In 1853, under orders from President Millard Fillmore, US Navy Commodore Matthew Perry led four warships on a mission to persuade Japan to end its 200-year-old isolationist policy. When he arrived at what is now Tokyo Bay, Perry delivered an ultimatum to the Tokugawa shogunate: open up to trade with the United States or face the consequences.

The arrival of these “black ships” (so named for the dark smoke emitted by their coal-fueled steam engines) was a pivotal moment. Confronted with this impressive display of technological prowess – which exemplified the industrial power that had already enabled the British Empire to dominate much of the world – the shogunate reluctantly agreed to Perry’s demands, leading to the signing of the Treaty of Kanagawa in 1854. One year later, the shogunate received its first steam-engine-powered warship from the Dutch as a token of appreciation.

While technology can pose a threat, it also powers critical infrastructure like schools and hospitals. Over the past century, in particular, the sovereign individual has become inextricably linked to a vast array of technologies, including interconnected systems like energy grids, the internet, mobile phones, and now artificial-intelligence chatbots.

As the Perry expedition showed, technology is also the backbone of state military sovereignty. Thanks to its technological dominance, the US has become the world’s leading military power, with more than 750 bases in 80 countries – three times as many as all other countries combined.

But this picture of state sovereignty is rapidly changing. While America’s financial sovereignty, underpinned by the dollar’s status as a global reserve currency, remains intact, its economic sovereignty is increasingly challenged by a rising China. In purchasing-power-parity terms, China surpassed the US to become the world’s largest economy in 2014. With manufacturing output roughly equal to the US and the European Union combined, China is the top trading partner of more than 120 countries.

Both superpowers are currently competing to control the design, development, and production of critical technologies such as semiconductors, AI, synthetic biology, quantum computing, and blockchain. A 2023 study commissioned by the US State Department, which tracksresearch contributions across 64 emerging technologies, showed that China is leading the US in more than 80% of these areas, with the US a close second.

As the US-China rivalry escalates in the technological arena, countries around the world will be forced to pick a side and adopt their chosen ally’s distinct technologies, standards, values, and supply chains. This could usher in a new era of technological colonialism, undermining global stability.

Curiously, however, neither the US nor China have been able to dominate the semiconductor industry, since Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) and Samsung in South Korea are the only manufacturers capable of producing semiconductors smaller than five nanometers. To change this, both superpowers are constructing what we call “technology sovereignty circles” – spheres of influence that other countries must join to access these critical technologies.

Unlike the colonialism of old, techno-colonialism is not about seizing territory but about controlling the technologies that underpin the world economy and our daily lives. To achieve this, the US and China are increasingly onshoring the most innovative and complex segments of global supply chains, thereby creating strategic chokepoints.

China, for example, has gained control of supply chains for critical raw materials, enabling it to become the world’s leading producer of electric vehicles. Meanwhile, the US leads in chip-design software thanks to companies like Cadence Design Systems and Synopsys.

Europe, too, is keen to establish itself as a key player in this rapidly evolving sector. Beyond hosting the Dutch company ASML, which produces extreme ultraviolet lithography systems crucial for advanced-chip manufacturing, the European Union is a net importer of AI research talent. It is also home to more STEM students and computer scientists and creates more startupsthan the US.

When onshoring proves impossible, technology sovereignty circles act as another, subtler form of coercion. By cultivating deeply entrenched asymmetric dependencies, they effectively push countries into techno-economic servitude.

The United Kingdom is a prime example. In 2020, the US forced the UK to exclude Chinese technology firm Huawei from its 5G network, threatening to cut off access to America’s intelligence apparatus and chip-design software. Similarly, the Netherlands was pressured to stop supplying China with ASML machinery in early January. In response, China has tightened its grip on critical materials by restricting exports of gallium and germanium, key inputs for microchips and solar panels.

Every country could soon face its own black-ship moment. Those without the protection provided by ownership of critical technologies risk becoming techno-colonies, serving the needs of their technological sovereigns by manufacturing simple electronics, refining rare metals, labeling data sets, or hosting cloud services – from physical mines to data mines. Countries that fail to align with either the US or China will find themselves relegated to the status of impoverished technological backwaters.

Amid heightened geopolitical tensions, emerging technologies such as quantum computing, AI, blockchain, and synthetic biology promise to push the boundaries of human discovery. As we explain in our forthcoming book, The Team of 8 Billion, the key question is whether these technological innovations will be controlled by a select few as instruments of subjugation or democratized to foster shared prosperity. Instead of ushering in an era of destructive techno-colonialism, these new technologies could help revitalize our rules-based international order and upgrade collective governance.

But to achieve this, we must replace today’s black ships with something humanity has yet to invent: a framework for planetary cooperation based on a unified substrate of human interests. Such a framework must reflect our growing interconnectedness and technological dependencies, as well as the ever-global challenges we face, from war and nuclear proliferation to pandemics and climate change.

Techno-colonialism represents the latest iteration of the age-old struggle for global dominance. Will we become the architects of our own doom, or the champions of a brighter future? For better or worse, the answer is in our hands.

Project Syndicate

Emery Wells put himself on the path to a dream career by recklessly buying a $17,500 camera that he definitely couldn’t afford.

Wells, 42, is the CEO of Frame.io, a video collaboration software business he co-founded in 2014 and sold to Adobe for $1.275 billion in 2021.

Nearly two decades ago, he was a 25-year-old freelance video editor who’d recently quit bartending in New York to pursue a full-time film career. At an industry trade show in 2006, he watched a startup called Red Digital Cinema announce its intention to build a digital camera high-quality enough for big-budget Hollywood productions.

Without hesitating, a colleague put down a $1,000 deposit to get on the product’s waitlist. “I was shocked,” Wells tells CNBC Make It. “And out of, really, just jealousy, I said: ‘Well, I’m signing up [too].’”

