CHANGE OF BATON IN RUSSIA

LAST Wednesday, another chapter was added to the exciting history of Russia. Former First Deputy Prime Minister, Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev, was inaugurated as the new Russian President following his landslide electoral victory in March. As the world watched, analysts pondered about what the future holds for the largest country on earth and the significance of the event on the international community.

President Medvedev succeeds Vladimir Putin who is now prime minister. He became Russia’s third leader since the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in the 90s in the same manner as his predecessors came to power. According to the new president, he would continue with the programmes of Mr. Putin as well as extend Russia’s civil and economic freedoms. What this means is subject to speculation if the country’s political history is anything to go by.

Wednesday’s inauguration capped President Medvedev’s fairy tale of ascendance from obscurity to political power in the world’s second most powerful nation. At 42, and given the dynamics of the Russian constitution, the world is, obviously, his oyster. If he likes, and avoids any political hiccups, he could serve two terms as his mentor, Prime Minister Putin. But that raises the question: will PM Putin – who is overtly ambitious in coming back to the presidency – allow President Medvedev more than one term?

Born on September 9, 1965 in Leningrad – now St. Petersburg – to middle class parents, Dmitry Medvedev has all it takes to become one of the greatest leaders of this century. He has the three important qualities that will sustain him in office. He is a technocrat of the highest pedigree, young and an astute politician. In addition, he rose through the ranks. He resigned his post as an assistant professor and joined government and politics, first as head of Mr. Putin’s campaign team and later in different capacities overseeing the health, housing and education ministries. In addition, he served as Mr. Putin’s chief of staff and chairman of Gazprom – the world’s largest producer and supplier of oil and gas – as well as serving as First Deputy Prime Minister in the last seven years. While serving in these capacities, he watched studiously the power play and manoeuvres in Russian politics.

A worrying puzzle being contemplated by analysts is whether the famed Russian roulette in being played out by the reversal of roles between Mr. Putin and Mr. Medvedev. In this puzzle, Medvedev will hold the fort for just a term before giving way to Putin who will serve another two terms before handing over to his protégé. Or will Medvedev be his own man, gradually uprooting or dislodging Putin’s men in the armed forces and security services and consolidating himself so he could serve two terms?

And there is the international dimension. How will President Medvedev fit into the post-Bush era? Will he continue Mr. Putin’s military resurgent programmes? How will he respond to Euro-American eastward expansion towards Russia? Will he withdraw Russia from the conventional armed forces of Europe treaty? These and many more questions will excite analysts in the next few months. Meanwhile, the current pro-western imperialist surge in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world will need Russia’s input as a major global player.

As for Africa, there’s the riveting excitement of a continued, even if not expanding, economic relations with Russia. With a glut of gas and petro dollars, Russia has embarked on an investment spree in Zambia, DR Congo, South Africa and Nigeria so far. Interest in heavy and light minerals for its surging military and industrial complexes means stepped up interest and investments in Africa’s key mineral resources sector. But African countries should be careful of not falling prey to what may be another form of colonial or neo-colonial exploitation.

JADESOLA Akande (1940-2008)

THE passing away of Professor Jadesola Akande, the first female professor of law in Nigeria, has no doubt left a vacuum that will be difficult to fill. We greatly lament her demise at a time that her services as an erudite scholar and committed democrat were most needed. Professor Akande, a renowned human rights activist, died peacefully in her sleep about a week ago at the age of 68 years.

The late professor will be remembered for her contributions to the fields of law as well as tireless service for the uplift of humanity. The deceased fought courageously for a better society and even at times participated in demonstrations to protest against negative developments. Akande was once tear-gassed along with several women who were protesting the death of their children in the Sosoliso plane crash. The accolades that poured in shortly after her demise are all testimonies to the fact that she was held in high esteem. The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) described her as a “legal icon and an academic giant.” The Lagos State chapter of the Action Congress (AC) rightly described her as an “erudite scholar of the finest tradition who was able to hold her own anywhere in the world.”

The late professor was born on November 15, 1940 to Chief Esan, a distinguished lawyer. Her mother was the Iyalode of Ibadan and a member, House of Assembly then. She attended University College, London where she obtained LLB (Hon) in 1963 and was called to the Inner Temple. Akande got her PhD from the same university in 1971 after completing her LLM from the University of Lagos in 1968. She later enrolled at the Harvard Institute of Management for a Certificate in Management in 1989. Akande was a research professor at the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of Lagos between 1984 and 1994. She became the head of Academic Department of Advanced Legal Studies (1984 – 1986). She later became the Dean of the Faculty of Law, Lagos State University (LASU) before her appointment as the Vice-Chancellor, a position in which she served for four years.

Akande developed the law faculty of LASU to such a high standard that it produced the best set of students at the Nigerian Law School for several years. The late legal icon was the founder of a non-governmental organisation (NGO), Women Law and Development Centre, as well as Chancellor and Chairman of the Governing Council, Federal University of Technology, Akure (FUTA). She consulted for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Children Education Fund (UNICEF) and African Union (AU) on Gender Issues.

In acknowledgement of her contributions to the uplift of humanity and women in particular, Akande had several awards and chieftaincy titles among which was the Yeye Mofin of Itire, Lagos.

