US predatory engagement in Africa

By: Azhar Azam

Africa's importance for being the home of more than half of the world's fastest growing economies and two-thirds of the Earth's arable land alongside the continent's untapped strategic materials was always enormous. Realizing these advantages, U.S. officials are abruptly advising their government not to ignore or underestimate the economic opportunity and strategic consequence of Africa.


Following the Suez Canal obstruction, the strategic choke points in the region have become waterways of special significance for Washington over their role in facilitating one-third each of shipping between North America and Asia and global oil trade. American security now depends on "unhindered access to these waters" as the U.S. African Command (AFRICOM) wants to use sea lines of communication to engage the continent.

The impoverished continent is one of the few areas where China and the U.S. can cooperate but when American officials wrongly disseminate China's base in Djibouti as its first overseas military outpost, it rings alarm bells. While the Chinese support base or logistics facility was opened in 2017 to assist peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts and anti-piracy escort missions in the Gulf of Aden and waters off Somalia – it was France, Japan and the U.S. that before China had already established military installations there.

Compared to China's only base in Africa, the U.S. between 2001 and 2020 had built a sprawling network of military outposts in more than a dozen African countries. The so-called "light and relatively low-cost footprint" comprising a constellation of 29 U.S. military bases in the continent debunked the claim that the U.S. never wanted to be a colonizing or dominant power in Africa.

In fact, the most extensive and permanent U.S. military base, Camp Lemonnier, is located in Djibouti where the U.S. special forces, fighter planes and helicopters are deployed under AFRICOM's Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa program. It is also a key U.S. base for conducting drone operations in Somalia and Yemen.

The establishment of AFRICOM in 2007 was itself controversial as people and governments in Africa feared a hidden U.S. agenda behind its creation. Termed as "militarization" of America's foreign policy, its formation was driven by U.S. imperious ambitions rather than meeting development needs of the continent.

The "long game" U.S. officials accuse Beijing of in the continent is a longstanding relationship between Africa and China that has been beefed up by decades of mutual understanding, bilateral respect and trust in each other. With more embassies than the U.S. and nonpareil investments, infrastructure and development spending – China doesn't need to set up military bases to be Africa's preferred partner.

Some argue that U.S. President Joe Biden's Africa policy will focus on building America's soft power in the continent through news and entertainment industries since 24 African countries use English as their official language. While Washington always had this edge, ever-growing Afro-Sino ties are testament that cultural exchanges, not cultural influence or linguistic advantage, are vital to gain moral high ground in bilateral relationships.

Although there are some areas of cooperation between China and the U.S. in Africa from security, economy to public health – until and unless the U.S. stops discrediting the Afro-Sino intimate fondness for one another and making Africa an additional battleground to outpace Beijing globally, any collaboration won't contribute toward achieving shared goals and peace and stability in the continent.

China's engagement in Africa could be classified as constructive, for it is Africa's largest trading partner and has been financing and constructing one in five and three projects in the continent respectively. Aches of the Cold War and development and trade benefits with China are the other major factors, which would enthuse the African governments to protect their economic and security interests by resisting the U.S. pressure on China.

From tart response on rooting out Huawei gears to voicing support for China on alleged human rights in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region and security law in Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, African nations have repeatedly communicated that they oppose disrupting the international harmony by trying to target a specific country on baseless allegations for vested interests of some states.

There has been a growing realization in the developed world that China's "debt trap" – a branding that irks several countries including African nations – is a myth as Chinese companies have learned to compete in the international construction business over the last 20 years and Beijing's diplomacy relies on consensus, sophistication and shared growth, which would be "a shame" if the U.S. fails to learn.

According to the World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa, out of 690 million COVID-19 doses administered globally as of earlier this month, only less than 2 percent of Africans have received the jabs, with 93 percent of shots given in 10 countries. By hoarding more-than-required vaccine, the "me first" Western attitude is risking millions of lives in Africa and threatens to prolong Africans' ordeal.

