Israeli demands for troops in Gaza blocking truce deal, sources say

Disagreements over Israel's future military presence in Gaza and over Palestinian prisoner releases are obstructing a ceasefire and hostage deal, according to ten sources familiar with the round of U.S.-mediated talks that concluded last week.

The sources, who include two Hamas officials and three Western diplomats, told Reuters the disagreements stemmed from demands Israel has introduced since Hamas accepted a version of a ceasefire proposalunveiled by U.S. President Joe Biden in May.

All the sources said Hamas was especially concerned about the latest demand to keep troops deployed along the Netzarim Corridor, an east-west strip Israel cleared during the current war that prevents Palestinians' free movement between north and south Gaza, as well as in a narrow border strip between Gaza and Egypt known as the Philadelphi Corridor.

The sources asked not to be named to speak freely about sensitive matters.

Israel's current grip on the Philadelphi Corridor gives it control of Gaza's frontier with Egypt, the enclave's only crossing that does not border Israel.

Hamas sees Israel as having changed its conditions and parameters "last-minute," and worries any concessions it makes would be met by more demands, one of the sources, who is close to the talks, told Reuters.

The media office for the Palestinian militant group did not respond to requests for comment for this story. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's office did not respond to questions about the talks.

In a press statement on Sunday, Hamas said the proposal arising from last week's talks was too close to Netanyahu's recent positions setting new conditions. It urged the mediators to stick to the implementation of a July versionof the framework agreement, rather than starting new negotiations.

In a statement prior to the talks last week, Netanyahu's office denied making new demands, saying its position built on the previous proposal.

In the statement, the office said Israel's May proposal stated that only unarmed civilians would be allowed to return to the northern part of Gaza, crossing the Netzarim Corridor.

The office said Israel's new proposal, first presented at a meeting of mediators in Rome on July 27, was that an agreed-upon mechanism should be established to assure this, implying but not specifically mentioning an Israeli military presence at Netzarim to prevent the movement of Hamas fighters.

According to a second source close to the talks, Israel proposed that an agreement for the return of non-combatants to the north half of Gaza would be agreed upon "at a later date".

That was seen by some of the mediators and Hamas as Israel backtracking on a previous commitment to withdraw from the Netzarim corridor and allow free movement inside Gaza, the source said.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken concluded a whirlwind trip to the region on Tuesday, seeking a breakthrough. After meeting Netanyahu, Blinken said Israel had accepted a new U.S. proposal aimed at narrowing differences between Israel and Hamas' latest positions. He urged Hamas to do the same.

"Once that happens we also have to complete the detailed implementation agreements that go along with putting the ceasefire into effect," he said at a news conference on Tuesday.

The sides have not released what Blinken called a bridging proposal, and Reuters has not seen a copy.

One Western diplomat, describing Israel's latest demands in the U.S.-led talks, said it appeared the United States had accepted changes proposed by Netanyahu, including on a continued Israeli military deployment in the two corridors.

One U.S. official disputed that suggestion, saying the negotiations on the "implementation" would aim to hash out disagreements over the Philadelphi and Netzarim corridors, the number of Palestinian prisoners and who to release among other topics.

Blinken also pushed back on any suggestion of Israeli troops occupying Gaza on a long term basis, saying at the press conference that the schedule and location of Israeli military withdrawals were very clear in the agreement.

FRESH TALKS

The next round of talks is expected in Cairo in the coming days, based around the U.S. bridging proposal.

The lead U.S. negotiator, CIA director Bill Burns, his Israeli counterpart, Mossad chief David Barnea, Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani and Egypt's lead negotiator are expected to attend, the source close to the talks said. Qatar's Sheikh Mohammed is expected to visit Tehran before heading to Cairo, the source said. An Iranian source said Sheikh Mohammed was due to visit on Monday.

Iran's foreign ministry did not respond to questions. The CIA declined to comment in line with its policy of not disclosing Burns' travel.

Two of the Hamas officials said the U.S. proposal contained some of the Israeli changes they reject, including allowing "Israel's continued military presence" along the crossings and releasing some Palestinian prisoners into exile, rather than to Gaza or the West Bank, in any swap for hostages.

However, a senior U.S. administration official said there was nothing in the bridging proposal that changed previously agreed commitments on the Netzarim Corridor. The official said any temporary arrangements on the Philadelphi Corridor must be consistent with Israel’s May 27 text and the outline put forth by Biden, as endorsed by the U.N. Security Council.

The proposal includes "massive and immediate benefits" for the people of Gaza and incorporates a number of Hamas' earlier demands, the official said.

Two of the sources, security officials in Egypt, said Israel and Hamas appeared willing to resolve differences in all areas other than that of the Israeli withdrawal.

Israel's war objectives include "securing the southern border," Netanyahu's office said in a statement on Thursday, referring to the Philadelphi Corridor.

In response to Reuters questions on differences over the latest ceasefire proposal, Egypt's state information service pointed to recent official statements emphasising a continuing push to reach a deal at talks in Cairo and Doha.

