SHAME ON YOU!

The number of people forcibly displaced worldwide has reached 43.7 Million, the highest number in 15 years- roughly equaling the entire populations of Colombia or South Korea, or of Scandinavia and Sri Lanka combined. Women and children suffer most and make up 47% of refugees. It is estimated that 15, 500 individual asylum applications were lodged by unaccompanied or separated children throughout 69 countries in 2010 most of them Somali or Afghan. So far, Syria has been the biggest refugee producing country and Somalia the second. In both countries and many other refugee source countries, the interrelated factors of conflict and climate change made survival at home impossible for them. Although each crisis is different, there are useful lessons that can be shared between the two.

Congo Refugees

In 1991 Somalia broke into civil war that has gone for close to a quarter of a century now. Since then a total of 500,000 Somali lives have been lost and another 770,154 Somalis have sought refuge in neighboring nations and western countries across the globe. According to UNHCR refugee statistics as of 31^st October 2015, Kenya hosts a total 329,811 registered Somali refugee population in Daadab camp while Ethiopia’s Dollo Ada camp is home  to 210, 698 registered Somali refugees (a 5% increase since 2012) making them the world's biggest refugee hosting countries . The world’s longest humanitarian crisis evidenced has not only resulted in a swell in the number of refugees in the region but also piracy, where Somali pirates were responsible for 44% of the 289 piracy incidents on the world's seas in the first nine months of 2010 (data from IMB) and also costed the global economy between $5.7 and $6.1 billion in 2012. A Hollywood film based on the container ship Maersk Alabama that tells the story of Captain Richard Phillips, who was taken hostage for five days by the pirates tries to paint the picture. But most important impact felt are the terror attacks in Somalia and across East Africa by the armed militia group Al-Shabaab, with Kenya having lost 300 lives making it the most hit which of course cannot be compared to the many more lives still being lost in Somalia.

Approximately 230, 000 Somalis made the trip to Daadab camp, Kenya In mid- 2010 and early- 2013 arriving in terrible health conditions after days of walking through the desert. Hundreds died on the journey and hundreds more families arrived with malnourished children. Aid agencies were severely overstretched trying to deal with both the sheer numbers arriving and the terrible health condition of people entering the camp. Studies show that countries neighbouring refugee source areas are almost always the primary destination for refugees, as seen in Africa where Kenya hosts refugees from both Somali and South Sudan or in the Middle East where Afghan refugees are in Pakistan. However, the crisis in Syria has unfolded on such an overwhelming scale that neighbouring countries can no longer adequately accommodate them. As a result, close to 7% of Syrian refugees have sought asylum in Europe but, as is becoming increasingly apparent, this percentage is quickly rising. This has resulted to a rapid instalment of razor-wire fences at Europe’s borders and the recent November 13^th attacks in Paris, hasn’t made things any better with campaigns lodged against more intake of refugees and immigrats intensifying within EU States and in the US where governors form 30 states say they will not take in any Syrian refugees. This has created Islamic phobia, Xenophobia as well as setting back the strides made towards the fight for equality and minority groups.

Jordanian Refugee Camp

During this year’s Refugee day the UN Secretary- General Ban Ki- moon acknowledged that theburden of helping the world’s displaced is uneven. A UNHCR report indicates that a full four fifths of the world’s refugees are being hosted by developing countries (80% of the world’s refugee’s) both in absolute terms and in relation to the size of their economies. Pakistan, Iran and Syria have the largest refugee populations at 1.9 million, 1.1 million and 1 million respectively. Pakistan also has the biggest economic impact with 710 refugees per $1 of GDP (Gross Domestic Product). The Democratic Republic of the Congo and Kenya come in second and third in the report with 475 and 247 refugees respectively. On the other hand, South Africa continues to be a major destination for asylum-seekers, as well as migrants and others seeking better economic and social opportunities, hosting nearly one fifth of the 850,000 registered asylum-seekers under the UNHCR. This makes the asylum system be overwhelmed creating a backlog that affects the quality and efficiency of refugee status determination. Without a comprehensive immigration system, migrant workers and others sometimes try to make use of the asylum system to stay legally and gain access to South Africa's services drawing back its economy. By comparison, Germany, the industrialized country with the largest refugee population (594,000 people), has 17 refugees for each dollar of per capita GDP and yet the anti- refugee sentiment are heard loudest in industralized countries. Conor Phillips, Country Director for the International Rescue Committee in Kenya writes that with the exception of Germany and Sweden, EU proposals to accept refugees have so far been verging on irrelevance. EU members are balking at a proposal to accept 160,000 refugees. To highlight the absurdity of this scale, this is 1/8 of the number of Syrians that Lebanon already hosts and Lebanon’s landmass is 1/423 the size of Europe. So, this situation demands an equitable solution. ISIS, Al-Shabaab, Hezbollah or any other armed group are not formed on religious principles and we all know this. They are groups that were formed as a result of poverty, marginalization, inequality and as a way of filling in social gaps left by our governments such as security and social welfare (See, The Side of Terrorism That Doesn’t Make Headlines: Part 1 ).