Blaming rich countries of perpetrating "vaccine apartheid," infuriated African nations are calling out vaccine-producing countries to stop practicing vaccine nationalism. As the health crisis in India halts vaccine supply to Africa, the U.S. has ingloriously turned to its Defense Production Act banning exports of vaccine raw materials and is bizarrely telling global nations that it was in their interest to see Americans vaccinated.

Despite a huge task to vaccinate 1.4 billion people, China has ramped up production to provide vaccines to more than 80 countries. Beijing has also forged alliances with 10 countries on vaccine research and development and production that would reinforce global cooperation and meet massive international vaccine demand including African nations.

As Washington is unwilling to help on global health crises, African countries would feel that renewed interest of the U.S. in the continent could indeed be a predatory engagement, which is less about development and more intended at expanding influence to damage Beijing's image in Africa and corroding the Africa-China relationship.

*This is one of my opinion pieces that first appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":    

https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-04-28/U-S-predatory-engagement-in-Africa-ZOfsGkLAQg/index.html

Disagreements enervate transatlantic relationship and NATO relevance

By: Azhar Azam

Notwithstanding decades-old disagreements and differences from the Suez crisis in 1956 and French withdrawal from military cooperation in 1960 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) coalition Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is trying to represent the "brain-dead" grouping as a stronger political alliance after Stoltenberg flagged China's assertive moves such as coercing neighbors in the region and hampering freedom of navigation in the South China Sea.

The idea to develop NATO into a reinforced alliance was brought to light when the bloc had quietly lost relevance at the international stage and desperate efforts were required to boost its significance. Stoltenberg's creation of Reflection Group in March 2020, to determine how alliance can strengthen its political role, adduced the very same thing.

The remotely-conducted reflection process emphasized that NATO should deepen consultation and cooperation with nations in the Asia Pacific such as Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea to cope with China's rise through NATO+4 Format or other channels. It further recalled political adaption was in the lifeblood of NATO and had become a baseline requirement of its survival.

Even though NATO countries acknowledge the importance of the Asia Pacific as a crucial and dynamic region of the world, collaboration between alliance and Pacific countries doesn't seem plausible any time soon as there is no agreement among allies on priority of the Asia Pacific to NATO or of its "Asia-Pacific partners" specifically.

The lack of consensus within NATO that handcuffs American sick goal to destabilize region, the key Pacific states are also publicly snubbing the temptation to join any U.S.-led initiative such as the Quad that "excludes or contains a particular country," indicating they remain diffident to frame any bilateral relationship against any nation.

NATO chief has been harping on a stronger political alliance and Asia Pacific, hoping it would help the organization reverse the declining relevance. The experts concur the 30-member alliance could soon turn irrelevant as it lacks strategic focus with club members cannot agree on a clear and definite purpose, resulting in a mission creep.

On the onset of the second decade of 21st century, even NATO's top command felt that the organization was fragmenting badly. In order to protect itself from further internal bleeding and demonstrate alliance's solidity, the alliance started carrying out counter-terrorism and anti-piracy operations in Iraq, Libya, Syria and the Horn of Africa through formal and informal alliances.

These abortive and controversial operations boomeranged and tanked the popularity and political cohesion of an organization whose brutal history was summed up by first NATO Secretary General Lord Ismay, "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down."

After the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001, NATO for the first and only time invoked Article 5, which declares an attack on one is attack on all. But the principle to protect each other couldn’t be translated into practice as some allied governments prevented their troops from conducting night missions or stopped their deployment in violent parts of Afghanistan.

The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) consequently was mocked as "I Saw Americans Fight" or "I Sunbathed at (heavily protected and largely safe) FOBs (forward operating bases)" and failed to achieve its single objective, defeating Taliban and destroying al-Qaeda, as insurgents strengthen their foothold in Afghanistan while Americans meet demands of the militants it overthrew 20 years ago and al-Qaeda, Islamic State and other militant groups haven't disappeared from the country.

