For the deposed Kano Emir, Aminu Bayero, it was not a matter of if but when. The moment the Supreme Court upheld Governor Abba Yusuf's election in January, Bayero knew the governor would need the throne to pay his debt. 

During the campaign, the governor promised that if he were elected, he would revoke the sharing of the Kano Municipal Emirate between two Bayeros among the four new emirs and restore the throne’s singular pre-eminence.

Of course, he won. But before the ruling of the Supreme Court in January affirming his election, two lower courts had ruled in favour of the APC candidate, increasing the probability that Yusuf might not get it.

But Yusuf defied the trend and got it. Since then, Aminu Ado Bayero has taken his case to virtually all notable traditional rulers in the country, begging them to beg President Bola Tinubu to save him. His last visit was to the Awujale of Ijebuland, Oba Sikuru Adetona. Neither the Awujale, the Sultan, nor any other traditional rulers he had visited could help.

The throne would be used to pay a debt foretold.

Nearly there 

But the re-instated Emir of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, is not sitting pretty yet. Not even one side of his royal buttocks is hugging the throne in the main palace yet. He’s currently in a holding room, besieged by orders and counter-court orders about what should happen next.

A young man genuinely surprised by the drama in Kano asked what the fuss was about. Why should the country almost come to grief over who of two cousins – with ties and friendships that run deep – would become the emir? It’s a fair point. 

There was a time in this country when the business of chiefs, obas, emirs—or any traditional rulers, by whatever description or name—was the concern of local governments.

How they were appointed, kept or removed was local. Their relevance or longevity depended mainly on how their communities perceived their compliance with the customs and traditions. 

Burden of a legacy 

Colonial rule exploited and undermined the system. However, the more significant damage was inflicted by the long years of military rule, which emasculated the states and local governments through a centralised system of administration that left the units bereft. Successive politicians have only paid lip service to federalism.

After the civil war and the national trauma that followed it, the military recruited traditional rulers, amongst others, to help heal the country and deepen their own legitimacy. They courted the institutions, propped them up, and invested them with responsibilities that made them more prestigious, prominent, and powerful.

A number of soldiers, especially from the North, where the traditional institution had grown from colonial rule to become something of a vital centre of political and religious authority, soon took traditional titles to reinvent and perpetuate their control, complete with the feudal and anachronistic levers of power.

Game of Thrones pro-max

A young man born into a modern world of merit, innovation and competence is right to question the sense in a country that advertises itself as a republic but is still obsessing over a wayward, neo-medieval concept called monarchy. The only thing that imitates what is happening in Kano is the fantasy TV series, “Game of Thrones”, based on George R. R. Martin’s book, A Song of Ice and Fire.

But that’s precisely the point about the pathology of the monarchy. Throne rule may be extinct in France and parts of Europe where monarchs paid for feudalism with their heads hoisted on spikes by wild mobs or it may be seriously challenged in a few remaining bastions like Britain, but the drama, the complex themes of power, loyalty and betrayal, remains a reality of our daily existence. That’s why Kano obsesses.

Powers behind the throne 

Sanusi and Bayero fancy themselves as the centre of the drama. They’re not. Both men and their supporters are grist in a vast and complex power mill grinding through the heart of the politics of 2027 and beyond in the North. Whoever wins now will still yield the throne to pay a future debt.

It's not Sanusi v Bayero. Or some karmic payback either way. It’s the leader of the NNPP Rabiu Kwankwaso v Abdullahi Ganduje and a few key members of the Tinubu’s cabinet who want to lead the North in 2027. 

One insider described what is happening as a “skirmish”, insisting that the battle, which obviously consumed former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai, is only just beginning.

Coming war

After President Muhammdu Buhari's catastrophic tenure and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s serial futile attempts at taking the presidency, the North has been asking itself if this is indeed the best it can offer. That soul-searching is at the heart of the jostling to produce credible leadership that can rally the region, if not for the next four years, then certainly for the next general election cycle.

In this coming battle, any potential contender who shows his hand early on may not be politically alive to tell the story. But that will not stop politicians from trying to succeed where El-Rufai was ambushed.

Kwankwaso is one such politician. With the victory at the governorship polls, he regained his political footing in Kano, the largest vote bank in the North-West, where his successor betrayed him. He has been trying, without much success, so far, to trash Ganduje, the chairman of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). 

What Kwankwaso may need to reinforce his grip as the potential pre-eminent political leader in the North, is to secure control of the Kano emirate. Whether given Sanusi’s own volatile history Kwankwaso would find him serviceable in this task is another matter. What is clear is that of the two devils, one is preferred.

Once the emirate is settled, Kwankwaso will return to the immediate task of worming his way into the ruling party. Why would he prefer the ruling party to the prospects of a mega-merger of PDP, LP and others? Because it’s a joke that offers no serious pathway to power, and those mooting the idea know it. Kwankwaso, too, knows it.

Why this skirmish matters 

But he also knows that the only thing more combustible than having FCT Minister Nyesom Wike and Rivers State Governor Simi Fubara in one room is having Kwankwaso and Ganduje in one room. The combatants, with the referee and spectators, are guaranteed a bloody ending. That’s why, after lining his political and monarchical ducks in a row, Kwankwaso's next stop is Abuja.

Ganduje knows that this is a fight for his political life. And even though forces around the president detest Ganduje, they are united on the matter of blocking any potential leader from the North who is currently outside Tinubu’s inner circle. There’s no guarantee they would succeed but they won’t fail for lack of effort.

As it was in the “Game of Thrones”, expect more surprises, more twists and turns, more convenient alliances, treachery and betrayals. The monarchy may be damaging itself either from within or from outside pressure, but the lessons it teaches about power, about its absolutism and ephemerality, remain for all who have eyes to see.

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

An unforgiving industry means you have to plan that much more.

Restaurants that open within the first year have a high failure rate, and they're extremely risky investments. Truth be told, I didn't fully grasp why this was until I researched restaurants for a college assignment. 

I quickly learned that the restaurant industry is extremely challenging. A restaurant's success depends on more than its ability to prepare quality meals and serve them on location.

A restaurant's success is influenced by many factors, and many of them are not simply related to the food's amazing quality and freshness. I recently spoke with restaurateurs of successful restaurants, and they revealed some of their tips and tricks for opening successful restaurants.

