On Sunday, the coup leaders in Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso announced the withdrawal of their countries from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). In a joint statement, the three military heads of states said it was a “sovereign decision” to leave ECOWAS “without delay,” because of the “inhumane” sanctions imposed against their countries. They also accused ECOWAS of having “moved away from the ideals of its founding fathers and Pan-Africanism”; claiming that the bloc is now “under the influence of foreign powers.” ECOWAS, according to the military leaders, “notably failed to assist these states in their existential fight against terrorism and insecurity.”

First, we must understand the desperation that pushed the trio of Captain Ibrahim Traore, General Abdourahmane Tchiani and Colonel Assimi Goita to take the action they did. Their three landlocked countries have been under tremendous domestic pressure since being suspended from ECOWAS: Mali in 2020, Burkina Faso in 2022 and Niger last July. The military rulers signed a defence pact, Alliance of Sahel States founded on the Mafia code of ‘one for all and all for one’ and severed military and cooperation ties with France, their former colonial power. They have now turned to Russia, long seeking a foothold on the continent.

Before I deal with the Russian angle, let me state that this is a problem for us in Nigeria only to the extent that we are seen as leader of the sub-region. President Bola Tinubu is also the current ECOWAS Chairman. Yes, there is a lot to say about a whimsical approach to serious problems becoming emblematic of the current Tinubu administration. And I am aware of the enormous economic and security challenges that plague our country. But Burkina Faso, Niger and Mali, three countries that collectively account for 8% of the $702 billion ECOWAS Gross Domestic Product (GDP), are not being helped by their military adventurers on this issue.

Not many people remember but ECOWAS was founded by 16 members comprising former British, French, and Portuguese colonies within the subregion. In 2000, Mauritania withdrew its membership in preference for the Arab Maghreb Union (AMU) which it had joined, even when there was nothing stopping the country from belonging to two regional bodies. It did not take long before Mauritanians begun expressing regrets. Yahya Ould Ahmed Waghef, a former Prime Minister (2008-2009), has deemed his country’s withdrawal from ECOWAS ‘a big mistake.’ Of the 54 African countries, according to Waghef, 27 are members of two regional groupings, 18 belong to three groupings and one country is a member of four groupings hence “we have the right to belong simultaneously to two sub-regional organizations (ECOWAS and AMU).” With that opportunity lost, Mauritania is back today in ECOWAS but as an associate member.

Meanwhile, the main ECOWAS challenge for Nigeria is in Niger where President Tinubu is walking a tightrope. Last November, the Northern Senators Forum (NSF) issued a communique indicating quite clearly that there is no consensus in Nigeria as to how to deal with the Niger coup. “The Northern Senators Forum asks ECOWAS to lift restrictions on Niger Republic in the interest of business at our border communities. It is important that Nigeriens should not suffer as a result of coup in their country just as we are seeing what is happening in Gaza,” said NSF Chairman, Abdul Ningi, who read the statement after their meeting. “We call on Niger and Nigeria that we remain brothers, we remain partners and we remain Africans.”

There are other complexities and sensitivities the president must understand. The Nigeria-Niger border is 1,608 kilometres long and traverses seven states: Sokoto, Kebbi, Zamfara, Jigawa, Yobe, Katsina and Borno. People in these states engage in open trade across borders and their livelihood is dependent on transactions that are now hampered. Tinubu’s immediate predecessor, President Muhammadu Buhari, we must also remember, admitted openly that Niger is a second home for him. So, already there is domestic pressure that relations be normalised with Niger. General Abdourahmane Tchiani understands these dynamics strengthen his hand and perhaps explains why he is playing hard ball. That’s also why President Tinubu (and by implication, the ECOWAS he chairs) cannot afford to be rigid. At some point, there will have to be a compromise. And whatever goes for Niger must go for Mali and Burkina Faso.