In addition to a sense of serving the U.S. interests for many decades and America's quiet shift from Europe to Asia, the transatlantic consensus is also complicated by internal divisions on China and halting and uneven European economic recovery. The splits would worsen in coming months as the Biden administration ignores Europe's economic woes and expects allies to hit defense spending to 2 percent of GDP even though they have contributed more funds in the pandemic.

Washington has been mounting pressure on Europe to jeopardize its economic interests with Beijing. The European countries including numerous NATO allies would balk at such a terrible idea that would break them up from the powerhouse of global growth, trade and investment and a valuable partner holding key to thwart global challenges such as climate change and biodiversity and achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

With Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and 17+1 cooperation between China and Central and Eastern European Countries steadily expanding in European peninsula – the global economic and infrastructure relationship leading economies will rebalance international order and bring more stability to world, urging NATO as an alliance to revisit its approach toward China and look Chinese growth with a positive attitude.

Realizing China's importance for European economic revival, the U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken promised not to force allies to choose between China and the United States. But his second visit in three weeks and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's inaugural trip to Europe to revitalize the transatlantic relationship and gain support on Iran, Russia and number-one "pacing challenge," China, underscored the NATO European allies are under full-court press of the Biden administration.

The pressure tactics and pandemic-hit Europe's economic and health crisis will only unearth divergence and divisions within the bloc, becoming altogether a source of bickering between U.S. and its European allies. These disagreements have enervated the transatlantic relationship in the past under Trump's four years and would continue to decimate NATO's relevance in the future.

*This is one of my opinion pieces that first appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":    

https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-04-20/Disagreements-enervate-transatlantic-relationship-and-NATO-relevance-ZCAlyo1dq8/index.html

Developed, developing world alike should appreciate China's victory against poverty

By: Azhar Azam

The economic development of China has been called miraculous by many experts, state heads and international financial institutions, including the World Bank. By 2010, Chinese average annual economic growth had reached about 10 percent, even exceeding the expectations of Deng Xiaoping, the initiator of China's reform program.

China's transition from a small agrarian society to global economic powerhouse was rapid. Between 1978 and 2019, China's trade as a percentage of GDP had roughly quadrupled. Chinese per-capita GDP increased 65 times in 40 years, with an economy that once accounted for only 5 percent of the global economy now contributing 17 percent of global GDP.

Forty years ago, about 80 percent of the country's population was living below the poverty line. The biggest of all China's successes is undoubtedly the pulling of 800 million people out of poverty as well as providing improved education, healthcare and other services.

Targeted poverty alleviation has been the cornerstone of China's poverty control strategy. The approach, first proposed in 2013, called for the implementation of tailored sets of targeted measures to eradicate poverty and build a moderately prosperous society.

In his New Year message in 2016, Chinese President Xi Jinping asked everyone in the country to join forces and exert combined and concerted efforts to win the key battle against rural poverty.

The national approach, among other policies, encompassed seven institutionalized systems: accountability, policy, investment, assistance, social mobilization, supervision and assessment. It further established a "five-batch" policy to take each batch of registered territory out of poverty through industrial development, relocation, eco-compensation, education and social security.

Xi's call sounded the death knell for absolute poverty. The Chinese victory against poverty means a lot for the world, as Beijing overall contributed 70 percent of global poverty reduction and met key UN sustainable development goals, which in other places look more and more distant as the pandemic rages on.

After eight years of backbreaking work, the per-capita disposable income of the rural poor has doubled from 6,079 to 12,588 yuan, and 832 impoverished counties and 128,000 poor villages have been declared poverty-free. Beijing's proposed monitoring system and five-year plan would ensure these counties and villages do not fall into poverty again.

Extreme poverty in China totaled 98.99 million in 2012. It was zero at the close of 2020, which means the poverty alleviation campaign was backed by the government's quick and substantial resource allocation, allowing Beijing to help more than 30,000 rural residents shake off extreme poverty every day.

While the pandemic exacerbates challenges to global poverty alleviation, China didn't break its five-year streak of apportioning 20 billion yuan in special funds toward poverty eradication and earmarked 146 billion yuan (about $22.4 billion) in 2020. China's investment in programs over the last eight years has now reached 1.6 trillion yuan (around $246 billion).

The ambition of a moderately prosperous society would be impossible to achieve without providing basic facilities and infrastructure development. By upgrading public services such as education, healthcare and housing, Beijing met the core needs of its people and through reconstructing roads, laying rail lines and developing technological infrastructure, the government linked destitute areas with developed areas and aided them in boosting their income and skills.

For ethnic minorities, Beijing pooled resources to launch extraordinary large-scale poverty-relief campaigns and implemented development plans. Beijing's social mobilization covered all 30 autonomous prefectures with sizable ethnic minority populations, and strengthened anti-poverty cooperation between East and West China.

Between 2016 and 2020, the five autonomous regions – Inner Mongolia, Guangxi, Tibet, Ningxia and Xinjiang – and three provinces with a large multi-ethnic population – Guizhou, Yunnan and Qinghai – made great strides, as the poverty headcount in all the regions dropped by 15.6 million, with abolition of absolute poverty in all 28 of these regions' ethnic groups.

The Chinese government rerouted specialized funds of about 300 billion yuan ($45.7 billion) to these minority zones in the last five years. Almost 45 percent of the national total addressed income disparities within ethnic minorities and raised their per-capita income to 10,000 yuan ($1,530) in 2020, bringing them on par with and even beyond the international benchmark of extreme poverty.

Some use "ifs" and "buts" to play down Chinese action against poverty, but no amount of qualifications or rationalizations can take away from Beijing's triumph. UN bodies have lauded the efforts, and the World Bank had predicted well in advance China was on track to eliminate absolute poverty by 2020.

As developing countries from Asia and Africa seek to learn from China to help their people in poverty, there is an abundance of lessons that could be learned.

*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared in "China Daily":

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202104/20/WS607e5e06a31024ad0bab6b98.html

China’s road to poverty alleviation

By: Azhar Azam

The economic development of China has been construed as miraculous by many experts, state heads and international financial institutions including the World Bank. By 2010, Chinese average economic growth had reached at about 10% and even exceeded expectations of Deng Xiaoping, the initiator of China’s reform program.

China’s transition from a small agrarian society to global economic powerhouse was splendid. Between 1978 and 2019, China’s trade as a percentage of GDP had roughly quadrupled. Chinese per capita GDP, which was just one-third of Sub-Saharan Africa, increased 65 times in forty years with an economy that once accounted for only 5% of the global economy now contributing 17% of global GDP.

Forty years ago, about 80% of the country’s population was living below the poverty line. The biggest of all successes is undoubtedly China’s victory in pulling 800 million people out of poverty as well as providing improved education, health and other services.

Targeted poverty alleviation has been the cornerstone of China’s poverty control strategy. The approach, first proposed in 2013, called for the implementation of tailored sets of targeted measures to eradicate poverty and build a moderately prosperous society in the country.

Building Xiaokang topped Xi Jinping’s “four comprehensives.” In his New Year message in 2016, Chinese president sought his nation and teammates to join forces and exert combined and concerted efforts to win the key battle against rural poverty to realize the vision of moderately prosperous society in all respects.

The national approach, among other system designs, encompassed seven institutionalized systems: accountability, policy, investment, assistance, social mobilization, supervision and assessment. It further established a “five-batch” policy to take each batch of registered territory out of poverty through industrial development, relocation, eco-compensation, education and social security.

Xi’s call sounded death knell for absolute poverty and rescued the remaining several dozen million rural people out of absolute poverty. Chinese win against poverty means a lot for the world as Beijing overall contributed 70% of global poverty reduction and made the key UN sustainable development goal, threatening to get distant as pandemic decelerates the poverty escape rate to one-third, more accessible.

After eight years of backbreaking work, per capita disposable income of rural poor has doubled from 6,079 yuan to 12,588 yuan and 832 impoverished counties and 128,000 poor villages have been declared poverty-free. Beijing’s proposed monitoring system and five-year plan would ensure that these counties and villages do not fall into poverty again.

