Donald Trump’s claim to have brokered the deal is made all the more ridiculous by the well-know reality that Tel Aviv and Rabat have secretive military relations dating back decades – to the time they were both in league with the apartheid regime.

In those Cold War days Morocco was being armed by Pretoria and Israel cooperated with apartheid South Africa in developing a nuclear weapon.

Both countries justifiably feel deep shame about this now and speak of it either with reluctance or try to deny it.

The surprise in yesterday’s announcement by President Trump is his recognizing what he calls Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara.

This amounts to him flying in the face on international condemnation of Morocco’s 1995 invasion of the former Spanish territory and its illegal occupation of it since then.

Britain, America’s permanent Western partner on the United Nations Security Council, who joined in scolding Morocco 45 year ago, hastened today to stress that its position on Western Sahara has not changed.

It is holding Morocco to its promise to hold a referendum on self-governance for the territory.

That was a condition of the 1991 ceasefire ending Morocco’s 16 year war with Polisario, the Western Sahara liberation movement.

The African Union also hastened to emphasize that Western Sahara is a founder member of the continental grouping having been admitted to its predecessor the Organization of African Unity.

Morocco stormed out of the OAU when this happened and shunned Africa until it recently joined the AU as a fellow member with the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic.

King Mohammed VI, Morocco’s absolute ruler, has clearly opted once again to turn his country’s back on Africa to take up with Israel and the lame duck Trump administration in the United States.

It remains to be seen whether President Joe Biden will persist with the maverick position on Morocco which is at odds with international opinion.

The ruling African national Congress in South Africa which currently occupies the  chair of the African Union says: “It is regrettable that outgoing President Trump in his last days in office tries to cement his legacy of reactionary foreign policies, that does not contribute to peaceful resolutions of conflict in  the world, but in fact fuels hatred and conflict.”

It “calls on all international and progressive forces on the continent and in the world to condemn this deal and continue to work for the implementation of UN and AU resolutions.”

The post Israel and Morocco have links dating back to when they were in league with apartheid South Africa appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

Like the rest of the world caught up in the pandemic, Africa waits impatiently for a vaccine.

Baffling the experts, Africa has had comparatively low numbers of infections.

These infections are starting to increase, but thus far Africa accounts for just over two million of the more than 60 million cases worldwide.

Medical experts say there has been an increase in Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria as the winter weather closes in.

South Africa, with more than 502000 infections and over 21 000 deaths tops the continental COVID list.

These experts fear it will later next year and perhaps even 2022 before Africa sees widespread distribution of vaccines.

It is unlikely, they say, that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, which are currently the frontrunners in the northern hemisphere, will be distributed in Africa.

Cost is not the chief obstacle.

According to the International Vaccine Access Centre at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health,  the storage and transportation of the vaccine are the chief obstacles.

The Pfizer vaccine has to be kept at minus 80 degrees.

Distributing it requires special refrigerated storage facilities and refrigerated aircraft and vehicles to move it around.

Africa requires a more hardy medication that does not require such expensive care.

There is also a question of safety.

Fourteen years ago Pfizer had to pay compensation to the 11 families in Nigeria’s Kano state who lost children in tests on the anti meningitis vaccine Travan.

African nations responded angrily early in the pandemic to French doctors suggesting Africans would be good subjects for testing a COVID vaccine.

The movement calling itself Africans Are Not Lab Rats has silenced similar suggestions.

However it is undeniable that if a vaccine is be effective in Africa, it needs to be tested here..

The post Africa will have to wait until later next year for a COVID vaccine appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

Surely in this age of social media that gossamer thin excuse has disappeared.

Some Germans might have claimed they did not know about the Nazi genocide until the Nuremberg trials painfully mapped them out.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission obliterated any ability South Africans might have had to profess ignorance of apartheid’s crimes against humanity.

No Moroccan with a smart phone or personal computer can pretend not to know about that country’s invasion, occupation and lethal repression of the neighbouring Saharawi people..

In all three cases the perpetrators of these outrages or their supporters not only knew exactly what was happening but they have the blood on their hands from backing it to the hilt.

Let us accept that over the years millions have been swept along by the wicked wind of history.

They are not exactly innocent. Just ignorant.

So we should give the benefit of the doubt to the Americans who accepted Donald Trump as President without knowing what he really was.

His conservative support base put him in the White House for the purpose of turning the tide of liberalism that has been washing over the the United States for more than half a century.