Qatar's international media office did not comment, but pointed to a statement issued late Tuesday after the Qatari prime minister spoke to Blinken, which urged efforts to secure a ceasefire in Gaza. In response to questions from Reuters the U.S. State Department referred to Blinken's public statements.

PHILADELPHI CORRIDOR

Control over the Philadelphi Corridor frontier area between Gaza and Egypt, along with the Rafah border crossing, is particularly sensitive for Cairo.

Egypt is prepared to take more security measures in the Philadelphi corridor but rejects the presence of Israeli troops there, the Egyptian security sources said.

Israel seized control of the strategic corridor in May, saying it was used by Hamas to smuggle weapons and banned material into its tunnels to Gaza.

The Israeli advance resulted in the closure of the Rafah crossing, sharply reducing the amount of humanitarian aid entering Gaza, halting most medical evacuations, and potentially depriving Egypt of its role brokering access at the only border crossing into Gaza that had not been directly controlled by Israel.

Egypt says that tunnels used for smuggling into Gaza have been closed or destroyed, that a Palestinian presence at Rafah should be restored, and that the Philadelphi corridor buffer zone is guaranteed by the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty.

An Israeli troop presence along the corridors, the Hamas sources said, would amount to a continued Israeli occupation that would stop the free movement of civilians.

PRISONERS AND PEACE

The two Hamas officials told Reuters the U.S. bridging plan "does not include a permanent ceasefire".

In the May proposal, Biden said a temporary ceasefire would become a permanent cessation of hostilities, "as long as Hamas lives up to its commitments."

The Hamas officials said Israel had also imposed a veto on the release of around 100 Palestinian prisoners whose names Hamas proposed, some elderly and with more than 20 years remaining on their sentences.

The issue of Palestinian prisoners to be released as part of a swap deal for hostages Hamas has held in Gaza since Oct. 7 had previously been seen as less difficult.

A main sticking point at present is an Israeli position that many of the prisoners it releases should be immediately deported and go into exile outside Israel, the West Bank or Gaza, the Western diplomat and the two Hamas officials said.

"In light of this, Hamas refused to accept the American-Israeli paper," one of the officials said.

A three-phase framework for a ceasefire deal has been on the table since late December, but the multiple disputes between Israel and Hamas over key details have made an agreement impossible.

The United States, along with mediators Qatar and Egypt, is trying to keep negotiations alive to end Israel's 10-month-campaign in Gaza and return remaining hostages seized by Hamas and its allies on Oct. 7.

The war began on Oct. 7 when Hamas gunmen stormed into Israeli communities and military bases, killing around 1,200 people and abducting about 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. More than 40,000 people have since been killed in Gaza, according to Palestinian health authorities.

Reuters

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine tried to attack Russian nuclear plant – Putin

Ukrainian forces have attempted to strike Russia’s Kursk Nuclear Power Plant (NPP), President Vladimir Putin has said during a cabinet meeting.

Kiev sent thousands of troops into Russia’s Kursk Region earlier this month, attempting to reach the town of Kurchatov, where the nuclear facility is located. Moscow has declared the incursion an act of terrorism and has deployed additional troops to repel the invaders.

“Last night, the enemy attempted to strike the atomic power plant,” Putin said at a cabinet meeting on Thursday afternoon. “The International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] has been informed. They promised to come themselves and send specialists to assess the situation. I hope they actually do so.”

The IAEA already has observers working at the Zaporozhye NPP, Europe’s largest such facility. The mission was deployed in the summer of 2023, as Ukrainian troops attempted to seize the plant. Earlier this month, a Ukrainian drone attack set one of the cooling towers at the plant on fire.

Rosatom CEO Alexey Likhachev has discussed the situation at both power plants with IAEA director Rafael Grossi, and invited him to visit Kursk to personally assess the situation, according to the Russian media.

Grossi has accepted the invitation and is planning to visit Kursk next week, an IAEA spokesman told AFP. Afterwards, he will visit Kiev and speak with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky.

According to Grossi, the IAEA is very concerned about any combat operations near the Kursk NPP, since it operates the same kind of reactors as the infamous Chernobyl NPP.

“They don’t have a protective dome around them, just the normal roof, which means that the reactor’s core is pretty exposed,” Grossi said. The presence of troops within artillery range “is a source of enormous concern to me and the agency,” he added, without specifying which forces he meant.

Moscow has repeatedly criticized the international agency for never identifying the perpetrator of the attacks on nuclear facilities, even though the IAEA staff has known perfectly well that Kiev is to blame.

Last week, Russian military journalist Marat Khairullin reported that Ukraine was preparing a “dirty bomb” for a false flag attack on either the Kursk or Zaporozhye NPP. Moscow said it was taking the report seriously and warned that any such attack would be met immediately with “tough military and military-technical countermeasures.”

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Russia and Ukraine report gains as some Ukrainians flee strategic city

Russia and Ukraine both reported new battlefield gains on Thursday, with Kyiv hailing the capture of another village on Russian soil but hundreds of Ukrainians fleeing the eastern city of Pokrovsk as Russian forces advance on it.