So instead of creating fear as some Senators in the US congress have expressed or turning down of economic refugees as witnessed in Croatia and Macedonia refusing to resubmit them, or Poland closing down it’s boarders which is against some of the principles that the EU is founded. Or even spreading of Islamic phobia and xenophobia by some political parties in France, Germany, United Kingdom and other parts of Europe and North America. Can we actually focus on the real issues at hand, such as the thousands of lives that are being lost in Syria, Somalia, Iraq and other refugee source nations, the 15.4 million refugees (10.55 million under UNHCR's care and 4.82 million registered with the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees), the 27.5 million people displaced within their own country by conflict, the nearly 850,000 asylum-seekers or the United Nations human rights investigators report that leveled accusations of genocide and war crimes by the Islamic State in Syria. This reactions in Europe can cause a ripple effect and the 80% of refugees in Africa and other developing nations will be affected immensely.

Kenya and other countries in the region must be applauded for continuing to receive huge refugee populations from Somalia and South Sudan, despite mounting internal pressure to close the camps. Without the political will to keep the camps open, thousands of women and children refugees would not survive. António Guterres, UN High Commissioner for Refugees once pointed out that in today's world there are worrying misperceptions about refugee movements and the international protection paradigm. Fears about supposed floods of refugees in industrialized countries are being vastly overblown or mistakenly conflated with issues of migration. Meanwhile, it's poorer countries that are left having to pick up the burden. This act by the EU and North America is highlighting how difficult it is for refugees to exercise the right to seek asylum in practice as is enshrined in international law. SHAME ON YOU!

THE SIDE OF TERRORISM THAT DOESN'T MAKE HEADLINES: PART 1

Hamas, Hezbollah, Taliban, Boko Haram, Al- Qaeda, Islamic State, Al-Shabaab… what comes to our minds when we hear or think of this names? Violence or maybe that which threatens the existence of over a billion people of the world? Today we have over 65 terror groups across the globe with most scattered in the Middle East, Asia, Europe, Africa and South America. War has changed, it used to be a contest between states but it is now a conflict between states and non- state actors, making the world enter a deadly new phase in the cycle of violence. Over the 216 peace agreements signed between 1975 and 2011, only 16 were between states while the other 196 were between a state and a non- state actor.

In April 2015, Al-Shabaab killed 147 students in the Garissa University attack in Kenya and at least another 67 were killed in the West gate mall attack in Nairobi in 2013. In Pakistan the annual death toll from terrorist attacks has risen from 164 in 2003 to 3, 318 in 2009, with a total of 35,000 Pakistanis killed between September 11, 2001 and May 2011. In the Philippines, since January 2000, radical Islamist groups and Islamist separatist forces have carried out over 40 major bombings against civilians and civilian property, mostly in the southern regions of the country. In Europe, France has been the most hit by terrorism through the al-Qaeda Charlie Hebdo attack that killed 12 people including 2 police officers, the attack at a kosher market in Porte de Vincennes by the Islamic State that killed 4 people and the recent November 13^th attacks in Paris that has claimed about 130 lives. Of course we can never forget the 9/11 attacks in the United States that resulted to the deaths of 2,996 people, including the 19 hijackers. Despite the subsequent declaration of a war on terror also known as the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) after the September 11^th attacks on the United States, terror attacks are on a rise. Not only is its intensity increasing, but its breadth is increasing as well. The Global Terrorism Index 2014 report indicated that 60 countries around the world recorded deaths from terrorism, with Africa being the most hit having 879 attacks recorded in 2010 that resulted to 2,137 deaths, 704 terrorist attacks were also counted in Europe and Eurasia that caused an estimated 355 deaths. According to the report about 161, 834 people globally have died from terror attacks between 2006 and 2014. The Maple croft’s Terrorism and Security Dashboard (MTSD) which logs, analyses and maps every reported incident of terrorism worldwide also formed a global ranking of 197 countries on their risk of terror attacks.

