International

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The UK government has unveiled a comprehensive five-point plan to curb immigration, drawing mixed reactions from various sectors.

The plan aims to address concerns over rising immigration levels and implement stricter measures for those seeking to enter the country. 

The plan for the policy 

1. Overseas care workers will no longer be able to bring their dependents to the UK. This measure aims to prevent the exploitation of care workers by employers and ensure that they are adequately compensated for their work. 

2. The minimum salary requirement for skilled worker visas will be raised from £26,000 to £38,700. This move aims to attract highly skilled workers and ensure they receive fair wages. 

3. The 20% minimum wage reduction previously offered to those applying for visas in shortage occupations will be eliminated. This decision aligns with the government’s efforts to ensure fair pay for all workers, regardless of their nationality. 

4. The minimum income requirement for family visas will be increased from £18,600 to £38,700. This measure aims to ensure that sponsors can financially support their dependents. 

5. The government has requested that the Migration Advisory Committee review the graduate route to prevent abuse. Changes to the student visa are expected to be announced soon. 

Expected outcome 

The government estimates that the five-point plan will reduce immigration by around 300,000 people annually.

However, critics argue that the plan could hinder the UK’s ability to attract and retain skilled workers, particularly in critical sectors such as healthcare and technology. 

Response from the Home Secretary 

Home Secretary James Cleverly defended the plan, stating that it is necessary to ensure a “fair, legal, and sustainable” immigration system.

He emphasised the need to address concerns over immigration levels and protect the rights of British citizens.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

A 70-year-old Safina Namukwaya has made history in Kampala, Uganda, becoming the oldest woman in Africa to give birth to twins through in vitro fertilisation (IVF). 

Namukwaya, who underwent a successful caesarean delivery at the Women’s Hospital International and Fertility Centre in Kampala, welcomed a healthy baby boy and girl on Wednesday. 

Medical professionals at the hospital have confirmed both Namukwaya and her newborns are in good health, highlighting the story as not only a medical success but also a testament to the strength of the human spirit. 

Speaking to a privately owned NTV channel, Namukwaya shared the challenges she faced during her pregnancy, including complications and the absence of the father of her children. 

Despite societal judgments and hardships, Namukwaya expressed her gratitude, stating, “Many people judged and abused me for being barren, but I decided to leave everything to the Almighty God who has finally answered my prayers.” 

This isn’t Namukwaya’s first journey into motherhood at an advanced age; she had her firstborn, Sarah, in 2020.

While cases like Namukwaya’s are rare, it echoes a similar instance in 2019 when Erramatti Mangayamma from India gave birth to twins through IVF at the age of 74, becoming the world’s oldest mother. 

Namukwaya’s story serves as an inspiration, showcasing the triumph of hope and determination in the face of societal challenges and personal struggles.

By Sabiu Abdullahi 

The delicate truce between Israel and Hamas faced a pivotal moment on Thursday as both parties agreed to extend the ceasefire just moments before its scheduled expiration at 0500 GMT.

The Israeli military declared an “operational pause” without specifying the duration, citing ongoing mediator efforts and the complex hostage release process. 

Hamas echoed the extension for a seventh day, leaving the specifics shrouded in uncertainty.

Qatar, spearheading the truce negotiations, confirmed the extension until Friday, a decision met with anticipation amid calls for a lengthened pause to facilitate additional hostage releases and increased humanitarian aid to the ravaged Gaza Strip.

The timing coincided with the arrival of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken for crucial talks on Wednesday night. 

The truce, initiated on October 7, brought a temporary cessation to hostilities that erupted when Hamas militants crossed into Israel, resulting in a toll of 1,200 lives, predominantly civilians, and the abduction of approximately 240 individuals, according to Israeli authorities.

Israel’s subsequent air and ground campaign in Gaza reportedly claimed nearly 15,000 lives, predominantly civilians, and left large parts of the northern region in ruins, as reported by Hamas officials. 

Crucially, the truce agreement permits extensions contingent on Hamas releasing ten hostages daily. A source close to the group expressed a willingness to extend the pause by four days.

However, with a mere hour remaining before the truce’s expiration, Hamas disclosed that its offer to release seven hostages and hand over the bodies of three individuals killed in Israeli bombardment had been rebuffed. 

Both sides had previously declared their readiness to resume hostilities, with Hamas’s armed wing instructing fighters to “maintain high military readiness” in anticipation of combat resumption if the truce elapsed.

IDF spokesman Doron Spielman issued a warning of a swift return to operational mode, vowing to continue targeting Gaza if the truce lapsed.