Visiting the border area from where his troops entered the Kursk region in western Russia on Aug. 6, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy announced the seizure of a new village that he did not name, and said the incursion had helped reduce Russian shelling of the northeastern Sumy region.

Russian authorities said a Russian ferry sank after a Ukrainian attack that struck southern Russia's Port Kavkaz, which supplies fuel to the occupied peninsula of Crimea. Kyiv said it had mounted a drone strike on an air base in southern Russia and carried out a raid about 240 km (150 miles) from the site of its push into Kursk region.

After returning to Kyiv, Zelenskiy said the latest Ukrainian military action was part of an effort to put an end to the war on Ukraine's terms instead of Russia's.

"This is all our systematic defence path, the path to end this war on the terms of an independent Ukraine," he said in an address to veterans.

He said that to force Russian troops out of Ukrainian territory, the Ukrainian military should "create as many problems as possible" on Russian territory.

But although the incursion is an embarrassment for Russia, Moscow's forces have continued their gradual advances of the past few months against tired Ukrainian troops in eastern Ukraine worn down by 2-1/2 years of heavy fighting.

Moscow said its troops had taken control of the village of Mezhove in the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine, and that they had beaten back an attempt by a Ukrainian force to infiltrate its border in a different region to Kyiv's Aug. 6 incursion.

Ukrainian authorities say Russian troops are now just 10 km (six miles) outside Pokrovsk, an important transport hub in eastern Ukraine, and this week started evacuating elderly residents and children.

"Everyone is in panic, people are running away," Liudmyla Sydorenko told Reuters on Thursday as she packed a 94-year-old relative's belongings into plastic bags at their apartment so that she could be evacuated.

"I went outside and was shocked: people with paper boxes there, mass evacuation. We don't want to leave, but we have to. We thought we could stay here. It's very difficult."

Moscow's capture of Pokrovsk, which lies at an intersection of roads and a railway line, would give Russia options to advance in new directions and also cut supply routes used by the Ukrainian military in the Donetsk region.

WARNING BY U.S. EMBASSY

Authorities in Kursk said they had begun installing concrete shelters to help protect civilians during the Ukrainian incursion.

President Vladimir Putin accused Ukraine of trying to strike Russia's Kursk nuclear power plant in an overnight attack and said Moscow had informed the U.N. nuclear safety watchdog about the situation.

But he provided no documentary evidence to back up his assertion and there was no immediate comment from Ukraine.

Reuters was unable to independently confirm the attack or reports from the battlefield.

Ukraine has closely guarded its main aims in the Kursk region but said it has carved out a buffer zone from an area that Russia has used to pound targets in Ukraine with cross-border strikes.

Military analysts say the incursion probably aims in part to divert Russian forces to ease pressure in the east, although there is no indication Russia has pulled troops from there.

The incursion has boosted morale among Ukrainians as they prepare to mark 33 years since independence from the Soviet Union on Saturday.

The U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, however, said there was a heightened risk of Russian missile and drone attacks throughout Ukraine in the coming days connected to Independence Day.

RT/Reuters

The #EndBadGovernance protest, which started on August 1, 2024 and formally ended on August 20, 2024 has continued to raise discussions across the country and beyond, especially within civil society groups. More than 1,400 people who took part in the protest have reportedly been arrested and detained by security agencies with indications that the government is still trying to hunt-down suspected sponsors of the protest.

One of the important lessons from the protest is that the storm clouds seem to be really gathering towards a totalitarian state – a system characterized by a strong central rule that attempts to control and direct all aspects of individual life through coercion and repression. In political science, totalitarianism is the extreme form of authoritarianism, wherein all power is held by a dictatorial nanny state that promotes group-think through blackmail and propaganda. Group-think, according to the American social psychologist Irving Janis who coined the term, is “the mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive in-group that it tends to override realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action.”  In groupthink, loyalty to the group requires individuals to avoid raising controversial or non-conforming issues and ideas or even alternative solutions.

The first lethal blow to liberal democracy by totalitarians is the ‘chilling of speech’. This refers to a situation where individuals or groups refrain from exercising their constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech (both verbal, and symbolic such as organizing peaceful protests) for fear of running afoul of a law or regulation. The ‘chilling of free speech’ is a form of ‘prior restraint’ (a form of censorship that allows the government to review the content of printed materials to decide whether such should be published or not). When free speech is successfully stifled, even an honest opinion could be construed as an incitement by the totalitarian state which then uses it as a pretext to come after purveyors of the speech it does not like. As the American jurist Wendell Holmes famously put it in Gitlow v New York (1925), “Every idea is an incitement… The only difference between the expression of an opinion and an incitement in the narrower sense is the speaker’s enthusiasm for the results”.

