Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
11 July 2023 | Story Dr Sunday Paul C Onwuegbuchulam | Photo Supplied
Dr Sunday Onwuegbuchulam
Dr Sunday Paul C Onwuegbuchulam is from the Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State.


Opinion article by Dr Sunday Paul C Onwuegbuchulam, Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State.


It has been more than a year since Putin declared his pogrom in Ukraine, which he termed a ‘special military operation’. The war – which Putin envisaged to last a few weeks – is now going into the second year, with lots of people killed on both sides, including civilians. It is also notable that the war has seen the destruction of several key civilian infrastructures in Ukraine, and different human rights abuses carried out by Russian soldiers and their Wagner Mercenary Group. It suffices to say that the bloodletting and destruction in Ukraine have been great, and up until now, there seems to be no solution at hand to stop this war. As the war drags on, with Ukraine engaging in counter-offensives to reclaim its stolen lands, the question on the mind of many is when and how this is going to end. Several countries, including China and South Africa, are making efforts to broker peace in Ukraine. China, for example, proposed a twelve-point political settlement framework, which, among other things, suggested that the Western countries relax their sanctions against Russia and called for a cease-fire and peace talks. In more recent times, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa led an African group to Ukraine on a peace mission in yet another effort to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine.

Brokering peace in Ukraine and Russia while their backyard is burning

My issue in the article concerns this move by African countries, especially South Africa. Firstly, I am wondering how these so-called African leaders can jet off to Ukraine and Russia to broker peace while their backyard here in Africa is burning with conflicts. One wonders why this delegation considers the Ukrainian conflict more serious than, for example, the ongoing war in Sudan. Secondly, I have a gripe against South Africa’s efforts to broker peace in Ukraine, when some of its leaders, politicians, and educated elites have come out categorically to enunciate the phrase, ‘We stand with Russia’. It is the same thing as China (which has clearly stated its alignment with Russia) now proposing a peace plan for stopping a war that Russia is complicit in starting. I am okay with countries aligning themselves with other countries. It is a norm in international relations and is good for cordial relationships among nations of the world.  My issue is with the double standards being played out by nations and that exist in the contemporary international relations arena.

The double standards being exhibited by countries around the world regarding Putin’s war against Ukraine will be an albatross that will ultimately lead to the failure of the peace talks and peace proposals. Notably, both China and South Africa have not been frugal with words against the West and have come short of blaming the whole war on the West and NATO, arguing that NATO’s expansionism agenda in Eastern Europe has led to the war. They further argue that Russia has the right to protect its territorial integrity (against the perceived NATO threat), hence the reason for Putin’s war. But these leaders also fail to condemn the fact that Putin invaded a sovereign country at peace, thereby going against the UN Charter (Article 2, 4) on sovereignty and the maintenance of territorial integrity of nations. They have not condemned Putin’s war, which is a threat to global peace and world order. Furthermore, the hypocrisy is evident in the condemnation of America and the West for the atrocities committed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the world (rightly so), but these countries have not been vociferous in condemning Putin for doing the same in Ukraine. South Africa, for example, has been vocal against the plight of Palestinians under Israel’s ‘apartheid repression’, but the country and its leaders have been indolent in calling Putin out regarding the war crimes going on in Ukraine, in which he has been implicated personally. Hence, in my view, this war has revealed the double standards by different countries of the world when it comes to the issue of maintaining the values enshrined in international humanitarian law and the fundamental principles of human rights as encapsulated in different UN documents. In more recent times, there have been denied reports that South Africa is supplying Russia with arms to aid its war in Ukraine; if true, this is the highest form of hypocrisy from a nation that trumpets respect for human rights and the need to maintain international order.

War in Ukraine is a war of choice

Rather than telling Putin to get out of Ukraine as a way of ensuring a genuine cease-fire, China and South Africa, for example, are going around in circles using some diplomatic approaches such as peace talks that propose peace plans, which they know Ukraine will reject. It should not be forgotten that this war in Ukraine is a war of choice, and it was Putin’s choice to invade a nation he saw as helpless and thought he could conquer within weeks. One wonders whether Putin did not foresee that America and NATO – which supported Ukraine even before this war – would come to Ukraine’s aid. On this, I think it is rather disingenuous that some argue that America and NATO could stop the war by ending the supply of arms to Ukraine to defend itself. The insincerity in this proposal is that these people are saying – just fold your arms and allow Putin to have what he wants and grab as much land as he wants in Ukraine. The hypocrisy also plays out here; they assert that Russia has the right to engage in this war to protect its territorial integrity against NATO’s expansionism, but it is not right for Ukraine to engage in the war to defend its territorial integrity. This kind of thinking is what ultimately led to WWII, because world leaders at the time turned a blind eye to Hitler's first land grabs (Czechoslovakia and Austria for example) until it was too late.