Michael and Kwini Reed are the owners of two wildly successful restaurants "Poppy + Rose" and "Poppy + Seed" located in Los Angeles and Anaheim, CA. Michael Reed, the chef behind both restaurants' modern twists on various cuisine styles has over 20 years of experience in the industry.

Bernard James is a gourmet celebrity chef and 25-year culinary and restaurant industry veteran. Originally from Guyana, he has been preparing authentic gourmet Caribbean cuisine since adolescence and owns Taste of the Caribbean in Los Angeles.

My own experiences and these discussions have enabled me to highlight four factors that entrepreneurs should consider before opening a restaurant.

1. Location

Significant factors to consider when choosing the right location for your restaurant are your target customers, accessibility, visibility, competition in the area, and the size or space you require to properly serve your ideal customer base. 

Once you know your target audience, you can find the appropriate location for the demographic of people you intend to serve. Choosing the right location also requires consideration of accessibility and visibility. 

The majority of restaurant chains are located near areas with plenty of foot traffic or highways as their visibility and accessibility are greatly enhanced. You will also need to consider the local competition and the size and space of your desired restaurant location. 

Selecting the wrong restaurant location can kill your restaurant if you do not properly evaluate the competition. Avoid choosing a location that is near a successful competitor offering similar cuisine. When it comes to restaurant location, size matters. 

How a restaurant is run and the overall customer experience can be impacted by its size. Customers are less likely to stay and dine in an area that feels cramped. Choose a location that reflects the experience you want to give your customers.

2. Funding

The vast majority of restaurants are in a financial deficit at their inception. The expenses associated with location, equipment, staff, ingredients, and marketing will likely result in most restaurants having more expenses than income at the start. 

Some restaurateurs seek breathing room by utilizing available business loans or credit cards to cover their growing expenses, but this is a short-term fix. Given these circumstances, cash flow is imperative to successful restaurant operations as the primary goal is to turn a profit as quickly as possible. 

Having a clear insight into your restaurant's finances is important. You can start with a cash flow statement to determine how much money you make and spend each month. A cash flow forecast can be created once your cash flow has been determined. 

Using one, you will be able to forecast future sales based on the past months or year(s), as well as ongoing operating costs, such as salary, rent, food, and capital expenses, such as taxes. According to Kwini Reed of Poppy & Love and Poppy & Seed, maintaining a cash flow forecast is vital. 

"You need to consider cash flow when starting a restaurant. Moreover, you should establish a forecasting system to determine your requirements and create a budget that includes working capital, salary, food costs, and liquor costs. 

These types of things are going to be recurring expenses each month. You want to have at least 3-4 months of operational cash flow in the bank, but 6 months is ideal. Normally, in the restaurant world, it's only feasible to have 3 months of operational cash flow."

3. Marketing

Social media has become a great tool for restaurants to advertise their businesses since it enables restaurateurs to reach their desired customer base and audience. 

Whether you are paying for social media ads or setting up your own pages and marketing your business, you must focus on social media marketing. Featuring regular food content on your restaurant's social media pages will help to attract more customers. 

Your restaurant's social media pages are also a great way to communicate with guests, not only about opening hours and contact information, but also about menu additions, events, and promotions.

In discussing social media marking with Michael Reed of Poppy & Love and Poppy & Seed, he shared, "Social media puts a face to the name, essentially. It allows us to visually demonstrate our craft to our customer base and show them who we really are. 

It provides customers with the opportunity to showcase reviews during actual restaurant service, share honest feedback directly with business owners, and connect with us on a more personal level. 

The faster pace of social media, compared to traditional marketing, works well with restaurants who change their menu offerings frequently with the seasons, like Poppy & Seed, so we can inform customers in real-time."

4. Inimitable

You can make your restaurant hard to rival by offering a well-chosen menu and excellent customer service. It may seem obvious, but the menu is one of the most powerful tools you can use when opening a restaurant. 

If the above conditions are properly met, a well-crafted and priced menu can drastically increase restaurant profits and ensure longevity. In order to differentiate your unique culinary vision from your competitors, your menu must be carefully designed.

Chef Bernard James shares how he keeps his food unique in his restaurant, "Taste Of The Caribbean LA differs from other Caribbean restaurants in that we incorporate ingredients from various Caribbean countries into our recipes and dishes. We work meticulously to ensure everything at our restaurant is fresh and authentic to capture the essence of Caribbean culture and it is evident in our food."  

An establishment's success can depend on the quality of customer service it provides. Satisfied customers share their positive experiences via word-of-mouth or online, and this generates more revenue. Exceptional customer service should accompany a thoughtfully well-crafted menu.

 

Inc

One year after President Bola Tinubu came to office, investor excitement over his reforms has faded, with some saying they’ll reconsider their positions if Nigeria stabilizes its currency and enacts more change.

“We are likely to add to local currency bonds once FX volatility declines, but the timing of that remains up in the air,” said Kevin Daly, a portfolio manager at London-based Abrdn Investments Ltd. “It will require a combination of factors such as further foreign portfolio flows, and more importantly some de-dollarization as the central bank can’t be the sole provider of FX liquidity for the market,” he said.

Since succeeding Muhammadu Buhari in late May 2023, Tinubu has instituted reforms to woo investors and boost dollar liquidity. They include scrapping costly fuel subsidies, replacing central bank governor Godwin Emefiele with ex-Citibank executive Olayemi Cardoso, who has pledged a return to orthodox central banking, clearing a foreign-exchange backlog, and overhauling the country’s exchange-rate policies — effectively devaluing the naira.

While the initial steps enthused investors, increased dollar flows and led to a rally in the naira, that’s since dissipated.

Tellimer Ltd. data shows investor inflows into the foreign-exchange market declined by almost a fifth in April to a daily average of $200 million from a month earlier and were at $180 million in the first three weeks of May. The naira has lost almost 67% of its value against the dollar since June and fuel subsidies have been reintroduced after a public backlash over rising food and fuel costs.

Inflation in Nigeria Has Surged

The policy rate has lagged price growth since 2020

Other measures investors would like to see before they boost their investments is better returns.