The deposit nearly maxed out his credit card’s $1,200 limit, he recalls: “I was already in debt ... and I think I may have had a few hundred dollars in my bank account at the time.” When his Red One camera shipped a couple years later, he found a way to scrounge up the rest of its cost.

Being among the few people in New York to own one altered the trajectory of Wells’ career, he says. Suddenly, he was in high demand. By 2014, his post-production company Katabatic Digital brought in more than $1 million in annual revenue from clients like Coca-Cola and Pfizer.

But the real money, it turns out, was in a piece of software built by Wells and Katabatic engineer John Traver — a platform for people to collaboratively give feedback on videos throughout the post-production process. When they launched Frame.io as a standalone tool, more than 15,000 clients signed up.

Wells faced a decision: Focus on the established, stable business or dedicate himself to a hot, but unproven, startup? He opted for the latter, shuttering Katabatic to focus on Frame.io full-time.

The startup raised more than $80 millionin funding over the next five years, and as Wells and Traver weighed an IPO, Adobe made them a billion-dollar offer they couldn’t refuse.

Here, Wells discusses the risks of giving up a sure thing to take a chance on a bigger opportunity and the reckless purchase that made it all possible.

CNBC Make It: You built Katabatic Digital into a successful business. What made you start thinking about sacrificing it for something bigger?

Wells: Post-production is client service work. Sometimes you have clients. Sometimes you don’t, and there’s nothing to do.

I hired John Traver to do post-production stuff, but he had a minor in computer science. We started tinkering on software ideas over the course of several months. I don’t think there was a super serious goal of creating a software company, because we didn’t know that we could.

We said, “Why don’t we spend some time building something that we know really, really well, that we know there’s a market for, we know we can solve the problem better, and we know we could make some money doing it?”

When did you realize Frame.io might be big enough that you’d have to shift your focus away from Katabatic? How did you make that decision?

In 2014, we were trying to raise money for Frame.io. One serial entrepreneur told us, “I would never give you $1, and nor would any other investor, until you’re all in. Not 99%. You cannot have this other thing. I’m not giving you money to do a side project.”

It really resonated with me. I was like, “Oh, gosh. Do I have to shut down? What do I do?”

As we got closer to the launch, where people could pay for Frame.io and use it, my time naturally shifted towards it. I started turning down work from clients, because we were spending all of our time trying to get this thing ready.

I think it was starting to form in my mind: If we’re going to really go for this, we have to really go for it.

Did it feel like a major risk to abandon Katabatic for something much less certain?

I’d spent almost a decade building this post-production company from scratch. I probably had a few hundred thousand dollars in savings, and I spent a lot of that money on Frame.io. So, yeah, it was definitely a huge risk.

But it was a calculated one, and I was getting signals on the success of Frame.io along the way [from customers and investors] that encouraged me to take more risk and more risk and more risk. In the first 90 days after we publicly launched, we were doing $30,000 of monthly recurring revenue. We raised a $2 million seed round from Accel.

That was the moment I was like, “OK.” I don’t think I ever personally took another post-production job at that point.

Did you always think Frame.io could become a billion-dollar company? Was it a big, “swing for the fences” idea?

Frame.io is the idea that became bigger and bigger and bigger the more time we spent thinking about it. When we launched, I wouldn’t say I had conviction that it was going to be a billion-dollar business.

I think that’s true for a lot of founders. Not to compare myself to Mark Zuckerberg, but there’s these fun interviews of Mark from the early daystalking about how big Facebook was going to get. He’s like, “I don’t think we’re ever going to [grow beyond college students].”

It just happens. You go from $1 million in revenue to $3 million to $6 million. Then you’re pitching how you’re going to get to $10 million, $20 million and beyond. And I’m like, “Are we? I don’t know if we’re really going to get there.”

Every single fundraising round, you have to sell that pitch to every investor you talk to — but if I’m being honest, I [didn’t] know.

CNBC

The Federal Government has declared that the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited does not have the funds required to rebuild old pipelines.

The Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, (Oil), Heineken Lokpobiri, stated this at the just concluded Energy and Labour Summit 2024 organised by the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria in Abuja.

Lokpobiri, while speaking about the divestment of international oil companies and the need to ramp up production, emphasised that Nigeria also needs to repair its pipelines, which he said are old, corroded, and expired.

He noted that even if the country can produce more than 1.7 million barrels of crude oil, the problem is how to evacuate it to the terminal.

“Part of our problem is that pipelines that were traditionally transporting our crude were built in the 1960s and the 1970s and the lifespan is since over. We have identified that even when we can produce, evacuation is a big problem.

“The reason why pipeline vandalism is very easy to do is because the pipelines have all expired they completely corroded and so, anybody can just go and tap it and the thing is busted; but there are better technologies which are more expensive, there are better pipelines that other people are using in other countries, but they are not cheap, We also need to change our model.

“Now, the NNPC that is our joint venture partner, do they have the money to be able to replace these pipelines? I think NNPC will speak for themselves whether they have the money to be able to do that, and I don’t think they have,” Lokpobiri declared.

Consequently, he called for public-private partnerships to fix the old pipelines, saying, “That is why we have to go for the global model – PPP. We have to get the private sector to come in.

For the private sector to come into any country to invest, he said they must have confidence in such a country, stressing that this was lacking in the past 12 years when there was no foreign investment in the nation’s oil company.

“When this government, came we tried to rebuild the confidence and investors are coming,” Lokpobiri added.

The oil minister maintained that the smuggling of fuel from Nigeria to other neighbouring countries is because the NNPC imports and sells below the landing cost.