By Sabiu Abdullahi 

The armed wing of Hamas, the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, announced on Saturday a delay in the handover of a second group of hostages.

This was part of a truce deal with Israel, contingent on Israel’s adherence to the terms of the agreement. 

The issues at the centre of the delay involve the entry of humanitarian aid to the north of the Gaza Strip and the criteria for selecting prisoners for release.

The truce agreement, spanning four days, included the release of Palestinian prisoners in exchange for a three-to-one ratio. 

Initially, a Hamas source informed AFP that the handover of 14 hostages to the Red Cross had commenced but later reported a halt in the transfer process.

However, an Israeli official countered, stating that the hostages had not yet been handed over to the Red Cross. 

Despite the delay, the Israeli source maintains that Israel has not violated the agreement, alluding to a a different perspective on the situation.

The intricacies of these negotiations continue to unfold against the backdrop of the fragile truce between Israel and the Islamist movement.

By Ahmad Deedat Zakari

The United Nations (UN) has mourned staff of the organization killed by the Israel attacks in Gaza. 

The UN Secretary-General, Antònio Guterres, disclosed the development in a tweet on Monday. 

According to Guterres, more than 100 staff of the United Nations Relief and Work Agency met their death as a result of the raging war. 

“Today, the @UN family observed a moment of silence to mourn & honour our colleagues killed in Gaza. Since the start of this conflict, more than 100 @UNRWA staff have lost their lives – the highest number of UN aid workers killed in a conflict in such a short time. They will never be forgotten.” He tweeted.

By Yusuf Idris

The Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most complex and long-standing disputes in modern history. Rooted in deep historical, religious, and political tensions, the conflict has resulted in a series of wars, uprisings, and ongoing violence between Israelis and Palestinians.

The origins of the conflict can be traced back to the late 19th century when Jewish and Arab nationalist movements emerged in the region, claiming their right to self-determination. After World War I, the League of Nations granted Britain a mandate to govern Palestine, facilitating Jewish immigration and settlement. However, this sparked resistance from the Arab population, who feared displacement and loss of their homeland.

Following the horrors of the Holocaust during World War II, international sympathy for the establishment of a Jewish homeland grew. In 1947, the United Nations proposed a partition plan to divide Palestine into separate Israeli and Palestinian states, but the Arab countries and Palestinian leadership rejected this plan.

The protection of persons, including both combatants and civilians, is a crucial aspect to consider in any conflict. From the perspective of the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, this issue carries significant weight as the conflict has led to the loss of countless lives and resulted in widespread suffering on both sides.

One of the key aspects to examine regarding the protection of persons in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the nature of the conflict itself. The conflict has been marked by a series of military confrontations, uprisings, and acts of terrorism, which have had severe humanitarian consequences. Both Israelis and Palestinians have been subjected to violence, displacement, and the violation of their fundamental human rights.

From the Israeli perspective, the protection of persons, particularly Israeli citizens, is a paramount concern. Israel, as a sovereign state, has the responsibility to safeguard the lives and security of its population, which various Palestinian militant groups have consistently targeted. 

The causes and origins of the Israel-Palestine crisis are complex and deeply rooted in historical, political, and religious factors. 

The Israel-Palestine conflict dates back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries when Zionist Jews sought to establish a Jewish homeland in historic Palestine, which was under Ottoman rule at the time. This intensified with the Balfour Declaration in 1917, in which Britain supported establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Partition and Creation of Israel: Following World War I and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Britain was granted the mandate to administer Palestine. Rising tensions between Jewish immigrants and the Arab local population led to conflicts. In 1947, the United Nations proposed a partition plan, recommending the creation of separate Jewish and Arab states in Palestine. 

 The term “protection of civilians” refers to the measures taken to ensure the safety and security of civilians during armed conflicts. This can include various actions such as providing humanitarian assistance, establishing safe zones or protected areas, and enforcing international human rights and humanitarian laws.

“Hors de combat” is a French term that translates to “combat horse” in English. It refers to horses used in military operations, particularly in combat roles.

 The phrase “protection of civilians horse de combat” does not inherently have a specific meaning as it combines two distinct concepts. However, one possible interpretation could be using combat horses in military operations, specifically focusing on protecting civilians.

Combat horses may be employed in a conflict situation for various purposes like transportation, reconnaissance, or combat roles. If the emphasis is on protecting civilians, combat horses could be trained to rescue civilians in dangerous situations, evacuate them from conflict zones, or provide a deterrent against attacks on civilians.