It may sound rather simplistic, but there is truth in the proposal that those who want true peace in Ukraine and Eastern Europe should just advise Putin to withdraw from Ukraine and stop this NAZI-style land grab he has engaged in since the annexation of Crimea in 2014. In my view, this war in Ukraine is going on today because some countries did not condemn that first flaunting of the stipulation of international law on the sovereignty of nations. This, in my view, emboldened Putin, hence his engagement in this war against Ukraine. Putin started this war. He can easily stop it, and the nations that have aligned themselves with Russia (including China and South Africa, and other African countries) can genuinely assist in stopping the war by jettisoning the double standards that are rife in the international relations arena, advising Putin to withdraw from Ukraine. We must not forget that if they keep quiet and Putin’s expansionist move is allowed to stand, it is open season for such a scenario to replicate itself elsewhere in the world. The big elephant in the room remains China, with its eye on Taiwan.

News Archive

Reclassification of giraffe status pivotal in public action, says UFS researcher
2016-12-08

Description: Reclassification of giraffe status  Tags: Reclassification of giraffe status  

Dr Francois Deacon, specialised researcher
in the Department of Animal, Wildlife, and
Grassland Sciences at the University of the Free State.
Photo: Supplied

Great news for those who care about the conservation of giraffes is today’s (8 December 2016) announcement by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) that giraffes are now classified as ‘Vulnerable’. The species, formerly classified as ‘Least Concern’ on the IUCN Red List — an index on the likelihood of extinction of animals worldwide — is threatened with extinction.

“Until recently, few people were aware of the situation facing giraffes. It is time to show the world giraffe numbers are in danger. This reclassification by the IUCN is pivotal to get the public to stand up and take action for giraffes,” said Dr Francois Deacon, specialised researcher in the Department of Animal, Wildlife, and Grassland Sciences at the University of the Free State (UFS).

Research is essential to develop effective conservation plans for a species

Key to this announcement was the status report submitted by Dr Deacon. He was the lead author responsible for the submission of the Southern African Giraffe subspecies (Giraffa camelopardalis giraffa) status report that was part of the larger species report submitted for review by the (IUCN). The UFS has been doing many research projects in the past couple of years on giraffe-related issues and topics to address this problem.

The UFS is one of only a few universities in Africa that is committed to studying giraffes to ensure the conservation of this species for generations to come.

“The reclassification of giraffes to ‘Vulnerable’
status, by the IUCN, is pivotal to get the public
to stand up and take action for giraffes.”

A 40% decline in the giraffe population over the past two decades is proof that the longnecks are officially in trouble. According to Dr Deacon, this rate of decline is faster than that of the elephant or rhino. The main reasons for the devastating decline are habitat loss, civil unrest and illegal hunting.

Dr Deacon, pioneer in the use of GPS technology to study giraffes and their natural habitat, said “This vulnerability clearly stipulates we are quickly losing grip on our last few natural populations”. He and a team of researchers at the UFS in South Africa are leading various research and conservation projects to help save the last remaining giraffes in Africa.

Giraffes moved from ‘least concern’ to ‘vulnerable’ on the Red List

The IUCN, a health check for our planet, is the highest level at which decision-makers can prove how many species (fauna or flora) are surviving or not. The update from ‘Least Concern’ to ‘Vulnerable’ on the Red List was released at the 13th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Cancun, Mexico.

A wildlife documentary, Last of the Longnecks clearly shows how the number of giraffes has plummeted in the past two decades from 154 000 to fewer than 98 000 today — with numbers of some giraffes, such as Kenya’s reticulated giraffe, declining by as much as 80%.  

Any individual or institution that wants to make a contribution relating to giraffe research can contact Dr Deacon at the UFS on deaconf@ufs.ac.za.

 

In other media:

Announcement on BBC news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38240760
Time: http://time.com/3622344/giraffe-extinction/
The Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/12/08/giraffes-now-facing-extinction-warn-conservationists/
ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/International/giraffes-danger-extinction-numbers-dropped/story?id=27334959
theguardian: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/08/giraffe-red-list-vulnerable-species-extinction
Aol: http://www.aol.co.uk/news/2016/12/07/giraffes-in-danger-of-extinction-as-population-plunges-by-up-to/  

 

Former articles:

18 November 2016: Studies to reveal correlation between terrain, energy use, and giraffe locomotion
23 August 2016:
Research on locomotion of giraffes valuable for conservation of this species
9 March 2016:
Giraffe research broadcast on National Geographic channel
18 September 2015:
Researchers reach out across continents in giraffe research
29 May 2015:
Researchers international leaders in satellite tracking in the wildlife environment

 



We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept