ICC issues arrest warrants for Israel's Netanyahu, Gallant and Hamas leader

The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants on Thursday for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence chief, as well as a Hamas leader, Ibrahim Al-Masri, for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza conflict.

In their decision, the ICC judges said there were reasonable grounds to believe Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant were criminally responsible for acts including murder, persecution and starvation as a weapon of war as part of a "widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza".

Judges said there were also reasonable grounds to believe the blockade on Gaza and lack of food, water, electricity, fuel and medical supplies "created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, which resulted in the death of civilians, including children, due to malnutrition and dehydration".

The decision was met with outrage in Israel, which called it shameful and absurd. Gaza residents expressed hope it would help end the violence and bring those responsible for war crimes to justice. Hamas welcomed the warrants against the Israelis, and a senior official told Reuters it was a first step towards justice.

The warrant for Masri lists charges of mass killings during the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel that triggered the Gaza war, and also charges of rape and the taking of hostages.

Israel has said it killed Masri, also known as Mohammed Deif, in an airstrike in July but Hamas has neither confirmed nor denied this. The prosecution indicated it would continue to gather information with respect to his reported death.

Israel has rejected the jurisdiction of the Hague-based court and denies war crimes in Gaza.

The United States, Israel's main diplomatic supporter, is also not a member of the ICC. It said it "fundamentally rejects" the move.

"We remain deeply concerned by the prosecutor’s rush to seek arrest warrants and the troubling process errors that led to this decision," a White House National Security Council spokesperson said, adding that the U.S. is discussing next steps with its partners.

Global powers Russia, China and India have also not signed onto the ICC, the world's permanent war crimes court, which is backed by all of the European Union, Australia, Canada, Britain, Brazil, Japan and dozens of African and Latin American countries.

ICC prosecutor Karim Khan had announced on May 20 that he was seeking arrest warrants for alleged crimes connected to the Hamas-led attacks on Israel and the Israeli military response in Gaza. Israeli and Hamas leaders have dismissed allegations that they committed war crimes.

The court does not have its own police force to carry out arrests and relies on its 124 member states for that, with only limited diplomatic means to force them if they do not want to.

Khan called on signatories of the court's founding treaty "to live up to their commitment to the Rome Statute by respecting and complying with these judicial orders."

In a statement he said "we count on their cooperation in this situation, as with all other situations... We also welcome collaboration with non-states parties in working towards accountability and upholding international law."

GLOBAL REACTION

"Netanyahu and Gallant now are war criminals and sooner or later some country will bring them to justice, no matter how long it takes," said Shaban Abed, 47, a technical engineer and a resident of Gaza City, now displaced in the Khan Younis area. He said the court's move was "late, but never too late".

Rabeeha, a mother of five and a resident of Gaza City who only gave her first name, said she hoped it would help bring an end to the war.

"I hope we can soon see Netanyahu and the criminal Gallant in jail," she said. "Now they can't travel, now they are being hunted."

Netanyahu's office said the ICC decision was "antisemitic" and he will "not yield to pressure, will not be deterred" until Israel's war objectives are met.

The ICC has "lost all legitimacy" after issuing the arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said.

"A dark moment for the International Criminal Court," Saar said on X, adding that it had issued "absurd orders without authority".

There was no immediate comment from Gallant.

In a statement, Hamas welcomed the warrants against Gallant and Netanyahu and urged the court to expand accountability to all Israeli leaders.

Senior Hamas official Basem Naim told Reuters the warrants against the Israelis were an important step towards bringing justice for the victims and that all countries should back them.

The EU's foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, said the decision was not political but made by a court and thus should be respected and implemented.

"The tragedy in Gaza has to stop," he said.

Jordan's foreign minister Ayman Safadi also said the ICC's decision must be implemented, adding that Palestinians deserved justice after what he termed Israel's "war crimes" in Gaza.

The Netherlands' foreign minister Caspar Veldkamp said his country acts on arrest warrants for people on its territory and will not engage in "non-essential" contacts.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a close ally of President-elect Donald Trump, said: "The court is a dangerous joke. It is now time for the U.S. Senate to act and sanction this irresponsible body."

