Testing the waters: Somaliland dives into the international arena

By Messenger Africa 

A container ship in the distance, seen from the shore of Berbera port, Somaliland.

By Jason Patinkin for The Messenger


With a sea breeze to his back, Ali Farah Negeye greets the lunch crowd at the Al Xayat restaurant in the Somaliland port city of Berbera. For the last fifteen years, he’s served lemonade and fried barracuda to a steady stream of regulars, who debate the topics of the day while watching fishing skiffs motor past the half-sunken hulls of ruined cargo ships. In the last year or so, though, Negeye says he’s seen new arrivals at the restaurant, mostly from other parts of Somaliland or its diaspora, but also a trickle of investors and tourists from the United Arab Emirates. “I can feel more customers,” Negeye says, as he relaxes following the afternoon rush. “People are understanding day after day the importance of Berbera.”

This is a welcome change for Negeye. For the last quarter century, there’s been little interest in Berbera, despite being along one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes. In 1991, Somaliland declared its independence from the rest of Somalia after a brutal civil war that killed tens of thousands of people. As Mogadishu fell into the anarchy from which it has yet to escape, Somaliland plodded along on its own, enjoying peace as it built a nascent democracy. While Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Djibouti are stuck in the tight grip of autocratic regimes, and Somalia and the Sudans suffer endless wars, Somaliland in its isolation has earned a reputation for relatively successful democracy and stability.

Negeye’s new customers signal that foreigners are taking a closer took at Somaliland again, and the government in the capital Hargeisa is responding. In the last six months, Somaliland’s authorities have entered into two long-term deals with the UAE to expand Berbera’s port and build a military base. The two projects, if completed, would bring nearly 700 million dollars in investment and might overhaul Somaliland’s economy.

But the deals bring considerable risks, too. Somaliland’s location along Red Sea shipping routes is also the crossroads of the Horn of Africa and the Middle East – the two most war-ridden regions on Earth. The two deals thrust Somaliland into a number of overlapping, high stakes political and economic rivalries involving the UAE, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other nations. Transforming Somaliland into a coveted piece of this regional chess board thus threatens to undermine the unique progress the breakaway state has made over the last 26 years.

“If you do try to play this role in international geopolitics, it’s a very risky game,” says Harry Verhoeven, a professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service in Qatar. “The rewards are of course very lucrative and that’s why you want to play the game, but getting it wrong can be potentially devastating.”

“Inviting interference”

Somaliland’s strategic importance has been known for centuries, evident in the architecture left behind by the various empires and fortune-seekers who passed through the city over the years. Up a small hill from the port, the minaret of a 19th-century Egyptian-Turkish mosque juts above the crumbling walls of former British colonial mansions and officers’ clubs. In the old city, storefronts originally built by Yemeni Jews and Indian traders now house teashops and private homes. The port itself is a product of modern imperialism: the Soviets built the current site in the 1970s, before the Americans took it over in the 1980s when Somalia switched its allegiance on the Cold War proxy battlefield.

The deals with the UAE could help return Berbera to its former prominence. The $442 million, 30-year port deal with Dubai Ports World (DPWorld), passed by Somaliland’s parliament in August 2016, would boost annual container capacity twenty-fold. Somaliland’s government estimates the deal will result in thousands of construction and service jobs, as well as millions of dollars a year in government revenue through profit sharing.

In Berbera, many in the business class looks forward to the port’s development. “People are expecting impact in a good way because the port will get investment,” says Negeye. “If we get a good investment for the port I expect that the business and the movement of the city will increase.”

Underpinning the port’s success is trade with landlocked Ethiopia, Somaliland’s closest ally and with 90 million people by far its largest neighbor. Currently, Ethiopia has access to only one modern seaport in Djibouti, and Somaliland hopes to capture some of that market share. To that end, Somaliland’s government says UAE will spend $250 million to build a highway between Berbera and Ethiopia and upgrade Berbera’s Russian-built airport, which boasts one of the longest runways in Africa but has largely fallen out of use, in lieu of paying rent for the military base, whose lease is for 25 years.

“It will be a huge gain for Somaliland,” Osman Abdillahi, Somaliland’s Minister of Information, says of the projects. “It will be a win-win for everybody.”

Yet for the UAE, for whom $700 million is a relatively small amount, Berbera’s allure is hardly economic. Instead, the port and military base appear part of a wider strategy by Arab Gulf nations including the UAE to establish a dominant presence in the Horn of Africa through construction of ports and military bases, training of armed groups, and payoffs of petrodollars to friendly Sunni governments. According to Verhoeven, this rapid investment in the Horn isn’t about trade, but about setting up a shield against Iran and its Shia allies.

“There really is this very strong belief in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi that Iran is hellbent on encircling them and toppling Gulf monarchies,” Verhoeven tells The Messenger. “The first layer of Gulf engagement with the Horn of Africa is this incredibly important proxy war with Iran. This is very much evident in Sudan, but also in a place like Eritrea and places like Somaliland and Somalia.”

So far, the UAE has a port and military base in Assab in Eritrea, from where it launches attacks on Yemen’s Iranian-backed Houthi rebels as part of the Saudi-led coalition. UAE has another base in Mogadishu, where UAE and Qatar are said to have poured money into recent elections, and whose government has voiced support for the coalition. UAE’s military has trained the Puntland Maritime Police Force (PMPF) into one of the most professional Somali armed groups, while DP World – the same UAE port company now in Berbera – plans to revamp the Puntland port of Bosasso. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, plans to build its own military base in Djibouti. Further north, Gulf states have pumped dollars into Sudan, reestablishing ties with the African nation which previously had been allied to Iran. Khartoum now contributes forces to the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen as well, and has hosted joint exercises with Saudi Arabia’s air force.

For some observers, the Gulf’s military interest in the Horn is alarming, and its arrival in Somaliland marks a dangerous new phase. “One of the reasons Somaliland survived and Somalia didn’t from 1991 is because Somalia was interfered by everyone. Somaliland wasn’t,” Guleid Ahmed Jama, chairman of the Hargeisa-based Human Rights Centre, told The Messenger. “We were very suspicious of interference. Now we are inviting interference.”

“Dangerous places”

Street scene - Berbera
A woman stands in the doorway of her home in the middle of a block of colonial era buildings.

One oft-cited fear is that a military partnership with the UAE could end Somaliland’s neutrality in the civil war in Yemen, which lies across the Gulf of Aden from Berbera. Thousands of Yemeni refugees have crossed to Somaliland to escape that war, and their presence is a daily reminder in Somaliland of the consequences of being sucked into the Sunni-Shia power struggle that has destabilized the Middle East. Yet Somalilanders don’t need foreigners to teach them about the dangers of war.

“Whenever I hear about those military [coming to Berbera], I remember the air force that was killing the people,” says Hinda Osman, a Berbera resident, referring to indiscriminate bombings by Mogadishu during the civil war. Osman’s home in Berbera, a dilapidated colonial mansion which her family shares with a half dozen others, still bears bullet holes sustained from that conflict. When the war ended in 1991, refugee families like hers returned to Berbera and set up camp in whichever war-battered buildings still stood. They’ve lived as squatters ever since, but at least they’ve enjoyed peace, and they’re not willing to risk that any time soon. “If the UAE has a military base here, they will plan to attack from here to Yemen, and then in return, Yemen will also attack us.”

Hussein A. Bulhan, founder of Hargeisa’s Frantz Fanon University and a prominent Somaliland public intellectual, also strongly questions the merits of the UAE base, highlighting the risk of being drawn into the Sunni-Shia power struggle.

“Why does Dubai want a military base in this area? The only obvious thing right now is the war going on in Yemen and close access to that,” he says. “I don’t think it makes sense for us to be involved in a war in the region … I think it would be better that Somaliland becomes more of the island of peace it has been for a while.”