There is no specific international instrument called “Words de combat” to protect civilians. However, several international legal frameworks and instruments address the protection of civilians during armed conflicts.

1. Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols: The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols provide the foundation for protecting civilians during armed conflicts. They outline rules for the humane treatment of civilians, prohibit attacks against them, and provide for the establishment of protections such as safe zones and medical facilities.

2. United Nations Security Council Resolutions: The UN Security Council has issued several resolutions to protect civilians in armed conflicts. For example, Resolution 1894 (2009) reaffirms the responsibility of all parties to an armed conflict to protect civilians and calls for accountability for those who violate these obligations.

3. International Humanitarian Law: This body of law includes principles and rules that regulate the conduct of armed conflicts and aim to minimise civilian harm. 

Several international humanitarian principles, protocols, and provisions of the Geneva Conventions govern the protection of civilians in armed conflict situations. These frameworks aim to ensure that civilians are protected from the effects of armed conflict and that their human rights and dignity are preserved. 

 Key principles, protocols, and provisions related to the protection of civilians:

1. Principle of Distinction: This principle, enshrined in the Geneva Conventions, requires parties to distinguish between civilians and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives. It prohibits direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects.

2. Principle of Proportionality: Under this principle, parties to the conflict must ensure that the anticipated military advantage from an attack is not outweighed by the expected harm to civilians or civilian objects. The excessive use of force that could cause disproportionate civilian casualties is prohibited.

3. Principle of Precautions in Attack: This principle obliges parties to take all feasible precautions to avoid or minimise harm to civilians and civilians.

The Israel-Palestine conflict falls within the scope of international humanitarian law, and the principle of protecting civilians applies to both parties. International humanitarian law, including the Geneva Conventions, stipulates that parties must take all necessary measures to protect civilians from the effects of hostilities in armed conflict situations.

This means that parties to the conflict, including Israel and Palestine, are obligated to:

1. Respect the distinction between civilians and combatants and between civilian objects and military targets. Deliberate attacks on civilians or civilian objects are prohibited.

2. Uphold the principle of proportionality by ensuring that the anticipated military advantage does not outweigh the expected harm to civilians or civilian infrastructure.

3. Take precautions in attacks to minimise harm to civilians. Parties should give effective warning of attacks that may affect the civilian population and take all feasible measures to avoid or minimise civilian casualties.

4. Provide medical care and humanitarian assistance to civilians affected by the conflict without discrimination.

Conclusively, the Israel-Palestine crisis is a complex and ongoing conflict with deep-rooted historical, political, and religious dimensions. A few general suggestions that various international actors have highlighted:

1. Dialogue and Negotiations: A peaceful and lasting resolution to the conflict can only be achieved through a comprehensive, inclusive, and sustained dialogue between the parties involved. This should be based on mutual recognition, understanding, and respect to reach a mutually acceptable solution.

2. Two-State Solution: The international community, including the United Nations, has long supported the idea of a two-state solution where Israel and Palestine exist side by side in peace and security. This solution typically involves the establishment of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state alongside Israel, with agreed-upon borders and mutually acceptable arrangements for Jerusalem, refugees, and security.

3. Respect for International Law: All parties should uphold and abide by international humanitarian law

Resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict is a complex and multifaceted issue that requires the commitment and cooperation of all parties involved. While there is no one-size-fits-all solution, several proposals have been put forward. Here are some potential solutions that have been discussed:

4. Two-State Solution: This solution involves the establishment of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state alongside Israel, based on the pre-1967 borders, with mutually agreed upon land swaps and a negotiated resolution to the status of Jerusalem. This solution has been endorsed by the international community, including the United Nations, as a means to address the aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians for self-determination and security.

Yusuf Idris writes from  Lagos and can be reached via yusufibnadamu@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Abdurrahman

An Islamic human rights organisation, the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), has warned those calling for the arrest of Dr Zakir Naik to mind their business. The organisation insists that the Islamic preacher is exercising his Allah-given fundamental human right of freedom of movement under international law. MURIC further warned that anybody found embarrassing to the Sultan’s guest would face the wrath of Nigerian Muslims. 

The warning was handed down on Sunday, 5th November 2023, by the Executive Director of MURIC, Professor Ishaq Akintola. 

The full statement reads:

“A campaign of calumny and religious hatred has been unleashed on an international Islamic figure, Dr Zakir Naik, who is currently in Nigeria. Dr Zakir Naik is in the country on the invitation of the Sultan of Sokoto and President General of the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA), Alhaji Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar.