Israel's 13-month campaign in Gaza has killed about 44,000 Palestinians and displaced nearly all the enclave's population while creating a humanitarian crisis, Gaza officials say.

It launched the campaign in response to the October 2023, Hamas-led attack which killed 1,200 people in southern Israel, with more than 250 others taken hostage, Israel has said.

Reuters

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukrainian conflict acquires global elements after strikes with Western missiles — Putin

The strikes with US-made long-range missiles at the Russian territory have introduced features of a global conflict to the conflict in Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a televised address.

"Since this moment, as we have underscored repeatedly, the conflict in Ukraine, provoked by the West, has acquired elements of global nature," he underscored.

** Russian forces successfully advancing in all areas in special military op zone — Putin

The Russian armed forces are successfully advancing in all areas of the special military operation despite Ukraine’s use of Western long-range missiles, President Vladimir Putin said.

"Our troops are successfully advancing along the entire line of engagement, all the goals we set for ourselves are being achieved," the Russian leader said.

** Russia fires ballistic, non-nuclear-tipped missile at Ukrainian aerospace plant — Putin

Russia struck a Ukrainian aerospace plant called Yuzhmash with a hypersonic ballistic missile that carried a non-nuclear warhead, Russian President Vladimir Putin said.

"There was, among other things, a combat-conditions test of one of Russia’s newest intermediate-range missile systems. In this case it was a ballistic missile in a non-nuclear hypersonic version," he said.

According to the president, the missile is code-named Oreshnik, which can roughly be translated as hazel bush.

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Biden's shift on missiles for Ukraine informed by North Korean troops in Kursk, Trump's election victory

President Joe Biden dropped his opposition to Ukraine firing U.S. missiles at targets deep inside Russia in response to North Korea's entry to the war, a shift in U.S. policy that took on added urgency following Donald Trump's Nov. 5 election win, sources familiar with the matter said.

Biden for months resisted pleas from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to ease limits on the use of U.S.-supplied ATACMs missiles, which can reach far into Russian territory, wary of potentially drawing NATO into a conflict with a nuclear-armed power.

But Moscow's decision to deploy North Korean soldiers to Russia's Kursk region represented a major escalation that demanded a response, a senior U.S. official and two other sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

The election of Trump - who is deeply skeptical of U.S. support for Ukraine - added pressure on the administration to loosen the rules on the use of the weapons and take other steps to bolster Ukraine as it suffers repeated setbacks on the battlefield, said two other sources familiar with the matter.

The decision could help to "Trump-proof" parts of Biden's Ukraine agenda by strengthening Ukraine's position in case they lose U.S. support, one of the sources said.

Trump has repeatedly criticized U.S. military aid to Ukraine, raising fears that he might suspend weapons supplies.

The relaxation of the restrictions on U.S. weapons may have come too late to alter the course of the conflict but could help Ukraine defend the foothold it has in Kursk.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A State Department spokesperson declined to say whether Biden had authorized the longer-range strikes but said Russia was escalating the conflict by deploying North Korean troops.

Moscow has vowed to respond to what it sees as an escalation by the West. A U.S. official said on Thursday that Russia may have fired an intermediate-range ballistic missile during an attack on the Ukrainian city of Dnipro, in a likely warning to NATO.

STRENGTHENING KYIV'S HAND

The relaxation of U.S. conditions was conveyed to Ukraine during a Nov. 12 call between Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Ukrainian Minister of Defense Rustem Umerov, said a source familiar with the discussions.

A day later, Secretary of State Antony Blinken informed NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and European officials of the decision as well as his Ukrainian counterpart, Andrii Sybiha, during a trip to Brussels, a senior U.S. official said.

Ukraine conducted its first long-range strike under the new policy on Tuesday, announcing it had fired U.S. ATACMS missiles on an arms depotabout 110 km (70 miles) inside Russia.

Biden's easing of weapons restrictions appeared to open the door for U.S. allies to allow their own weapons to be used in new ways. On Wednesday, Ukraine fired a volley of British Storm Shadow cruise missiles into Russia.