“We have invested in Nigerian eurobonds, but not yet invested in the local currency bonds,” said Ayo Salami, chief investment officer at Emerging Markets Investment Management Ltd. “The local currency bonds are not yet attractive given that inflation at about 33.7% is still above the policy rate at 26.25%,” Salami said.

Another issue Nigeria needs to address is the repatriation of funds.

While Nigeria offers higher equity valuations and better yields, emerging and frontier market peers like South Africa, Egypt, Kenya, Turkey and Pakistan offer less repatriation risks and a more advanced policy course correction and higher credibility that policies will be sustained, Tellimer said.

“I think as long as we can be consistent and clear about policy direction, when it comes to monetary policy and the like, then I think you will see confidence return, then you will see liquidity return,” said Ladi Balogun, chief executive officer of Lagos-based FCMB Group. “That is when you will see international investors come back.”

 

Bloomberg

President Bola Tinubu has officially signed a bill reintroducing Nigeria’s old national anthem, "Nigeria, We Hail Thee," into law. This was announced by Senate President Godswill Akpabio during a joint session of the Senate and House of Representatives on Wednesday.

Akpabio stated that the president signed the bill on Wednesday morning. He also mentioned that Tinubu would launch the rendition of the old national anthem during the joint session of the National Assembly yesterday.

The anthem "Nigeria, We Hail Thee" had been replaced in 1978 by "Arise, O Compatriots."

However, Tajudeen Abbas, Speaker of the House of Representatives, noted that Tinubu would not deliver a "state of the nation" address as previously announced, explaining that yesterday (May 29) is not officially designated as Democracy Day. Abbas apologized for the earlier miscommunication.

The bill was swiftly passed by the House of Representatives on May 23, followed by the Senate's approval on Tuesday. Presenting the judiciary committee's report on the bill, Chairman Tahir Monguno said the committee disagreed with Attorney-General Lateef Fagbemi’s suggestion that the process to change the anthem should be subjected to a more extensive review.

During the public hearing, Fagbemi had argued that the decision to change the national anthem should not be made hastily but should involve a broader consultation process.

Some Nigerians have expressed outrage over the bill President Bola Tinubu signed into law on Wednesday morning.

The bill, which was simultaneously introduced in the Senate and the House of Representatives last week, received an accelerated consideration and passage.

The speed with which both chambers of the National Assembly considered and passed the bill at a time Nigerians are facing more pressing issues occasioned by rising inflation and security challenges, has been criticised.

While launching the National Anthem at the National Assembly, Tinubu commended the lawmakers.

“Please, let’s continue to collaborate and build our country. We have no other institutions or personality that will help us unless we do it ourselves. Let us work together to build our nation not only for us but generations yet unborn”, he said.

‘Nigeria, We Hail Thee’, composed by the Britons, was the national anthem of Nigeria used from Independence in 1960 until 1978, when it was replaced by a new anthem, ‘Arise, O Compatriots.’

But with the new law, ‘Arise, O Compatriots’, will give way for ‘Nigeria, we hail Thee’.

While a few persons have commended the president for signing it into law, others see it as a mispriority.

On X, a social media user, @Zarmaomar, wrote: “The long-awaited national anthem bill that will solve the issues of insecurity, hunger, corruption and create job opportunities has been officially signed by the President…”

@Mudiaga247 said: “How does signing this bill help the Drowning Economy.”

@KennyNuga: “Misplaced priority. we need laws mandating all vehicles to shift off the road when an Ambulance is approaching. we need laws that criminalize bullying in our institutions.”

@RealQueenBee_: “This will now be an achievement for the Tinubu administration, reverting back to the colonial anthem.”
@Ikepicano: “did he know what he signed?”

@PatoEner: “This government is never implementing policies that would alleviate the poverty in the economy. Or do they think hungry people sing the national anthem?”

@DoublePrince001: “Within 7 days it was sorted….. Let’s talk about minimum wage or what will benefit Nigerians… It will take months and years.”

@iam_damayor: “Congratulations Nigerians, we now have a new National Anthem. When you want to buy anything, just recite it and you get the 2015 price of that goods/service.”

@That_Ondo_Boy: “As for me, I’m in support of this Old National Anthem ooo. Tinubu you do this one oooo. Now, let’s sign to bill the old exchange rate, old food price too as at the time of the old National Anthem.”

Analysts, CSOs fault bill

In an interview with Daily Trust, analysts and civil society organisations argued that the resolution of the National Assembly to revert to the old National Anthem was a misplacement of priority, and also a sign of disconnection with reality.

The Country Director of Action Aid Nigeria (AAN), Andrew Mamedu, in an interview with our correspondent, said the bill to revert to the old National Anthem “is an absolute misplacement of priorities and an abuse of legislative privilege, especially given the numerous pressing issues facing the nation that remain unaddressed”.

He stated: “While the National Anthem is a symbol of our heritage, the urgent and concurrent approval of this bill stands in stark contrast to the lack of prioritisation and accelerated legislative action on critical national matters. Issues such as security, economic stability, education, healthcare and infrastructure development are in dire need of attention and resources.

“It is profoundly disappointing and frankly outrageous that the National Anthem is being prioritised over these vital concerns”, he stressed.

Similarly, Yiaga Africa’s Senior Communications Officer, Mark Amaza, told one of our correspondents that the actions of the federal lawmakers on the issue were “a misplacement of priorities”.

“There is absolutely nothing wrong with our current National Anthem that warrants a change. Not only that, this episode shows how disconnected our legislators are from the challenges of Nigeria that at this critical juncture, they chose to prioritise a needless return to our former National Anthem”, Amaza said.

The Executive Director, Resource Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education (CHRICED), Ibrahim Zikirullahi, also decried that Nigeria continued to exhibit a disturbing trend of misplaced priorities.

According to him, it is disheartening to see the nation trapped in a cycle of ineffective leadership.

“Our senators, elected to represent the masses, seem disconnected from the pressing needs of the people. Who among the citizens indicated that changing the National Anthem was a priority?

“Nigerians are hungry, angry, and deeply disappointed. Trust in the government is at an all-time low.