“The campaign is being sponsored by Christians who are jittery. They are aware of the visitor’s oratory, intellectual prowess and amazing ability to convince his audience with indubitable facts. We remind these overzealous interlopers that Dr Zakir Naik is exercising his Allah-given fundamental human right of freedom of movement. 

“Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations guarantees the right to freedom of movement around the globe without interference. It says, ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

“Those behind this shameful exercise are meddlesome interlopers and Muslim haters disguising themselves as public commentators. They are motivated by hate, ignorance and gymnastic religiosity. 

“For the avoidance of doubt, we warn that anybody found embarrassing an official guest of His Eminence the Sultan and head of more than 150 million Nigerian Muslims will face the wrath of Muslims in this country.

“Why are our Christian neighbours so intolerant? How many times have Muslims raised objections when Christians invite foreign preachers? Several Christian preachers have toured this country without any Muslim protesting. 

“We recall the way Louis Farrakhan, the black American Muslim leader, was disallowed from giving a lecture in Nigeria in 1986. That ugly and disgraceful incident was engineered by the same set of people. It must not happen again.

“To those who are pursuing this ignoble goal, we say, ‘Take notice that Dr Zakir Naik is not Louis Farrakhan and Nigeria of 1986 is different from Nigeria in 2023. Nigerian Muslims of today, under a dynamic and visionary leadership, can give measure for measure.’ 

“The whole world knows the Indian government for what it is when it comes to religious tolerance. The crimes of the Indian state against its Muslim population of 204 million Muslims are legendary. Muslim haters in Nigeria should allow the Indian government to convince Interpol to do its dirty work for it. 

“India has failed to involve Interpol because its allegations against Dr Zakir Naik are religiously motivated. How did the Islamic scholar travel across several countries without Interpol arresting him if, indeed, he is a wanted person? Let the Indian government convince Interpol first.

“As far as we are concerned, Dr Zakir Naik has not broken any known law of Nigeria. He is, therefore, innocent and free to move around and deliver lectures. We remind the law enforcement agencies of their duty to ensure the safety and security of this Islamic scholar. Nothing must happen to him. It is needless to assert that any guest of the Sultan is a guest of all Nigerian Muslims.”

#LeaveDrZaikNaikAlone

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Gunmen stormed the main prison in Conakry, Guinea’s capital, leading to the escape of 2008 coup leader Moussa “Dadis” Camara, along with military figures Claude Pivi and Blaise Goumou. 

The incident was confirmed by Guinea’s justice minister, Charles Wright, during a broadcast on local Radio Fim FM. 

Eyewitnesses reported that Conakry was sealed off, with gunfire echoing near the city’s administrative heart.

The escape occurred in Kaloum, the political and administrative center of Conakry, housing the presidential palace and other official buildings. 

Camara, the former head of the 2008 military junta, was on trial for his involvement in a 2009 massacre where at least 157 people were killed. 

The massacre took place at Conakry’s stadium, where tens of thousands had gathered to protest against Camara’s presidential candidacy.

Security forces opened fire on the crowd, resulting in the tragic loss of lives. Guinea’s justice minister, Charles Wright, assured the public, “We will find them. And those responsible will be held accountable,” emphasizing the government’s determination to bring the fugitives to justice. 

This incident adds to the concerning trend in the region, as Guinea becomes the latest among eight Western and Central African countries to experience a military coup in the past three years.

The situation remains tense in Conakry, with authorities intensifying efforts to locate the escaped prisoners and restore calm to the city.

By Sabiu Abdullahi 

Tensions within the British government have come to the forefront as a ministerial aide, Paul Bristow, was dismissed from his position after calling for a permanent ceasefire in the ongoing Gaza conflict.

Bristow’s plea for a ceasefire conflicted with the government’s support for “humanitarian pauses” instead. 

The dismissal came in the wake of a letter Bristow addressed to the Prime Minister, urging for a lasting ceasefire to save lives and enable crucial aid delivery to the affected region.

His removal was swift, with government officials citing his comments as a breach of the principle of collective responsibility, wherein government members are expected to publicly support official policies regardless of personal beliefs. 

The internal discord was further highlighted during a recent session of Prime Minister’s Questions, where Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak advocated for “specific pauses” to facilitate aid delivery while firmly rejecting calls for a complete ceasefire.

Sunak emphasised Israel’s legitimate right to self-defence, underscoring the government’s stance on the matter. Bristow, a Conservative MP representing Peterborough, expressed his deep concern for his constituents, a significant portion of whom have been directly impacted by the conflict.

His questioning of the effectiveness of ongoing military actions in enhancing security or improving the situation resonated with a portion of the public. 

