hillary Clinton becoming president will be a far greater legacy than anything he himself can do as a former president," Updegrove said.

The foundation made some adjustments after she became secretary of state, but it has still faced numerous questions about how rigorously firewalls were upheld that were meant to separate donors from her government work.

An Associated Press review of Clinton's calendars from a two-year stretch show that more than half of those she met with from outside of government had made contributions to the foundation. For Trump and other Republicans, the Clintons' overlapping worlds are rife with ethical lapses. And for some Democrats, even that perception is worrisome in an election year where control of the White House and Congress are at stake.

Meanwhile, there's an odd reality of modern American politics: What presidents do after leaving the White House can shape their legacy almost as much as their tenure in the Oval Office. It can be an opportunity to bolster presidential successes and try to make up for failures. And those who leave office relatively young — Clinton was 54 — can spend many more years on these legacy projects than they did in the White House.

"For the last 15 years, it has been his life," said Tina Flournoy, Clinton's chief of staff. During the announcement of his potential departure, she said he noted that his role as head of the foundation was "the longest job he has held."

Jimmy Carter, who was seen by some as an ineffectual one-term president, has dramatically reshaped his image with decades of work on global issues. George W. Bush left office deeply unpopular, but has been applauded for dedicating his post-White House years to HIV programs in Africa and work with wounded military veterans. President Barack Obama has been discussing plans for his White House afterlife with confidants for months.

"There's a certain expectation that you stay involved, you don't totally get off the scene," said Anita McBride, a longtime Bush family aide. Bill Clinton's foundation began largely to support the building of his presidential library in Little Rock, Arkansas. As his post-White House ambitions grew, so did the foundation, ballooning into a $2 billion charity focused on global health, climate change and other international efforts.

The former president has leveraged his contacts to fill the foundation's coffers and traveled the world to meet with people helped by its work. He's the star of the annual Clinton Global Initiative meetings in New York, a mingling of international power players and celebrities that has become the hottest invitation in the philanthropic community.

The plan for the foundation's future in the event of a Clinton victory this fall includes daughter Chelsea Clinton remaining. Foreign and corporate donations will be halted, though the foundation is looking for ways to spin off some programs and keep them running.

The prospect of Bill Clinton stepping away from the foundation that has been the main outlet for his energy and intellect has renewed discussions about how he would fill his time in his wife's administration. Though he's now 70 and slowed by health issues, people close to the Clintons say they fully expect him to seek a prominent role. Hillary Clinton has even raised the prospect of putting her husband in charge of "revitalizing the economy."

"He just has to feel productive every single day," said Susie Tompkins Buell, a longtime Clinton friend. "If he gets into another situation where he's going to have that ability, he's going to be fine."

Follow Julie Pace at http://twitter.com/jpaceDC

If You Work In Development In Africa, You Need To Get On Board With Black Lives Matter

BY NNEKA EZE

QUARTZ AFRICA

As a child of a Nigerian immigrant and an African American, I grew up in the US crossing and navigating many cultural lines. For the past seven years I have been living and working across Africa. In my time here, I have watched from afar, helplessly, as the numbers of our African American brothers and sisters—victims of extrajudicial killings, continue to grow along with the lack of verifiable action on the part of the US government.

Over the past decade, I have worked with a range of international development practitioners in Africa and in the Americas. While some development organizations and individual practitioners are aware of the current and historical context in which they are operating, others are very unaware of terms, behavior, and perceptions that make up neo-colonialism and the preferential treatment which one of my taxi drivers in Kenya terms “white magic”.

White privilege goes hand in hand with the injustice minorities face in the United States. If development organizations don’t face and address the significance of this privilege in Africa, they will export similar issues worldwide (and arguably are already doing so). In Kenya, for example, NGOs are being asked to justify overpayment of expatriate staff --particularly those being paid sometimes three to four times more than Kenyan staff filling the same roles

This is not about white people or whiteness but about a system of white supremacy that no development organization working in Africa should be on the fence about. I am most impressed by organizations that take an approach to program design and particularly to senior leadership and organizational composition that says—we care about the people we are trying to empower or support so much so that they need a voice at the (leadership) table.