“Changing the National Anthem does not address the urgent issues we face: it doesn’t put food on our tables, create jobs, improve security, provide reliable electricity, clean water, good roads, or quality healthcare,” Zikirullahi said.

On his part, a former senator from Kaduna Central Senatorial District, Senator Shehu Sani, said the parliament should have consulted widely before tampering with the National Anthem.

He said that altering the National Anthem without wide consultations would be seen as an attempt to dissolve Nigeria.

Commenting on his X handle, the former lawmaker said: “Tempering with or changing the National Anthem or National Pledge of Nigeria should be done after wider public consultation and should be factored in the process of constitutional amendments.”

A seasoned journalist and former Director-General of the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), Is’haq Modibbo Kawu, also faulted the lawmakers’ decision to reintroduce the old National Anthem.

He said: “The excessive embrace of the past is part of the metaphysical nostalgia that refused to appreciate the political economic choices and wrong leadership recruitment processes that led us to the deep pit we have been dug into.

“Instead of searching for far more rational and scientifically relevant instruments of problem solving, our lawmakers think an empty gesture of nostalgia offers an easy route.

“There is also an unacceptable demographic tyranny that Opeyemi Bamidele and his colleagues are attempting to impose on Nigeria, with the plan to revert to the old National Anthem. It is an anthem that would resonate with the generation born before independence and maybe immediately after. Let us unpack the facts”, he said in an opinion article published in Daily Trust on Saturday.

Lawmakers’ move in order – NOA DG

The Director-General of the National Orientation Agency (NOA), Lanre Issa-Oninlu, said even though the bill was yet to become a law, the move was not a bad one.

“You see, there is so much in words that we speak and we hear. So, in communication, the impact of our statement resonates with us. There are some anthems that you listen to and then you see a call to it. They call you to action. They ask you to act and do certain things. And there are some that are just flags that are just like any other song.

“And anytime you sing them, you don’t feel any psychological attachment. No any feeling. It doesn’t call up any passion in you. It doesn’t really speak to your emotion, and doesn’t call up to your sentiment.

“And it’s important that you have an anthem that connects with your sentiment; that calls you to action so that when carrying out those actions, the impact of the anthem will now reflect in our lives”, he said in an interview on Trust TV’s Daily Politics.

Senate, Reps’ spokespersons silent

Efforts by Daily Trust to get reactions of the spokespersons of the two chambers of the National Assembly were unsuccessful.

 

Daily Trust

In his inaugural address one year ago, President Bola Tinubu championed unity and promised to remodel the economy to bring about growth and development through job creation, food security and ending extreme poverty.

As Tinubu begins his second year as president, most Nigerians score him very low on the economy, according to results from a new national Africa Polling Institute (API) poll.

At least 84 percent of respondents expressed sadness with the current state of affairs in the country under Tinubu while 81 per cent said that the president is driving the country in the wrong direction.

One such Nigerian dissatisfied with Tinubu’s performance is Abubakar Ibrahim, a development worker in the Nigerian capital and former supporter of the president.

Ibrahim told PREMIUM TIMES that he was no longer happy to have voted for Tinubu and remains sceptical of how much he can achieve. Ibrahim, 31, sees Tinubu’s first year as one of “ups and downs.”

“The biggest problem that continues to face us is inflation and in turn the cost of living crisis. Unfortunately, these are problems induced by the president’s policies,” Ibrahim said.

The latest API national survey brings to light a stark reality, said Bell Ihua, the API’s executive director. “Hunger, poverty, and dissatisfaction are the harsh realities of Tinubu’s one year in office.”

In terms of the biggest challenges facing the country under Tinubu’s stewardship, 36 per cent of respondents said hunger, 28 per cent identified with inability to meet basic needs and 13 per cent said unemployment. This is followed by heightened insecurity (9 per cent) and poor electricity supply (5 per cent).

Similarly, about 74 per cent of respondents affirmed that their economic situation has deteriorated over the last year, compared to 20 per cent who said their economic situation had remained the same and a meagre 5 per cent who said it had improved.

“The impact of the cost of living crisis we are in is weighing heavily on me,” Muhammad Sani, a resident of Kano State, told PREMIUM TIMES. “The prices of goods have more than doubled under this administration. There are basic things we can’t afford now as a family and that has impacted our living standard negatively.”

In terms of the job performance of Tinubu, 78 per cent of respondents said he has performed abysmally, with 49 per cent rating him “Very Poor” and 29 per cent “Poor.”

Methodology

The national survey was administered between the 1st and 18th of May to elicit citizens’ opinions and assessments of Tinubu’s first year in office.

The researchers said they applied a stratified random sampling method, ensuring representation from all nationwide demographic groups. A total of 3,996 randomly selected Nigerians aged 18 years and above were interviewed in the 36 states and Abuja, representing the six geopolitical zones in the country.

The researchers said they visited three local government areas (LGAs) in each of the 36 states, covering the 108 senatorial districts in the country, as well as the urban, semi-urban, and rural residents. In the FCT, the API visited the six area councils to meet respondents.

“With a sample of this size, we can say with 95 per cent confidence that the results are statistically precise – within a range of plus or minus 3 per cent,” Ihua said, adding, “For scholars, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers who wish to undertake further statistical analysis of our data, the raw data for this national survey can be purchased on our website.”

 

PT

The Federal Government has withdrawn the three-count terrorism charge against Bello Bodejo, the President of Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore. Bodejo was arrested at the Miyetti Allah office in Karu Local Government Area of Nasarawa State after unveiling a vigilante group.

The government had accused Bodejo of establishing an ethnic militia in Nasarawa State and being involved in activities detrimental to national security and public safety. The charges included providing material support, assistance, and transportation for acts of terrorism, as specified under Sections 29, 2(3)(g)(xii), 12(a), and 13(2)(b) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

Bodejo had been in the custody of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) since January 23, with the trial court approving his detention on March 22. On May 27, the court denied his bail but ordered an accelerated hearing of the charges.

However, at the commencement of the hearing yesterday, Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, applied to withdraw the charges. A lawyer from the AGF’s office, Mrs. Aderonke Imana, made an oral application for the withdrawal.

Bodejo’s legal team, led by Ahmed Raji, did not oppose the withdrawal and thanked the AGF for his "magnanimous gesture." In a brief ruling, the trial judge, Inyang Ekwo, discharged Bodejo from the allegations.