So far it’s unclear whether Somaliland has given UAE permission to launch operations on Yemen from Berbera. Before the signing of the deal, Somaliland’s Foreign Minister Saad Shire told The Messenger that specific point was still under negotiation. Since the signing, he has not answered repeated queries on this point, and the full text of the deal has not been released. Regardless, Shire dismissed concerns that Somaliland would be sucked into a wider regional war.

“Somaliland isn’t really interested or is not aimed to get involved in any war or any conflict in the region or beyond,” he said. “We are just using Berbera’s strategic location to advance our interests, which are really nothing more than development.”

Berbera Scene
An old building in Berbera, showing signs of wear.

But a military deal with one of the belligerents in the Yemen war hardly looks neutral, and Somaliland’s information minister Abdillahi admits they support through official recognition Yemen’s Saudi-backed government over the Houthis. Still, Abdillahi contends the presence of UAE’s military in Berbera will actually strengthen Somaliland’s security, rather than erode it, including through UAE training of Somaliland’s naval and land forces. A recent resurgence of piracy is another reason for Somaliland to take extra precautions as it aims to make Berbera into a hub.

“With the Berbera port and its free zone coming into reality, we need someone to protect our seacoast. We have 850 kilometers, and that has a lot of dangerous places including what’s happening in Yemen, including a lot of pirates,” Abdillahi told The Messenger. “We have been doing all we can to protect, [but] we need their equipment, we need their knowledge. It’s imperative that we have someone who has got more resources than we have.”

Whether UAE base will be a bulwark or not, Somalilanders have already found themselves under fire as a result of the Yemen war. Earlier this month, an Apache helicopter believed to be from the Saudi-led coalition of which UAE is part, attacked a boat of Somali refugees off Yemen’s coast, killing dozens including Somalilanders. Somalia’s government in Mogadishu swiftly condemned the attack and demanded an investigation by the coalition, but Somaliland’s Foreign Minister Shire, who was in Abu Dhabi at the time for negotiations on the military base, was more cautious. When The Messenger asked how the attack would impact Somaliland’s relations with the Gulf and the UAE agreements, he demurred.

“I suppose this is under investigations, so really I cannot say,” he said. “We caution all parties to make sure that civilians are not affected in the conflict.”

Balancing act

Current state of the port.jpg
The current port of Berbera, due for a USD 442 million upgrade

Whether or not the UAE base pulls Somaliland further into Gulf conflicts, the Arab-Iranian competition is only one regional power struggle which Somaliland will have to navigate following the Berbera deals. Perhaps an even greater worry than the Yemen war is that a UAE military base could upset Somaliland’s closest ally, Ethiopia. Though access to a second port would surely please Addis Ababa, the Gulf’s growing presence in the Horn also looks a lot like encirclement of the so-called “Christian Kingdom.” The fact the UAE has close military relationships with Ethiopia’s arch-rivals Eritrea and Egypt further raises alarm for Addis Ababa.

“In Berbera what you’re looking at is obviously from the Ethiopian standpoint concerning,” says Verhoeven. “The worry is that UAE in particular has been snatching up a number of ports in the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean area, and certainly substantially increasing its equipment and its military presence. There’s an incredible amount of skepticism about that, especially because Ethiopian and UAE relations are not particularly good.”

regional dynamics
Summary of regional dynamics around Somaliland. Black markers indicate key ports.

Upsetting Ethiopia is hardly in Somaliland’s national interest. Ethiopia is a main trading partner for Somaliland and the only country which accepts Somaliland passports. Ethiopia provides crucial diplomatic support to the breakaway state, including by hosting a large mission from Hargeisa in Addis Ababa, which gives the Somaliland government a platform to lobby the African Union and wider international community. Hargeisa and Addis Ababa also collaborate on security operations, particularly on immigration, and Somalilanders travel to Ethiopia for health care and education. But support from Ethiopia, itself a low-income country dealing with its own political upheavals, only goes so far.

“Somaliland’s government may be trying to send a signal to Addis not to take them for granted, and say, ‘look we might have other partners other than you who are willing to support us and provide us with a lot more cash than you can,’ ” says Verhoeven. “There are obviously important risks to this strategy namely that you end up disappointing the people who are so far the most loyal allies of your country.”

Foreign Minister Shire denied that Ethiopia had any concerns over the UAE deals. He added that Ethiopia recently has been brought on board in the port deal, and will have a 19% stake in the port itself, taking 5% of the total from Somaliland’s originally agreed-upon shares, and 14% of the total from DPWorld. That leaves DPWorld with a majority stake of 51% and Somaliland with just 30%, compared to 35% in the original agreement. Shire said this change to the deal was done for purely economic reasons.

The alliance with UAE draws Somaliland into other regional rivalries as well. The Gulf states have their own competition, with UAE and Qatar vying for equal footing with Saudi Arabia, and for supremacy in the Horn. Internally, clan tensions, and a struggle between Sufism and Salafism – stoked by Saudi influence in particular – continue to fester. The UAE’s investments also up the stakes of Hargeisa’s secession standoff with Mogadishu.

With all of these interests from regional heavy hitters, the question is how tiny Somaliland can balance its various, at-times conflicting allegiances. It’s certinaly not impossible: neighboring Djibouti’s leaders have successfully welcomed France, the United States, China, and Saudi Arabia, all of whom either operate or are building military bases in the port-nation. But Bulhan contends that Somaliland’s leaders are not nearly as savvy as Djibouti’s President Ismail Omar Guellah, pointing out that a succession of administrations in Hargeisa have all failed over the last twenty five years to gain recognition from a single country. And that lack of recognition in itself opens up Somaliland to greater risk.

“Somaliland because of its non-recognition, isolation, smaller state, is alway more vulnerable to more powerful states,” he says, specifically emphasizing Somaliland’s minority shareholder status in the port deal. “It’s not going to be a question of equity.”

Should UAE break or tamper with the deals, with its military in Berbera, Somaliland may have little recourse to accountability. Even restauranteur Negeye, an enthusiastic supporter of the port, is wary of the military base for this reason. Berbera residents have other concerns too. Numerous women, including Osman, told The Messenger they feared the arrival of foreign soldiers after hearing reports that African Union peacekeepers in southern Somalia raped local women there. (Somaliland’s information minister told The Messenger that UAE troops will not have immunity from prosecution).

But even Djibouti, with its nationhood and strong leadership, has suffered from hosting wealthy foreign militaries. Backed by the largest armies on Earth, President Guellah has entrenched his autocratic rule, tightening his grip on power over the last eighteen years. In Somaliland, there’s a similar potential for an erosion of open government, simply because the sums of money on offer are so large from Hargeisa’s perspective. The port deal, according to a summary distributed to parliament last August, includes an up front payment of 10 million dollars to the government, big money in Somaliland considering its 2016 budget was under 300 million dollars.

“The very fact that you have such neighbors with deep pockets has a very similar effect to say the sudden a discovery of oil. All of a sudden there is a huge inflow of cash, many of it of course unregistered, into the political system, so that raises the stakes of the game,” says Verhoeven. “Capturing the presidency or a ministerial portfolio has just become a lot more lucrative and potentially powerful than it was before, but it also gives far greater power to those who are already in positions of authority, and to buy their way to stay into power and consolidating their grip on it, and in that sense it can potentially be quite destabilizing.”

Indeed, in Somaliland, it appears the democratic backslide has already begun.

“The government’s behavior has changed”

Fishermen in Berbera
Fishermen unload their catch onshore, Berbera, Somaliland

Berbera-based journalist Mubaarik Nirig has been arrested twice in the last two years. He would have been arrested a third time, after interviewing locals opposed to the DP World Port deal, if he hadn’t received a tip that police had a warrant with his name on it. He went into hiding until things cooled down. “Before [the deals] we never had this repressive attitude toward journalists,” he told The Messenger. “Of course there were little disagreements with the local government, small issues, but the national government and the arrests really has started with these two issues.”