Married to a distinguished lawyer, Chief Debo Akande, the late professor led a humble and simple life till her demise. She will sorely be missed, especially by the many women whose lives she had touched positively. Akande was no doubt a role model whose sterling qualities should be emulated by Nigerian women.

We urge the authorities to immortalize this great and patriotic Nigerian. Her dream of a society where women’s well-being will be a priority concern must also be actualized by our elected representatives.  We pray that the Almighty God will give her family the fortitude to bear the irreparable loss. May her soul rest in perfect peace. (Amen).

THE FOOD CRISIS

WHAT the international community has come to identify as the “world food crisis” has, in fact, long been with us in most of the Third World. Essentially, it means the gap between the need to feed an ever-expanding global population and declining agricultural production. Filling that yawning gap has engaged the attention – and resources – of governments all over the world, while the UN scrambled to inject short-term measures it said are necessary to avert a worldwide catastrophe.

The UN, its agencies and a large number of donor agencies, including the World Bank, met in Berne, Switzerland, last week and agreed on 755 million dollar plan to deal with the emergency. According to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, governments must contribute that money to the World Food Programme (WFP). “Without full funding of these emergency requirements, we risk again the spectre of widespread hunger, malnutrition and social unrest on an unprecedented scale,” Mr Ban noted. “We anticipate that additional funding will be required.” According to UN and World Bank estimates, another 100 million of the world’s population have been driven into poverty and hunger as a result of the dramatic increase in food prices.

Prices of staple commodities have more than doubled over the last couple of years, driven by shifts in agricultural production priorities, increasing focus on the production of bio-fuel by developed nations in renewed efforts to lessen dependence on fossil fuel and – some have suggested – the effects of global warming. Each of these factors, and others not listed, has underlying causes, according to experts. In the United States alone, about one-third of its corn harvest that should form part of the food stock will instead be processed as bio-fuel this year. Food price riots have broken out in Egypt, the Philippines, Haiti (where they are blamed for the toppling of the country’s government), Senegal, Pakistan and some countries in the Americas.

Farmers in developing countries, which rightly should be the world’s food basket, are planting less and harvesting less because of the high cost of input such as fertilizer and energy. The effects of the current crisis on the developing world are particularly tragic. With populations already reeling from widespread huger and malnutrition, and mounting tolls from an unholy convergence of killer diseases such as AIDS and tuberculosis, governments in the region must bear responsibility for the latest affliction.

In Nigeria, the problem is no less acute. In fact, given the previous lip-service that government officials paid to the primacy of agriculture as the foundation for national food security, and literally stole the money that could have translated that intention into action, our condition is worse in comparison. As the world’s 6th largest oil producing nation, Nigeria’s nutritional status of the urban poor – to say nothing of the long-neglected, long-suffering dwellers of the hinterland and villages – tells a story of the squandering of resources and a betrayal of the citizens’ trust.

The federal government has responded to the food crisis by announcing the approval of the release of 80 billion naira from the Natural Resources Development Fund to import 500, 000 tonnes of rice from Thailand. ( We wonder how this can be accomplished in the short-term given the fact that Thailand, India, Myanmar and other rice producing countries have banned, or imposed limits on exports of rice to stabilise their own markets.) In addition, the government also approved the immediate release of 11, 000 tonnes of assorted grains from strategic reserves. Both steps are intended to provide a steady effect on the global food prices and prevent them from having a debilitating influence in the country. These are commendable moves; they reflect a government that tries to be sensitive to the potential consequences of the global trend on the citizens at home. And the palliative measures ought to begin to have their intended effects expeditiously. This is because the prices of basic commodities are already getting out of the reach of the average Nigerian wage earner.

New Nigerian, however, rejects the notion implicit in the government’s measure that this would, in itself, solve the problem. It is our view that it would not. Indeed, far more fundamental policy decisions have to be made and practical steps taken to address the fundamental issues that have so far prevented this country from realising its full potential as a basically agrarian community. True, various decades-old agricultural credit schemes have been in place, but their impact is difficult to evaluate in the absence of sufficient data. The federal, state, local governments and several private sector initiatives have introduced a multitude of poverty alleviation strategies, targeting specific groups, but the majority of them have been in the service sector, that some might consider non-productive. Not many of the projects are into agriculture. And we think that the global food crisis is a wake-up call, an opportunity for the government to shift its focus and stress agriculture in its national development programmes. No nation, no matter how richly endowed, can thrive in an increasingly globalising world if it cannot feed its citizens.

The strategy must involve more creative ways of encouraging people to take to agriculture, on vastly more liberalised credit terms. Some states in the North have taken the initiative to boost the production of rice and other crops. Kano State, for instance, has committed 3 billion naira to collaborate with a Malaysian consortium to increase the cultivation of rice in the state. Recently, states in the north-central agreed to pool resources and encourage the cultivation of rice and other staple crops over which they have comparative advantage. Other states should also introduce similar measures and encourage financial institutions to step in with credit lines. All attempts to initiate bio-fuel, like ethanol, which requires vast areas for cultivation, should end. It is only with concerted effort can the country defeat the looming danger and avoid its destabilizing potential. Reliance on other countries, or handouts from richer nations for the food that our people eat, such as the one proposed by the US President, George W. Bush – when we can produce the same food on our soil – does not make sense. In fact, it is a threat to our national security.