Israel seizes Gaza's entire border with Egypt, presses with raids into Rafah

Israeli forces have taken control of a buffer zone along the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, the country's military said on Wednesday, giving Israel effective authority over the Palestinian territory's entire land border.

Israel also continued deadly raids on Rafah in southern Gaza despite an order from the International Court of Justice to end attacks on the city, where half of Gaza's 2.3 million people had previously taken refuge.

In a televised briefing, chief military spokesperson Daniel Hagari said Israeli forces had gained "operational" control over the "Philadelphi Corridor", using the Israeli military's code name for the 14 km-long (9 mile) corridor along the Gaza Strip's only border with Egypt.

"The Philadelphi Corridor served as an oxygen line for Hamas, which it regularly used to smuggle weapons into the area of the Gaza Strip," Hagari said. Hamas is the armed Palestinian group that governs the blockaded territory.

Hagari did not spell out what "operational" control referred to but an Israeli military official earlier said there were Israeli "boots on the ground" along parts of the corridor.

The border with Egypt along the southern edge was the Gaza Strip's only land border that Israel had not controlled directly.

Earlier on Wednesday, Israel sent tanks on raids into Rafah. They had moved into the heart of Rafah for the first time on Tuesday despite an order from the top United Nations court to immediately halt the assault on the city.

The World Court said Israel had not explained how it would keep evacuees from Rafah safe and provide food, water and medicine. Its ruling also called on Hamas to immediately and unconditionally release hostages taken from Israel on Oct. 7.

Rafah residents said Israeli tanks had pushed into Tel Al-Sultan in the west and Yibna and near Shaboura in the centre before retreating towards a buffer zone on the border with Egypt, rather than staying put as they have in other offensives.

"We received distress calls from residents in Tel Al-Sultan where drones targeted displaced citizens as they moved from areas where they were staying toward the safe areas," the deputy director of ambulance and emergency services in Rafah, Haitham al Hams, said.

Palestinian health officials said 19 civilians had been killed in Israeli airstrikes and shelling across Gaza. Israel accuses Hamas militants of hiding among civilians, something Gaza's ruling Islamist group denies.

Health Minister Majed Abu Raman urged Washington to pressure Israel to open the Rafah crossing to aid, saying there was no indication that Israeli authorities would do so soon and that patients in besieged Gaza were dying for lack of treatment.

Fighting in Gaza will continue throughout 2024 at least, Israel's National Security Adviser Tzachi Hanegbi said, signalling Israel was not ready to end the war as Hamas has demanded as part of a deal to exchange its hostages for Palestinian prisoners.

"The fighting in Rafah is not a pointless war," Hanegbi said, reiterating that Israel aimed to end Hamas rule in Gaza and stop it and its allies attacking Israel.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Israel needed to craft a post-war plan for Gaza or risk lawlessness, chaos and a Hamas comeback in the enclave.

The U.S., Israel's closest ally, reiterated its opposition to a major ground offensive in Rafah on Tuesday while saying it did not believe such an operation was under way.

More than 36,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel's Gaza offensive, the enclave's health ministry said.

Israel launched its war after Hamas-led militants attacked southern Israeli communities on Oct. 7, killing around 1,200 people and seizing more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.

CEASEFIRE NEGOTIATIONS STRUGGLE ON

There was no word on Wednesday on developments in the ceasefire and hostage release talks. Hamas has said talks are pointless unless Israel ends its offensive on Rafah.

The armed wing of Hamas and that of allies Islamic Jihad said they confronted invading forces in Rafah with anti-tank rockets and mortar bombs and blew up explosive devices they had planted, resulting in numerous successful hits.

The Israeli military said three Israeli soldiers were killed and three badly wounded. Public broadcaster Kan radio said an explosive device had been set off in a Rafah building.

Palestinian health officials said several people were wounded by Israeli fire and stores of aid were set ablaze in eastern Rafah, where residents said Israeli bombardment had destroyed many homes in an area Israel has ordered evacuated.

Around a million Palestinians who had taken shelter in Rafah at the southern end of the Gaza Strip have now fled after Israeli orders to evacuate, the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees UNRWA reported on Tuesday.

The Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) said it had evacuated its medical teams from its field hospital in the Al-Mawasi area, a designated civilian evacuation zone, because of continued bombardments.

PRCS said two of its staff were killed when an ambulance was struck while on a mission to rescue people in Rafah. In another Israeli air strike on a house in Gaza City, medics said five other Palestinians were killed.

In the nearby city of Khan Younis, an Israeli air strike killed three people overnight, including Salama Baraka, a former senior Hamas police officer, medics and Hamas media said. Another killed four people, including two children, medics said.

In northern Gaza, Israeli forces shelled Gaza City neighbourhoods and moved deeper into Jabalia, where residents said large residential districts were destroyed.

Malnutrition has become widespread in Gaza as aid deliveries have slowed to a trickle. The U.N., which has warned of famine, said on Wednesday the amount of humanitarian aid entering the enclave has dropped by two-thirds since Israel began its assault on the Rafah region this month.

 

Reuters

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Soldiers in Ukraine say US-supplied tanks have made them targets for Russian strikes

Ukrainian crews working on US-supplied Abrams tanks have told CNN of a series of the weaknesses and flaws with the armored vehicles, calling into doubt their utility on the war’s ever-changing frontlines. The donation was announced by US President Joe Biden as evidence of the United States’ “enduring and unflagging commitment to Ukraine.”

CNN journalists were the first reporters to see the M1 Abrams in Ukraine, at a location in the country’s east, where around six vehicles were visible, hiding in the foliage.

Crews trained in Germany said the vehicles – the US military’s main $10 million battle tank used in Iraq against Saddam Hussein’s forces and insurgents – lacked armor that could stop modern weapons.

“Its armor is not sufficient for this moment,” said one crew member, callsign Joker. “It doesn’t protect the crew. For real, today this is the war of drones. So now, when the tank rolls out, they always try to hit them.”

His colleague, Dnipro, added they are the “number one target.”

“Without defense, the crew doesn’t survive at the battlefield,” he said.

The crew showed CNN their attempts to affix active armor to one damaged tank. They used plates of plastic explosive that, when hit by a round, detonate and provide a protective counter-blast.

All 31 Abrams deployed to Ukraine are engaged near the frontline in the east, according to officials in the 47th Mechanised Brigade, who took receipt of them all. The Ukrainian request for Abrams, complex and heavy tanks, sparked significant debate in early 2023, as the American vehicle has a complex supply chain. Some versions even run on jet fuel.

Pentagon officials said in April that the Abrams were pulled back from the frontline due to the threat of Russian attack drones, although the 47th said some were still in action, despite the deficiencies that had materialized.

Much of the Ukrainian frontline is now dominated by the use of self-destructing attack drones, tiny and accurate devices that can swarm infantry and even cause significant damage to tanks. The advent of these so called First-Person Vision (FPV) drones, flown by soldiers wearing gaming goggles, has changed the nature of the war, limiting movement and introducing a new element of vulnerability to armored vehicles.

This Ukrainian crew have learned of the Abrams’ limitations the hard way, in pitched battles around the town of Avdiivka, which Russia finally took control of in February. A driver lost a leg when the armor was penetrated. Yet it is not just innovation that is hamstringing the tanks — they appear to have technical issues too.

One, parked under a tree, was almost immobile during CNN’s visit, due to an engine problem, the crew say, despite the vehicle having just been shipped in from Poland. They also complain of how, in rain or fog, condensation can fry the electronics inside the vehicle.

Ammunition is also a problem, like elsewhere on the Ukrainian frontline. They say they seem to have the wrong type for the fight they are in.

“What we have is more for direct tank-to-tank fights, which happens very rarely,” Joker said. “Much more often we work as artillery. You need to take apart a tree-line or a building. We had a case when we fired 17 rounds into a house and it was still standing.”

The Ukrainian crew expressed frustration the tanks were made for a NATO style of warfare, in which air power and artillery prepare the battlefield before tanks and infantry advance. Kyiv has long bemoaned its lack of artillery and air power.

“They would never do it,” Joker said, of NATO soldiers undertaking the same advances they make without air support. He switched to English to mimic a NATO soldier: “‘Call the aviation, call the artillery,’” he said. “We have no aviation and artillery. We have only tank. And it’s the problem.”

A spokesperson for the Ukrainian defense ministry told CNN that “Ukraine is now testing and improving equipment that was not initially prepared for our war.”

“We are asking all countries to support us with equipment of any technical capacity levels. We use all of it accordingly,” the spokesperson added.

Biden’s decision to supply the Abrams came after European allies pledged to send their own battle tanks in early 2023 ahead of Ukraine’s failed summer counteroffensive last year, a step that had been deemed unthinkable months earlier.

Kyiv’s allies have slowly swallowed the red lines of what equipment they once refused to supply. F-16s may arrive in Ukraine in the months ahead. Oleksandr Syrsky, Ukraine’s military commander, on Monday said he had signed initial paperwork to permit France to send military trainers into the country to try and reverse an urgent manpower problem on the frontlines. France’s defense ministry declined to confirm the plan, but said it, and other ideas, had long been under discussion. The move would mark a significant escalation in the West’s involvement in the war, now in its third year.

The Ukrainian defense ministry later appeared to tamp down those expectations, saying in a statement to CNN that it had “started internal paperwork to move forward when the decision is taken.”

For the Abrams crew, each delay in equipment or assistance costs the lives of friends. “I only have one question,” Joker said of US assistance. “Why is this taking so long and (comes) partially? We are losing time. It’s death to us.”

** France and Germany say Ukraine should be able to use their weapons to strike inside Russia

France and Germany said Tuesday that Ukraine should be allowed to use their weapons against targets inside Russia from which Moscow attacks Ukraine.

Speaking at a news conference alongside German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Tuesday, French President Emmanuel Macron outlined that French weapons sent to Ukraine, including long-range missiles, were permitted to target bases inside Russia.

“Ukrainian soil is being attacked from bases in Russia,” Macron said during his visit to Schloss Meseberg in Brandenburg, Germany. “So how do we explain to the Ukrainians that we’re going to have to protect these towns and basically everything we’re seeing around Kharkiv at the moment, if we tell them you are not allowed to hit the point from which the missiles are fired?”

“We think that we should allow them to neutralize the military sites from which the missiles are fired and, basically, the military sites from which Ukraine is attacked,” Macron continued.

Macron added, however, that “we must not allow them to hit other targets in Russia,” including civilian or other military targets.

Germany’s Scholz echoed Macron’s comments and said that Ukraine was allowed to defend itself as long as it respected the conditions given by the countries that supplied the weapons - including the United States - and international law.

“Ukraine has every possibility under international law for what it is doing. That has to be said explicitly,” Scholz said. “I find it strange when some people argue that it should not be allowed to defend itself and take measures that are suitable for this.”

Western allies of Ukraine have long held the policy that donated weapons should be strictly limited to usage inside Ukrainian territory. The issue is a controversial one, with fears from Western leaders that if their weaponry is used to strike inside Russia, it would escalate the violence and trigger a wider war involving NATO.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly asked permission from his allies to expand the usage of the provided weapons to strike inside Russia.

The United States, the largest arms supplier to Ukraine, has previously forbidden Kyiv from firing its weapons inside Russian territory over escalation concerns.

However, in comments that appeared to hint at the possibility of a change in policy, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Wednesday that the US would continue to “adapt and adjust” its support for Ukraine.

“Another hallmark of our support for Ukraine over the last two years has been to adapt as the conditions have changed. Battlefields change. As what Russia does has changed in terms of how it is pursuing its aggression escalation, we’ve adapted and adjusted too. And I am confident we will continue to do that,” he said when asked about the possibility of allowing Ukraine to strike Russian soil.

But Blinken also reiterated that at present the US has not enabled Ukraine to strike beyond its borders into Russia with US weaponry.

“We haven’t encouraged or enabled strikes outside of Ukraine. Ukraine, as I’ve said before, has to make its own decisions about the best way to effectively defend itself. We’re going to make sure that it has the equipment that it needs to do that,” Blinken said.