Since the elections, the Biden administration has taken other actions to support Kyiv, approving the use of anti-personnel mines to slow Russia's advance in Ukraine's east and allowing U.S. defense contractors to work inside Ukraine to repair U.S.-supplied weapons, enabling the Ukrainians to keep more of the gear in active use.

For months, Ukrainian officials pleaded with Americans to let them use the 190-mile range rockets for targets deeper inside Russian territory, arguing that their inability to hit air bases hosting warplanes involved in strikes on Ukraine was a major handicap.

But the Biden administration declined to give a green light.

U.S. officials have been skeptical of the value of letting Ukraine use weapons such as the ATACMs, arguing that Moscow has already moved some bombing targets out of range, and that Ukraine already has domestically made rockets and kamikaze drones that can reach into Russian territory.

They have also worried that such a move could risk a direct war between NATO and Russia, a possibility some experts and U.S. lawmakers have downplayed.

Russia's decision to deploy thousands of North Korean troops to join the fighting changed the administration's thinking.

The U.S. acknowledged in late October that it had seen evidence of North Korean troops in Russia for possible deployment in the Ukraine conflict.

North Korean soldiers had docked in the eastern port city of Vladivostok, after boarding ships in early-to-mid October from North Korea's Wonsan region, and were taken to three military training sites in eastern Russia, White House spokesperson John Kirby told reporters.

The following week Blinken said as many as 8,000 North Korean forces were in Kursk, where Ukrainian forces have controlled territory since August.

Easing U.S. controls on the use of the missiles was intended to send a message to the North Koreans and Russians that the shift was unacceptable, as well as hamper their efforts to push Ukrainians out of Kursk, said a senior U.S. official familiar with the administration's thinking.

The official acknowledged that relaxing the restrictions risked a further escalation of the conflict - but noted that Russia has so far taken no action against states other than Ukraine.

And a congressional aide said they believed the new policy only applied to the Kursk region.

"Ukraine is only authorized to shoot deeper into Russia to constrain the Russian-North Korean effort to push Ukraine out of the Russian territory," the aide said.

Tass/Reuters

It’s a famous story in Christendom. Palestine, a vassal territory under the Roman Emperor Caesar, was obliged to pay tributes and taxes to Rome. A radical teacher in the territory, Jesus, taught things that the teachers of the law and local administrators in Palestine were uncomfortable with. 

After setting traps for him but missing, they pitted him against Caesar by asking him a question that could have gotten him in trouble and possibly gotten rid of him for good.

“Is it lawful to pay taxes?” the Pharisees asked him.

“Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s,” he replied.

Caesar’s dilemma

The problem is that the world's Caesars have never been satisfied with what is theirs without resistance or, sometimes, a nasty fight. 

Take England, for example. In the 13th century, the barons revolted against King John over arbitrary taxation. When the King would not budge, they renounced their allegiance, forcing him to back down and sign a charter (the Magna Carta) which limited his powers.

It was the same in the US about four centuries later, leading to the famous “No taxation without representation” that paved the way for American independence. The Germans had theirs earlier, and the French, who loved nothing more than a rebellion, also waged violent wars against their kings for excessive taxation.

It’s not a foreign thing. Our tax rebellions have been championed not by men who often start the trouble but by women who bear the brunt. The British colonialists, for example, will not forget the Aba Women’s Riots of 1929 in a hurry.

Money not a problem

Yet, much as the world’s Caesars may be despised or resisted, running a country without taxation is not an option. Nigeria almost succeeded in doing so. I am not using the worn-out statistic about the low tax-to-GDP ratio to make the point. As long as there was oil money to spend, the problem—as General Yakubu Gowon said in the 1970s—was not the money but how to spend it. Tax was a non-issue.

The elite lived mainly on rent. Businesses recruited smart consultants to manipulate their numbers, and a small percentage of the public sector population who paid anything at all paid a token. Oil money was not the problem, but how to spend it.

We woke up one morning to find that while our population was growing rapidly and the infrastructure was decaying, what was left from declining oil sales, after accounting for corruption, theft, and our appetite for foreign products and services, was barely enough to fix the broken system. 