The statistics bear this out. Jama, the human rights activist, says the majority of arrests related to freedom of speech in 2015 and 2016 were connected to the port deal. At least four journalists have been arrested this year so far, two of whom in connection with reporting or criticism of the port and military base. None of the arrests have been upheld in courts, but Abdillahi, the information minister has bluntly vowed to arrest other journalists who “threaten national security.”

The free speech crackdown reflects a wider lack of transparency and intolerance of dissent regarding the two projects. Parliament approved terms of the deals without seeing the full text of the agreements. In the case of the port, lawmakers received a detailed summary, but the final deal has never been made public. The revelation that the government has brought Ethiopia on board indicates the port deal remains mutable even after parliamentary approval, but there’s little public information of how it is being changed.

The deal for the military base is even more opaque. Parliament approved the basic terms’ of the deal without debate in a chaotic session in which opposing lawmakers were thrown out. The deal itself was believed to be the work of a small coterie of individuals close to the president, including his son-in-law who serves as Somaliland’s representative to the UAE and the Minister for the Presidency. And the fact that the talks were completed in the last year of the current administration further fuel suspicions of underhandedness.

“It’s not democratic. They talk about parliamentarians having made a decision, but they’re not even legitimate to be here,” says Bulhan, referring to the fact that Somaliland’s parliamentarians have sat in office for over a decade without re-election. “The democracy is degenerating out of these desperations.”

There was no substantive local consultation over the two projects, either. Even supporters of the port, like Yusuf Abdillahi Gulled, the director of Fair Fishing, an organization that promotes small-scale fishermen in Berbera, say bypassing locals was a mistake. “It was supposed to be a town hall meeting where all the people in the local communities come up, asked questions, proposed ideas,” he told The Messenger last August, shortly after parliament approved of the port deal. “For illiterate people which is the majority of our people, they cannot understand how things are, so they need to be confronted and have a meeting with them and tell them this investment will help their lives.”

With the lack of open discussion and transparency on the terms of the two UAE deals, negative rumors have flourished, stoked by local politicians who have seen their patronage networks upended with DPWorld’s arrival. There are widely held beliefs among Berbera residents that the land for the military base was purchased for just 1.2 million dollars and that DPWorld will conduct mass layoffs of port workers as they implement automation. Officials could probably assuage such fears with explanation and outreach — mass job cuts haven’t played out so far, for instance. Instead, the government has met local outcry with outright repression.

In August, troops deployed in Berbera’s streets when demonstrators planned to protest the sudden removal of the port manager. The demonstrators then cancelled their action. Later, the governor in Berbera banned public meetings from being held without prior government approval. Two weeks after DPWorld assumed control of the port, police arrested striking port workers complaining about pay. Days later, Somaliland’s National Security Minister banned all meetings to discuss the UAE military base.

“Essentially, the government’s behavior has changed,” says Nirig.

‘De facto’ recognition

View from Al-Xayat
View from Al Xayat restaurant in the Somaliland port city of Berbera.

From his top floor office on Frantz Fanon University’s Hargeisa campus, Bulhan downplays the recent turmoil surrounding the UAE deals. He takes the longer view: Somaliland’s citizens were the ones who built the country after the war, he says, and they will carry on regardless of their leaders. He says that the government’s backslide on rights and transparency, though disappointing, is not surprising. Twenty five years of stability and fragile democracy has not resulted in recognition from the region or the west, so Hargeisa is looking elsewhere, despite the risks.

“I’ve been here for 21 years, and I see a society being rebuilt from total ruin,” he says. “It did a remarkable thing, but then these things are not sustainable in the long term [without recognition].”

Somaliland’s government seems to agree. Abdillahi, the information minister, makes clear that the hope for recognition is one reasons they’re looking to the Gulf. “We believe that if UAE has invested a billion dollars or more in Somaliland that’s a game changer for the international community,” he says. “They have their tentacles reaching a lot of different places, like an octopus, and we believe within that reach Somaliland will benefit in the long run, including recognition.”

Foreign Minister Shire is even more bullish: “I think the fact that we signed agreements with countries is itself a sign of recognition,” he said. “Somaliland is a de facto country.”

It’s an argument that doesn’t sway everyone in Berbera. Unless recognition is part of the deal, many residents told The Messenger, they have no reason to believe UAE will bestow it. But after a quarter century of isolation, it’s clear that Somaliland’s government is diving headfirst into the uncharted waters of increased foreign engagement anyway.

Back at Al-Xayat restaurant, Negeye gazes upon the ruins and potential in Berbera’s harbor. “Berbera will become an international place where all the world will come,” he says. What that will mean for the people of Somaliland remains an open question.


All photos © Jason Patinkin / The Messenger

WHAT EGYPT’S EL-SISSI WANTS FROM TRUMP

 

Egypt President el-Sisi Says There is “No Doubt” that Donald Trump Would Make A Strong Leader
Image result for EL-SISI and trump

Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi visits the White House to meet with U.S. President Donald Trump.

El-Sissi’s first visit to the White House is important for U.S.-Egypt relations. Both leaders have repeatedly expressed admiration for each other, and Cairo appears eager to push for a stronger bilateral relationship that it perceives will do more to benefit its interests than its strained relationship with the Obama administration.

Ahead of the visit, the White House released a statement praising the “positive momentum [Trump and el-Sissi] have built for the United States-Egypt relationship.” Cairo has also been vocal in expressing support for strategic U.S.-Egypt ties and enhanced cooperation under the Trump administration.

In addition to the overall strengthening of ties, el-Sissi likely has four major priorities for this visit: securing U.S. support for Egypt’s counterterror interests, pressuring the United States to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, promoting Egypt’s economic reform program, and presenting Egypt as a leading regional power.

Security and Terrorism

Egypt presents itself as being on “the frontlines of the global war against terrorism” and extremism. That narrative drives much of the Egyptian rhetoric surrounding U.S. military assistance to Cairo.

04_03_Sisi_Trump_02Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in New Delhi in September 2016. Elissa Miller writes that el-Sisi’s visit comes amid Trump’s proposed budget cuts, which would significantly reduce spending on U.S. foreign aid. However, the administration is unlikely to cut foreign military financing to Egypt, which makes up the bulk of the $1.3 billion in annual assistance the United States gives to Egypt.CATHAL MCNAUGHTON/REUTERS

During a recent visit to Washington, meetings included those with Deputy National Security Advisor K. T. McFarland and Senior Director for Middle East policies on the National Security Council Derek Harvey. Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry called for continued U.S. assistance for Egypt’s counterterror operations and efforts as crucial to maintaining regional stability. He further described Egypt as “the country most capable [of confronting] extremist ideology amidst a region engulfed in conflicts and disputes.”

Cairo has also made efforts to present military assistance to Egypt as beneficial for U.S. interests in the region. On March 30, Egyptian Army Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Mahmoud Hegazy met with the Commander General of U.S. Army Central Michael Garrett to discuss military cooperation. A statement from the Egyptian military said that the meeting focused on the importance of continuing coordination and strengthening ties “in a way that serves the mutual interests [of both countries].” This rhetoric will certainly be echoed by el-Sissi during his Washington visit.

El-Sissi’s meeting with Trump also comes on the heels of two other major global meetings, both of which offered Cairo an opportunity to discuss Egypt’s counterterror vision ahead of el-Sissi’s visit with Trump.

On March 22, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson hosted a 68-member meeting of the Global Coalition to Counter ISIS in Washington. At the meeting, Foreign Minister Shoukry emphasized Egypt’s efforts to fight extremist ideologies through “religious moderate platforms.” In 2015, el-Sissi called for a “religious revolution” and urged Islamic scholars to engage in reforms that would help combat extremism.

Cairo has been battling militants in the Sinai since 2013; in late 2014, the militant group Ansar Beit al-Maqdis pledged loyalty to ISIS. Days later in Amman, Jordan, at the 28th Arab summit, el-Sissi called for a “comprehensive” approach to fighting terrorism in the Middle East that underlines the role religious institutions, particularly Egypt’s al-Azhar, can play in that effort.

Sissi’s visit also comes amid Trump’s proposed budget cuts, which would significantly reduce spending on U.S. foreign aid. However, the administration is unlikely to decrease foreign military financing to Egypt, which makes up the bulk of the $1.3 billion in annual assistance the United States gives to Egypt.

Still, Egypt may also use the visit and the surrounding security rhetoric to advocate for the renewal of cash flow financing (CFF), a perk allowing Egypt to buy U.S. defense equipment on credit, which the Obama administration ordered to be terminated by 2018. In the current budget climate, it appears unlikely a decision would be made to continue CFF in its current form post-2018, despite efforts by some U.S. lawmakers to push legislation to reverse the Obama-era decision.

Muslim Brotherhood

In the aftermath of the ouster of former President Mohamed Morsi in 2013, Egypt banned the Muslim Brotherhood and labeled the group a terrorist organization. While there has been much debate in Washington since Trump’s inauguration regarding the possible designation of the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization by the United States, the administration has reportedly put on hold an executive order on the Brotherhood, possibly following an internal State Department memo, which advised against such an action.

Still, Egypt will continue to push for Trump to make the designation. An Egyptian delegation that included several members of parliament visited the United States ahead of el-Sissi’s arrival with the goal of pressuring the U.S. administration and members of Congress to designate the Brotherhood a terrorist organization.

However, the administration is unlikely to follow through on such a step anytime soon because the Brotherhood is a global organization and labeling it a terrorist organization would impact U.S. policy in other countries. Brotherhood-affiliated political parties are major U.S. allies, including those in Jordan and Tunisia. Indeed, the Tunisian Islamist party Ennahda has played a key role in Tunisia’s transition toward democracy.

Economy

Egypt will also seek to promote its economic reform and attract U.S. investments. As part of its economic reform program, Egypt has adopted a flexible exchange rate, enacted a value-added tax and increased fuel prices.

In November 2016, Egypt signed a three-year $12 billion agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that aimed to help the country achieve macroeconomic stability and promote inclusive growth. Egypt has also been negotiating funding agreements to fulfill its ambitious commitments in the IMF program with France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and other G8 member countries.

U.S. investments in Egypt are important as Cairo seeks to attract more foreign direct investment. Last week, Egyptian Minister of Investment and International Cooperation Sahar Nasr chaired a conference with the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt. Nasr highlighted new investment opportunities in the country, which included new legislation that aims to minimize obstacles to would-be investors.

At the conference, AmCham Egypt President Anis Aclimandos said he was optimistic that the United States would increase investment in Egypt. Notably, el-Sissi will be accompanied in Washington by representatives from AmCham Egypt and the U.S.-Egypt Business Council, who will meet with U.S. businessmen to explain Egypt’s economic reform plans.

It is also worth noting that Egyptian intelligence recently hired two public relations firms in Washington to boost the country’s image in the United States and highlight, among other things, Cairo’s economic development efforts.

Regional Matters

Regional challenges will be high on the agenda during the Trump and el-Sissi meeting—not least of which is Israeli-Palestinian peace. El-Sissi is among the Arab leaders in Jordan this week for the 28th Arab summit, a major focus of the summit being Palestinian statehood.

El-Sissi has sought to position Egypt as a leading regional actor on this issue. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas met with el-Sissi in Cairo ahead of the Arab summit to discuss the U.S. administration’s position on the Israeli-Palestinian issue as well as Palestinian economic development and security. These issues were also discussed in Foreign Minister Shoukry’s meetings with Trump administration officials prior to the el-Sissi visit, who, according to the foreign ministry, were “keen to listen to the Egyptian perspective.”

Finally, el-Sissi is expected to discuss other critical regional issues, including the war in Syria, conflict in Yemen and instability in Libya. Egypt has worked to position itself as a regional leader on counterterrorism and a bastion of stability in a turbulent region. El-Sissi will likely present Cairo as a key U.S. partner in tackling regional instability.

Conclusion

There are certainly several topics that are not likely to be on the table for discussion. One of these is the imprisonment of U.S. citizen Aya Hegazy, who has been held in pretrial detention in Egypt for more than a year. The verdict in her case was recently postponed to April 16.

Other human rights issues or concerns are also unlikely to find a place on the agenda. And while it is worth noting that Egypt expressed dissatisfaction with the State Department’s recent 2016 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, Cairo linked its discontent to the previous administration, saying it “reflected the view of the former Obama administration which had always sought to tarnish the image of Egypt in any way.”

Deputy Foreign Minister for Human Rights Laila Bahaaeddin said the Egyptian government “decided not to make a lot of fuss in the media on a negative report which was issued by the outgoing administration” because Trump “has said he wants closer relations with Egypt.” Closer U.S.-Egypt ties in this context refer to strengthened U.S. support for Egypt’s national security interests, while issues of democratic governance and respect for human rights will be pushed aside.

Ultimately, we are unlikely to see any major developments come out of el-Sissi’s meeting with Trump. Rather, optics will dominate over substance.

The visit provides an important opportunity for the Egyptian government to take advantage of positive rhetoric from the White House regarding the U.S.-Egyptian partnership and to continue to push the idea of a “renewed” strategic relationship with this administration.

Elissa Miller is an assistant director at the Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East.

WHAT EGYPT’S EL-SISSI WANTS FROM TRUMP

 

Egypt President el-Sisi Says There is “No Doubt” that Donald Trump Would Make A Strong Leader
Image result for EL-SISI and trump

Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi visits the White House to meet with U.S. President Donald Trump.

El-Sissi’s first visit to the White House is important for U.S.-Egypt relations. Both leaders have repeatedly expressed admiration for each other, and Cairo appears eager to push for a stronger bilateral relationship that it perceives will do more to benefit its interests than its strained relationship with the Obama administration.

Ahead of the visit, the White House released a statement praising the “positive momentum [Trump and el-Sissi] have built for the United States-Egypt relationship.” Cairo has also been vocal in expressing support for strategic U.S.-Egypt ties and enhanced cooperation under the Trump administration.

In addition to the overall strengthening of ties, el-Sissi likely has four major priorities for this visit: securing U.S. support for Egypt’s counterterror interests, pressuring the United States to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, promoting Egypt’s economic reform program, and presenting Egypt as a leading regional power.

Security and Terrorism

Egypt presents itself as being on “the frontlines of the global war against terrorism” and extremism. That narrative drives much of the Egyptian rhetoric surrounding U.S. military assistance to Cairo.

04_03_Sisi_Trump_02Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in New Delhi in September 2016. Elissa Miller writes that el-Sisi’s visit comes amid Trump’s proposed budget cuts, which would significantly reduce spending on U.S. foreign aid. However, the administration is unlikely to cut foreign military financing to Egypt, which makes up the bulk of the $1.3 billion in annual assistance the United States gives to Egypt.CATHAL MCNAUGHTON/REUTERS

During a recent visit to Washington, meetings included those with Deputy National Security Advisor K. T. McFarland and Senior Director for Middle East policies on the National Security Council Derek Harvey. Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry called for continued U.S. assistance for Egypt’s counterterror operations and efforts as crucial to maintaining regional stability. He further described Egypt as “the country most capable [of confronting] extremist ideology amidst a region engulfed in conflicts and disputes.”

Cairo has also made efforts to present military assistance to Egypt as beneficial for U.S. interests in the region. On March 30, Egyptian Army Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Mahmoud Hegazy met with the Commander General of U.S. Army Central Michael Garrett to discuss military cooperation. A statement from the Egyptian military said that the meeting focused on the importance of continuing coordination and strengthening ties “in a way that serves the mutual interests [of both countries].” This rhetoric will certainly be echoed by el-Sissi during his Washington visit.

El-Sissi’s meeting with Trump also comes on the heels of two other major global meetings, both of which offered Cairo an opportunity to discuss Egypt’s counterterror vision ahead of el-Sissi’s visit with Trump.