Now to the Russian angle. In an interview with ARISE NEWS on Monday, former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, argued that Russia may be “emboldening these three countries to break up ECOWAS as part of the attempt to weaken what one will call the western influence in this part of the world.” Yet, according to Akinyemi, “Russia has not shown that it has the capability to help these three countries to combat the jihadists, the Tuaregs, the ISIS who are running wild in the Sahel.” To the respected diplomat, Nigeria and the regional bloc now contend with a crisis, essentially “because these three countries, in terms of landmass, that’s about half of ECOWAS. So, we’re not dealing with just a little hiccup on our hands.”

Regarding allegations by the three countries that ECOWAS is being teleguided by foreign powers, Akinyemi said it was clear what they mean. “You know the power that they are referring to, and presumably, the fact that our president is in France at the moment kind of reinforces this fear in their minds that the ECOWAS policies are actually French policies,” said Akinyemi. “We’re going to need some clever steps, diplomatically on this matter, and I think that ECOWAS needs some fast thinking to make sure that this situation does not get out of hand.”

I am aware that Russia is investing considerable resources (mostly non-financial apart from wheat donations) to gain a stronger foothold in a number of African countries. Russia has been deploying two vehicles: Military through the Wagner mercenary group and media propaganda, especially against France. In practically all the French speaking countries on the continent, local social media influencers are being contracted to spread pro-Russia (and anti-France) propaganda. “I manage the cyberwar, the media war… and (the late Wagner leader, Yevgeny) Prigozhin conducts military activities,” Luc Michel, who heads the media machine told BBC two years ago. “I think that Russia must replace the French in all of Africa.” So, obviously, there is no altruism in the Russian intervention in these countries.

After almost 50 years, ECOWAS has become part of the political and economic lifeblood of the subregion. To that extent, Nigeria’s very strategic importance and political stability are tied to the survival of the regional bloc. The leadership role we play makes the threat to its existence a serious matter. Therefore, the challenge of the moment requires deft diplomatic leadership that is inclusive and multicultural. That is the best way to neutralize the departure of France from the affected countries. As for the Russian meddlesomeness, it can be dealt with as part of the global anti-authoritarian drive. That of course presupposes strengthening our democracy at home and working for the peace and prosperity of our people.

Nigeria, 105 Years Ago…ll

In the first part of this series started last week, I excerpted from ‘The Nigeria Handbook 1919 (Issued with the approval of the Nigerian Government)’—a 304-page publication which contains ‘Statistical and General Information respecting the Colony and Protectorate’. The main idea was to draw lessons from the Nigeria of 105 years ago. Although I promised to continue the excerpts, I no longer see the need for it given the feedback I received. Most of the mails centre around our colonial experience and ‘where the rain started to beat us’ which, for me, cannot be a justification for our failings. I do not discount the harm of colonialism, but I believe Nigeria is what it is today because of the choices made in the past 63 years. 

The Republic of Cyprus was not only colonised like Nigeria but also shares with our country the same Independence Day: 1^st October 1960. Like Nigeria, Cyprus has faced wars, military coups and all manner of disruptions, instigated from within and without. But unlike Nigeria, the Eastern Mediterranean Island has done relatively well for itself. In practically all development indicators, Cyprus has fared far much better than Nigeria. So, we cannot continue to cite our colonial experience as reason for the rot in our society. The paradox, as I have written in the past, is that while Nigeria may not be doing well as a country, many of our citizens are doing well as individuals—both at home and in the Diaspora. There is hardly any compilation of the Global 100 in any sphere of human endeavour that does not include at least one Nigerian. That has been the consistent pattern no matter the metrics used and regardless of the field profiled.

Interestingly, my young friend, Ejiro Oghenechovwen, who until recently worked with the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), seems to understand the essence of my intervention. And I crave the indulgence of readers to publish his mail before I conclude. “I have just finished reading your column on ‘Nigeria, 105 years ago’. I am particularly jolted by your comment that there was no conscious effort at nation building by Nigeria’s postcolonial leaders. Beyond it being painfully true, it strongly suggests that not even national or subnational government and governing processes (which we aren’t even doing well in) are sufficient for a pluralistic country like ours.

