5 August 2016 – The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) said today that it is responding to a growing food security emergency causing malnutrition in children in both rural and urban areas of crisis-gripped South Sudan.
“The situation in South Sudan is catastrophic, and even more so for children,” UNICEF spokesperson Christophe Boulierac told a news briefing in Geneva, where he also pointed out that so far this year, the agency has treated 120,000 children under age five for severe malnutrition; a nearly 50 per cent increase over the same period in 2015.
Initially, UNICEF had been planning to provide support to 166,000 children in 2016, but that figure has been revised to more than 250,000, he added.
Seven out of the country’s 10 states have reached the malnutrition-rate-emergency threshold of 15 per cent, while in Northern Bahr el Ghazal, the malnutrition rate stands at 33 per cent, he explained.
UNICEF has also noted a sharp rise in malnutrition in South Sudan’s urban areas, including the capital, Juba, where the rates of children admitted for malnutrition to UNICEF-supported Al-Sabbah children’s hospitals were some 20 per cent higher in the first six months of 2016 than for the same period last year. The spokesperson cited the country’s inflation rate as one of the main reasons for the high increase, explaining that it made basic household staples too expensive for many families.
Mr. Boulierac stated that while UNICEF could not provide figures of children dying from starvation, “one quarter of a million children in South Sudan are facing severe malnutrition.”
According to the spokesperson, with a number of roads inaccessible, the ongoing conflict has further limited UNICEF’s ability to respond – leaving, in the most urgent cases, the more expensive option of air transport for delivering supplies.
Additionally, Mr. Boulierac stressed that “due to insecurity and the rainy season, UNICEF staff in South Sudan are unable to be fully mobile and deliver their goods and services.”
Mr. Boulierac said that of the $154.5 million UNICEF needs for South Sudan in 2016, the Fund had, to date, received only $52 million to assist with water and sanitation; child support services; nutrition; health; and education.
He indicated that more than 900,000 children have been displaced in the country, which – with 1.8 million children, or 51 per cent of school-age youngsters out of school – also had the highest proportion of out-of-school children in the world.
“An estimated 16,000 children had been recruited by armed groups, and there were concerns that the renewed violence would lead to a further expansion of that practice,” explained the spokesperson.
He also called attention to the fact that sexual violence and rape had been used as a weapon of war, saying “all the ingredients were there to be extremely concerned.”
Between 8 and 25 July, at least 72 civilian deaths and 217 cases of sexual violence had been documented in Juba alone.
The spokesperson for the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), William Spindler, added that the total number of South Sudanese refugees in the region stood at 917,418 – most of whom are sheltering in Uganda.
The recent fighting in South Sudan between rival forces – the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) loyal to President Salva Kiir and the SPLA in Opposition backing First Vice-President Riek Machar – erupted in and around Juba, on 7 July, close to the fifth anniversary of its independence.
The young country has faced ongoing challenges since a political face-off between the two leaders erupted into conflict in December 2013. The crisis has produced one of the world’s worst displacement situations with immense suffering for civilians.
The UNCTAD report was presented as a starting point for a discussion organized in Kigali by the Sub-Regional Office for Eastern Africa of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA).
DAKAR, Senegal, August 5, 2016 – In Eastern Africa, debt stocks have risen rapidly over the past five years, but debt ratios appear to remain manageable, according to the UNCTAD Economic Development in Africa 2016 Report on “Debt Dynamics and Development Finance in Africa” which was released in July in Nairobi during UNCTAD 14.
The UNCTAD report was presented as a starting point for a discussion organized in Kigali by the Sub-Regional Office for Eastern Africa of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), with Leonard Rugwabiza, the Chief Economist at the Rwanda Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, acting as the discussant.
Andrew Mold, a senior economist from ECA, recalled that it is estimated that an additional 600 billion USD is needed in Africa every year until 2030 in order to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Progress towards achieving such ambitious levels of additional finance can only be achieved by relying more on domestic resource mobilization, he argued, particularly since the prospects for ODA are not especially encouraging.
To underpin this point, preliminary econometric research conducted by ECA and presented by Andrew Mold suggests that growth performance in Eastern Africa over the last three decades has been stronger when supported by higher domestic savings, rather than being financed from external sources (such as FDI, debt, or ODA).