They were prepared to put him there despite his bullying, narcism.

They are planning to keep him there to continue that trend even though he represents everything they are taught not to be.

For this to happen, there has to be support, however unwitting, from middle America.

This came from people who either don’t vote for him or will later claim they were swept along by his anti-establishment image and didn’t know what he really represented..

Monday’s bombshell from the New York Times has made that impossible.

Donald Trump has not paid tax for 12 of the past 18 years.

He paid a paltry $750 in each of his first two years as US President. 

The average U.S.tax bill is about $12 000. Trump paid less tax than the undocumented workers he employed at his golf estates and resorts

How has he managed to do this?

For starters he is nowhere near as rich as he claims to be.

So the idea of the offensive, potty-mouthed braggart making himself acceptable because of his business skills is pure cant.

He has been bankrupt more times than he has had years in office.

And his business ventures continue to post millions in losses, despite his pouring into them money earned from his “Apprentice” television series.

These losses, together with some imaginative returns have allowed him to avoid paying taxes.

He claimed $70 000 for personal hairdressing.

He paid his daughter Ivanka $750 000 in consultation fees even though she is already on the family payroll.

That is called double dipping, I believe.

When Hillary Clinton pointed out during their 2016 debate that Trump has paid no taxes on some years, he interrupted her to declare: “That takes me smart!”

Does it? 

Are Americans prepared to pay their share and see their President dodge paying his?

The New York Times, brings up this blatant unfairness, and also points to a national security issue.

Trump owes close to $400 million dollars that will fall due during his second term, if indeed he is re-elected.

The potential embarrassment of having creditors foreclose on a sitting president notwithstanding, the most concerning thing is not knowing if they include foreign countries or individuals.

Trump’s son Eric has boasted that they don’t use American banks because they have  access to Russian funds.

What leverage does this give the Russians over the President?

An audience of 80 million people is expected for the  first debate.

Whether or not Joe Biden is able to capitalize on the bombshell revelations by the New York Times, the American people have been given the truth about the current occupant of the White House.

They will not be able to say we didn’t know.

The post Americans won’t be able to say they did uot know appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

On World Press Freedom day it is apposite that we show concern and solidarity with colleagues under the thumbs and worse of oppressive regimes.

On our continent, I think of those bravely trying to speak truth to power in Eritrea, Rwanda, Morocco and Zimbabwe among others.

We may justifiably take a modest bow when told that we are an integral part of democracy by giving  people the facts that enable them to make crucial decisions about their futures.

It is all very reminiscent of the apartheid days when South Africa’s independent media could explain their mission statement in a paragraph.

It was all about ending one of the greatest evils of the 20th century.

We used to hand off compliments about our courage by saying to our readers and listeners that it was in fact they who were being brave.

We had the information and were able to get it to them by driving a coach and horses through the oppressive machinery of the apartheid regime.

It was the people who had to act on that information.

So important as we liked to think we were, it was about them, not us.

Things have changed dramatically since then.

The democratic government in South Africa has lamentable failed to keep its promises as a liberation movement.

Corruption, greed and inefficiency have enriched a thin strata at the top of society and destined the majority who voted them into power to perpetual suffering.

The independent media, which always was a business operation, has been forced to make deeply compromising choices to secure their very survival.

The economic downturn has put them on the back foot.

The COVID 19 pandemic has already pushed some outlets over the edge and threatens to send others into the precipice.

This is reflected in the coverage of what is unquestionably the story of our generation.

Young and inexperienced journalists, who are the reporters that proprietors can afford, are doing their level best to keep their viewers, listeners and readers abreast of developments.

They cover virtual media briefing and try to make sense of the utterances of ministers who are often as much in the dark as they are.

The analysis, both positive and critical, is largely left to the small band of foreign correspondents.

Surely this is the job of the South African media.

Even with the relaxations that came last Friday, our lockdown is one of the most draconian on the planet.

We make the United Nations roll of shame for excessive action by security forces policing the enforced stay-at-home.

We are also in the top ranks of countries suffering gender-baed-violence during the enforced confinement .

What happened to the moral high ground of 25 years ago?

Ministers have allowed their personal ambition and prejudices to impact on their decisions.

A perfect example is continuing on plainly spurious grounds to deny the sale of tobacco products. This was clearly designed, among other things,  to embarrass President Cyril Ramaphosa who now has to countermand the inveterately anti-smoking Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma, whom he has put in charge of this process, if he wants to keep the word he gave last week.