When pressed on his remarks about adjusting and adapting, he added, “We’re always listening. We’re always learning, and we’re always making determinations about what’s necessary to make sure that Ukraine can effectively continue to defend itself.”

Shift in red lines?

Previous red lines drawn by Western leaders in their support for Ukraine have been crossed, including the provision of tanks, which was agreed in early 2023 to help Ukraine breach enemy defensive lines, and F-16 fighter jets, which European governments agreed to in the summer of 2023 after months of diplomatic pressure.

France has supplied Ukraine with an unknown number of SCALP cruise missiles, according to the French Defense Ministry’s website.

The SCALP missiles have a range of up to 155 kilometers (96 miles) and carry a 400-kilogram (881-pound) high-explosive penetration warhead, according to the Missile Threat project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The SCALP is the equivalent of Britain’s Storm Shadow, which has also been given to Ukraine, and which British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said earlier this month could be used at Kyiv’s discretion.

“In terms of what the Ukrainians do, in our view it is their decision about how to use these weapons, they are defending their country, they were illegally invaded by Putin and they must take those steps,” Cameron said during a visit to Kyiv. “We don’t discuss any caveats that we put on those things. But let’s be absolutely clear: Russia has launched an attack into Ukraine, and Ukraine absolutely has the right to strike back at Russia.”

France has also supplied Ukraine with a range of military weaponry, including Caesar self-propelled howitzers with a range of up to 42 kilometers.

Macron stressed that the French arms are to be used only against targets from which attacks are launched into Ukraine.

“We must not allow them to hit other targets in Russia,” including civilian or other military targets, the French leader said.

But Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed Ukraine could not use the long-range weapons without significant NATO support, and such involvement by the alliance could trigger “a global conflict.”

For instance, “long-range precision weapons cannot be used without space-based reconnaissance,” Putin said Tuesday during a state visit to Uzbekistan.

“Final target selection” or “launch mission” for Western systems need to be made by “highly skilled specialists who rely on this reconnaissance data,” Putin said.

“So, these officials from NATO countries, especially the ones based in Europe, particularly in small European countries, should be fully aware of what is at stake,” he emphasized.

“They should keep in mind that theirs are small and densely populated countries, which is a factor to reckon with before they start talking about striking deep into the Russian territory.”

Meanwhile, Ukraine got a key pledge of support on Tuesday from Belgium, which said it will supply Kyiv with 30 F-16 fighter jets in the next four years, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The deal was part of a bilateral security agreement signed between the two countries Tuesday in Brussels, according to the Ukrainian leader.

The agreement includes at least $1.06 billion in Belgian military aid to Ukraine this year, with Belgium offering its long-term commitment to support Ukraine over the next 10 years, Zelensky detailed in a post on X. The first F-16 jets from Belgium will be delivered this year.

“The agreement guarantees Belgium’s timely security assistance, modern armored vehicles, equipment to meet Ukraine’s air force and air defense needs, naval security, mine clearance, participation in the artillery ammunition coalition, and military training,” Zelensky said.

The meeting follows a similar agreement between Ukraine and Spain on Monday, with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez announcing a $1.08 billion weapons deal for Ukraine.

Alongside Belgium and Spain, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Denmark, Finland and Canada have also signed security agreements.

 

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Russian troops destroy first French-made TRF1 howitzer in Ukraine operation

Russian troops destroyed the first French-made TRF1 towed howitzer of the Ukrainian army over the past day in the special military operation in Ukraine, Russia’s Defense Ministry reported on Wednesday.

Russia’s Battlegroup West units gained better ground and inflicted casualties on six Ukrainian army and National Guard brigades in the Kupyansk area where the enemy lost roughly 400 troops over the past day, it specified.

In addition, "the Ukrainian army lost two tanks, 11 motor vehicles, a Polish-manufactured 155mm Krab self-propelled artillery system, a French-made 155mm TRF1 howitzer and two US-made 105mm M119 guns," the ministry said in a statement.

Ukrainian army loses 165 troops in Kharkov area over past day

The Ukrainian army lost roughly 165 troops and two combat vehicles in battles with Russian forces in the Kharkov area over the past day, the ministry reported.

"Battlegroup North units continued advancing deep into the enemy’s defenses and inflicted casualties on manpower and equipment of the Ukrainian army’s 82nd air assault, 3rd tank and 125th territorial defense brigades in areas near the settlements of Liptsy, Volchansk, Vilcha, Neskuchnoye and Malaya Danilovka in the Kharkov Region. In addition, they repulsed four counterattacks by assault groups of the Ukrainian army’s 57th motorized infantry, 71st jaeger and 13th National Guard brigades," the ministry said.

The Ukrainian army’s losses in the Kharkov direction over the past 24 hours amounted to 165 personnel, two infantry fighting vehicles, seven motor vehicles, a 152mm D-20 howitzer, a US-manufactured 155mm Paladin self-propelled artillery gun and two Bukovel-AD electronic warfare stations, it specified.

Russian forces also destroyed a Ukrainian ammunition depot, it said.

Russian troops strike six Ukrainian army brigades in Kupyansk area over past day

Russian troops advanced to better positions and inflicted casualties on six Ukrainian army brigades in the Kupyansk area over the past day, the ministry reported.

"Battlegroup West units took more advantageous positions and inflicted damage on formations of the Ukrainian army’s 14th, 30th, 77th and 116th mechanized, 13th and 31st National Guard brigades in areas near the settlements of Sinkovka in the Kharkov Region, Novosyolovskoye in the Lugansk People’s Republic, Grigorovka and Serebryanka in the Donetsk People’s Republic. They repelled two counterattacks by assault groups of the Ukrainian army’s 43rd mechanized brigade and 3rd border guard squad. The Ukrainian army lost as many as 400 personnel," the ministry said.

Ukrainian army loses 245 troops in Donetsk area over past day

The Ukrainian army lost roughly 245 troops and six ammunition depots in battles with Russian forces in the Donetsk area over the past day, the ministry reported.

"The enemy lost as many as 245 personnel, two tanks, two motor vehicles, a 152mm Giatsint gun and a 122mm D-30 howitzer. Over the past 24 hours, six ammunition depots of the Ukrainian army were destroyed," the ministry said.