This incident reveals a rift within the UK government, raising questions about the nation’s diplomatic stance and the complex challenges posed by international conflicts.

By Professor Abdussamad Umar Jibia

In 1992, about 20 years after Nigeria severed ties with Israel, General Ibrahim Babangida’s administration restored diplomatic relations with the Jewish occupier state. This followed incessant calls for doing so by Nigerian Christians. 

Islamic scholars berated the Christian clerics who called for restoring ties with Israel for their blatant ignorance of the Jewish state and what it stood for. Contrary to what is believed by the Nigerian Christian clergy, Israel is not a Christian state, and Jews do not believe in Jesus Christ either as a Messiah like the Christians believe or even as a Messenger of God like I, a Muslim, believe. As far as the Jew is concerned, Jesus is an illegitimate child of Mary who is a product of fornication committed by his mother.

And what is special about Israel? Unlike Ghanaian, Nigerian, Pakistani and other nationals who feel at home whenever they are in their countries, the Israeli carries the guilt and discomfort of an occupier even while “at home” in the land now called Israel. Many countries do not recognise the existence of Israel as a state. 

What followed Babangida’s diplomatic decision is a shame. A Christian Pilgrims Commission at the centre and a Christian Pilgrims Board in each state. That’s not all. While my own grandfather travelled to Saudi Arabia to perform the hajj on foot without any Government facilitation, and I saved my own money to go on hajj by air because we believe in hajj as part of our religion, an average Nigerian Christian is waiting for Government to pay for him to visit Israel to do what they call a “religious” duty. The journey, year in and year out, by Nigerian Christians to visit Israel for ‘pilgrimage’ has thus been a huge burden on the Nigerian Government. I believe there should be an act of the National Assembly to criminalise the sponsorship of pilgrims by Governments at all levels to whichever holy land the former want to go for their worship. 

The latest struggle by Hamas to free Palestine from Zionist occupation is now in its second week. Governments and individuals worldwide have been voicing their opinions, with many taking sides and others calling for cessation of hostilities. One would commend the Christians Association of Nigeria (CAN) for being cautious this time. The Nigerian Christians’ umbrella body spoke against bloodletting and preached the sanctity of human life. I am personally impressed. The leadership of CAN under Daniel Okoh should go a step further to end hostilities against non-Christians in Christian-majority communities of the North. This would contribute towards the desired peace and development that has eluded Nigerians.

If CAN exercised caution under Most Rev. Daniel Okoh, the same cannot be said about the overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), Pastor Enoch Adeboye. When I saw him calling Jews his “brethren”, I wondered whether I would laugh or cry. No matter how one tries to give Pastor Adebayo the benefit of the doubt for being a Nigerian respected by many, one will have to admit that the Pastor has, in this case, behaved like one of those roadside church-goers who have not been to school. Otherwise, how on earth would a Christian refer to Israeli criminals as his brethren and even ask thousands of unsuspecting RCCG members to pray for them?

Perhaps Pastor Adebayo is unaware of the Jewish state’s atrocities against innocent Palestinian Christians. Only recently, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Jerusalem, Pierbattsta Pizzaballa, was reportedly complaining of increasing attacks by Jewish extremists “emboldened by [the] Israeli Government”. 

The attacks on the Christian community in Israel, whose record is handy for anyone looking for it, include attacks on Christian sites, which people like Adeboye say they go to Israel to visit and Christian worshippers whom the attackers refer to as idol worshippers who should be, “killed according to Torah”.

According to a recent NBC News report about Jerusalem, “Churches have been graffitied and clergy who live and work here report being frequently spit on, harassed and even physically attacked by extremist Jews”. The report concluded that “Christian leaders say most incidents are never thoroughly investigated,” confirming that it has the backing of the Zionist state.

Hear Pastor Adeboye, “It is my prayer for all our brethren in Israel that the Almighty will grant you absolute peace from now on in Jesus’s name”. Haba Pastor! What does Jesus have to do with Zionists? And what do Zionists have to do with Jesus? The only non-Christian group who accepts Jesus, the son of Mary and believes in the virgin birth, are Muslims. 

And he said, “The almighty God, the only one of Israel…”. My dear pastor, which God are you referring to here? Is it Jesus Christ whom they refer to as an idol or the only God who created Jesus without a father, just like he created Adam without two parents?

Adebayo and other African Christians should get their priorities right. Palestinian Christians have done so long ago. They have always identified with Palestinian Muslims in their struggle for freedom. 

Professor Abdussamad Umar Jibia wrote from Kano via aujibia@gmail.com.