“Nigeria plays a very critical role in the energy security in Africa. That is why whatever PMS we import into Nigeria finds its way to the whole of West Africa. That is why smuggling cannot stop. If NNPC Imports PMS and sells to marketers at perhaps N600 or below, there’s no way that smuggling can stop,’ saying the security agents at the borders are also involved.

“When smugglers are taking the products outside the country, even if you put all the policemen on the road, they are Nigerians; you and I know the answer. If you put all the customs men on the road, they are Nigerians, you and I know what the problem is, and that is why I’m saying that for Africa to attain energy

security, Nigeria has to play a very strategic role,” he remarked.

On the supply of crude to Dangote and other local refineries, he expressed fear that this may suffer a setback except production is ramped up.

“Our ambition is to ramp up production. It is only when we ramp on production that the midstream and the downstream can also be successful. You know we resolve at the Federal Executive Council to sell crude to local refineries – Dangote and the other refineries that are refining products for local consumption.

“But the bigger challenge is whether we have enough quantity to be able to supply them because of certain things that happened before we came. You will agree with me that when I became minister one year ago, we were doing barely about a million barrels, but today we’re doing 1.7mbpd approximately, inclusive of condensate,” Lokpobiri said.

He added, “Supporting local refining is the way to go. We can look for investors to explore and ring out this crude, so I will be able to meet both our domestic obligation and also export some to be able to raise more dollars and meet our obligations.

“We are committed to ensuring we support local refineries with all the feed-stock. If you must supply refineries in Nigeria and you don’t have the crude to supply, it remains something that is written beautifully in a law.”

He said the Federal Government would ensure there is healthy competition by being fair to both the small and the big refiners.

Punch

Many Nigerians have condemned the early Sunday arrest of a journalist, Adejuwon Soyinka, at the Muhammed Murtala International Airport, Lagos, on his arrival from the United Kingdom. They also expressed worry over the growing trend of harassment of journalists in the country.

SSS operatives arrested Soyinka at the airport on his arrival via a Virgin Atlantic flight.

In a flood of reactions following story of the arrest on Sunday, many Nigerians spontaneously expressed their outrage about the arrest and detention.

After being picked up at the airport, Soyinka was driven to the SSS headquarters annexe in Ikoyi, Lagos, and released after about six hours of detention.

SSS operatives seized his passport to release him on bail.

The reason for Soyinka’s arrest is still unknown, although SSS said without giving details that its operatives arrested him based on a request from another agency.

Meanwhile, hours after his release, many Nigerians continued to react in anger to the tweeted story of the detention of the journalist.

Many of the commentators painted a picture of how it has become President Bola Tinubu’s government’s stock-in-trade to harass journalists and suppress dissenting and critical voices.

They said Soyinka’s arrest is the latest in a series of government attempts to limit Nigeria’s civic space and curtail the right to freedom of expression.

Nigerians react in anger

“Hunt for Journalists up and down in just 1 year and 3 months. Is there still light at the end of the Nigeria tunnel?” an X user, @Obed Obaa, wrote.

Another user, @Amourab, said Soyinka’s arrest might be foretelling a broader picture. “They’re going for the journalists. I pray Nigerians wake up one day to see the bigger picture and fight for a country that works,” the tweet read.

@MOOD OBIDIENT stressed the importance of freedom of the press and urged Nigerians to rise against tyranny. “Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy. Nigeria currently runs a ‘Kleptocracy’ system of Government. The citizens must rise against tyranny.”

“Why is the government having issues with journalists, are we back to the military regime?” @Aremu Adeola, another X user, questioned.

Another user, @Giovanni, wrote: “The ability of a free and independent press to hold political leaders accountable is what makes open government possible—it is the heartbeat of democracy. This recent attack on investigative journalists is quite worrisome and should be condemned!”

Many others, like @SirMcAwesome247, described the attacks on the Fourth Estate of the Realm as “worrisome”.

“Our journalists should not be harassed into a position where they’re unable to do their jobs,” the reply post read.

@Future stated: “First it was PIDOM now Adejuwon. Freedom of Speech is gradually dying in Nigeria. I once knew a Country.”

@OnileGogoro cried out to Elon Musk, who owns X, to help protect journalists. The user wrote, “Really dangerous times for Investigative Journalists in Nigeria @elonmusk, please lend us your voice! The Nigerian Government is trying to silence free speech and journalists.”

Deteriorating state of press freedom

Nigerian authorities recently said that some Nigerians who played key roles in the recent #EndBadGovernance protests had been placed on watchlist at the nation’s international airports.

It is unclear if Soyinka’s arrest is related to that controversial action, although the journalist is not publicly known to have participated in organising and executing the protest.

Several journalists covering the ten-day protest were attacked and brutalised by security agents, including personnel of the SSS.

In one shocking case in Abuja, operatives shot live ammunition at a car carrying some journalists who were on duty at the Moshood Abiola Stadium, where peaceful protesters gathered.

Nigerian journalists and activists have continuously decried the deteriorating state of press freedom in Nigeria, especially in the last one year under Tinubu.

More than 100 attacks on journalists have been verified in Nigeria this year, according to the Press Attack Tracker. The attacks on the press and journalists are primarily by state actors, with the police accounting for almost 50 per cent of all harassment faced by journalists in the first half of the year.

The military and the SSS are also prominent culprits, arbitrarily arresting and detaining journalists unlawfully.

Notable cases

On Wednesday, 1 May, a journalist with the Foundation for Investigative Journalism (FIJ), Daniel Ojukwu, was abducted by the Intelligence Response Team (IRT) of the Inspector General of Police for a story which revealed that the senior special assistant to former President Muhammad Buhari on sustainable development goals (SSAP-SDGs), Adejoke Orelope-Adefulire, allegedly paid N147 million to a restaurant for the construction of classrooms in Lagos.