Between 2011 and 2014, the annual growth rate of external debt in Eastern Africa has been higher (13.3%) than the average for Sub-Saharan Africa (9%), However, as a percentage of GNI, debt levels are still sustainable, with only two countries in the region (Burundi and Djibouti) currently being deemed at high risk of debt default, according to a recent evaluation of the joint World Bank–International Monetary Fund Debt Sustainability Framework.
In order to increase domestic resource mobilisation, Eastern African countries will also want to stem more effectively illicit financial flows, which currently account for a loss of around -6% of GDP in Africa, according to UNCTAD estimates.
Similarly, remittances and diaspora savings could be leveraged more to provide financial resources in the region, especially in Kenya and Uganda.
“I hear she has developed some breathing problems after inhaling police tear gas during the Harare demonstrations today. UMakhumalo is a very unfortunate character, she needs our prayers as we play toyi toyi with our self created dictatorship” (Ndaba Nhuku, 03.08.2016)
Other victims of Police Brutality today:
“ANTI-RIOT police of Wednesday ran amok, beating up journalists and protesters who were had embarked on a peaceful demonstration against continued joblessness under the current Zanu PF led government. Journalists who fell victim to the cops during the Harare demo were Aljazeera’s Haru Mutasa, BBC’s Tendai Masiyazviripo, freelance journalists Chris Mahove and Tony Manyangadze as well as Idah Mhetu, a female photo journalist with the Financial Gazette” (RadioVop Zimbabwe, 03.08.2016).
So the Zanu-PF does not accept people demonstrating against them or the ones reporting them to the media. So the demonstrations against the economic policies and longevity of Mugabe Presidency is not seen as good thing by the ruling regime. They continue to hurt innocent civilians to be in power. The Good Governance and Justice is not worthy words coming out of Mugabe’s mouth, as his actions and his Police are making citizens to criminals for doing the duty as citizens. Peace.
“Riot police in Zimbabwe used tear gas and water cannon Wednesday to break up a protest by several hundred demonstrators gathered in Harare in a fresh outbreak of opposition to President Robert Mugabe. An AFP reporter said police dispersed the rally by beating protesters with batons and firing tear gas, injuring several people as the fleeing crowds threw stones in response. Many of the marchers wore the national flag around their necks — seen as a symbol of a surge in recent protests — while unemployed graduates wore academic gowns and others held wooden Christian crosses. Among the slogans on placards were “Once Liberator, Now Oppressor”, “Mugabe Must Go” and “You Have Failed Mr Mugabe.” Zimbabwe’s economic collapse has worsened this year, with the government now without the funds to pay even its military or civil servants on time. A series of street protests has erupted in past weeks, despite 92-year-old Mugabe’s record of using his ruthless security forces to crush public dissent” (taiMEDIA, 2016)
As there been a leak of documents that are addressing the Bilderberg conferences that have been silenced and been a not well-known public affair between the European Government and also the World Affairs,as they have been set invited to discuss the affairs and deal with the present takes of issues.
Like on the Bliderberg Conference of 1954 that we’re on the 29th – 31st May. When the Chairman for the Conference we’re Prince of the Netherlands Prince Bernhard and his Vice-Chairmen we’re John S. Coleman and Paul Van Zeeland. While the same Conference had rapporteurs on the subjects that we’re discussed, these men we’re from USA, Belgium, Netherlands, France and Italy, but half we’re from the United States. Of attenders there we’re from all across Europe, like from Norway came Leif Høegh; UK had a dozen attendees, but the one standout we’re Sir Harry Pilkington; From Germany Rudolf Mueller, Penagiottis Pipenelis from Greece for instance. This proves the importance of the conference as the nations didn’t send some random citizens.
They held the conference in hope for the American that the European Countries could through the NATO partnership have the military arm inside the European Defense Community, while German and French didn’t have faith in or could be part of the EDC. While the unity within unions like Steel and Coal we’re possible, as the sacrifices we’re not feasible, even if the American wished for something more than a European answer, but a Atlantic Pact, that we’re combining the European and American, not only trade, but also Defense. There we’re a general agreement between Europeans at the conference to work against the Soviet propaganda and advantages from the Communists.