“I am delighted that the compiler of the 1919 handbook under reference admitted that organization and order were existent in precolonial Nigeria, contrary to the widespread Western view of an inherently savage and barbaric Africa. Furthermore, hearing a then-active participant in the country’s blossoming political process describe the obtainable government structure as indirect rule is, to me, liberating, as I had always believed that the term was coined in retrospect by future historians. Interestingly, I find astonishing your statistical comparison of the elements of the trade balance between the period covered and that of 2018. The proximity of 1913’s figures to 2018’s is saddening and depicts a merry-go-round affair over a century later, so that, beyond the incredulous fact that we now import palm seedlings – the products of which we earlier exported at two-thirds output volume as you revealed, we have always been a predominantly mono-product economy. When it is palm seeds and their produce, it is majorly palm seeds and their produce; and when it is crude oil, it is equally almost totally crude oil. In other words, we have historically not fared well with diversification.

“It is, therefore, imperative that we pay serious attention to the nation-building question, realizing that the call to leadership goes beyond maintaining, servicing, or upgrading processes, systems, and entities year after year and one democratic dispensation after another. It is also about consciously and masterfully moulding consensus, ensuring that everyone is on the same page – or at least, the same chapter – and journeying collectively, even if in pools and batches, in the same direction. This requires sincerity, courage, and continuous concession-making. I am reminded of a scene in ‘Invictus’, the 2009 movie on Nelson Mandela. Madiba, as he was fondly called, had just been elected South Africa’s first black president and was on his usual pre-dawn walk when he and his two bodyguards saw that day’s newspaper with a banner headline: HE CAN WIN AN ELECTION, BUT CAN HE RUN A COUNTRY? One guard was amazed at such a question when the man wasn’t even up to a day in office. Mandela calmly stated that it was a legitimate query. In like manner, our leaders at all levels and in all spheres must take an informed pause from their routine and reflect deeply on our national question. Why are things falling apart? Why is the nation’s center not holding? What should be done? The real question, perhaps, is, even when we find answers to those questions, are we sincere and courageous enough to respond accordingly?”

Perhaps Ejiro was reading my mind. Despite being blessed with abundant human and material resources, we have failed to aggregate the parts into a collective whole. With no communal sense to build a functioning society, the ‘whole’ of our country remains far much less than the sum of its parts.  Essentially because the accumulation of individual greed far outweighs the collective need. When You apply the law of the jungle in competing for scarce resources without any sense of order which nation building entails, the chaos that we have in Nigeria today is inevitable.

Since the beginning of the year, for instance, the recurring news in our country is that of kidnappings by sundry cartels of criminals who seem to have overpowered the capacity of the state. Not only is the list of victims becoming increasingly long, but there are also thousands of others across the country who have been in prolonged captivity and whose ordeals are heart-wrenching for their families. They remain nameless: mere statistics in a nation where human life has become easily dispensable. What is the national response? Let us continue to pray! 

Notwithstanding misgivings over the 1914 amalgamation, distortions to our federal structure caused by years of military rule, and disappointment with the current crop of leaders and the choices they make; it is also appropriate to remind ourselves that we have come a long way as a nation. Not even the most implacable enemies of Nigeria will deny its socio-economic potential, the enormous capacity of its people and the bright future that continues to beckon. If only our leaders would look beyond artificial differences, apply themselves to the jobs for which they were elected or appointed and rally our diversity as the real source of our strength. 

The mood at the National Assembly yesterday was quite reflective of the rising anxiety about the worsening insecurity in the land.

Expectedly, federal legislators related the stories of anguish and helplessness being  told in many communities in the country. These are tragic stories of kidnappings, banditry, terrorism and wanton killings. The map of insecurity looks scarier by the day. No part of Nigeria is immune to this climate of danger. The vulnerability of the people is so obvious. The risks faced by   rural and urban communities alike are glaring.  The word in the  mouths of the old and the young around the country is insecurity.

This fact was evident in the yesterday contributions from senators and members of the House of Representatives.

Samples could be taken from  the tragic stories of  what happened in parts of the country just in the last one week. A member of the House broke down  as he moved a motion on the killings of two traditional rulers in Ekiti State. Another member reported  that about 50 people were killed in the latest round of bloodletting  in the extremely troubled Mangu Local Government Area of Plateau state. A senator told the story of  the Agatu area of Benue state being overrun by invaders.   