Also, in May, another journalist with WikkiTimes, Yawale Adamu, was reportedly being threatened by a political aide to the member of the House of Representatives representing the Jama’are Itas Federal Constituency in the National Assembly over a story he did accusing the lawmaker of politicising distribution of aid from the North East Development Commission (NEDC).

Also in May, the Nigerian Police Force Cybercrime Centre (NPF-NCCC) detained the Executive Director of the International Centre for Investigative Reporting (ICIR), Dayo Aiyetan, and an investigative journalist with the platform, Nurudeen Akewushola, for over nine hours after honouring their invitation.

In June, PREMIUM TIMES reporter Emmanuel Agbo was also summonedover a yet-to-be-published report he was working on.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) reported that at least 56 journalists were assaulted or harassed by security forces or unidentified citizens while covering the recent anti-government #EndBadGovernance demonstrations.

Recently, the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) reported that Nigeria remained one of West Africa’s most dangerous and difficult countries for journalists.

According to RSF, which ranked Nigeria 123 of 180 countries in its global press freedom report for 2023, Nigerian journalists are regularly monitored, attacked and arbitrarily arrested, and “crimes committed against journalists continue to go unpunished, even when the perpetrators are known or apprehended.”

In May, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and the Nigerian Guild of Editors called on the Nigerian authorities to stop using repressive and anti-media laws such as the Cybercrime Act and some codes of the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) to target, intimidate, and harass journalists and media houses.

UNESCO also recently called on all authorities worldwide to prioritise the duty and responsibility to ensure the safety of journalists covering protests, in accordance with international norms and human rights obligations.

However, despite calls and criticism, the Security continued to attack and also refused to respond to calls on the need to stop attacking journalists in Nigeria.

PT

Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun's ascent to the position of acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) comes at a time when the Supreme Court and the Nigerian judiciary are grappling with an unprecedented crisis of public confidence. Her appointment, shrouded in controversy due to her involvement in the widely criticized Imo State governorship decision of 2020, only deepens the skepticism of a public already weary of a judiciary perceived as corrupt, inconsistent, and subservient to political powers.

The task before Kekere-Ekun is monumental: to restore the integrity of an institution that has, over the past years, become synonymous with compromised verdicts and opaque practices. This challenge is compounded by her own controversial past, which threatens to overshadow her tenure before it even begins. However, it is not an impossible task. With decisive actions and unwavering commitment to judicial reform, she can set the Nigerian judiciary on a path to redemption.

One of the most glaring issues undermining the judiciary is the lack of transparency in its operations, particularly in the areas of financial management, appointment processes, and disciplinary actions. Kekere-Ekun must prioritize opening up these processes to public scrutiny. The National Judicial Council (NJC) should adopt a more transparent system for the appointment of judges, ensuring that merit, rather than political connections, is the guiding principle. Additionally, disciplinary measures against erring judges must be stringent and publicized to demonstrate a zero-tolerance policy towards corruption.

The Nigerian judiciary's perceived subservience to the executive branch is another critical issue. Recent administrations have been accused of exerting undue influence over judicial appointments and decisions, leading to a judiciary that often appears to be an extension of the ruling party rather than an independent arbiter of justice. Kekere-Ekun must assert the independence of the judiciary by resisting any attempts at political interference. This includes standing firm against any pressure to deliver judgments that favour the government or powerful individuals. Upholding the sanctity of the judiciary requires courage, and Kekere-Ekun must demonstrate this by ensuring that justice is not only done but seen to be done.

Inconsistent and contradictory judgments have plagued the Nigerian judiciary, leading to confusion and further eroding public trust. The Imo State governorship verdict, where a candidate who came fourth in the election was declared the winner, is a prime example of such inconsistencies. Despite her involvement in this disgraceful judicial faux pas, Kekere-Ekun must lead efforts to establish clear, consistent judicial precedents. This can be achieved by fostering a culture of rigorous legal reasoning and adherence to established legal principles among judges. The Supreme Court, under her leadership, must become a beacon of clarity and consistency in the interpretation of the law.

Restoring public confidence in the judiciary also requires rebuilding the relationship between the courts and the public. Kekere-Ekun must be proactive in engaging with civil society, the legal community, and the broader public to understand their concerns and expectations. Regular communication, transparency in court proceedings, and the inclusion of public input in judicial reforms can help bridge the gap between the judiciary and the people it serves. Additionally, addressing the long-standing issue of judicial delays, which frustrate litigants and contribute to the perception of inefficiency, should be a top priority.

Finally, Kekere-Ekun must recognize that her legacy will be defined by her ability to restore the Supreme Court's reputation. This requires not only delivering justice but also ensuring that the court is above reproach. She must take a firm stand against any form of corruption within the judiciary, and her actions must reflect a commitment to ethical standards that inspire confidence. Her pledge to restore public confidence must be matched by tangible actions that address the systemic issues within the judiciary.

In conclusion, Kudirat Kekere-Ekun's appointment as acting Chief Justice of Nigeria presents both a challenge and an opportunity. While her past decisions have cast a shadow over her reputation, her tenure as CJN offers a chance to turn the tide and restore the judiciary's standing. The road to redemption is long and fraught with obstacles, but with bold reforms, a commitment to transparency, and a steadfast defense of judicial independence, Kekere-Ekun can lay the foundation for a judiciary that the Nigerian people can once again trust and respect.

Members of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN), better known as Shi’ites, have clashed with the police in Abuja.

The brawl occurred on Sunday at the Wuse area of the federal capital territory (FCT) during the Arba’een symbolic trek observed by IMN members.

In a statement, Josephine Adeh, FCT police spokesperson, claimed members of the group attacked and killed two officers.

The police spokesperson added that three officers were rushed to the hospital for medical attention after the incident.