As to the continued alcohol ban, we can be assured of heavy-handed enforcement under Police Minister Bheki Cele.

On World Press Freedom Day surely we should be doing our job by shining  the light on these inequities.

The post World Press Freedom Day in a time of COVID 19 appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

He did not do this either Morocco or Egypt – two of his four previous African visit – that arguably have more deplorable human rights records than the Pope’s current hosts.

Amnesty International has asked the Pope to express concern about the prolonged detention of pretrial prisoners in Mozambique and the beating of journalists and human rights defenders.

It was Pope Benedict, the incumbent’s predecessor, who angered Egypt during his visit with the vehemence of his denunciation of attacks on Christians.

And in Morocco earlier this year, Pope Francis said nothing about that country’s protracted illegal occupation of the Western Sahara in defiance of the international community.

The post Pope unlikely to directly criticise Morocco’s human rights record appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

Recent events at the International Court of Justice in the Hague and the United Nations General Assembly remind us there is another: Britain’s continued administration of the Indian Ocean Chagos Archipelago.

Holding sway over the empire upon which the sun never set, Britain began calling the shots on  developments in the Indian Oceans around Mauritius from 1814.

Before giving that country independence in 1968, Britain paid four million pounds for the Chagos Archipelago and called it the British Indian Ocean Territory

In the mid sixties it leased one of the islands, Diego Garcia to the United States.

The Pentagon build a strategically importnat military base there, secure in the knowledge that it has tenure until 2035.

At Washington’s behest, Britain moved the  1800-odd islanders  off their home. They have never been allowed to return.

This type of behaviour might have been generally accepted in a bygone era of colonial administration..

It does not wash today – certainly not from a  country that has long passed the twilight of its global power.

Britain has set aside 40 million pounds to assist the displaced Chagoans who are mostly in Britain, the Seychelles and Mauritius.

Still not good enough.

The matter was brought to the United Nations’ top court that found in February that Britain had acted illegally by hiving off the archipelago to continue its occupation. The ICJ ruled this should end as soon as possible.

In the General Assembly this week, an African-sponsored motion was passed by 116 votes to six giving Britain six month to get off Chagos.

Britain’s ambassador to the world organization Dame Karen Pierce said candidly that this would not happen.

Britain is determined to continue its control of Chagos at least until 2036.

Not surprisingly the United States was one of the half-dozen opponents of the resolution.

It reminded the international community that operations from Diego Garcia protect the region from terrorists and pirates. The base is also used for humanitarian purposes like reducing tsunami victims.

Diego Garcia is not used to house terror suspects  but it is used as a refueling stop in transitioning them from points of capture to places of incarceration.

It was also used for US bombing raids on Iraq and Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington 18 years ago.

Neither the ICJ ruling nor the UNGA resolution is binding.

General Assembly resolutions cannot be enforced.

However the strongly reflects international opinion.

Flying in the face of it brings into question Britain’s commitment to the multilateral system of  governance.

With its military power having waned, Britain, like most other countries, has to rely on moral clout.

Mauritian Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth urged countries to support the General Assembly resolution, saying failure to do so would be endorsing colonialism.

He maintains the United States can lease its military base from his government, adding that Mauritius would find it deeply offensive if Washington did not regard it as a trusted security partner.

The post Chagos archipelago questions Britain’s commitment to multilateral governance appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

The International Oganisation for Migration fears the death toll from the sinking of two crowded boats could be high higher.

Djibouti has become a major launch site for migrants, mainly from Ethiopia, heading for the Arabian peninsula.

Crossing the Red Sea is less considered hazardous than braving the Mediterranean which claimed six lives a day in 2018, according to a United Nations report.

This figure takes in launchings from Libya in the east and Morocco in the west.

Yesterday’s tragedy underlines the harsh reality that vast numbers of people are prepared to risk their lives and those of their families seeking economically more prosperous  and politically more peaceful futures away from Africa.

The post Scores drown trying to drop the Red Sea from Djibouti appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

Two of the five coup leaders have been killed as the army restores control, closing down the internet and broadcasting services in the oil-rich, small West African state.

The South African statement recalls the African Union’s rejection of any unconstitutional change of government and calls on the Gabonese army to restore the democratically elected government in Gabon.

That’s headed by President Ali Bongo who is recovering in Morocco from a  stroke suffered in Saudi Arabia two months ago.