On March 22, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson hosted a 68-member meeting of the Global Coalition to Counter ISIS in Washington. At the meeting, Foreign Minister Shoukry emphasized Egypt’s efforts to fight extremist ideologies through “religious moderate platforms.” In 2015, el-Sissi called for a “religious revolution” and urged Islamic scholars to engage in reforms that would help combat extremism.

Cairo has been battling militants in the Sinai since 2013; in late 2014, the militant group Ansar Beit al-Maqdis pledged loyalty to ISIS. Days later in Amman, Jordan, at the 28th Arab summit, el-Sissi called for a “comprehensive” approach to fighting terrorism in the Middle East that underlines the role religious institutions, particularly Egypt’s al-Azhar, can play in that effort.

Sissi’s visit also comes amid Trump’s proposed budget cuts, which would significantly reduce spending on U.S. foreign aid. However, the administration is unlikely to decrease foreign military financing to Egypt, which makes up the bulk of the $1.3 billion in annual assistance the United States gives to Egypt.

Still, Egypt may also use the visit and the surrounding security rhetoric to advocate for the renewal of cash flow financing (CFF), a perk allowing Egypt to buy U.S. defense equipment on credit, which the Obama administration ordered to be terminated by 2018. In the current budget climate, it appears unlikely a decision would be made to continue CFF in its current form post-2018, despite efforts by some U.S. lawmakers to push legislation to reverse the Obama-era decision.

Muslim Brotherhood

In the aftermath of the ouster of former President Mohamed Morsi in 2013, Egypt banned the Muslim Brotherhood and labeled the group a terrorist organization. While there has been much debate in Washington since Trump’s inauguration regarding the possible designation of the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization by the United States, the administration has reportedly put on hold an executive order on the Brotherhood, possibly following an internal State Department memo, which advised against such an action.

Still, Egypt will continue to push for Trump to make the designation. An Egyptian delegation that included several members of parliament visited the United States ahead of el-Sissi’s arrival with the goal of pressuring the U.S. administration and members of Congress to designate the Brotherhood a terrorist organization.

However, the administration is unlikely to follow through on such a step anytime soon because the Brotherhood is a global organization and labeling it a terrorist organization would impact U.S. policy in other countries. Brotherhood-affiliated political parties are major U.S. allies, including those in Jordan and Tunisia. Indeed, the Tunisian Islamist party Ennahda has played a key role in Tunisia’s transition toward democracy.

Economy

Egypt will also seek to promote its economic reform and attract U.S. investments. As part of its economic reform program, Egypt has adopted a flexible exchange rate, enacted a value-added tax and increased fuel prices.

In November 2016, Egypt signed a three-year $12 billion agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that aimed to help the country achieve macroeconomic stability and promote inclusive growth. Egypt has also been negotiating funding agreements to fulfill its ambitious commitments in the IMF program with France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and other G8 member countries.

U.S. investments in Egypt are important as Cairo seeks to attract more foreign direct investment. Last week, Egyptian Minister of Investment and International Cooperation Sahar Nasr chaired a conference with the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt. Nasr highlighted new investment opportunities in the country, which included new legislation that aims to minimize obstacles to would-be investors.

At the conference, AmCham Egypt President Anis Aclimandos said he was optimistic that the United States would increase investment in Egypt. Notably, el-Sissi will be accompanied in Washington by representatives from AmCham Egypt and the U.S.-Egypt Business Council, who will meet with U.S. businessmen to explain Egypt’s economic reform plans.

It is also worth noting that Egyptian intelligence recently hired two public relations firms in Washington to boost the country’s image in the United States and highlight, among other things, Cairo’s economic development efforts.

Regional Matters

Regional challenges will be high on the agenda during the Trump and el-Sissi meeting—not least of which is Israeli-Palestinian peace. El-Sissi is among the Arab leaders in Jordan this week for the 28th Arab summit, a major focus of the summit being Palestinian statehood.

El-Sissi has sought to position Egypt as a leading regional actor on this issue. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas met with el-Sissi in Cairo ahead of the Arab summit to discuss the U.S. administration’s position on the Israeli-Palestinian issue as well as Palestinian economic development and security. These issues were also discussed in Foreign Minister Shoukry’s meetings with Trump administration officials prior to the el-Sissi visit, who, according to the foreign ministry, were “keen to listen to the Egyptian perspective.”

Finally, el-Sissi is expected to discuss other critical regional issues, including the war in Syria, conflict in Yemen and instability in Libya. Egypt has worked to position itself as a regional leader on counterterrorism and a bastion of stability in a turbulent region. El-Sissi will likely present Cairo as a key U.S. partner in tackling regional instability.

Conclusion

There are certainly several topics that are not likely to be on the table for discussion. One of these is the imprisonment of U.S. citizen Aya Hegazy, who has been held in pretrial detention in Egypt for more than a year. The verdict in her case was recently postponed to April 16.

Other human rights issues or concerns are also unlikely to find a place on the agenda. And while it is worth noting that Egypt expressed dissatisfaction with the State Department’s recent 2016 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, Cairo linked its discontent to the previous administration, saying it “reflected the view of the former Obama administration which had always sought to tarnish the image of Egypt in any way.”

Deputy Foreign Minister for Human Rights Laila Bahaaeddin said the Egyptian government “decided not to make a lot of fuss in the media on a negative report which was issued by the outgoing administration” because Trump “has said he wants closer relations with Egypt.” Closer U.S.-Egypt ties in this context refer to strengthened U.S. support for Egypt’s national security interests, while issues of democratic governance and respect for human rights will be pushed aside.

Ultimately, we are unlikely to see any major developments come out of el-Sissi’s meeting with Trump. Rather, optics will dominate over substance.

The visit provides an important opportunity for the Egyptian government to take advantage of positive rhetoric from the White House regarding the U.S.-Egyptian partnership and to continue to push the idea of a “renewed” strategic relationship with this administration.

Elissa Miller is an assistant director at the Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East.

Dead Donkeys Fear No Hyenas: Land Grabbing

Kulturhusetstadsteatern

Dead donkeys fear no hyenas.  Swedish Human Rights Film Festival.  Klarabiografen 2017

Dead Donkeys Fear No Hyenas

Human Rights Film Festival


Klarabiografen


A documentary thriller investigating the murky concept of ‘land grabbing,’

15:00 to 15:30  Q & A with director Joakim Demmer. Read more about Director Demmer’s inspiration for the film . 

Around the globe, there is a massive commercial rush for farmland – the new green gold. One of the most profitable new spots for farming is Ethiopia.

Hoping for export revenues, the Ethiopian government leases millions of hectares of allegedly unused land to foreign investors. But the dream of prosperity has a dark side – the most massive forced evictions in modern history, lost livelihoods of small farmers, harsh repression and a vicious spiral of violence. Contributing to this disaster are the EU, the World Bank and DFID, Providing billions of dollars in development money.

Dead Donkeys Fear No Hyenas investigates These foreign land Investments and exposes Their impact on people’s lives. In the pursuit of truth, we meet investors, development bureaucrats, persecuted journalists struggling Environmentalists and small farmers deprived of Their Country.

Human Rights Film Festival’s website: http://humanrightsfilmfestival.se/index.php/2017/02/14/dead-donkeys-fear-no-hyenas/

More info: http://www.deaddonkeysfearnohyenas.com/

about the film

Director:  Joakim Demmer
Length:  1 hr 30 mins

Information

Scene

Klarabiografen

Premiere

April 2, 2017

Price

  • Regular:$ 100
  • Seniors:80 SEK
  • Students:80 SEK

Dead Donkeys Fear No Hyenas: Land Grabbing

Kulturhusetstadsteatern

Dead donkeys fear no hyenas.  Swedish Human Rights Film Festival.  Klarabiografen 2017

Dead Donkeys Fear No Hyenas

Human Rights Film Festival


Klarabiografen


A documentary thriller investigating the murky concept of ‘land grabbing,’

15:00 to 15:30  Q & A with director Joakim Demmer. Read more about Director Demmer’s inspiration for the film . 