One key pieces from the 1954: “The difference between America and Europe with respect to the problem of overseas territories emerged from the discussion as minor by comparison with the areas of agreement. The obvious objective to be sought is an agreed policy of the West to work towards colonial self~government as rapidly and safely as is possible. Such a solution serves the interests of the West and of the dependent peoples. It thwarts the imperialistic interests of Communism”. Second piece: “It was recognised that this conflict sprang largely from the differences in the emotional reactions to the Korean war in America and Europe – differences which it was thought had recently diminished. It was hoped that the negotiations at present taking place on the list of controlled exports would do much to eliminate them”. Third piece: “European unity in some form has long been a Utopian dream, but the conference was agreed that it is now a necessity of our times. Only thus can the free nations of Europe achieve a moral and material strength capable of meeting any threat to their freedom”.
The next conference we’re on the 18th– 20th February 1955 at Barbizon Conference. The Chairman of the Conference we’re H.R.H the Prince of Netherlands. Honorary Secretary we’re J.H. Reitinger and American Secretary Joseph E. Johnson. Interesting people’s attending we’re Sir. Colin Gubbins of United Kingdom, H.J. Heinz of United States and Alberto Pirelli of Italy.
Sir John Kotelawala
This was the second conference and here is the key issues and quotes from the report: “We had created the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to oppose Stalinism all Its aspects, but today that Organisation had a very difficult task. Set on foot to meet the possibility of an attaque brusquee it now found itself facing the long struggle of the cold war, perhaps to be prolonged through many decades to come” (…) “Anti-Colonialism: “A European speaker discussed the important psychological aspect of the uncommitted peoples of Asia and Africa, and a number of Latin Americans. He had been very much struck during the last General Assembly of the United Nations by the fact that so much jealousy and resentment was pent up beneath the mostly polished exteriors of representatives of these countries. This was particularly so with the Asians and to a lesser degree there was something of the kind at work in the minds of quite a few South Americans” (…) “There were Asians who, being ardent nationalists and in many cases instrumental in forging the independence of their countries, nevertheless understood the West and all it had to offer to Asia and Africa well enough to interpret it. Names of men like General Romulo sprang to mind, or Sir John Kotelawala” (…) “There was a dangerous tendency on the part of United Nations commissions, after short visits to territories under European tutelage, to recommend periods after which independence should be given. There had been continuous attacks on the Belgian position in Ruanda-Urundi, in East Africa. In this case the Commission had recommended a course which might transform the territory directly from feudalism to“peoples’ democracy”. It must be remembered that the more the Western powers were weakened in Africa the more would their political, economic and even moral powers of resistance to communism be weakened” (…) “The United Nations had entered into the discussion by way of the problem of colonialism. But in terms of the broad relationships between the West and the East the United Nations was an instrument of the greatest importance. It had been said that international law was a generalisation of British foreign policy of the nineteenth century. Whether that was true or not, there was written into the preamble and articles 1 and 2 of the Charter a set of propositions about international order which were entirely congenial to the foreign policies of all who sat there in the room and these had been agreed by sixty governments, including the uncommitted peoples whom we were discussing” (…) “One of Europe’s greatest responsibilities today was to find new formulae for getting over nationalism and in that the speaker agreed with the views of a participant who had suggested that some sort of federation might be the solution. We must find some form, whether it was of federation or of any other juridical term which one might give it, which would be a European-invented by-pass for European-created nationalism”.
The next conference we’re in Garmish-Partenkichen conference at the date 23rd – 25th September 1955. When the same leaders as earlier in the year at the Barbizon Conference as this was a continues effort on the common work. The key things to take from this one we’re this: “The discussion on this subject revealed general support for the idea of European Integration and unification among the participation from the six countries of the European Coal and Steel Community, and a recognition of the urgency of the problem” (…) “The six countries of the Coal and Steel Community had definitely decided to establish a common market and that the experts were now working this out was felt to be a most encouraging step forward and it was hoped that other countries would subsequently join in”.