One of the reasons some Kenyans and Africans in the diaspora don’t trust the Nairobi social enterprise scene is that it has often been disconnected from the day-to-day politics. challenges, and realities on the ground. This is changing. African entrepreneurs are speaking up, crowdsourcing platforms like Homestrings and Emerging Crowd are democratizing fundraising so you no longer need to be Harvard or MIT trained with connections to US investors to make it work. African institutions are training and developing the next generation of African leaders, who are becoming more aware and critical of aid and interests.

Recently, the Ford Foundation wrote about  "Why black lives matter to philanthropy"  on the role of philanthropy in social justice movements. The article calls out the need to have public services focus more attention on those populations that have historically been excluded, and the need for philanthropic organizations to invest in social justice organizations.

#BlackLivesMatter should be central to any organization operating on the continent. It should be central to the policies and procedures with which we operate. Black lives matter is about equality and human rights. How can you claim to be an organization fighting to help people and countries that are less privileged than you are, but ignore inequality in your backyard? Illicit financial flows occur many times with the knowledge and support of wealthier countries and account for as much as ten times the amount of aid Africa receives. Children under five should not be dying of malnutrition in developing countries when the world produces more food than we need. This is not about idealism, but about a shift in the way we view our work, operations, and our impact on creating a better world for ourselves, our children, and for others. If we are serious about “development”, we must be serious about black lives mattering and what it means for the world.

What next?

Ignoring what “black lives matter” is about in the context of development work misses a direct, clear link to the core of the movement “a world in which the full humanity and dignity of all people is recognized”. Black lives matter should be reflected as a call to action and for self- and organizational reflection on the interconnectedness of our world and the need for intentionality in actions and addressing consequences.

For our individual selves: How critical are we of the behaviors, strategies, perceptions we use in our work day-to-day? How sensitive are we to ensuring our African colleagues have a voice at the table? What are we doing to support our colleagues in the US that experience now more visible injustices day-to-day? Let’s learn more about BLM, support the movement, and reflect its values and vision every day. Let’s influence those in power to change the policies, processes, and perceptions that have led us to where we are. In the words of Bishop Desmond Tutu, ““If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” Let’s break the silence and complicity.

EFCC Rakes In N1.9bn From Seized Funds Of Tafa Balogun, Others

BY YUSUF ALLI

THE NATION

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) says N1,956,007,975.81 has accrued to government as interest from the public funds sized from a former Inspector-General of Police, Mr. Tafa Balogun, and other suspects under investigation or trial.

N2.25billion was confiscated from Balogun alone.

The amount was deposited in 11 accounts,according to records put together by the agency.

The EFCC document sighted by The Nation also shows that seized properties from the founder of the defunct Intercontinental Bank Erastus Akingbola, former Edo State Governor Lucky Igbinedion, former Plateau State Governor Joshua Dariye and seven other highly-placed people under investigation ,have yielded about N185.6million as rents for government.

The other suspects in this category are: Alhaji Tukur Muazu, Bayo Lawal, Kayode Ojuri, Timothy Akani, Esai Dangabar, Aliyu Bello and John Yusuf Yakubu.


Similalrly, the EFCC took over 75 money laundering cases involving drug barons from the National Drugs Law Enforcement Agency ( NDLEA) between 2006 and 2013.

EFCC sources said the records were put together following the controversy generated by the assets seized from the former IGP.

Balogun resigned his appointment as the IGP on January 18, 2005 following the uncovering of a huge amount in his accounts by the EFCC under its pioneer chairman, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu.

But 11years after, some critics alleged that cash and assets seized from Balogun had been re-looted.

The EFCC records sighted by The Nation says in part: “A total of 15 Spring Bank accounts were forfeited by Mr. Tafa Balogun. Of this number, four accounts had NIL (zero) balance.

“The total balance in the remaining 11 accounts as of January 2005 was N1, 226,518,163.09. In addition to this, seven treasury bills/commercial papers in the same bank had a total balance of N1, 017, 178, 719.42.