Around the globe, there is a massive commercial rush for farmland – the new green gold. One of the most profitable new spots for farming is Ethiopia.

Hoping for export revenues, the Ethiopian government leases millions of hectares of allegedly unused land to foreign investors. But the dream of prosperity has a dark side – the most massive forced evictions in modern history, lost livelihoods of small farmers, harsh repression and a vicious spiral of violence. Contributing to this disaster are the EU, the World Bank and DFID, Providing billions of dollars in development money.

Dead Donkeys Fear No Hyenas investigates These foreign land Investments and exposes Their impact on people’s lives. In the pursuit of truth, we meet investors, development bureaucrats, persecuted journalists struggling Environmentalists and small farmers deprived of Their Country.

Human Rights Film Festival’s website: http://humanrightsfilmfestival.se/index.php/2017/02/14/dead-donkeys-fear-no-hyenas/

More info: http://www.deaddonkeysfearnohyenas.com/

about the film

Director:  Joakim Demmer
Length:  1 hr 30 mins

Information

Scene

Klarabiografen

Premiere

April 2, 2017

Price

  • Regular:$ 100
  • Seniors:80 SEK
  • Students:80 SEK

DONALD TRUMP’S AFRICA!

The New Yorker

By The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief provides support to clinics like the one above, in South Africa. President Trump’s team has questioned whether such programs should continue.

The Trump Administration’s budget proposal for next year includes drastic cuts to a myriad of social services and programs, to environmental protection, education, public housing, and the arts and science. But there is something else buried under all of those line items: a call to completely eliminate the African Development Foundation, a government agency that gives grants worth thousands of dollars, in the form of seed capital and technical support, to community enterprises and small businesses on the African continent.

The A.D.F. functions as a kind of alternative to the aid money that the United States regularly provides to several governments in Africa; it was designed to encourage self-sufficiency and entrepreneurship, and it focusses on ventures by farmers, women, and young people, particularly those in post-conflict communities. Last year, it invested just more than fifty million dollars in five hundred active businesses, including agriculture co-operatives and solar-energy enterprises, which in turn reportedly generated new economic activity worth eighty million dollars. (The agency’s Twitter account has been valiantly tweetingout the results of its work in recent days.) The A.D.F.’s reach has been meaningful, though modest. But its proposed termination reflects a deeper apathy, and even belligerence, about Africa from President Trump’s Administration, whose members have publicly wondered what the United States is doing on the continent, and why it is interested in parts of it at all.

So far, the Trump Administration’s prevailing mood toward much of the world, including Africa, has been one of xenophobia and carelessness. Three of the six Muslim-majority countries named in Trump’s executive order barring people from the United States—Somalia, Sudan, and Libya—are in Africa. (The order is on hold pending court challenges.) The Administration is also expected to soon change the parameters of U.S. military operations in Somalia, by removing constraints on special-operations airstrikes and other actions directed at the terrorist group al-Shabaab—rules that were put in place to limit civilian deaths. The University of Southern California hosts an annual summit on trade in Africa, meant to bring together representatives of business and government interests on the continent and in the United States. This year, there were no Africans present, because the State Department did not grant visas to any of the roughly sixty African delegates who were invited. The head of the African Union has criticized the travel ban, saying, “The very country to which many of our people were taken as slaves during the transatlantic slave trade has now decided to ban refugees from some of our countries.” Otherwise, African leaders have mostly refrained from offering public appraisals of the current President. Perhaps they consider it wiser to stay out of the spotlight as Trump goes on tirades against foes like Mexico and China.

But if questions posed earlier this year by the Trump transition team to the State Department regarding Africa are any indication, ignorance may be just as harmful as blustery tweets and threats at post-election rallies, if not more so. As the Times, which got a copy of the questions, summed it up, the incoming President’s team wondered why the United States was “even bothering to fight the Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria,” and why it hadn’t yet defeated al-Shabaab. It asked about doing away with assistance for Uganda’s hunt of the vicious, Joseph Kony-led Lord’s Resistance Army, which is still rampaging through central Africa, since the “LRA has never attacked U.S. interests.” It also asked if the President’s Emergency Plan for aids Relief (pepfar), a program started by former President George W. Bush which helps fight H.I.V./aids and tuberculosis on the continent, was a “massive, international entitlement program”—welfare for Africans, in other words. The questions revealed a stunning lack of knowledge about the humanitarian impulses behind the most important operations and programs on the continent, including the most successful, like pepfar, and the longest running, such as the hunt to capture Kony. There were legitimate points of inquiry, such as whether the aid given to some African countries disappears into corrupt pockets—a question that could, in theory, lead to a serious discussion about whether it is more efficient to focus on investment than on assistance. But there was no sign that this Administration will capitalize on that insight. The tone of the questions, judging from press reports, appears to have been overwhelmingly confrontational and dismissive, and even flippant.

The United States has slowly become more and more irrelevant to Africa’s economic progress. Besides foreign aid, America’s main concern in the region has been bolstering its war on Al Qaeda- and ISIS-affiliated militant groups. Meanwhile, its competitors, mainly China, have seized enormously profitable investment opportunities throughout the continent, and maintained beneficial relationships with African governments. Often enough, those ties involve China looking the other way when it comes to human-rights concerns, while making aggressive, ethically nebulous deals. “How does U.S. business compete with other nations in Africa?” the transition team asked. “Are we losing out to the Chinese?” The answer to the second question is a resounding yes. Based on the queries about China, observers have speculated that the Trump Administration may also look toward investing in Africa. But retooling America’s approach to the continent requires not only business savvy but also the foresight to recognize that Africa is not simply a destination for constant aid—and never really has been.

So what is Ethereuma and Blockchain again?

Ethereum: The not-Bitcoin cryptocurrency that could help replace Uber

BY EMMA HINCHLIFFE  Mashable

2017 has been a big year for Bitcoin: its highest price ever, a major disappointment from the SEC for No. 1 Bitcoin fans the Winkelvoss twins, and, for a moment, a value higher than gold.
But another cryptocurrency has been quietly growing in volume while everyone was focused on Bitcoin. Ethereum, which is kind of like Bitcoin but slightly nerdier and more complicated, edged up against Bitcoin in its daily volume earlier this month. In plain english, Bitcoin is much bigger in terms of monetary value, but Ethereum is being used so much that it’s facilitating nearly as much business.

Even people who don’t care about digital currencies at all have heard of Bitcoin. But according to a brief unscientific survey of the Mashable offices, it appears that approximately no one outside the cryptocurrency loop knows what Ethereum is.

So what is Ethereum?

Ethereum is a decentralized application that supports a cryptocurrency, or digital currency, just like Bitcoin. You can pay for things online, trade money, and buy and sell anywhere that accepts it.

But there’s more to Ethereum than there is to Bitcoin. The cryptocurrency, called ether, runs on a “smart contract.” The smart contract is a blockchain technology and “if:then” system that allows Ethereum to be traded if a certain condition is met.

Bitcoin runs on the blockchain (a distributed, decentralized ledger of transactions) too, but it doesn’t involve the extra step of a smart contract.

What is the blockchain again?

Blockchain is a distributed ledger where all of Bitcoin’s — and Ethereum’s — transactions are recorded. It’s totally decentralized, which means it’s not run by any one person or company. Its decentralization gives it a ton of other applications besides Bitcoin — distributing music rights, powering components of traditional financial institutions — and it’s integral to digital currencies.

What can Ethereum do that Bitcoin can’t?

Ethereum’s cryptocurrency is like Bitcoin with a few extra features.

The smart contract means that you can use Ethereum to do more than just pay for something. If you want to place a bet on the Super Bowl, for example, you could use Ethereum to pay only if the Patriots win.