At the end of a sombre survey of the national security landscape, Senate President Godswill Akpabio announced   the resolution of the chamber that  security and defence chiefs should be invited to answer questions on the state of things in the security sector. Speaker of the House of Representatives Tajudeen Abass’ summation of the proceedings in the House was that President Bola Tinubu should  “take tough decisions.”

So, as Lenin puts in the title of  his famous political pamphlet in a markedly different context, the question of the moment is this: What is to be done?

The focus should be on this question as we commiserate with those who have lost their loved ones while wishing  the injured quick recovery and sustaining the call for the freedom of those still suffering  in captivity. This question has been asked as the various typologies of violent crimes were confronted in more than 20 years. Answers have also been generated as many as times as the question has been posed by the  manifestations of  insecurity all these years. These answers could be found in  the various reports of commissions and committees which looked into the various tragic events at different periods as well as government’s white papers. Pundits have also espoused perspectives on the insecurity. Books have been written from divergent standpoints on the problem.   Implicit in these various views  are  some answers to the question. Only yesterday a fellow columnist , Dr. Reuben Abati, in an extensive discussion of the problem on this page actually wrote pointedly : “Let the federal government declare a national emergency on insecurity.”

Besides, insecurity in Nigeria also has  an international dimension which could be compounded by the recent unsettling political developments in the Sahel region.

It may, therefore, be useful in the circumstance that as pressure mounts on security agencies  and defence forces to keep Nigeria secure the grim moment should be used for a  strategic review in the security sector.  This is often done by some countries facing challenges of insecurity in varied forms and degrees.  The gravity of the violent crimes plaguing the land demands such a systematic response. Members of the public who have inputs to make  usually participate in the process of such periodic reviews.  

A lot of lessons could be learnt from elsewhere despite Nigeria’s unique situation. For instance, over a decade ago, the United Kingdom had an important examination  of its defence, security and intelligence in a report entitled  “Securing Britain in an Age of Uncertainty: The Strategic Defence and Security Review.” Embodied in the British report is an observation that could be interest to Nigeria: “All too often, we focus on military hardware. But we know from our many visits to Afghanistan and to military units around our country, that ultimately it is our people that really make the difference. As a country, we have failed to give them the support they deserve. We are putting that right, even in the

very difficult economic circumstances we face. We will renew the military covenant, that vital contract between the Armed Forces, their families, our veterans and the country they sacrifice so much to keep safe. Each and every one of us has a responsibility to do more to support the men and women of our Armed Forces. We must never send our soldiers, sailors and airmen into battle without the right

equipment, the right training or the right support. That objective has been a fundamental guiding principle of this Review, and it is one to which this Government will remain absolutely committed.”

A few things could be shared  from the British experience.

First, the sacrifices of soldiers, policemen, security agents and other  operatives on the field should be better appreciated. Security and defence personnel have also been killed and maimed in cases of kidnaps, banditry and  terror attacks. The talk about funding security often focuses on acquiring equipment and technology. A greater emphasis should also  be put on the welfare, training  and motivation of the men and women who actually carry out field  operations to keep the nation secure. Even drones have to be deployed by human beings to hit the right  targets. The compensation of the fallen heroes should be paid promptly while their survivors are humanely treated. Those who are in  retirement should be paid their pensions decently. The nation  should demonstrate empathy and respect for those who are put in harm’s way in order to keep the rest of the society secure. Their duty is  highly  honourable regardless of the acts of bad eggs in  their  organisations. In any case, is there any organisation without its own bad eggs? Soldiers, policemen and intelligence operatives should be applauded when victims of kidnapping are rescued or bandits are vanquished. The human factor still remains the pivot of any security strategy even in the era of Artificial Intelligence. So the security and defence authorities should make this a central component of any review.