“The FCT police command wishes to confirm an unprovoked attack by the proscribed Islamic Movement of Nigeria, popularly known as the ‘Shi’ite’ group, on some personnel of the Nigeria Police Force attached to FCT command at Wuse Junction by traffic light, where two (2) police personnel were killed, three left unconscious in the hospital, and three (3) Police patrol vehicles set ablaze,” the statement reads.

“The proscribed organisation attacked the police checkpoint unprovoked, wielding machetes, improvised explosive devices (locally made bombs in bottles with kerosene), and knives.”

Adeh said several arrests have been made, adding that normalcy has returned to the area.

‘NUMEROUS MEMBERS KILLED’

In a statement, Sidi Mainasara, spokesperson of IMN, alleged that police killed “numerous members” of the group during the procession.

“We wish to inform the public that police have attacked the ongoing Arba’een Symbolic Trek at Wuse District in Abuja and killed numerous mourners. While trying to disperse the Arbaeen Trek, the police killed and injured numerous mourners,” the statement reads.

“Presently, security agents are busy arresting the Arbaeen Trek mourners.

“Medical practitioners are attending to those critically injured, and details of those killed, injured, and arrested will be made available to members of the press in due course.

“Before the commencement of the trek, we have searched all participants to ensure no infiltration, and the programme will end as scheduled.

“The Arbeen Trek that was conducted yesterday at Masaka and Zuba axis ended peacefully and successfully.”

The Cable

Israel and Hezbollah in major missile exchange as escalation fears grow

Hezbollah launched hundreds of rockets and drones at Israel early on Sunday, as Israel's military said it struck Lebanon with around 100 jets to thwart a larger attack, in one of the biggest clashes in more than 10 months of border warfare.

Missiles were visible curling up through the dawn sky, dark vapour trails behind them, as an air raid siren sounded in Israel and a distant blast lit the horizon, while smoke rose over houses in Khiam in southern Lebanon.

On Sunday evening, sirens sounded in Rishon Letsiyon, central Israel, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) said, and added that one projectile had been identified crossing from the southern Gaza Strip and falling in an open area. The armed wing of Hamas said it had fired an "M90" rocket at Tel Aviv.

Any major spillover in the fighting, which began in parallel with the war in Gaza, risks morphing into a regional conflagration drawing in Hezbollah's backer Iran and Israel's main ally the United States.

With three deaths confirmed in Lebanon and one in Israel, both sides indicated they were happy to avoid further escalation for now, but warned that there could be more strikes to come.

Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said the Iranian-backed group's barrage, a reprisal for the assassination of senior commander Fuad Shukr last month, had been completed "as planned".

However, the group would assess the impact of its strikes and "if the result is not enough, then we retain the right to respond another time", he said.

Israel's foreign minister said the country did not seek a full-scale war, but Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned: "This is not the end of the story."

Earlier, Netanyahu had said: "We are determined to do everything we can to defend our country ... whoever harms us - we harm him".

The two sides have exchanged messages that neither wants to escalate further, with the main gist being that the exchange was "done", two diplomats told Reuters.

Expectations of an escalation had risen since a missile strike in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights last month killed 12 youths and the Israeli military assassinated Shukr in Beirut in response.

Hezbollah had delayed its retaliation to give time for ceasefire talks, and had calibrated its attack to avoid triggering a full-scale war, a Hezbollah official said.

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered the presence of two aircraft carrier strike groups in the Middle East, bolstering the U.S. military presence. Earlier, top U.S. General C.Q. Brown arrived in Israel for talks with military leaders.

Meanwhile in Gaza, the Israeli offensive continued, with air strikes killing at least five Palestinians in Gaza City early on Monday, according to the official Palestinian news agency Wafa.

There was no agreement in the Gaza ceasefire talks that took place in Cairo, with neither Hamas nor Israel agreeing to several compromises presented by mediators, although a senior U.S. official, described the talks as "constructive" and said the process would continue in the coming days.

DENSE BOMBARDMENT

Israel's air strikes started before Hezbollah began its barrage, Nasrallah said. Netanyahu said these "pre-emptive" strikes had foiled a much larger Hezbollah barrage but Nasrallah said they had had little impact.

Hezbollah's own rocket and drone strikes were focused on an intelligence base near Tel Aviv, Nasrallah said. Netanyahu said all the drones targeting what he called a strategic location in central Israel were intercepted.

A security source in Lebanon said at least 40 Israeli strikes had hit various towns in the country's south in one of the densest bombardments since hostilities began in October.

Hezbollah said the strikes killed two of its fighters in al-Tiri. The Hezbollah-allied Shi'ite Muslim group Amal said a strike on Khiam killed one of its fighters.

Israel's military said a naval soldier was killed and two wounded.

Lebanon's caretaker prime minister, Najib Mikati, met cabinet ministers at a session of the national emergency committee.

Flights to and from Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv were suspended for around 90 minutes. Some flights to and from Beirut were also halted, stranding passengers.

WARNING SIRENS

In northern Israel, warning sirens sounded and explosions were heard in several areas as Israel's Iron Dome aerial defence system shot down rockets coming from southern Lebanon.

"Israel should, as it did this morning, deliver a pre-emptive strike. But if Hezbollah continues, Israel should strike very hard to remove the threat from Hezbollah once and for all," said Yuval Peleg, 73, from Haifa.

A resident of the southern Lebanese town of Zibqeen told Reuters he had awakened "to the sound of planes and the loud explosions of rockets - even before the dawn prayer. It felt like the apocalypse."

The White House said U.S. President Joe Biden was following events. "We will keep supporting Israel's right to defend itself, and we will keep working for regional stability," National Security Council spokesperson Sean Savett said.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was "deeply concerned" by the escalation between Israel and Hezbollah and called on both parties to immediately return to a cessation of hostilities, his spokesperson said.