Whether by nationalistic or religious groups, revolutionaries or ruling governments’ terrorism is intensifying. The United States for instance, spends more than $500 million per victim on anti-terrorism efforts, while, cancer research spending is only $10,000 per victim and with the global governments still allocating hundreds of billions of dollars to the so-called war on terror as well, we still had a fivefold increase in terrorism fatalities since 9/11. So the task falls to our governments to allocate and direct the resources we have in a manner that will effectively treat each threat sustainably. If we, as a society, want to effectively counter the dangers we face from terrorism, we first have to put them in perspective. Benedetta Berti (native Italian foreign policy and security researcher and analyst) speaks of transition from violent engagement (which is what states have been doing since 1970) to non- violent confrontation and that arms struggle and unarmed struggles are related. Thus, there is need to know what makes this organizations tick, what they do when they are not fighting.


In her studies, she's found out that today’s terror groups are complex organizations, the Lebanese Hezbollah for instance has so far set up a political party, a social service network and a military apparatus since its creation in the early 1980s. Similarly, the Palestinian Hamas has run and benefited from the Gaza strip since 2007. Clearly, terror groups do more than just shoot or bomb. They set up complex communications machines (radio and TV stations, websites and social media strategists) that are intended to recruit, they also invest in complex fundraising through setting up profitable businesses such as construction companies. This activities allow them to increase their strengths and funds to better recruit and build their brand. Armed groups also build relationships with the population by investing in social services such as schools, hospital, vocational trainnngs or micro- loan programmes, Hezbollah offers this services and more. They also seek to win over the population by offering something that the state is not providing, safety and security. The initial rise of the Taliban in war torn Afghanistan or even that of ISIS can be understood also by looking at their efforts to provide security, unfortunately the provision of security in this instances came with an unbearably high price for the population. Providing social services fills a governance gap left by governments that allows this groups to increase their strengths and power. The 2006 electoral victory by Palestinian Hames cannot be understood without acknowledging this. Looking only at the violent side of this armed groups is not enough to understand there hybridity or complexity (strengths, strategies or long term vision). They rise because they fill a gap left by the government and emerge to be both armed and political, engaging violence struggle and providing governance, and the more sophisticated and complex they become the less we will think of them as the opposite of a state. The Hezbollah for instance runs part of a territory where they administer all their functions, pick up garbage and run the sewage system- can they be considered aa a rebel group, government or something new we are not aware of? The more states are weak the more non- state actors step in and fill the gap.

For governments to counter this groups they will have to invest more in non- military tools. Filling that governance gap has to be at the center of any sustainable approach. The Body Count Report Revealed that at least 1.3 Million lives have been lost to the US-led war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan since its onset following September 11, 2001 with a recent ongoing example being Syria through the Russian airstrikes. Military power can win some battles but it will not give us peace nor stability. We need a long term investment by filling in that governance gap that allows this groups to thrive. We need to transition from violent engagement to non- violent confrontation.

IT’S A DEAD END!

My birth mother worked as a midwife at Pumwani Maternity Hospital, Nairobi until 2001. Her job came with some benefits such as community council housing in the hospital premise, which we called ‘kambi moto’ and was multi-ethnic in nature. I spent most of my childhood here, it was a vivacious one. The community was vibrant as well. It taught me care, love and that charity will never make me poor. As kids, we played together and nobody was ever left out. I also knew that if I had something nice and joined the rest of my friends with it, I had to share. Even my older siblings and their friends would lend out dresses to each other. Sharing wasn’t a problem, even for the older.