“The two added together came up to N2, 243,696,882.51. With the addition of the accrued interest of N14, 403,634.36, the figure came to N2, 258,100,516.87.

“This sum was what was paid to the commission by Spring Bank and eventually remitted to the Federal Government, through the Federal Ministry of Finance.”

But the commission said that some assets of the former IGP were yet to be disposed of because of legal disputes.

Continuing, the EFCC says: “There were legal issues on some of the properties recovered from Tafa Balogun. Other claimants emerged, with claims to the properties. The cases include the property at Plot 2220 Suez Crescent, Zone 4, Abuja, which the Commission eventually won in 2013, while the other involved a property at Plot 1488, Fugar Street, Asokoro which case the Commission lost in 2014.

” Apart from the Fugar Street Asokoro property that is now a subject of appeal by the EFCC; three other properties forfeited by Tafa Balogun are yet to be disposed of. One of the properties is located at Plot 110, Tunis Street, Wuse Zone 5, Abuja.

“Meanwhile, the total sum of N46,358,393.15 generated from the management of the property by Diya Fatimilehin & Co since 2009 was remitted to the Commission at various times.

“The remitted sum is in the Commission’s recovery account.

“The remaining two properties which appeared on the forfeiture order as Plot 75, Asokoro and Plot 2262B Maitama A6 District, Abuja, are also subject of legal disputes.”

The EFCC also admitted that it raked in about N1,956,007,975.81 from forfeited funds placed in interest yielding accounts.

It says: “The placement of forfeited monies in interest yielding accounts is not an entirely new idea. The court in various rulings ordered some funds to be placed in interest yielding accounts.

“Rather than warehousing forfeited funds in current accounts for a long period, the commission lodged such funds, including those of Tafa Balogun, in interest yielding accounts.

“The interest element is always in line with CBN Cash Reserve Ratio and not fixed. Not a single kobo is taken out by the commission under this initiative.

It is interesting to note that under this initiative, as at March 2015, the sum of N696, 590,765.36 was generated as interest on recovered funds with Access Bank Plc. “Another sum of N522,807,543.83 presently stands as interest generated from recovered funds with Ecobank Plc, while the subsidy recoveries with Enterprise Bank Plc has yielded the sum of N736,609,666.62. All these monies are intact and are held on behalf of the Federal Government until all encumbrances to their release are cleared.

“For purposes of transparency and accountability, the commission sought and obtained approval to operate a dedicated interest income account vide a letter from the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation Ref. No. AGF/TRY/RB/441/VOL.I/128 dated 3rd December, 2012.”

Meanwhile, about N185.6million was collected as rents from seized properties of Erastus Akingbola, Lucky Igbinedion, Alh. Tukur Muazu, Bayo Lawal, Kayode Ojuri, Timothy Akani, Esai Dangabar, Aliyu Bello, Joshua Chibi Dariye and John Yusuf Yakubu.

“For the avoidance of doubt, the said rents were remitted to the commission as follows:
The sum of N70, 655,872.47 was collectively generated from the management of the forfeited properties of Erastus Akingbola, Lucky Igbinedion and Alh. Tukur Muazu.
The sum of N99, 083,241.75 was collectively generated from the management of the forfeited properties of Erastus Akingbola, Bayo Lawal, Kayode Ojuri, Timothy Akani, Esai Dangabar, Aliyu Bello, Joshua Chibi Dariye and others.

iii. The N15, 944,222.40 was collectively generated from the management of the forfeited properties of Mr. Bayo Lawal, Esai Dangabar and John Yusuf Yakubu.

On money laundering cases by drug barons, the EFCC confirmed receipt of 75 cases from the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency ( NDLEA) between 2006 and 2007.

It said: “Between 2006 and 2013, the EFCC received a total of 75 cases from NDLEA. The cases related to various offences including, unlawful possession of financial instruments, currency trafficking, unlawful possession of counterfeit financial instrument, obtaining under false pretense and unlawful possession of fake currencies among others.

“The cases were basically transferred along with exhibits which include financial instruments in form of cheques, drafts, traveler’s cheques, money order and cash in local and foreign currencies which were mostly fake or counterfeit in nature.”