Egypt and Jordan also warned against escalation.

The United States was not involved in Israel's strikes on Sunday, but provided some intelligence about incoming Hezbollah attacks, a U.S. official said.

Hezbollah fired missiles at Israel immediately after the Oct. 7 attacks by Hamas gunmen on Israel. Hezbollah and Israel have been exchanging fire constantly ever since, while avoiding a major escalation as war rages in Gaza to the south.

That precarious balance appeared to shift after the strike in the Golan Heights, for which Hezbollah denied responsibility, and the subsequent assassination of Shukr, one of Hezbollah's most senior military commanders.

Shukr's death in an air strike was quickly followed by the assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, which led to vows of reprisals against Israel by Iran.

Reuters

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Russian attacks on Ukraine kill 4, injure 37

Russia launched attacks on northern, eastern and southern Ukraine, killing at least four people and injuring 37, Ukrainian military and local authorities said on Sunday.

Overnight attacks targeted Ukraine's frontline regions of Chernihiv, Sumy, Kharkiv and Donetsk, Ukraine's air force said on the Telegram messaging app.

Russia has been pummelling Ukrainian border regions with strikes, and Kyiv said its surprise incursion earlier this month into Russia's Kursk regionaimed to hinder Moscow's ability to stage such attacks.

"Most of the missiles did not reach their targets," the air force said, adding that Russia launched an Iskander-M ballistic missile, an Iskander-K cruise missile and six guided air missiles. It did not specify how many were destroyed.

A missile attack on the northern region of Sumy killed one person, injuring at least 16 more, including three children, local authorities said on Telegram.

Oleh Sinehubov, governor of the Kharkiv region in the east, posted that at least 13 people were injured in the Russian attacks, including a 4-year-old child.

Ihor Terekhov, mayor of Kharkiv city, said a gas pipeline was damaged in the city and at least two houses were destroyed and 10 damaged.

The air force said Russia launched nine attack drones, with Ukraine's air defence systems destroying eight of them over the Mykolaiv region.

Russian attacks continued throughout the day in the southern region of Kherson, killing one person and injuring six more, according to Roman Mrochko, head of Kherson city's military administration.

Regional prosecutors in Sumy said an aerial bomb attack on Sunday afternoon struck a residential neighbourhood in the Svesa village, killing two people and injuring two more.

Reuters could not independently verify the reports. There was no immediate comment from Russia.

Both sides deny targeting civilians in the war that Russia launched with a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukrainian drone strikes apartment block deep inside Russia

Ukrainian kamikaze drones have hit high-rise residential buildings in Russia’s Saratov Region, Governor Roman Busargin said in the early hours of Monday.

According to Busargin, the air defenses responded to the attack, but falling “drone fragments” hit houses in the cities of Saratov and Engels.

A video posted on Telegram news channel Mash shows the moment when the drone hit the tall apartment block in Saratov, a city of 950,000 people in western Russian. 

Reuters/RT

Amid the greatest crisis of judicial authority since Nigeria’s independence in 1960, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on 23 August 2024 swore in an Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN). For the new Chief Justice, this challenge is also an opportunity to articulate an agenda for reform that can restore public trust in the judiciary. Such an agenda must address the following:

• ensuring merit-based judicial appointments;
• addressing the problem of abuse of interim injunctions, ex-parteorders, and conflicting judgments;
• enhancing judicial discipline and accountability;
• addressing the crisis of political cases, election petitions, and judicialization of politics; and
• reform of the Supreme Court.

1. Judicial Appointments

The National Judicial Council (NJC), which oversees judicial appointments and is led by the CJN, has been severely criticism for mishandling judicial appointments. In 2020, for instance, it authorised 15 vacancies for the Federal Capital Territory High Court but nominated 34 for appointment. The NJC has also been accused of retrenching its Procedural Rules for judicial appointments, thereby undermining merit-based appointments; compromising judicial integrity; and breeding a loss of confidence in the judiciary. Against this background, it is of the utmost importance that the new CJN commits explicitly to a policy of restoring integrity and merit to judicial appointments through the introduction of transparent processes of advertisement of vacancies; nomination of candidates, interviews, short-listing, and selection.

1. Conflicting Judgements and Abuse of Interim Injunctions

Rule 3 (3.5) of the Judicial Code of Conductprovides that “a Judicial Officer must avoid the abuse of the power of issuing interim injunctions, ex parte.” Although the standards governing interim injunctions are very well established in Nigeria, these are often either disregarded or abused without consequences. Equally, courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction routinely issue conflicting orders that seem almost calculated to damage the institution of the judiciary. It is suggested that:

• Priority should be accorded to monitoring and reporting interim or ex parte orders by trial judges. There should also be clear consequences attached to a breach of the Judicial Code of Conduct.
• Judicial appraisals should be both quantitative and qualitative. Accordingly, they should proactively address evidence of ethical deficits in the work or output of judges, focusing on adherence to ethical guidelines and the quality of judicial decisions.
• There should be clear Practice Directions on the management of jurisdictional overlaps. The structure and scope of such overlaps should be discussed at the All Nigerian Judges Conference and the Practice Directions should be uniform across all the court systems in the country.
• The NJC should establish a central database or easily searchable platform for judges to share information on ongoing cases.