The day after

The states went haywire, and Caesars everywhere launched one of the most egregious campaigns to finance themselves in an epidemic of internally generated revenue. Thus, the era of agencies staffed with some of the most ruthless staff members was born, mandated to raise revenues from the living, the dying, and the dead by hook or by crook.

It’s not funny. There was a proliferation of levies and taxes, some collected on the Walking Dead. In a September 2024 report, BusinessDay said a study by the Stakeholder Democratic Network showed that businesses in Rivers State identified 75 taxes and levies. Anambra, Lagos, and Edo are also in this brutal tax-and-levy bracket.

In addition to taxes and levies paid by companies to states and local governments, the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) collects income tax, stamp duties, capital gains tax, personal income tax, withholding tax, industrial training fund tax, VAT, and education tax for the Federal Government.

If you are wondering how bad it is, PwC cited 57 percent of multiple tax and levies incidents, revealing a significant lack of coordination between the states and the Federal Government. As it might have been said in old Palestine, it was a case of more Caesars than taxpayers. The system is broken and overdue for reform.

Anatomy of the bill

That’s why the current interest in the Tax Reform Bill 2024 is good. If the good times were still here, the government would not bother, and few Nigerians would care. But we now care more because the times are hard and mainly because, in recent years, governments have promised to use taxes and levies to improve infrastructure but have done nothing, if not worse.

According to the government, the Tax Reform Bill promises significant changes in tax relief to small businesses (with exemptions for those earning below N25 million), expansion of VAT exemptions on essential goods, and harmonisation of consumption taxes to simplify the tax system. The bill also aims to increase transparency and compliance, reduce the corporate tax rate from 30 to 25 percent, adjust the PAYE band, focus on technology, and centralise VAT collection.

Governors and the political class directly oppose the reform, especially in the North. In addition to the derivation-based VAT model and potential increased tax burden, this objection concerns regional disparity. 

The governors are concerned that the reform may not energise people and enable investment. Manufacturers also have these concerns, including the potential inflationary impact of an incremental hike in the VAT rate from the current 7.5 percent to 15 percent in six years. They worry that it does not address the economic realities of the different regions, may worsen existing inequalities, and may not benefit local economies. 

The heart of the matter

I have a slightly different concern. Centralising VAT and tax collection despite genuine concerns about a poor federal structure is ill-advised. How can a government pursuing an agenda for a state police emasculate the states? 

How can President Bola Tinubu, whose government as Lagos governor achieved some of the most far-reaching fiscal restructuring by ligation, be the enabler of central tax collection, which Rivers State litigated against, and Lagos State even joined? 

How can a government that went to the Supreme Court to promote fiscal independence for local governments, promote a centralised system that collects revenues that should go to the states? Except if the intention is to treat the states like Rome did ancient Palestine—a conquered territory, by the way—a reform that creates a Caesar in Abuja does not make sense.

VAT is commonly used in Europe and is the prevalent system in many parts of the world. However, it’s a far cry from what has been implemented in Nigeria. For example, a critical element of VAT in Europe and elsewhere is VAT refund. That is not on the cards in Nigeria and never was. 

I wonder if it confers more advantages than the consumption or sales tax, for example, the predominant US system. If the goals are simplicity in the collection, lower compliance costs, instant revenue generation, transaction transparency, and lower risk of evasion, sales tax ticks all the boxes.

Still a federalist?

This centralised plan should be particularly troubling for Tinubu, an acclaimed exponent of true federalism. I understand the point about simplicity, transparency, and the benefits of technology. I also appreciate the nonsensical irony of states that ban certain items wanting to share VAT revenue from the same items. 

The government has responded to many of these concerns and said the bill is a work in progress. It promises that a fairer, harmonised, and transparent system will block leakages and create a larger pool by making the wealthy and big businesses pay more. However, it remains to be seen how a central collection and distribution system, which often has significant administrative costs and complexities, will deliver these benefits. 

Under the reform's proposed centralised collection system, Abuja may become more affluent, giving Tinubu’s government more money to spend, hopefully on good causes. But nothing stops his successor from using the same larger pool of funds for bad causes, including those that would undermine his legacy.