In 2 Years the next conference happened on St. Simon Island on the 15th – 17th February 1957. Where most of the usual suspects showed up again, when even a Turkish representative Muharrem Nuri Birgi; Jean De La Garde, French and David Rockefeller, United States. The discussion of this conference led to this: “Several speakers urged that patience was essential in the present Suez crisis. Situations like that which developed in Iran in 1951 and was now being repeated in Egypt could not be dealt with in a hurry. A dictator who is impervious to external influences must be allowed to run through his cycle. For a period his personal pride and the demands of his position will render him insusceptible to advice or pressure. The point at which this cycle begins to turn is very delicate and needs careful watching, since a dictator like Nasser might well take desperate measures” (…) “According to the best available estimates, the expansion of oil sales in the years ahead would bring greatly increasing revenues, in fact within the next ten years the oil-producing countries of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrein should receive 5 billion dollars in oil royalties; yet it was calculated that. over this period they would not be able to spend more than a third of this amount inside their own frontiers. This would leave a surplus of about billion dollars to dispose of” (…) “It might be possible and desirable to change NATO’s present strategic!’ posture and to develop a military organization and doctrine which would free Europe from total . dependence on the threat of massive atomic retaliation. But until or unless this was done the contradictions of our present policy were damaging and dangerous. Because the peoples of NATO did not believe in the possibility of an effective shield against attack, they were reluctant to make the sacrifices required to provide for the forward advance strategy was official doctrine at present”.
The Second conference that year was in Fiuggi, we’re still the usual suspects we’re in control of it and the men behind it. Special names registered at this one we’re Henry A. Kissinger we’re a U.S. Representative and Major-General James Jr. McCormack a U.S. Representative. Key issues and quotes from the Fiuggi we’re this: “Participants from the countries directly involved, however, felt that these fears would prove to be unfounded. The Common Market would be implemented by easy stages and, if the experience of Benelux was any guide, trade With the outside world would increase together with internal trade. They were confident that the Common Market would be a step towards greater freedom in world trade as a whole. This was the purpose of the plan, although in some cases adjustments had had to be made so that particular interests would not be too drastically affected. Now that the internal pattern had been settled in the Common Market Treaty attention would concentrate increasingly on relations with third countries; the Free Trade Area would be the next step in the process of European economic integration” (…) “the main obstacle to British and Scandinavian participation in the Common Market was its function a step towards political union among the countries concerned” (…) “there was also the problem of including agriculture, which for countries like Denmark was of fundamental importance”.
At the 1958 Buxton Conference on the 13th September to 15th September 1958; which was run by the usual suspects yet again. Other representatives worth noticing from this ones we’re E.N. Van Kleefens from the European Coal and Steel Community, Jaques Rueff, European Economic Community (EEC), C.V.R. Schuyler, S.H.A.P.E., Sakari Tuomioja, UN Economic Commission for Europe and Sir. Gordon Archibald of the United Kingdom; other key quotes from this conference are these: “Nationalism could well yield positive results, as was the case in Turkey under Ataturk. It was objectionable, however, when it reached beyond its own borders hurting the interests of others. In such cases we had the right to protect ourselves, and should be firm about it” (…) “The Common Market was due to come into operation on a January 1959, and it was feared that, if no solution were in sight by then, the first appearance of discrimination would produce a schism between the Six and the rest of Europe” (…) “Further the speaker suggested that the Free Trade Area proposals were not the only alternative to theEuropean Economic Community. The notion of association had a technical meaning, and various degrees of rights and obligations were conceivable and could be worked out between the European Economic Community and individual countries on a bilateral basis” (…) “Another major problem facing the European Economic Community was the co-ordination of monetary policies. As one of the participants pointed out, the economic integration of the Six required the co-ordination of all fields of economic policy”.
So there you have it and this is just outtakes, the Soviet problem is a key picture on every single conference, but that isn’t that important now. As the proof of the cold-war and the escalated influence U.S. policy had in Europe. That with their will of a more unified Europe; this being more valid for me, as the proof of the works behind the scenes from the Bliderberg group and their supporters from both United States and Canada; as they even wanted a federal solution to issues between the nation and their integration of monetary and trade-agreements on the continent.
Also the worrying views of Europeans wish to hold-on to their colonies and the liberation of the nations under British and French rule. While the Americans actually wanted a quicker liberation, while they had the worry of Soviet and Communist influence in the new “territories”; the leaked documents really reflect the dominance and arrogance of the Europeans at the time as their paternalistic threshold came under question. Another key we’re the usefulness of NATO and the place of military operations as a countering for peace in Europe, as the fear of Soviet was a reason for the alliance after the Second World War.
Next time I drop on the subject, I will go through the 1960s documents of Bilderberg conferences. To see what else that came up in the next decade. Peace.