Totalitarians come in different guises, usually rationalizing their desire to chill free speech by hiding under higher values. A good example is the ‘end of politics’ sycophants in the Tinubu government. This is an overzealous but self-serving group which, in the wake of the Supreme Court affirmation of Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the President after the controversial 2023 presidential election, began an aggressive quest to muzzle free speech by those they consider as opposition elements. They did so (and still do) using various mantras such as “the time for politicking is over, it is now the time for governance” or “the President should be allowed to concentrate on governance”, the “President should not be distracted”, “those who lost elections should wait until 2027” etc. etc. The irony is that the advocates of “the end of politics” are themselves being political. They are either trying to stifle the voices of opposition or blackmail critics of the government, both of which are needed in a democracy to keep the government on its toes for optimal performance. Ironically, some members of this in-group flaunt their ‘democratic credentials’ by constantly reminding us of their roles in the struggle for the revalidation of MKO Abiola’s mandate.  The truth is that not all who partook in the noble struggle to re-validate MKO Abiola’s mandate were democrats. Some were drawn into the struggle by different motives, including defence of ethnic pride.

Just like the DSS infamously went after people who expressed an honest opinion of supporting an interim government after the 2023 elections and sought to blackmail the public into believing that such expressions of honest opinion amounted to intentions to commit treason, the ‘end of politics’ zealots, (many of who are linked to the government), are going overdrive to criminalize protest. I fail to see any crime not just in peaceful protests but also in the ‘sponsorship’ of such protests – which is actually a way of encouraging citizens to become active participants in the political process. And talking of sponsorship, are various state agencies such as the National Orientation Agencies and others that provide myriad forms of political enlightenment campaigns not also engaging in ‘sponsorship’ when they devise schemes for citizens to identify more with the government of the day, including funding pro-government or counter protests? The only difference is that while one group is presumably ‘sponsored’ to voice its displeasure with the government (which is constitutionally allowed), another group is ‘sponsored’ to identify with the government of the day. Of course supporting citizens to become active participants in the political process through ‘sponsoring’ peaceful protest must be distinguished from sponsoring an insurrection or encouraging violent protest or vandalizing   people’s property, which is condemnable.

In the run-up to the protest, Bayo Onanuga, who had in the aftermath of the 2023 presidential election in Lagos proclaimed himself a Yoruba irredentist and weaponized ethnicity, accused Peter Obi of being the secret sponsor of the #EndBadGovernance protest. Others linked to the government have also variously accused Atiku Abubakar, the North, some Senior Army officers from the North, the Igbos and foreign interest of being the sponsors of the protest. There was also a threat to start a campaign for Igbo Must Go from August 20 2024 to force the Igbos to vacate Lagos and all the states in the South-west (so far no arrest has been made about the sponsors of the genocidal campaign).  Recently, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas, introduced a so-called Counter Subversive Bill 24 (now withdrawn), which proposed harsh penalties for Nigerians who refuse to recite the national anthem, destroy national symbols, or deface places of worship or who organize “an unlawful procession”. I see all these as gangster methods of chilling speech through the spreading of fear across the camps of opposition forces. Once free speech is successfully chilled, our current liberal democracy, as imperfect as it is, would be further corrupted into George Orwell’s dystopian account of a totalitarian state in his book, ‘Nineteen-Eighty-Four’. Since the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, it is important that anti-democratic forces, in whatever guises they come, are not allowed to gain an upper hand. It is germane to note that the very First Amendment to the American Constitution in 1791 was to protect freedom of speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. This is because free speech, and the marketplace of ideas which it creates, is the foundational structure of democracy. Without it, democracy dies.

** Jideofor Adibe is a professor of Political Science at Nasarawa State University, Keffi.

Deryl McKissack is no stranger to spotting toxic traits.

McKissack, 63, is the founder and CEO of Washington D.C.-based construction firm McKissack & McKissack, which she launched with $1,000 from her savings in 1990. She churned through employees who weren’t the right fit in her company’s early years and the business struggled, she says.

Finding the right talent helped grow her company, which now brings in $25 million per year in revenue, according to documents reviewed by CNBC Make It.

These three red flags stand out the most when McKissack is hiring employees or evaluating her current talent, she says.

People who lack integrity

Every boss needs to be able to trust their employees, McKissack says. People who lack integrity are a problem, especially managers who don’t give their teams proper credit.

Alarm bells go off in her head “if someone is saying ‘I did this’ the whole time, and they’re not giving credit to their team,” McKissack says.

McKissack isn’t the only person who says a lack of integrity is a red flag among employees: Heidi K. Gardner, a professional leadership advisor and distinguished fellow at Harvard Law School, similarly calls out workers who pass off other people’s work as their own. It’s unethical, and it gives off the impression that you don’t respect your colleagues, Gardner told Make It last year.

“Maybe they’re unable to actually see how much value the people around them bring to their own success,” she said. “And that inability to appreciate other people’s contributions is a huge red flag for me ... It’s anti-collaborative.”

People who are hard to be around

Nearly every team, no matter your industry, needs people who can work well with others. That’s difficult when your co-workers don’t like being around you, or vice versa.

McKissack says she needs to actually like her employees’ personalities, because if she doesn’t like to be around you, chances are, clients won’t either. “If I don’t want to be in their presence, then no one wants to be in their presence, usually” she says.