During calamities like death, we had ‘matagaas’ –funeral meetings- that were more of celebrating the departed and would run through the night. Music and coffee were both played and made at a fee. This was a way to raise more funds for funeral expenses and a way to entertain ourselves as we kept awake. They were also a form of showing support and an assurance that we would be available for each other through day or night. To me they were a way we protected each other from the phenomenon of death which of course is overwhelming. I remember visiting my friends’ rural homes which were in different parts of Kenya, differences such as ethnicity, educational level, religion and the likes were never an issue, we simply were ‘kambi motorians’. Of course we did have disagreements and exchanged words or got into petty fights but we always resolved them and at times, we just forgave which made us a strong united community. I will always believe this is the African way of life, Ubuntu. Africa naturally has an ethnolinguistic nature and has tribal groupings. We have roughly 1000 tribes across sub- Saharan Africa with distinct languages and customs that varies. Nigeria with a population of over 150 million has almost 400 tribes (ten times that of Kenya) while Botswana with just over 1 million people has at least 8 large tribal groupings.

Ethnicity is one of the major strategies that African politicians use to divide us. In 1994, nearly a million people were killed in Rwanda’s horrendous genocide and in the Darfur region of Sudan, where ethnic violence has displaced and killed hundreds of thousands. It is estimated that as many as 2000 people were killed in 1992 during Kenya’s tribal clashes while another 1, 300 died and 600, 000 displaced in the 2008 clashes, 309, 200 are still leaving in IDP camps since 2008 as of 24^th April 2015 (estimates by IDMC). In the past 5 decades, an estimated 40 million Africans have died in civil wars (which includes tribal wars) scattered across the continent, this  is  equivalent to the population of South Africa and twice the Russian lives lost in the second world war. 

Ethnicity is also one reason offered to account for why African countries have little to show for despite it being the world’s biggest producer of raw materials and having still received over US$ 300 billion of aid since 1970. It is estimated that a typical civil war costs around four times annual GDP, that is, four times the country’s annual domestic earnings. Evidently, ethnicity limits a country’s economic, social and moral growth resulting to poverty, crime and at times full blown civil war. It creates distrust between different groups thus making collective governance and public service provision difficult. It also slows down the implementation of key policies that could spur economic growth limiting investment and entrepreneurship. A World Bank study showed that 85 per cent of aid flows (loans and grants) received by Africa were used for purposes other than that which they were intended for. It is also estimated that US$ 10 billion depart Africa every year through corruption -this is roughly half of Africa’s 2003 aid receipts. This indicates that even public funds stolen through corruption aren’t invested back in Africa but abroad. A wise investor who has invested heavily in their country/ region will promote peace and stability among other factors to protect his? her investment for sustainable growth. When a politician incites on ethnic grounds or any other way for that matter, it indicates that they have invested little if at all for that matter in their country or region. They clearly have little to lose and maybe a lot to gain from a tribal war.

We cannot deny that Africa has had its fair share of tribal fracas. But by the same token it is true that that there are a number of African countries where disparate groups have continued to co-exist peacefully (Botswana, Ghana, Zambia just to name a few). I do not believe that people who have lived as neighbours for hundreds of years start attacking and killing each with no provocation or support from those in power. We all were born by mother Africa so why bother listen or act for individuals who are less interested in investing in us, in fostering entrepreneurship or in developing our middle class, than they are in furthering their own personal and financial interests? Dambisa Moyo in her book Dead Aid points out that African cities live in a more integrated Way than you might find in other cities- there are no ethnic zones such as those that exist in Belfast, London or New York, for that matter.

Ethnicity has cost us many lives and many years that could have been used to promote development. Once locked into the ethnic argument, there is no obvious policy prescription, IT’S A DEAD END! Better to look to a world where all citizens can freely participate in a country’s economic prosperity, and watch the divisive role of ethnicity evaporate. Don’t you think?