In Ancient Rome, lack and scarcity didn’t ruin the empire. It was complacency and abundance.

** Ishiekwene is the Editor-In-Chief of LEADERSHIP and author of the book Writing for Media and Monetising It.

David G. Ewing

In today’s tech-driven business world, the ability to navigate technological challenges isn’t just for engineers anymore—it’s a must-have skill for leaders across all industries. As an engineer-turned-CEO, I’ve discovered that the most valuable asset isn’t specific technical knowledge, but a mindset primed for problem-solving, adaptation, and continuous learning.

My engineering degree taught me to dive deep into technical challenges. But here’s the thing: Whether you have a technical background or not, you need to be ready to roll up your sleeves as a leader and “dive in,” in order to innovate. 

One of the most striking realizations I’ve had in my career is just how quickly technology evolves. Much of what I learned during my time at Harvard and MIT is now outdated—a fact that becomes glaringly apparent when I see the advanced capabilities of my son’s high school robotics team today. In today’s world, shying away from technology or avoiding challenging questions is a critical misstep. Every business, regardless of industry, is now driven by AI and data. As such, leaders must cultivate an insatiable curiosity and actively engage with emerging technologies, irrespective of their background.

Adapting and continuing learning is far more valuable than any specific technical skill. Whether you’re an engineer, a marketer, or in any other field, understanding and embracing technology is no longer optional; it’s a core skill for leaders of all kinds. The engineering mindset is a powerful tool kit for any leader facing the complexities of our rapidly evolving world. 

So, how exactly does an engineering mindset translate into effective business leadership? And what if you didn’t get an engineering degree? How can you take the best lessons from the engineering world and use it to be successful? 

Here are three key principles that I’ve distilled from my experience in transitioning from engineer to CEO:

ENGINEERING PRINCIPLE #1: BREAK DOWN BIG PROBLEMS INTO SMALL ONES

Everyone’s heard the expression, “The only way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time.” It can be overwhelming as a business leader to see all the problems the business has to overcome. You might feel yourself begin to shut down. 

The much better approach is to take out a blank piece of paper, write down the problem in one sentence, and then draw three lines to break it down into the three biggest sub-parts of that problem. Keep doing this until you’ve got it all mapped out. Then, start working on one piece at a time. Let your intuition guide you as to where you want to go next and solve the small parts before you try to tackle the big one.

This systematic approach to problem-solving is a cornerstone of the engineering mindset. It allows you to tackle seemingly insurmountable challenges by breaking them down into manageable pieces. In business, this skill is invaluable when facing complex market disruptions or optimizing intricate processes.

Innovation, in my view, isn’t just about creating new technologies. It’s about applying existing tools and knowledge in novel ways to solve real-world problems. As an engineer turned CEO, I’ve learned to look beyond surface-level issues and dig into the foundational elements of change.

For example, we had a customer with a call center who was concerned about the fact that their calls were taking five minutes. We re-engineered their process so that calls could be done in 90 seconds. When we flipped the switch 90 days later, the calls still took five minutes. But what we found was that the calls were so much more meaningful and concrete that customers were spending those five minutes buying two to four times as much as they had been buying previously. The project became the highest ROI project in the history of the company.

When we defined the problem, we thought it was about reducing call time. But when we redefined the problem, we realized we were trying to maximize customer lifetime value. We realized we had solved a different, more valuable problem. The lesson? Never be so sure of what you want that you wouldn’t take something better.

This approach to problem-solving and innovation is deeply rooted in the principles of the engineering mindset. It’s about questioning assumptions, reframing problems, and being open to unexpected solutions.

ENGINEERING PRINCIPLE #2: GET OUT OF THE OFFICE

A mentor of mine once told me, “I’ve never had a great idea sitting in my office.” He’s right. To think creatively, you’ve got to expose yourself systematically to all kinds of new places to get inspiration. Depending on whether you’re an introvert or an extrovert, you’ve got to find the things that work for you and find a way to stay plugged in. You aren’t going to have a great idea just sitting behind your desk.

Another mentor at MIT told me that if you never miss an airplane, you’re spending too much time sitting in airports. His point wasn’t to be sloppy and show up late for every flight. Rather, he was emphasizing that you’ve got to push yourself and sometimes take a little bit of risk. If everything you do is a success, then you’re probably not taking enough risks.

The difference between being number one and number two is often not 100% or 50% or even 25%—it’s less than 1%. That’s the difference between first place and second. And yet, the gains of being in first place versus second are tremendous. You must get out of the office, push and lean out and understand that not everything can be comfortable.

In engineering, failure is often seen as a valuable learning experience. The same should be true in business. By celebrating failure—or at least not fearing it—you create an environment where innovation can thrive. This doesn’t mean being reckless, but rather understanding that calculated risks and occasional setbacks are part of the journey to success.

One of the most valuable lessons I’ve learned from the engineering mindset is the importance of continuous learning. For example, I had a friend who regularly flew to Asia, and every time he did, he brought a textbook on a subject he knew nothing about. He always started his 12 to 14-hour flight on page one. By the time he got to the other side, he had mastered at least a quarter to half of the textbook and would finish the rest on the way back.

The willingness to make some white space in your life to dive in and learn something is often the only thing stopping you. All of us can study, learn, and gain more technical depth and understanding. You never know when that’s going to pay off, but it always does.

This mindset of continuous learning and growth –a.k.a. getting out of the office — is crucial in today’s rapidly evolving business landscape. As a CEO, I’ve found that this principle has instilled in me a curiosity and drive to always be learning, adapting, and improving.

This brings me to a mantra that my mom always drilled into me: “Always Be Becoming” (ABB). What it means is you always must be becoming something else. Maybe you’re becoming an AI expert, a marketer, or a better leader. You’ll always be becoming something because once you stop becoming something, it’s over, and you’re a has-been.

This principle is about staying in front of changes and innovations. As a CEO, it’s crucial to be aware of emerging trends and technologies that could impact your industry. By actively seeking out new experiences and perspectives, you’re more likely to stumble upon the next big idea or solution to a pressing problem.

ENGINEERING PRINCIPLE #3: UNDERSTAND THE BALANCE BETWEEN IMPACT AND INTENT

Nobody wakes up every day and says, “You know what? I’m going to give a half-hearted attempt and do a crappy job for my company or my team.” And yet, not everybody can make a great impact every day. It’s important to recognize that everyone has the intent of doing well, but that doesn’t mean it translates into the desired impact. As a leader, you must point out as constructively as possible when people are not making the impact needed, without ever insulting their intent.

For example, I once had an engineer who tried to write as many lines of code as he possibly could. The code wasn’t half bad, but he never put any comments anywhere, never documented his ideas and never let anyone know what he was thinking. He had a belief that if he produced lines of code (intent), he was doing a good job. We had to get him to realize that he had to produce lines of code that the team could use (impact) then he was truly successful. 

This principle is about understanding the difference between effort and results. In engineering, we’re taught to focus on outcomes and measurable impact. As a CEO, I’ve learned to apply this same thinking to people management. It’s crucial to create a culture where effort is appreciated, but impact is rewarded.

For example, as optimists, we’re always convinced that our product is ready to go the second we’ve built version 1.0. But the reality is 1.0 is never good enough. It’s important to be patient and to test and be rigorous with your products to make sure that the one chance you have to impress the customer is not wasted.

Remember to always test, test, test. This patience and attention to detail are hallmarks of good engineering practice. In business, they translate into a commitment to quality and customer satisfaction. It’s about resisting the urge to rush to market and instead taking the time to refine and perfect your offering.

THE ENGINEER’S MINDSET IN BUSINESS LEADERSHIP

My journey from engineer to CEO has taught me that true innovation isn’t just about creating new solutions. It’s about applying a systematic, curious, and adaptable approach to business challenges. Breaking down complex problems, focusing on fundamental elements, remaining open to unexpected outcomes—these are the keys to driving change and creating exceptional experiences for employees and clients alike.

While you may not come from an engineering background, if you open your mind to the idea that you will always be becoming something new, then you have the adaptable mindset that will put you on the right path to figuring out your business and experiencing joy under pressure.