Having a warm, inviting personality at work can potentially take you farther in your career than your capabilities and credentials, self-made millionaire and entrepreneur Steve Adcock told Make It in April.

“Your personality will get you 10 times richer than your intelligence,” said Adcock. “I learned that throughout my career, slowly but surely. I worked with a lot of smart people, no doubt about it. But those smartest people in the office weren’t necessarily the ones getting the raises and promotions.”

People who don’t live up to the company mantra

McKissack has a three-word mantra for her business: humble, hungry, smart. She says she picked it up from author and business management expert Patrick Lencioni’s book, “The Ideal Team Player.”

“We have an insatiable appetite for success,” McKissack wrote on LinkedInearlier this year. “Humility drives us to make decisions for the collective good ... [and] we value emotional intelligence because we know that’s what builds strong relationships.”

Expecting employees to embody those three descriptors — humble, hungry, smart — turned McKissack’s firm into a workforce full of people dedicated to the same mission, rather than one that struggled with low employee engagement, she says.

They’re the “three virtues” of successful team players, according to Lencioni’s book.

“I kept saying, ‘We’ve been stagnant for years. Why am I stagnant?’” says McKissack. “But when I made that decision to make our mission larger than just what we do, bricks and mortar, but make it more about the betterment of mankind, is when we really started changing.”

CNBC

Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has said the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) has been hijacked by a cabal around President Bola Tinubu.

The opposition leader said future of the country has been “effectively mortgaged to Tinubu, his family, and associates”, saying that “even after Tinubu leaves office, it will be nearly impossible to break these shackles.”

Atiku in a statement signed by Paul Ibe, his Media Adviser, said, “Just as Alpha Beta, Primero, and others act as Tinubu’s proxies in Lagos, managing critical sectors and generating revenue for him and his family, he has begun to replicate this at the federal level.”

He also expressed surprise at the operations of the NNPC and how the government-owned oil company had put its retail arm under the control of OVH, a company in which Oando, led by Wale Tinubu, owns 49%.

Atiku regretted that his “intention to privatize the NNPC and increase its transparency has been overshadowed by what he describes as the criminal hijack of the NNPC by corporate cabals around the current president.”

He narrated that “In October 2022, just five months before the elections, the NNPC Retail controversially announced it had acquired OVH and all its filling stations. NNPCL already had about 550 filling stations across the country but claimed it was enhancing its capacity by acquiring OVH, which had only 94 stations and 100 others leased.

“The NNPC did not disclose the purchase price of OVH or the terms of the acquisition. A Freedom of Information request by an online medium was also rejected by the NNPC, which claimed to be a private company despite still being government-owned.

“Following this dubious deal, Mele Kyari was controversially retained as NNPC GMD despite his incompetence. Tinubu then appointed his former boss at Mobil, turned ally, Pius Akinyelure, as NNPC Chairman, while he himself took on the role of Minister of Petroleum.

“In a move that defies economic logic, OVH, previously owned by NNPC Retail, has now acquired NNPC Retail. This absurd situation means that Wale Tinubu’s Oando now owns 49% of NNPC Retail. Moreover, Nigeria paid Wale Tinubu a significant sum to facilitate the Tinubu family’s acquisition of the national oil company. This represents a clear case of illogical business transactions and abuse of office by Tinubu, who has prevented NNPC from becoming a public liability company as stipulated by the PIA.”

Atiku acknowledged that the NNPC and its leadership are under legislative investigation but expressed skepticism about the process’s credibility due to the vested interests of those conducting the investigation.

Atiku also commented on the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway project which he said is under litigation.

He said, “The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), a global network of investigative journalists, reported that the coastal highway project has been taken to court and revealed a close relationship between Tinubu’s son, Seyi, and Gilbert Chagoury, who was awarded the contract without competitive bidding.

“I had earlier claimed that the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway project was fraudulent, but the government denied it. Now, the matter is in court. It is also concerning that Chagoury and Tinubu have a business relationship, and their children are business partners, as revealed by the OCCRP.

“This indicates a conflict of interest. It is no surprise that the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway and the Sokoto-Badagry Coastal Highway, which together will cost over $24 billion, were approved without competitive bidding. It seems that whatever Tinubu wants, he gets.” Atiku said.

Daily Trust

The federal government has approved an upward review of the passport fees.

This is contained in a statement by the Service Public Relations Officer (SPRO) of the Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS), Kenneth Udo, on Wednesday in Abuja.

According to him, the new charges take effect from 1 September.

“Based on the review, 32-page passport booklet with five year validity previously charged at N35,000 would now be N50,000 only.

“The 64-page Passport booklet with 10-year validity, which was N70,000, would be N100,000 only.”

However, the statement said the fees remain unchanged in for Nigerians in the Diaspora.

“The Service regrets any inconvenience this increase might cause prospective applicants.

“The service assures Nigerians of unwavering commitment to transparency and quality service delivery at all times.”

NAN

In a country where over 130 million people are trapped in multidimensional poverty, where hunger gnaws at the bellies of millions, and where the echoes of protests against bad governance are still fresh, President Bola Tinubu has committed an unforgivable act of extravagance. His administration’s decision to spend $150 million on a new presidential jet is not just tone-deaf; it is a brazen act of contempt for the very people he was elected to serve.

This move is particularly galling when juxtaposed with the actions of leaders in other parts of the world. U.S. President Joe Biden continues to use a 34-year-old aircraft, which has served multiple American presidents, without so much as a whisper of complaint. Meanwhile, Tinubu, barely a year into his presidency, has deemed it necessary to discard a 19-year-old aircraft—a plane that has served Nigeria through the terms of four presidents—as unfit for use.

The Tinubu government’s rationale for this purchase is as weak as it is insulting. The claim that the old Boeing Business Jet (BBJ) was embarrassing because of mechanical issues on trips abroad is laughable at best. If the American Air Force One, which has been in operation for decades, can be maintained to the highest standards, why couldn’t the federal government ensure the same for its presidential aircraft? This is not about the age of the aircraft; it is about the glaring failure of leadership and a misplaced sense of priority.

The audacity of this purchase, in the face of widespread suffering, is nothing short of scandalous. Nigeria is reeling from economic hardship that has pushed millions into poverty. Basic amenities are out of reach for many, and the cost of living is skyrocketing. Yet, the Presidency finds it appropriate to spend $150 million on a luxury jet, including $50 million on unnecessary retrofits and upgrades. This is the height of irresponsibility, a stark reminder that the Nigerian political elite are grossly disconnected from the reality on the ground.

Oby Ezekwesili, a former Minister of Education, aptly described this situation when she called the Presidency and the National Assembly “bandits” against Nigerians. Her words are a painful truth that resonates deeply with the masses. The political class in Nigeria seems to have abandoned any pretense of serving the public good. Instead, they have chosen to enrich themselves, disregarding the suffering of the very citizens who put them in power.

The timing of this purchase adds salt to the wound. Coming on the heels of the #EndBadGovernment protests—a movement born out of frustration with corruption, mismanagement, and disregard for human life—this action is a slap in the face of every Nigerian who dared to dream of a better country. It is a reminder that, in the ears of those in power, the cries of the masses are mere noise.

This jet is not just a symbol of luxury; it is a symbol of everything that is wrong with Nigerian governance. It represents the skewed priorities of a government that would rather spend billions on personal comfort than address the critical needs of its people. It is a blatant display of power and privilege, a message that the elites will continue to live in opulence while the masses suffer in silence.

Nigerians must not allow this affront to go unanswered. This is not just about a jet; it is about the future of a country where the gap between the rich and the poor grows wider every day. It is about demanding accountability from those in power and insisting that the needs of the people come first. Tinubu’s extravagant purchase is a betrayal of the Nigerian people, and it must not be forgotten or forgiven. It is time for Nigerians to be more determined to hold their leaders accountable, to demand a government that serves the people rather than one that exploits them.

Africa has the youngest population of any continent, and recent protests in Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda suggest growing youth disillusionment. Will they be able to turn discontent into action?

The youth-led protests that have broken out in several African countries over the past weeks should, say observers, serve as warnings that a disillusioned generation blame the elders of the ruling political classes for missed economic opportunities.

From mid-June to early August, young people in Kenya hit the streets protesting against what they described as runaway corruption and high taxes levied by President William Ruto’s regime. In Uganda, what was shaping up as protests against the government in July were nipped in the bud by police after President Yoweri Museveni’s warning that those thinking of such protests “were playing with fire”. Nigeria saw short-lived protests against the poor handling of the economy by President Bola Tinubu’s government.

But beyond these protests, Africa’s demographic bulge finds itself at a crossroads; distrustful of the ruling class but seemingly unable to drive the change.

Last week, more than 400 young people, mostly in their early to mid-20s, converged at the UN offices in Nairobi for the Africa Youth Forum 2024 in order to stimulate an intergenerational dialogue that promotes the perspectives of all age groups in a continent where older ones’ viewpoints are rarely questioned.

“We are here to share our values, our challenges and harmonise the potential within the young people in Africa,” says Mohamed Abdulhalim from the coastal Kenyan county of Lamu.

The continent has the youngest population in the world with more than 400 million people aged between 18 and 35 and by 2030, it is estimated that 42% of all young people entering the workplace will be African.

Abdulhalim says the generational gap that exists between the youth and Africa’s leadership denies young people a chance to show their abilities, energy, and their contribution to the continent’s economy, hence the widespread protests in Kenya and elsewhere in Africa.

“Look, we have the capacity, but we don’t have a platform to showcase [our abilities],” says Abdulhalim. “And that is the reason we went to the streets. We are saying our voices must count, that we must be part of the decision-making process, including those of us from far away in Lamu.”

After the protests in Kenya, the government was forced to drop the contentious finance bill that contained harsh taxation measures. Ruto also disbanded his cabinet hoping the measures would appease the young protesters, or the generation Z. His pleas for dialogue were shrugged off as they demanded that he too, step down.