1. Discipline and Accountability

Preserving the dignity and integrity of the judiciary hinges on upholding discipline and accountability which is in turn essential for preserving the institutional authority of the judicial branch. If the judiciary lacks credibility, its authority suffers irredeemably. Tragically, this eventuality may already be upon us. A recent survey by the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) finds the judiciary as the recipient of the highest per capita rates of bribery, ahead of both the Nigeria Police Force and the Nigerian Customs Service. The damage that this does to the institutional credibility and authority of the judiciary is incalculable. To reverse this, it is suggested that:

• Disciplinary processes within the judiciary should be both prompt and decisive and dispositions should be calibrated to be proportionate to the seriousness of the misconduct found.
• Reports on disciplinary investigations by the NJC should routinely be transmitted to law enforcement agencies for follow-up.
• The CJN should initiate public consultation leading within six months to an announcement of measures designed to address the escalating patterns of judicial corruption as documented by the UNODC-NBS Corruption in Nigeria Report 2024.

1. Election Petitions and Political Cases

Political cases and election petitions now increasingly threaten the foundations of fairness on which the judicial system should be anchored. Of 248 judgments issued by the Supreme Court in the last judicial year, 74 or about 30% were “political cases.” At a similar occasion only two years ago, his predecessor 

reported that the court’s portfolio of 269 appeals disposed of included 139 civil appeals, 102 criminal appeals, and 28 “political cases”. The volume of election petitions has become an adverse charge on the credibility of the judiciary and an intolerable burden on both judges and non-political court users alike. Underlying this burden is a judiciary that has installed itself as the sole dispenser of electoral mandates, with judges routinely substituting their views for the votes of the people contrary to the considered recommendations of two presidential panels on electoral reform led respectively by former Supreme Court Justice, Bolarinwa Babalakin in 1986 and by former Chief Justice Mohammed Lawal Uwais in 2008. It is suggested that:

• The Chief Justice should initiate reform of the election dispute resolution system to ensure the implementation of the Babalakin Commission and Uwais Panel recommendations concerning the need for Courts to respect and not subvert the will of the people in elections.
• The category of “political” cases should be reviewed and court systems should be encouraged to establish Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms for political disputes.
• Consideration should be given to utilizing retired senior judges for the administration of election dispute resolution, so that serving judges may be preserved for regular court work.
• Election petitions should be disposed of before inauguration. The current practice whereby candidates are sworn in despite pending petitions against them facilitates judicial capture.

1. Reforming the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is overburdened and its Justices are paying for this with their lives. In the 30 months from the beginning of 2021 to the middle of 2023, three Justices of the Supreme Court tragically died in service. This period coincided with a revolt by Justices against the conditions of work and judicial well-being at the Supreme Court. These two developments underscore very clearly the urgent need for reform of the Supreme Court. As the apex court, the Supreme Court should settle the most rarefied questions of law and legal policy in Nigeria. Instead, it is burdened with inconsequential appeals and crippled by priority to political cases. The result is a court with an ungovernable docket which also endangers the constitutional promise of fair trial “within a reasonable time.” Structural and procedural enhancements needed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Supreme Court will include:

• The National Assembly should review and re-enact the Supreme Court Act and amend the Constitution to limit the kinds of cases or appeals that can be introduced to the Supreme Court.
• The full digitization of the Supreme Court is overdue. Judgments should be publicly available on the day they are delivered and it should be possible to do filings at the court remotely.
• The Court needs to implement a structured system of judicial clerkships which would help to relieve Justices of some of the tedium of research and writing.

Conclusion

Far from being exhaustive, this five-point agenda only highlights pressing priorities for the incoming CJN. There remain important issues, such as the question of whether the NJC has continuing relevance; what should be its composition (if it continues to exist), and whether or not it should continue to co-exist as it presently does with the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC).

As the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights declared in 2009: “Courts need the trust of the people to maintain their authority and legitimacy. The credibility of the courts must not be weakened by the perception that they can be influenced by any external pressure.” Success in judicial reform will depend on engaging a broad constituency of stakeholders, especially citizens, civil society, and court users. By fostering a collaborative approach to judicial reform, the CJN can construct the foundations for reclaiming public trust.

The measures suggested here can reverse inefficiencies; retrench renegades from the system; and reposition the judiciary as an institution fit for the changing landscape of a complex political economy. By implementing these changes, the new CJN can rebuild public confidence; put the judiciary on track towards credibility; and guarantee a legacy that will be evergreen at the end of her tenure.

Chidi Anselm Odinkalu teaches at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, Ernest Ojukwu (SAN) is former deputy director-general of the Nigerian Law School, Sam Erugo(SAN) is former dean of Law, Abia State University, and Mbasekei Martin Obono, a lawyer, is executive director of TAP Nitiative

Key Takeaways

• Mistake #1: Rushing the pitch
• Mistake #2: Skipping trust indicators and key differentiators
• Mistake #3: Talking too much and for too long
• Mistake #4: Forgetting who you're pitching to
• Mistake #5: Undermining your credibility with weak language
• Mistake #6: Using broad claims instead of precise data points
• Mistake #7: Telling instead of showing

With U.S. venture capital fundraising at a 6-year low, raising investor capital for your startup has become more challenging than ever. Potential investors are tightening their budgets and adopting a "wait and see" approach before putting their capital at risk. Yet, some of the best startups — like Airbnb, Uber and Square — were born during market downturns. So, if you're an entrepreneurseeking capital in this environment, you might wonder about your chances of success.

As a serial entrepreneur and now CEO of Builderall, I've heard over 3,000 pitches and helped founders raise millions. From my experience, seven common mistakes often derail attempts to raise investment capital. If you're looking to raise money for your startup in this uncertain economic environment, be sure to avoid the following:

Mistake #1: Rushing the pitch

Many founders rush through their pitch, but speed isn't always your friend in the venture capital world. Your goal is to establish key points and let them resonate, not finish your presentation as quickly as possible.

Think of it like telling a good joke at a party — you wouldn't rush to the punchline before everyone has had a chance to grasp the setup, right? The same principle applies when pitching. You want your investors to hang on to every word. But that's impossible if you rush or gloss over crucial information.