The tech world is full of obstacles, but with the principles of the engineering mindset and a CEO’s strategic vision, these challenges become opportunities for innovation and growth. By embracing this mindset—breaking down problems, getting out of your comfort zone, and understanding the balance between intent vs. impact—you can navigate today’s complex landscape with confidence and creativity.

Remember, in the end, it’s not about having all the answers. It’s about having the right approach to finding them. That’s the true power of an engineering mindset in business leadership.

Fast Company

The Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) has announced its decision to support 

northerners running for the presidency and other offices who might be interested in contesting elections in 2027 in order to save the region and the country in general.

The forum at its National Executive Council meeting in Kaduna State expressed concern over the deplorable economic situation in the North under the President Bola Tinubu administration, blaming poor socio-economic policies of the Federal Government for the region’s deteriorating condition.

It warned that unless urgent steps are taken, the North may face severe economic difficulties, stating that it will declare support for Northern politicians committed to saving the region and the country in the 2027 general election.

In a communique by its National Publicity Secretary, Tukur Muhammad-Baba, ACF faulted the leadership selection process by the Tinubu-led government, which it notes appears flawed and allows so many people without competence or experience to rise to positions of power and authority.

The forum also called on the Federal Government under the leadership of Tinubu to review, reassess, reevaluate and re-order the direction of its economic policies with a view to giving it the needed human face.

“Security is an irreducible minimum of human existence. In this regard, insecurity in its various manifestations remains the most worrisome challenge for Arewa people, that has even started to corrosively undermine the authority of government; such that people have started to ask what the purpose of government is!” the communique read.

“That those whose responsibility it is to provide security will be saying they are doing their best is unacceptable. The minimum duty of government is to safeguard life and property, and doing anything less is a failure.

“Members expressed displeasure at the current and continuing impoverishment of the proverbial common men and women in the country due to the economic policies of the current administration.

“The Meeting noted in particular that Arewa people remain at great disadvantage, being already relatively worse off economically, compared to other parts of Nigeria. Livelihoods are currently dependent on micro activities. The region faces acute and chronic food insecurity; its youths lack education and skills training. Daunting as these may be, they can be reversed. The time to think big is now.

“Notwithstanding the parlous state of Arewa’s glaring challenging economic conditions, the policies of current Federal Government has continued to make matters much worse, with little indications of needed sensitivity to the precarious existential conditions of Arewa people. Succinctly stated, economic reforms while indeed desirable, should not impoverish the same people that they are meant to serve; the people may not be alive to reap the putative benefits.”

CTV

The Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) announced on Wednesday that it distributed N1.41 trillion among federal, state, and local government levels in October 2024, representing a substantial increase of N113 billion from September's allocation.

The total gross revenue for the month was N2.668 trillion, with the distributable revenue comprising various sources including statutory revenue, value-added tax (VAT), electronic money transfer levy, and exchange differences.

Breakdown of the Allocation:

- Federal Government: N433.021 billion

- State Governments: N490.696 billion

- Local Government Councils: N355.621 billion

- Oil-Producing States: N132.404 billion (13% of mineral revenue)

Key Revenue Highlights:

- VAT increased by 14.4% to N668.291 billion from the previous month's N583.676 billion

- Gross Statutory Revenue rose by N293.009 billion compared to the previous month

- Significant increases were observed in oil and royalty, excise duty, VAT, import duty, petroleum profit tax, and companies income tax

Additional Allocations:

- Cost of collection: N97.517 billion

- Transfers, Intervention, and Refunds: N1.159 trillion

- Electronic Money Transfer Levy distribution varied across government tiers

The allocation was made following FAAC's monthly meeting, which took place after the 2024 National Council on Finance and Economic Development hosted by Bauchi State. The meeting was chaired by Oluwatoyin Madein, the Accountant-General of the Federation.

At least 50 Boko Haram fighters were killed on Tuesday and seven members of Nigeria's infrastructure security force were missing following an insurgent ambush on a convoy monitoring the country's power grid installations, a spokesperson said.

Boko Haram, which has waged an insurgency for 15 years mainly in the northeast, has been weakened by the military and internal fighting but remains a threat as it makes deadly attacks against civilians and government targets.

Babawale Afolabi, spokesperson for the Nigerian Civil Defence Corp, a government agency set up to protect infrastructure, said security operatives were ambushed by about 200 Boko Haram fighters during the patrol mission.

Afolabi said more than 50 insurgents were killed in the fighting but seven operatives were missing, adding that efforts are underway to find them in the bush. He said "a few others" of the security force were wounded.

Although Boko Haram mainly operates in the northeast, Nigerian authorities say the group has cells in the largely Muslim Niger state, where they have previously carried attacks against the military and civilians.

In a separate attack in northeast Borno state, a military spokesperson said five soldiers were killed by suspected insurgents last Saturday.

Reuters

Hamas: No hostages-for-prisoners swap deal with Israel unless Gaza war ends

Hamas' acting Gaza chief Khalil al-Hayya said in remarks broadcast on Wednesday that there would be no hostages-for-prisoners swap deal with Israel unless the war in the Palestinian enclave ended.

"Without an end to the war, there can be no prisoner swap," Hayya said in a televised interview with the group's Al-Aqsa television channel, reiterating the group's position on how to bring the war to an end.

"If the aggression is not ended, why would the resistance and in particular Hamas, return the prisoners (hostages)?" he said. "How would a sane or an insane person lose a strong card he owns while the war is continuing?"

Efforts to negotiate a truce for Gaza have stalled, and the U.S. on Wednesday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for an unconditional permanent ceasefire. Washington's U.N. ambassador said the U.S. would only support a resolution that explicitly calls for the immediate release of the Israeli hostages as part of a ceasefire.

Hayya, who led the group's negotiating team in talks with Qatari and Egyptian mediators, blamed the lack of progress on Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who in turn holds the Islamist group responsible for the stalled talks.

"There are contacts under way with some countries and mediators to revive this file (negotiation). We are ready to continue with those efforts but it is more important to see a real will on the side of the occupation to end the aggression," said Hayya.

"The reality proves that Netanyahu is the one who undermines it (negotiations)," he added.

Speaking during a visit to Gaza on Tuesday, Netanyahu said that Hamas would not rule the Palestinian enclave after the war had ended and that Israel had destroyed the Islamist group's military capabilities.

HAMAS WELCOMES EGYPT'S GAZA POST-WAR PROPOSAL

Netanyahu also said Israel had not given up trying to locate the 101 remaining hostages believed to be still in the enclave, and he offered a $5 million reward for the return of each one.

Hamas wants a deal that ends the war and sees the release of Israeli and foreign hostages held captive in Gaza as well as Palestinians jailed by Israel, while Netanyahu vowed the war can only end once Hamas is eradicated.

Qatar, a key ceasefire mediator alongside Egypt, said it had informed Hamas and Israel that it would stall its mediation efforts unless the two warring parties showed "willingness and seriousness" to reach a deal.

On Nov. 19, Qatari foreign ministry spokesperson Majed Al-Ansari said the political office of Hamas in Doha had not been permanently closed.

Earlier this month, Reuters quoted a U.S. official saying Washington had asked Qatar to expel the group and that Doha had passed this message on to Hamas.

Al-Ansari said the Hamas office had been created to facilitate mediation efforts to end the Gaza war.

Hayya said Hamas had welcomed an Egyptian proposal for Hamas to form an administrative committee with the rival Fatah movement of President Mahmoud Abbas to run the Gaza Strip, a move that addresses the outstanding question of how the enclave would be run when the fighting stops.

But an agreement has yet to be finalised, Hayya said. Israel rejects any Hamas role in governing Gaza after the war and neither does it trust Abbas' Palestinian Authority to take over running the enclave.

The 2023 attack on Israel, which shattered Israel's aura of invincibility, marked the country's bloodiest day in its history, with 1,200 people killed and over 250 taken hostage, according to Israeli tallies.

Israel responded with its most destructive offensive in Gaza, killing nearly 44,000 people and wounding 103,898, according to the Gaza health ministry, and turning the enclave into a wasteland of rubble with millions desperate for food, fuel, water and sanitation.

Reuters