The young protesters in Kenya styled themselves as “leaderless and tribeless”, thus complicating government efforts to arrange any dialogue. Without dialogue, however, organisers of the Nairobi meeting say Africa’s youth will have no meaningful contribution to state affairs and will always be at the mercy of crafty politicians.

“Dialogue is not being naive,” says Kjell Magne Bondevik, the former prime minister of Norway and founder of the Oslo Center that convened the Nairobi forum. “Dialogue is about listening and learning from each other. It is about identifying common values and strengthening the youth’s participation in political parties.”

Faith Norah Lukosi, a youth representative in a national fund meant to assist young Kenyans set up commercial enterprises has in the past tried to get young people on the negotiating table with mixed success. In 2021, she wrote a scathing piece in the the Daily Nation, where she castigated the youth for sitting on the fence and waiting for handouts from politicians.

“Kenya is ripe for revolution led by youth”, read the title of her article. But they have failed “to portray themselves as the solution, instead flocking around political heavyweights for financial expediency and other short-term goals … easily swayed by the highest financial bidder in the market, regardless of what one stands for,” she wrote.

Lukosi says: “I received so many negative reactions from people thereafter. Some said, ‘Do you want us to burn our country down?’ But I am happy my sentiments have been vindicated in 2024. A revolution is building up and young people are ready for it. Kenya’s gen Zs have led the way. I believe we are on the right trajectory.”

Rwanda has not witnessed the kind of political and economic protests seen in Kenya or Uganda, as young people in the country still feel the best way to forestall such chaotic scenes is by continued government engagement, “something that we have been mentioning over and over again”, says Deborah Mukundwa from the capital, Kigali.

“I think we also need to understand our leaders,” Mukundwa says. “What are they up to and how can the youth contribute into that thought process? For example, I have the privilege of accessing quality education, a privilege of expression and being informed about national matters, but I recognise the majority of young people are lacking such privileges.”

Not just education but digital access is a major challenge for many – in 2021 only 43% of Africans had access to the internet, below a global average of 66%.

As of January 2024, about 74% of web traffic in Africa was via mobile phones, over 14 percentage points higher than the world average. This is down to cost and the availability of infrastructure needed for computers with fixed-line internet connections.

“Youths in Africa lack internet accessibility and have an education system that doesn’t really serve them in order to execute the different agendas and matters that we are talking about at this meeting,” says Mukundwa.

Without physical and intellectual infrastructure, she says Africa’s youth will not reach their potential, will not have any tangible input in the global, regional, or national agendas, nor will they understand what really matters to them and how policies formulated at the highest levels affect them.

“We are lacking that meaningful youth engagement, an engagement that goes beyond inviting young people to forums, inviting them to speak. They need an engagement that enforces that collaboration and partnership to the execution of different projects and agendas, an engagement that is more meaningful and that says, ‘We see you, we see your project, and we support you with resources.’ We are not only present at these forums, but have safe spaces for such engagement,” she says.

Kalonzo Musyoka, a former vice-president and key opposition figure in Kenya, says it will no longer be business as usual. Young people, he says, are offering the continent a new viewpoint and a desire to innovate “as long as they are spared state-sanctioned brutality”.

The Guardian, UK

Israeli military intelligence head leaves post, takes responsibility for Oct. 7 failure

Israel's outgoing head of military intelligence took responsibility for his country's failures to defend its border on Oct. 7 at his resignation ceremony on Wednesday.

Major General Aharon Haliva, a 38-year veteran of the military, announced his resignation in April and was one of a number of senior Israeli commanders who said they had failed to foresee and prevent the deadliest attack in Israel's history.

"The failure of the intelligence corps was my fault," Haliva said at the ceremony on Wednesday, and he called for a national investigation "in order to study" and "understand deeply" the reasons that led to the war between Israel and Hamas.

The Oct. 7 attack badly tarnished the reputation of the Israeli military and intelligence services, previously seen as all but unbeatable by armed Palestinian groups such as Hamas.

In the early hours of the morning of Oct. 7, following an intense rocket barrage, thousands of fighters from Hamas and other groups broke through security barriers around Gaza, surprising Israeli forces and rampaging through communities in southern Israel.

Some 1,200 Israelis and foreigners were killed in the attack, most of them civilians, and about 250 were taken into captivity in Gaza, according to Israeli tallies. Some 109 hostages are believed to still be in Gaza, around a third of whom are thought to be dead.

The head of the armed forces, Lieutenant-General Herzi Halevi, and the head of the domestic intelligence agency Shin Bet, Ronen Bar, both accepted responsibility in the aftermath of the attack but have stayed on while the war in Gaza has continued.

Reuters

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine attacks Moscow in one of largest ever drone strikes on Russian capital

Ukraine attacked Moscow on Wednesday with at least 11 drones that were shot down by air defences in what Russian officials called one of the biggest drone strikes on the capital since the war in Ukraine began in February 2022.