Bongo took the reins when his father died in 2002 having seized power in 1967.

Ali Bongo won an election in 2016 by fewer than 6 000 votes and  at least  seven people died in demonstrations calling for an end to the 50-year Bongo dynasty in Gabon.

The post South Africa condemns attempted coup in Gabon appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

The coup leader says a New Year’s eve address by Bongo reinforced doubts about the president’s ability to continue to carry out of the responsibilities of his office.

Speaking for the putschists is Lieutenant Kelly Ondo Obiang. 

He leads the self-declared Patriotic Movement of the Defence and Security Forces of Gabon.

He’s calling on Gabonese to join his national restoration movement. 

President Ali Bongo has been out of the country since suffering a stroke while attending an economic summit in Saudi Arabia two months ago.

There have been several calls of late for an end to the Bongo dynasty that started with Omar Bongo seizing power in 1967.

Ali Bongo took power after his father’s death in 2002.

The post Soldiers take over radio station in Gabon in attempted coup appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.

South Africa has twice proved the veracity of this.

In its first rotating term on the UN powerhouse between 2007 and 2008, the South African government – still in its heady days of President Nelson Mandela – appeared insensitive to human rights violations in Myanmar and Zimbabwe.

Eager to avoid a similar accusation in its second term between 2011 and 2012 South Africa voted for a resolution supporting “all necessary measures to protect civilians on the ground” from aerial against attacks by the forces of dictator Muammar Gadaffi. 

This led to military action that contributed to Gadaffi’s overthrow and killing which set off violence and insecurity from which the country still has not recovered.

South African protests that it never actually supported military action against Gadaffi drew chortles from observers who said it was dangerously naive of the South Africans not to realize their vote for a no-fly zone over Libya could possibly lead to anything else.

South Africa’s newly-acquired BRICS partners Brazil, Russia, India and China abstained in that vote.

Barak Obama’s U.S. Government reiterated that South Africa had merely done the right thing.

This was cold comfort for the African nations who insisted that Libya should have been left for the AU to sort out.

The Africans saw fit to put South Africa up for a third term in the diplomatic engine room.

Will South Africa be able to parlay this into eventually becoming the permanent African member on a reformed UN Security Council?

This will be the call not so much of fellow Africans but of the heavy hitters who would have to agree to the reforms.

The signs so far are rather ominous.

South Africa has sat so firmly on the fence on the fraught Ukraine issue that it has iron its soul.

In the year ahead, the Western powers on the Security Council are bound to take a tougher line against Russian aggression aimed at its western neighbour and its annexation of Crimea.

They will be looking for consistency from South Africa that has steadfastly cited moral grounds for standing against Moroccan aggression in north Africa and its invasion of Western Sahara.

European diplomats say South Africa’s decision to abstain in the UN General Assembly vote on human rights violations in Myanmar is disappointing.

There has been stronger language from Asian countries.

They are comparing South Africa’s refusal to vote in favor of human rights protection for Rohingya refugees with what they call discredited Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s abetting of genocide.

Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Lindiwe Sisulu has signaled there will be change in this stance and they are all eagerly awaiting the new position.

They will also look to South Africa to alter it abstention and actually support UN disarmament chief Izumi Nakamitsu’s call for an end to the use of chemical weapons by Syria.

Doing this would put South Africa at odds with Russia as it shows an increasing tendency to stay on-side with its BRICS partner.

In the vote for the new Interpol chief, for example, South Africa withdrew it’d candidate for the post and threw its support behind Russian Alexander Prokapchuk who eventually lost to South Korean Kim Yong Yan.

At stake over the next two years is more than merely irritating Western friends.

South Africa’s contributions and votes on the 15-nation Security Council will bring it directly into the cross-hairs of Donald Trump whose vengeful  petulance easily exceeds his short attention span.

If he doesn’t like something South Africa does it is easily within the realms of possibility that it might be made to pay by losing its favorable access to US markets via the American Growth and Opportunity Act or AGOA.

The Saharawi people, living under Moroccan occupation for 43 years,  will be grateful for having South Africa on the Security Council.Sisulu has promised South Africa will use its position to press for self-determination for the Western Sahara. By implication this means getting Morocco to quit the territory.

So, however we look at it, for the next two years South Africa will be playing high-stakes poker at the biggest game in town.

EndsIsumi

The post Ominous signs as South Africa approaches its rotating seat on the United Nations Security Council appeared first on Jean-Jacques Cornish.