Secondly, the intersection between physical security and social security as well as economic progress is an obvious one. This makes the involvement of  other sectors an imperative for a meaningful review. Beyond the usual official exhortation that security is a  “collective responsibility” the society at large should be rigorously mobilised to support the gallant efforts of  the professionals who are on the field to ward off  all risks to peaceful existence. In addition, the experience of a large community of retired officers of the various forces and agencies could also be useful.  This reservoir of knowledge and experience constitutes a national asset. Yet, it is hardly utilised.  Maybe,  if some  past leaders of the security sector confidentially share with the current ones their stories of  mistakes the system  would be spared of a repeat of such mistakes. The fora for such exchanges of views  do not have to be formalised with any bureaucracy. The products of the thinking that goes on  in the various think tanks should not be ignored by those who are currently  in command in the security sector.  

The corollary to the foregoing, of course, is that security agencies and defence institutions should not only be subordinated  to civil authorities as compelled by the constitution, they should also develop a culture of accountability. The accountability being suggested here  goes beyond naira and kobo. It is not enough to increase defence and security budgets. It is also important that the expectations of the public are met. This can be measured by the level of security.

It is in this light that the meeting of   the service chiefs and heads of security agencies with senators scheduled for next week should not be just another talking shop. The important dialogue between lawmakers and the leaders of the security sector  should be a turning point in the chilling story of insecurity.

The title above was what my wife confronted me with after the 5:30 am Mass on the 28th of January 2024 at St. Joseph the Worker Catholic Parish, Awka. As we were returning to our seats after the offertory, I encountered what I considered an offensive sight: a young man with long plaited hair. He appeared to be an exceptionally troublesome individual, with distrustful eyes. Deliberately, I decided to address what to me was the foolishness of his inverted sartorial display by asking him for his head covering, like other women.

After the Mass, while waiting for the Mass server to return my balance for the Fides newspaper that I had purchased, he approached my wife and requested her to warn me with these words: "warn your husband, tell him that I do not take nonsense." I regretted not meeting him eyeball to eyeball. I would have engaged him in conversation, asking about his profession and other matters in a convivial atmosphere. "What did you do to him?" my wife inquired. Although she did not support me, I explained to her that the reaction of that young man brought me joy, as it indicated that my actions had an impact on him and would lead him to reflect in his saner moments. Conversion is a process that involves a chain of events— observation, rebuke, protest, reflection, and a gradual return to a sense of propriety. My wife was concerned because, according to her, when the young man spoke, his eyes flashed lightning-like Jove’s thunderbolts and seemed to pierce in all directions as if he would have fought me if he saw me.

As a chief executive, I have had the opportunity to invite some job seekers to my office. Interestingly, their dressing, confidence, courage, and even their demeanor are all part of the interview. Due to the inadequate upbringing of today's children, you may find some of them attending interviews with braids and wearing suggestive clothing not realizing that no serious Chief Executive would procure temptation for himself. Unfortunately, this marks the beginning of their failures. This brings us to the fashion trends of today's men.

Many years ago, when I met my former Rector in the Seminary, who was then the spiritual director, Msgr. Jeremiah Ikegbusi, he recounted how times had changed. He mentioned that during our time, parents raised children with proper values for their continued development, but nowadays, they bring up children without any trace of home training. This explains why irresponsible fashion trends are fully embraced today, unlike in the past when only a few followed such trends. What are the definitions of these fashion trends?

Today, in addition to poor behaviour and a total lack of respect, fashion is defined in terms of nudity. Like in Eden, our girls are mostly naked, and they do not seem to realize it. Once one opens some social media platforms, one is bombarded with all sorts of filthy words from those who are seeking followers. I was once shown a woman advertising what is now baptized as “ Kpekus”, as other wares are advertised! Why is it that only nudity and filthy language attract more followers than refined content?

We are burdened by an environment where characters like Bobrisky, who would have been ostracized in the past, are now followed and even defended by those who share his views. They often justify their actions with what they term "body positivity" and the freedom to choose what to do with oneself. If suicide is a crime, one not allowed to take one’s life, logic demands that one is not entirely free to do with oneself whatever one likes. What is particularly confusing in a country like Nigeria is that despite the laws regulating certain behaviours, law enforcement agents has yet to use Bobrisky as an example by arresting, prosecuting, and imprisoning him, thus demonstrating that society remains the custodian of its values. This suggests that even those who should enforce these laws lack values themselves or have grown insouciant. Daily, in the name of LGBTQ, some young men openly declare themselves as homosexuals and lesbians, and yet they are not only celebrated but also allowed to influence others. Instead of seeking meaningful ways to contribute to society, our people are seeking easy ways to make money through boisterous indecency.