An if:then tool has bigger applications that just gambling. You could set up a crowdfunding campaign using Ethereum, as the Huffington Post pointed out, that would only take your money if a project’s goal was met — without the fees charged by Kickstarter or GoFundMe.

“Things are possible with Ethereum that aren’t imaginable with any other technology today.” 

The smart contract could even replace lawyers, CEOs and companies.

“You don’t need to have Uber, the company, anymore,” said Benedikt Bunz, a Ph.D. student at Stanford who studies cryptocurrencies. “You could have the Uber contract handle the money and do the payouts.”

Who’s using Ethereum now?

Ethereum, perhaps unsurprisingly, has similar clientele to Bitcoin. But Ethereum is in an earlier, more experimental stage. Investors and speculators are still focused on building new applications — not on introducing Ethereum ATMs.

How can I buy Ethereum?

Getting started with cryptocurrencies is a whole thing — you need an account, for instance, but a good place to start is Coinbase.

What’s the price of Ethereum?

A single Bitcoin is really expensive: on Thursday morning, it was valued at $1,050. Ethereum isn’t nearly as pricy by unit. Its value hovered around $41 on Thursday.

What has Ethereum already done?

Developers can use Ethereum to build apps that take advantage of its smart contract technology. A few cool ones support microfinance, build virtual worlds and prevent identity theft.

Is Ethereum the only alternative to Bitcoin?

No, but it’s the best one. Most other cryptocurrencies provide an alternative to Bitcoin without adding any real reason to switch. Ethereum is the only one that comes with a totally different set of advantages because of its smart contract.

The cryptocurrency Zerocash is the most persuasive alternative besides Ethereum, Bunz said. Its innovation is improving the privacy of transactions, since Bitcoin transactions are public on the blockchain ledger.

Besides that, everything else is pretty much just like Bitcoin.

What are the risks of Ethereum?

If something were to go wrong with Ethereum’s smart contract, it could be really bad. The program wouldn’t just crash — it could wipe away money with no way to get it back, since an if:then command could go through and would be irreversible, Bunz said.

The chance of that happening is pretty low, but it’s still a scary prospect.

There’s also the general volatility of Ethereum, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. During a recent three-day stretch in March, the price of Ether doubled and has been all over the place since.

How important could Ethereum actually be?

Ethereum’s main quality at the moment is its potential. Cryptocurrency believers say that the technology could, well, replace Uber and, theoretically, a variety of other services.

“There are things that are absolutely possible that aren’t possible with mainstream currency and are not even possible with Bitcoin today,” Bunz said. “Things are possible with Ethereum that aren’t imaginable with any other technology today.”

The Pastor as Sexual Object

Contending Modernities

Photo Credit: Dr Chris Okafor. https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/drchrisokafor

At the core of my ongoing study of Pentecostal pastors and changing forms of authority in Africa are two related premises.

First, due to a variety of factors, partly socio-economic, but also cultural as well as political, the landscape of authority across a majority of African states has altered radically over the last three decades. For example: if one effect of the combined militarization of the state and ‘Structural Adjustment’ of the economies of many African countries in the 1980s was the impoverishment of the academy, its logic has been the delegitimizing of universities themselves as authoritative centers of knowledge production.

With the entire system of tertiary education more or less stripped of its epistemological raison d’être, growing numbers of the African intelligentsia have had to look elsewhere for intellectual fulfillment and compensation that is commensurate with their status and skills. Hence my claim: that for all that this exodus has bequeathed a social and intellectual void, Pentecostal pastors have been the indirect beneficiaries, purveyors of a new kind of authoritative clerical speech-act which tends to be valorized over and above secular law or normativity.

The Pentecostal pastor is no mere direct substitute for the intellectual though. True, he (or in far fewer cases, she) now occupies what once was the academic’s spotlight as authority on economic, political, and cultural matters, to such an extent that today, even the academic tends to genuflect to his (i.e. the pastor’s) authority. But that is where, seemingly, the comparison ends. At the peak of his influence, the African intellectual was a mere defender of the public good, in which capacity he defined and contributed to public debates, built bridges with popular organizations like trade unions, resisted military and other forms of dictatorial rule, and generally aligned with efforts to hold the state accountable. In short, the intellectual was a crucial cog in an emergent postcolonial public sphere.

In terms of his authority, the modern-day Pentecostal pastor is a different beast. Contra his predecessor the intellectual, his power and influence project over a wider range of social life, including the most intimate. He is a widely sought after existential micromanager: a blend of spiritual guide, financial coach, marriage counselor, fashion icon, travel advisor, all-purpose celebrity, and last but not least, and as we are beginning to see from a stream of media reports from across the continent, center of an erotic economy.

He is the one with the power either to command female congregants to come to church without their underwear so that they can be ‘more easily receive the spirit of Jesus Christ,’ as was reportedly the case with Reverend Pastor Njohi of the Lord’s Propeller Redemption Church, Nairobi, Kenya; or, as we saw more recently with Kumasi-based pastor ‘Bishop’ Daniel Obinim, the one with the license to openly massage the penises of male congregants with erectile anxiety.

Whilst the political sociology of the pastor is a well-trodden ground, the idea of the pastor as an object of erotic fascination, part sexual healer, part sex symbol, the throbbing center of an intense Pentecostal sexual economy, is comparatively less frequented. Yet, this is something that my research has persistently thrust on me, and one I would argue holds immense riches.

For one thing, it furnishes a radical approach to the study of African Pentecostalism by allowing us to corral and cross-fertilize issues and subjects typically allocated in separate intellectual compartments. Foremost amongst these are: masculinity, gender, patriarchy, femininity, studies of affect, crowd engineering and crowd control, the religious spectacle, media studies, emotions, pornography, sex and sexuality, and ethics.

For another, it allows us, taking provocation from theorists Niklaus Largier, Birgit Meyer, and Nimi Wariboko’s respective works on the religious sensorium, to approach the physical space of the church as a sensual space, a place where people go to find pleasure, and where sounds, ululations, music, dance, bodies in motion, bodies flailing and sprawling, bodies in collision [whether casually or intentionally], bodies sometimes literally thrown at or surrendered to the mercy of the pastor; all combine to produce ecstatic worship.

Photo Credit: Ebenezer Obadare. Lagos, Nigeria.

Accepting the Pentecostal church as sensual space frees us to imagine the altar as a special stage repurposed, if not in fact designed, for the pastor’s hypersexual posturing. On this altar—increasingly, the ritualistic center of worship in many mega churches—the sexualized pastor channels masculine performances that bristle with erotic intimations. Through him, female congregants may lay a vicarious claim to ‘spiritual impregnation;’ often times, and as vindicated by countless examples across African Pentecostal churches, it goes beyond that.

Thus, to place the pastor at the center of a Pentecostal libidinal economy is, in essence, to put the persona of the pastor under a completely different analytic light. What my study appears to mandate, and what I am proposing here, is a critical shift from the idea of the pastor as the one who dictates sexual mores, who gives counsel on sex and proper sexual conduct, the physical symbol of heteronormativity whose stable (sexually and otherwise) domestic life is invoked as an example to the congregation; to the idea of the (body of) the pastor as an object of desire whose sexual energy comes from a strategic choreography of dress, mode of preaching and performance on the pulpit, aesthetics, personal ‘tone,’ automobile, travel, and ‘connections’ (either proven or suggested) to transnational networks.

Suffice to say, the backdrop to all this is extremely complex. It involves—and is in part enabled by—the rise of the celebrity pastor in Africa; the rise of pastoral ‘calling’ as the quickest route to social prestige, critical in a context in which the need to ‘be somebody’ has become very acute; and its corollary, the emergence of pastoring as a virtually automatic guarantor of social mobility.

But perhaps of utmost importance is what appears to be Pentecostalism’s theological project of producing a new man, which tends to translate all too literally into a man shorn of his masculine properties, i.e. highly domesticated, abjuring the company of ‘sinful’ former friends, and most important, sexually ‘tamed.’ A ‘demasculinized’ man, in short. The consequence, I would argue, is that often times, the only ‘man’ left standing in the Pentecostal church is the pastor occupying the altar. Cherished, beloved, and, dare I suggest, eroticized.