The war, largely a grinding artillery and drone battle across the fields, forests and villages of eastern Ukraine, escalated on Aug. 6 when Ukraine sent thousands of soldiers over the border into Russia's western Kursk region.

For months, Ukraine has also fought an increasingly damaging drone war against the refineries and airfields of Russia, the world's second largest oil exporter, though major drone attacks on the Moscow region - with a population of over 21 million - have been rarer.

Russia's defence ministry said its air defences destroyed a total of 45 drones over Russian territory, including 11 over the Moscow region, 23 over the border region of Bryansk, six over the Belgorod region, three over the Kaluga region and two over the Kursk region.

Some of the drones were shot down over the city of Podolsk, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin said. The city in the Moscow region is some 38 km (24 miles) south of the Kremlin.

"This is one of the largest attempts to attack Moscow using drones ever," Sobyanin said on the Telegram messaging app in the early hours of Wednesday. "The layered defence of Moscow that was created made it possible to successfully repel all the attacks from the enemy UAVs."

Along Moscow's boulevards, the cafes, restaurants and shops of the capital - which has been carefully insulated from the war - were crowded with little sign of concern, while President Vladimir Putin met Chinese premier Li Qiang in the Kremlin.

Two Russian citizens who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity said the foiled drone attack simply showed how well defended Moscow now was, and that Ukraine was "playing with fire" by attacking Russia both in Kursk and in Moscow.

Russia meanwhile is advancing in eastern Ukraine, where it controls about 18% of the territory, and battling to repel Ukraine's incursion into the Kursk region, the biggest foreign attack on Russian territory since World War Two.

Russian media showed unverified footage of drones whirring over the dawn sky of the Moscow region and then being shot down in a ball of flame by air defences.

Moscow's airports, Vnukovo, Domodedovo and Zhukovsky, limited flights for four hours but restarted normal operations from 0330 GMT, Russia's aviation watchdog said.

Sobyanin said that according to preliminary information, there were no injuries or damage reported in the aftermath of the attacks. There were also no casualties or damage reported following the attack on Bryansk in Russia's southwest, the governor of the region, Alexander Bogomaz, wrote on Telegram.

Russia's RIA state news agency reported that two drones were destroyed over the Tula region, which borders the Moscow region to its north. Vasily Golubev, governor of the Rostov region in Russia's southwest, said air defence forces destroyed a Ukraine-launched missile over the region, with no injuries reported.

The Russian defence ministry did not mention either Tula or Rostov in its statement listing destroyed Ukrainian air weapons. Ukraine's military said on Wednesday it overnight struck an S-300 anti-aircraft missile systembased in the Rostov region.

Reuters could not independently verify the reports.

The drone attack on Moscow was on a par with a May 2023 attack when at least eight droneswere destroyed over the capital, a strike Putin said was a Ukrainian attempt to scare and provoke Russia.

In Kursk, Russian war bloggers said intense battles were ongoing along the front in the region where Ukraine has carved out at least 450 square km (175 square miles) of Russian territory.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Russia saved from ‘talks trap’ – Medvedev

Kiev’s decision to launch an offensive on Russian soil has benefited Moscow, since it can no longer be pressured to compromise for the sake of peace, former president Dmitry Medvedev has suggested.

Ukrainian troops occupied some border areas in Kursk Region this month in a move that the country’s leadership claims would strengthen its position in eventual peace talks. However, President Vladimir Putin has ruled out negotiations with Kiev following the incursion, accusing Ukraine of targeting Russian civilians during the attack.

Medvedev, who serves as deputy chair of the Russian Security Council, argued that Russia should take a more hardline position in response to the incursion.

”In my view, there was a theoretical threat of a talks trap, which our nation could fall into under certain circumstances. That is, unnecessary early peace negotiations, offered by the international community and imposed on the Kiev regime,” he wrote on social media on Wednesday.

”After the neo-Nazis committed an act of terrorism in Kursk Region, every piece got into its place,” he added. “Everyone realizes that there can be NO TALKS BEFORE THE ENEMY IS FULLY DEFEATED!”

Medvedev lashed out specifically at Britain and its former prime minister Boris Johnson, who enthusiastically welcomed Kiev’s move. The UK has hurt Ukraine a lot with its support, since it led to unnecessary destruction and loss of life, Medvedev said.

Before the offensive started, Moscow was willing to order a ceasefire in exchange for Kiev renouncing its aspirations for NATO membership and pulling troops out of all territories claimed by Russia.

Politico reported on Monday that the Ukrainian government wanted to have mediated, indirect talks with Russia similar to those that resulted in the Black Sea grain initiative, an arrangement that provided safe passage to certain merchant ships sailing to or from Ukrainian ports. The 2022 deal was technically two separate agreements that Russia and Ukraine signed with Türkiye and the UN, but not with each other.

Ukrainian officials have told the outlet that they are hoping for the same model and expect Russia to accept an outcome based on the so-called ‘peace formula’ penned by the country’s leader Vladimir Zelensky in 2022. Moscow has rejected his proposal from the start, calling it a de facto demand for capitulation that is detached from reality.

Reuters/RT