Kiev loses 125 troops in south Donetsk area over past day

The Ukrainian army lost roughly 125 troops in battles with Russian forces in the south Donetsk area over the past day, the ministry reported.

"The enemy’s losses amounted to 125 personnel, a tank, two armored combat vehicles and six motor vehicles," the ministry said.

 

CNN/Tass

This week last year, two things were enthroned in the Nigerian political space. One was the man, Bola Tinubu, who was sworn in as the president. The other was the myth of the man as a headhunter endowed with a unique instinct for sourcing the right talent and an astute administrator. So much was this idea of Tinubu as administrative capacity believed that his supporters were sure he would—to use the language of former Abia state governor Orji Kalu—forward Nigeria to all forwardness. Well, it is one year now, and we might as well start asking how that myth has fared.

Let me digress here to point out that two kinds of people propagated the myth of Tinubu’s governing capacity. In one category are those you might call the Know-No-Betters. These are those who have never seen—let alone lived in—a properly functioning city and therefore have no frame of comparison when they were told Tinubu would build Nigeria as he built Lagos. They could be beguiled by the travesty of Lagos, a city where property value costs a fortune but cannot even boast of something as basic as potable water because that is the height of their experience. Even when they see the seedy sides of Lagos, their desperation for an idol to worship pushes them to willingly blind themselves to reality by eagerly gorging on glossy photoshopped images of Eko Atlantic. When you can self-soothe with the visuals of utopia, dystopia becomes livable.

Then there are the Dishonest-Know-Betters—the people whose lives and livelihoods depend on peddling lies, distortions, sentiments, and blatantly voiced falsehoods. They have experienced functional societies so they know what we have is subpar but they still tell you it is sufficient. Nigeria’s future does not concern them because they have built a safe house elsewhere where they and their children will forever be untainted by the rottenness of the country.

So, how has the myth of Tinubu as a savvy administrator held up? Well, two separate policies might best illustrate how they have conducted themselves in office so far. On May 29, 2023, Tinubu pronounced the three words that immediately unleashed hardship on Nigerians who had already endured hell under the Muhammadu Buhari administration: subsidy is gone. Now, the issue is not that he removed the subsidy—that was already expected—but he was haphazard about such a significant step.

Here is why: about a month after that pronouncement, he announced that he could announce the decision because he was under the influence of some “spirits.” Please think about that for a moment. The President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria made a decision that would affect the lives and livelihood of millions of people, not because he had sat down and worked out a policy agenda with an economic team, but because he was pushed by some voices in his head? Wow!

If it was some “spirits” that took possession of him and forced the words out of his mouth, it means there was no thorough planning to see how the fuel subsidy removal would work, how to mitigate the resultant suffering, and how to assess if their programme was working. Even worse, it means he cannot fully take responsibility for the fallouts of such a programme since it originated from some forces. Whatever pain and hardship you will experience due to his policy decision is not for him to bear. After all, he only acted under some supernatural influence when he pronounced the policy into effect. That too is worth ruminating over: the man some people convinced themselves would turn Nigeria into a Dubai does not plan.

Then came this year when the same administration that told us that the fuel subsidy that helped to attenuate the economic reality was a waste also approved a whopping N90bn to subsidise the hajj pilgrimage. Again, this is worth a reflection: the man saw Nigerians groan in pain from his fuel subsidy removal and grovelled for help, but looked away. They insisted on delivering the hard shocks because the subsidies were supposedly a waste of resources. They offered “palliatives” instead. Their efforts in this direction were so poorly thought-out and poorly organised that they reversed the plan. So, while they had no answer for the pain of the generality of Nigerians and resolutely watched people suffer, they had no qualms catering to a tiny segment of the population embarking on something as privileged as a religious pilgrimage.

What is worse than Tinubu paying N90bn on the hajj this year is that he has to pay it next year, and the year after, and continue like that, especially as his second term election approaches. If he fails to sustain it, the Muslim population whose vote he is targeting through the humongous expense will not forgive him. Worse still, they would have forgotten what he paid in 2024. He has to keep up the spending. Given the Nigerian penchant to turn virtually any initiative into an avenue to siphon public funds, do not be any surprised if that N90bn starts ballooning yearly. You assess the situation he got himself and long-suffering Nigerians into, and wonder how a man who was so mythicized could unravel that quickly. When it came to administering pain and shock, Tinubu was possessed with the spirits of “courage” and “freedom” as he gayly put it. When it came to standing up to religious and ethnic sentiments, his pandering revealed those spirits as “cowardice” and “economic bondage.”

But that is not only where the legion spirits of indecisiveness have possessed the man. First, he took forever to assemble a cabinet even though he won the election in March. He had enough time to decide on a team; he just took it for granted. By the time he unfolded his team, there was initially some confusion over who had made the list. When the final list was unfolded, it was anything but inspiring. Even some of his supporters who had boasted that he knows how to look for the best people were disappointed by how many of those nominated were recycled from the garbage cans of the past administration. To think they even expanded the cabinet just to take some clowns on board.

He signed the Student Loan Act into law, but they later withdrew it with the promise to return. Till now, they are still fumbling through the launch. He recalled ambassadors from their posts, but it turned out that he had no plans in place to replace them. He also proposed the Green Tax but had to reverse it when the introduction turned out to be ill-timed. Then there were the Import Tax Adjustment Levy, Expatriate Tax, and the Cybersecurity Levy that were introduced but needed to be reversed. He will probably go down in history as the president with the most reversed policies in the history of governance at the rate he is going. Even the construction Lagos-Calabar highway, announced with fanfare, had not been fully thought through. Then the blatant and needless lies such as the UAE visa ban and the Maersk affair suggest that they lack any integrity. If they cannot be honest with even the simple things, why should you trust them on the big things?

Plot all of these together, and you come up with a solid picture of a man whose administration lacks coordination and takes decisions based on what their hormones (and some spirits, of course) dictate. Tinubu’s myth as an efficient administrator that has always been propped up with media propaganda and self-serving intellectuals has severely unravelled, revealing an unpleasant picture of the man, the myth, and the mediocrity. To think we are going through this after “16 years of the Peoples Democratic Party” and “eight years of Buhari.” Add the past one year, and you see 25 directionless years. God help somebody!

 

Punch