One effective technique is to use strategic pauses. In between slides or after making a key point, pause for about three seconds to let it sink in and observe your audience's reactions. Don't be afraid of silence. Patience in delivery can be a powerful strategy.

Mistake #2: Skipping trust indicators and key differentiators

Balancing detail with brevity is tricky, but it's essential. There are some critical signals you should share to help build trust and differentiate your business. While most founders want to focus on how great their product is, there are two questions that are arguably more important:

• Why is your team uniquely qualified to lead this business?
• How does your company stand out in the market?

As far as team qualifications, don't be shy about including specifics on years of experience, prestigious university degrees, previous exits, existing patents and/or impressive startup or corporate experiences.

I once coached a founder who was struggling to raise capital. After reviewing his pitch deck, I said, "The problem is that you have no real startup experience." He then proceeded to tell me that he and his co-founder sold their last company for $80 million, but he thought it wasn't relevant since it was in a different industry. Let me tell you, your previous accomplishments are 100% relevant to whether or not investors will trust you with their money.

Next, I can almost guarantee that whatever amazing idea you are pitching — we have probably already seen it. This begs the question, how are you going to execute differently when you get to market? This is where your current traction becomes crucial: existing user base, early subscribers, accepted patents and strategic partnerships all come into play. These elements demonstrate that you're not just another idea but a viable business that is already making waves.

Mistake #3: Talking too much and for too long

I know — this sounds like a contradiction based on the first point, but hear me out. Blathering on is another fatal mistake. You should plan for a nine-minute pitch, but you don't want to "rush through" your nine minutes. Instead, be relentless about what to include – and what to cut – so the pacing feels natural and you're still covering the key data points that make your business compelling.

I often ask new founders to introduce their startup in just two sentences: What do you do, and why should I care? After that, you have under 10 minutes to explain the market problem, the market size, your business model, your solution, your traction, your team, and your ask. That means you need to be very specific about what details will tell your story most effectively.

I've seen many founders get nervous and overcompensate by filling the conversation with unnecessary details and fillers. This often has the opposite effect of what they intend. If you talk too much or too quickly, investors might think you're not being straightforward, or they may get bored and lose interest.

Mistake #4: Forgetting who you're pitching to

Remember, you're pitching to investors, not potential clients. Investors are not interested in how great your product is; they want to know about your market, margins, and differentiation.

I once sat through a pitch for a young women's jewelry startup where the founder spent the entire time trying to sell me on the jewelry. As an investor, I wasn't the target audience and the pitch fell flat. Rather than sell me on the business, she was selling me on the product. When talking to investors, they want to hear about the business opportunity, not the product.

Mistake #5: Undermining your credibility with weak language

This might seem like needless semantics, but words like "hope" subtly signal uncertainty, and investors are not fond of taking chances on "hope." They want clear-cut projections backed by data and logic.

Instead of saying "we hope," use phrases like "we will" or "we project." This shift instantly ramps up your pitch's credibility. Be definitive; your words should exude confidence, not wishful thinking.

Here are a few more examples:

• Instead of saying, "We think our product will be successful," assert your confidence by stating, "Our product is positioned to be successful." This subtle shift conveys certainty and strengthens your pitch.
• Replace "We believe our revenue will grow" with "Our projections show our revenue will grow." This not only sounds more authoritative but also indicates that your assumptions are based on concrete data.
• Don't say, "We aim to capture 10% of the market;" instead, say, "We are on track to capture 10% of the market." This adjustment demonstrates that you are actively working toward a clear, achievable target.
• Change statements like "We expect to launch by Q2" to "We will launch by Q2." This minor change projects certainty and reliability, which are crucial to building investor trust.

These subtle language changes replace hesitation and probability with assertiveness. It emphasizes that your pitch is built on credibility and supported by a solid, well-thought-out plan.

Mistake #6: Using broad claims instead of precise data points

When pitching to investors, generalized claims can raise red flags, making investors wonder if you're trying to obscure the truth or lack the necessary detail.

For example, instead of saying, "We have a huge subscriber list," focus on concrete details like, "We have over 20,000 subscribers." Specifics not only clarify your claims but also significantly boost your credibility and trustworthiness.

Here are a few more examples:

• Don't say, "Our team has a lot of experience." Say, "Our team has eight years of experience in this industry."
• Replace "Our product is very sticky, and our customers rarely leave" with "Our product has an 89% customer retention rate."
• Instead of "We anticipate rapid growth," say, "Our projections show 30% month-over-month growth in the fourth quarter."
• Swap "We dominate the market" with "We currently hold 45% of the market share in our region."

These changes in phrasing turn vague assertions into solid, data-backed statements, which help to build investor confidence and convey that your pitch is grounded in reality.

Mistake #7: Telling instead of showing

Our final lesson: show, don't tell. Depicting something visually instead of through words will have a greater impact and be more likely to be remembered. Instead of telling investors, "We have a great interface," show the interface screens and let them make the determination themselves about whether it's great or not. Instead of saying, "We've grown exponentially over the years," show a line or bar chart illustrating your impressive growth.

One more example: telling investors how much your customers love you is far less impactful than showing screenshots of social media posts where your customers are raving about you in their own words. Keep this mantra in mind: less talk, more visuals.

Bottom line

Mastering the art of pitching involves more than just avoiding pitfalls — it's about crafting a narrative that resonates with investors and builds trust. However, by avoiding these seven mistakes, you significantly increase your chances of securing the capital needed to take your startup to the next level.

In today's challenging economic climate, precise communication, showing rather than telling, and delivering data-backed arguments will set you apart. Investors want to back entrepreneurs who can navigate adversity and drive their ventures to success. Keep refining your pitch, build strong relationships, and show investors why your startup is the one to bet on.

Entrepreneur