Women are naturally distinguished by the symmetry of their figures, the gracefulness of their bodies, the length and waviness of their hair, and the pleasing lightness of their movement. When a man, like Bobrisky, unnaturally attempts to transform himself into a woman in pursuit of fame, something is clearly wrong with him. Our people will start naming white men and women that did the same as if they are stamps of approval.

About two years ago, I wrote and suggested the arrest of one “Onye Eze” Jesus for indecent exposure in the name of “Isa uchu.” I commended the Anambra State government, then under Gov. Willie Obiano, for promptly taking action, but I regret that he was not prosecuted and jailed. The current situation calls for drastic action. Why does the government allow charlatans like those at Oba,l and Asaba to continue deceiving the people? For the well-being of the society, the government should either look for existing laws or enact new ones to put an end to their activities. Why should a few renegades be allowed to lead the youth astray in the name of making money without working, by promoting terms like “Oke Ite,“ “Ibubo”, “awelle”, and the like? What our youth need is not foolishness but encouragement to be inventive, industrious, and thrifty.

That young man whom I asked to cover his head probably did not understand what he was doing. He likely braided his hair because others were doing so, without a moment’s reflection about propriety. The same goes for men who wear earrings. To illustrate how low their thinking is, the culture has been hijacked by individuals like them, mostly “keke” drivers, “agberoes”, masons, and others. Have you not noticed that many of them dye their hair in various colors, braid it, and generally carry themselves with an air of importance, as if they belong to the "ndi na amovu” forward tribe? Such individuals think they belong without realizing that such indulgences were already seen in the past and died out when such fashion failed the test of reason to be sustained. What is heartbreaking is that they are not enlightened enough to realize the folly of their actions.

Also on the rise are breast enhancements and related indulgences. I consider those who undergo any type of body enhancement, including buttock and breast augmentation, as suffering from low self-esteem—all of them. They are so fixated on these enhancements because they seem to be in vogue, without considering the regrets of those who underwent such procedures in the past.

Society should not allow those who are deceived or ignorant to persist in their madness in the name of fashion. They live under the illusion that celebrities like Flavour and Osihmehn dye their hair and engage in such inverted sartorial displays, as if their participation lends legitimacy to nonsense. The truth is that many of these celebrities are not at all suited to the dignity Nigerians attribute to them. Do these pointless hairstyles affect the quality of their music? Did musicians who gave the world timeless lyrics like Don Williams, Kenny Rogers, Osadebe, and Ebenezer Obe embrace such inverted sartorial displays? What about fiery lyricists like Smokie whose words were irresistible to the ears?

The current generation often fails to grasp that there is nothing inherently novel in their actions or lifestyle choices. Breast enlargement, homosexuality, lesbianism—these are not recent phenomena. There is actually nothing new under the sun. Many years ago, philosopher Aristippus advocated for embracing pleasure, epitomised by his motto, "I possess, but am not possessed." Conversely, Antisthenes, the founder of Cynicism, emphasised stripping away material attachments to free the soul, as reflected in his motto, "I do not possess, in order not to be possessed." He lived a modest life, prompting Socrates to jest about his apparent vanity. Diogenes, a staunch follower of Cynic doctrine, famously admired the simplicity of animals and sought to emulate it by living on the ground, subsisting on whatever he could find, and openly engaging in natural acts in plain view. Let our youth know that even going naked is not an innovation. There is nothing they do today that has not been done in the past. Society always provides us with the alternative of vice or virtue, but good sense, maturity, and discernment enable us to choose rightly.