Ebenezer Obadare
Ebenezer Obadare is Professor of Sociology at the University of Kansas, and Research Fellow at the Research Institute for Theology and Religion, University of South Africa. He is author of Humor, Silence, and Civil Society in Nigeria (University of Rochester Press, 2016) and co-editor of Civic Agency in Africa: Arts of Resistance in the 21st Century (James Currey, 2014). His ongoing Contending Modernities research focuses on Pentecostal pastors and changing patterns of authority in Nigeria and Ghana.

The Pastor as Sexual Object

Contending Modernities

Photo Credit: Dr Chris Okafor. https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/drchrisokafor

At the core of my ongoing study of Pentecostal pastors and changing forms of authority in Africa are two related premises.

First, due to a variety of factors, partly socio-economic, but also cultural as well as political, the landscape of authority across a majority of African states has altered radically over the last three decades. For example: if one effect of the combined militarization of the state and ‘Structural Adjustment’ of the economies of many African countries in the 1980s was the impoverishment of the academy, its logic has been the delegitimizing of universities themselves as authoritative centers of knowledge production.

With the entire system of tertiary education more or less stripped of its epistemological raison d’être, growing numbers of the African intelligentsia have had to look elsewhere for intellectual fulfillment and compensation that is commensurate with their status and skills. Hence my claim: that for all that this exodus has bequeathed a social and intellectual void, Pentecostal pastors have been the indirect beneficiaries, purveyors of a new kind of authoritative clerical speech-act which tends to be valorized over and above secular law or normativity.

The Pentecostal pastor is no mere direct substitute for the intellectual though. True, he (or in far fewer cases, she) now occupies what once was the academic’s spotlight as authority on economic, political, and cultural matters, to such an extent that today, even the academic tends to genuflect to his (i.e. the pastor’s) authority. But that is where, seemingly, the comparison ends. At the peak of his influence, the African intellectual was a mere defender of the public good, in which capacity he defined and contributed to public debates, built bridges with popular organizations like trade unions, resisted military and other forms of dictatorial rule, and generally aligned with efforts to hold the state accountable. In short, the intellectual was a crucial cog in an emergent postcolonial public sphere.

In terms of his authority, the modern-day Pentecostal pastor is a different beast. Contra his predecessor the intellectual, his power and influence project over a wider range of social life, including the most intimate. He is a widely sought after existential micromanager: a blend of spiritual guide, financial coach, marriage counselor, fashion icon, travel advisor, all-purpose celebrity, and last but not least, and as we are beginning to see from a stream of media reports from across the continent, center of an erotic economy.

He is the one with the power either to command female congregants to come to church without their underwear so that they can be ‘more easily receive the spirit of Jesus Christ,’ as was reportedly the case with Reverend Pastor Njohi of the Lord’s Propeller Redemption Church, Nairobi, Kenya; or, as we saw more recently with Kumasi-based pastor ‘Bishop’ Daniel Obinim, the one with the license to openly massage the penises of male congregants with erectile anxiety.

Whilst the political sociology of the pastor is a well-trodden ground, the idea of the pastor as an object of erotic fascination, part sexual healer, part sex symbol, the throbbing center of an intense Pentecostal sexual economy, is comparatively less frequented. Yet, this is something that my research has persistently thrust on me, and one I would argue holds immense riches.

For one thing, it furnishes a radical approach to the study of African Pentecostalism by allowing us to corral and cross-fertilize issues and subjects typically allocated in separate intellectual compartments. Foremost amongst these are: masculinity, gender, patriarchy, femininity, studies of affect, crowd engineering and crowd control, the religious spectacle, media studies, emotions, pornography, sex and sexuality, and ethics.

For another, it allows us, taking provocation from theorists Niklaus Largier, Birgit Meyer, and Nimi Wariboko’s respective works on the religious sensorium, to approach the physical space of the church as a sensual space, a place where people go to find pleasure, and where sounds, ululations, music, dance, bodies in motion, bodies flailing and sprawling, bodies in collision [whether casually or intentionally], bodies sometimes literally thrown at or surrendered to the mercy of the pastor; all combine to produce ecstatic worship.

Photo Credit: Ebenezer Obadare. Lagos, Nigeria.

Accepting the Pentecostal church as sensual space frees us to imagine the altar as a special stage repurposed, if not in fact designed, for the pastor’s hypersexual posturing. On this altar—increasingly, the ritualistic center of worship in many mega churches—the sexualized pastor channels masculine performances that bristle with erotic intimations. Through him, female congregants may lay a vicarious claim to ‘spiritual impregnation;’ often times, and as vindicated by countless examples across African Pentecostal churches, it goes beyond that.

Thus, to place the pastor at the center of a Pentecostal libidinal economy is, in essence, to put the persona of the pastor under a completely different analytic light. What my study appears to mandate, and what I am proposing here, is a critical shift from the idea of the pastor as the one who dictates sexual mores, who gives counsel on sex and proper sexual conduct, the physical symbol of heteronormativity whose stable (sexually and otherwise) domestic life is invoked as an example to the congregation; to the idea of the (body of) the pastor as an object of desire whose sexual energy comes from a strategic choreography of dress, mode of preaching and performance on the pulpit, aesthetics, personal ‘tone,’ automobile, travel, and ‘connections’ (either proven or suggested) to transnational networks.

Suffice to say, the backdrop to all this is extremely complex. It involves—and is in part enabled by—the rise of the celebrity pastor in Africa; the rise of pastoral ‘calling’ as the quickest route to social prestige, critical in a context in which the need to ‘be somebody’ has become very acute; and its corollary, the emergence of pastoring as a virtually automatic guarantor of social mobility.

But perhaps of utmost importance is what appears to be Pentecostalism’s theological project of producing a new man, which tends to translate all too literally into a man shorn of his masculine properties, i.e. highly domesticated, abjuring the company of ‘sinful’ former friends, and most important, sexually ‘tamed.’ A ‘demasculinized’ man, in short. The consequence, I would argue, is that often times, the only ‘man’ left standing in the Pentecostal church is the pastor occupying the altar. Cherished, beloved, and, dare I suggest, eroticized.

Ebenezer Obadare
Ebenezer Obadare is Professor of Sociology at the University of Kansas, and Research Fellow at the Research Institute for Theology and Religion, University of South Africa. He is author of Humor, Silence, and Civil Society in Nigeria (University of Rochester Press, 2016) and co-editor of Civic Agency in Africa: Arts of Resistance in the 21st Century (James Currey, 2014). His ongoing Contending Modernities research focuses on Pentecostal pastors and changing patterns of authority in Nigeria and Ghana.

Finally, Africa gets its own web address with launch of .africa

Africa

People attend a computer training course, as part of the 'Afrique Innovation, reinventer les mediasImage copyrightAFP
The African Union hopes .africa will create a unique online identity for the continent

Africa now has the unique web address .africa, equivalent to the more familiar .com, following its official launch by the African Union.

AU commission chairperson Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma hailed its creation as the moment when Africa “got [its] own digital identity”.

The AU says the .africa domain name will “bring the continent together as an internet community”.

Addresses can now reflect a company’s interest in the whole of Africa.

For example, a mobile phone company could create mobile.africa to show its Africa-wide presence, or a travel company could set up travel.africa.

Icann, the body that establishes these addresses known as generic Top-Level Domains, approved the move, after lobbying by the AU.

The campaign was spearheaded by a South African company ZA Central Registry (ZACR), which will now be responsible for registering .africa names.

ZACR’s boss Lucky Masilela said that .africa addresses could cost as little as $18 (£15), AFP news agency quotes him as saying, and registration will start in July.

Other domain names recently created by Icann, include .fun, .phone and .hair.