Society continues to drift aimlessly; the tragedy is that most of those who should offer direction are themselves immersed in vices. During my undergraduate studies in Philosophy, Prof. Mmaduabichi Dukor conducted a thought-provoking exercise in one of his classes in Symbolic Logic. He singled out a student with dreadlocks and asked him to ponder how his parents would perceive his appearance compared to his peers. Such gestures can prompt individuals to reflect deeply on their actions and reconsider their inauthentic choices. Similarly, I hope religious leaders, like Reverend Fathers, can delicately address such matters, encouraging introspection. I have not heard any of them express disgust during mass as the number of male braided hair threatens to equal those of women. We must urge young people to uphold discipline in their conduct, moderation in their desires, and objectivity in their thoughts.

Have you observed how some individuals profit from promoting indecency and vice? Consider those who establish clubs and facilitate environments conducive to the exploitation of women as objects of desire or even prostitution. Despite the harm inflicted on countless lives, they ultimately profit financially. Is it appropriate for us to commend such individuals? Yet, sadly, they often receive praise and recognition in our society, which has a more negative than positive effect.

In conclusion, Msgr. Ikegbusi rightly lamented the decline in proper home upbringing. As a parent, it is crucial to reflect on what we are imparting to the next generation. What kind of society are we nurturing?

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) at the Hague on Friday ordered Israel to “take all measures within its powers to prevent the commission of any acts of genocide” against Palestinians in the besieged Hamas-controlled Gaza but fell short of calling for an immediate ceasefire as demanded by South Africa in its case of alleged genocide against Israel.

In its 35-minute majority ruling read by Justice Joan Donoghue, President of the 17-member panel of Judges, the Court also ordered Israel to “prevent and punish direct and public incitement to commit genocide; and to “immediately enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance in Gaza.”

Noting that it has jurisdiction on the case and dismissing Israel’s objection, the Court also ordered Israel to “prevent the destruction, and ensure the preservation, of evidence related to South Africa's allegations.”

Both South Africa and Israel claimed “victory” over the ICJ ruling, which also ordered both parties to submit to the Court within one month, reports on their compliance with its orders.

South Africa had taken Israel to the ICJ alleging that Israel had violated the United Nations 1948 Genocide Convention as a result of the Israeli military ceaseless bombardments of Gaza in retaliation for the 7th of October 2023 raids on Israel by the Palestine militant group Hamas.

In reaching its conclusions, the ICJ cited statements by Israeli officials, including racial slurs and the reference to Palestinians as “human animals.”

The Court also referred to statements by UN senior officials describing the sufferings and deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza, as well as attacks by the Israeli military on infrastructure, homes, and hospitals, and denial of births in Gaza.

The Genocide Convention is the first human rights Treaty adopted by the UN General Assembly on 9 December 1948, signifying the international community’s commitment to ‘never again’ after the atrocities committed during the Second World War.

It describes genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy in whole, or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.”

The ICJ decisions are binding on State signatories, but the court has no means of enforcement.

Although Israel has a track record of disobeying UN decisions/resolutions, the Gaza case before the ICJ, a legal arm of the UN, is different since it touches on genocide.

Israel is among the UN’s 92-member State signatories to the 1948 Genocide Convention, which was informed by the mass killings of European Jews by Nazi Germany under Hitler, known as The Holocaust.

Also, apart from the outrage expressed in “Court of Public Opinion,” growing anti-Israeli sentiments over the humanitarian devastation in Gaza, support is waning for Israel, which continues to claim self-defence in the Gaza war.

Israeli officials said some 1,200 Israelis were killed, while 250 people of different nationalities were also taken hostage during the Hamas raids.

According to the Health Ministry in Hamas-ruled Gaza, some 26,083 Palestinians have been killed and more than 64,400 wounded since the 7th of October 2023 Hamas raids on Israel.

South Africa deserves credit for escalating the Gaza crisis to the ICJ, although it remains to be seen whether the Court’s ruling would increase the pressure on the U.S. to persuade Israel, its major ally to end hostilities in Gaza in favour of a negotiated settlement to the conflict.

Could Africa take a cue from this development, to review its relations with external partners given the “many raging Gaza-like” conflicts on the continent and other parts of the World with negative impacts on the continent and its more than 1.3 billion people?

Incidentally, Justice Donoghue is American, but ICJ judges are supposed to be apolitical and supranational.##