Extreme poverty in China totaled 98.99 million in 2012. It was zero at the close of 2020, which means the poverty alleviation campaign was backed by the government's quick and substantial resource allocation, allowing Beijing to help more than 30,000 rural residents shake off the extreme poverty every day.

While pandemic exacerbates challenges to global poverty together with conflict and climate change, China didn’t break the five-year streak of apportioning 20 billion yuan special funds toward poverty eradication and earmarked 146 billion yuan (about $22.4 billion) in 2020 including increase. China’s investment in program over the last eight year has now reached 1.6 trillion yuan (around $246 billion).

The ambition of a moderately prosperous society was a Gordian knot without providing basic facilities and infrastructure development. By upgrading public services such as education, healthcare and housing – Beijing tapered off core issues of its people and through reconstructing roads, laying rail lines and developing technological infrastructure – the government linked destitute areas with developed parts of the country and world and aided them to boost their income and skills.

For Chinese minorities, Beijing pooled resources to launch extraordinary large-scale poverty-relief campaigns and implemented development plans. Beijing’s social mobilization covered all 30 autonomous prefectures inhabited by ethnic communities and strengthened anti-poverty cooperation between east and west China.

Between 2016 and 2020, five minority areas – Inner Mongolia, Guangxi, Tibet, Ningxia and Xinjiang – and three provinces with a large multi-ethnic population – Guizhou, Yunnan and Qinghai) – made great strides as number of poor headcount in all the regions dropped by 15.6 million with abolition of absolute poverty in all 28 minority ethnic groups.

Chinese government rerouted specialized funds of about 300 billion yuan ($45.7 billion) to these 8 minority zones in the last five years. Almost 45% of national total addressed income disparities within ethnic minorities and raised their per capita income to 10,000 yuan ($1,530) in 2020, bringing them at par with and even beyond the international benchmark of ultra-poor.

Some put ifs and buts to play down Chinese heroic-scale action against poverty but neither of them can take nothing away from Beijing’s triumph since they admit that incomes of rural people and minorities were significantly boosted “out of the toughest standards of living over the last few decades,” the UN bodies have lauded the miracle and the World Bank had long-predicted China was on track to eliminate absolute poverty by 2020.

As developing countries from Asia and Africa romanticize China’s dream growth and seek to learn from it to help their people languished in poverty and there are lessons that could be learnt – a big heart what is required from the developed world, unequivocally appreciate Chinese emphatic win against abject poverty and support international institutions to share the experiences learned.

*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared in "The Express Tribune":
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2294739/chinas-road-to-poverty-alleviation

Biden should keep focus on rebuilding US infrastructure

By: Azhar Azam

The U.S. ranks 13th globally in infrastructure and invests just one-third of China in development. Washington currently is facing a shortfall of about $2.6 trillion to rebuild the dangerously degraded national infrastructure. The devastated physical and technological in the country threatens to wipe away $10 trillion in economic growth, $2.4 trillion from exports, and three million jobs by 2039.

One-third and one-fifth of bridges and roads in the U.S. need repair; 20 percent of flights are delayed resulting in 1.6 million hours lost in production; six to eight million homes still have lead pipes, and over 100,000 wellheads aren't capped and are leaking methane. The nationwide infrastructure has virtually broken down, demanding extraordinary measures.

In Pittsburg, U.S. President Joe Biden detailed the first of his two-pronged infrastructure and jobs roadmap, dubbed as the "American Jobs Plan," which will invest about $2 trillion in this decade. Citing transition from gas to electric vehicles ($174) alone would alone receive more funds than repairs of highways and bridges ($115 billion), ranking Republican Sam Graves on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee called it a "Green New Deal," not a transportation bill.

The effort will be largely financed by a corporate tax hike from 21 percent to 28 percent and would eliminate subsidies for fossil fuel companies. The divisive proposal to raise taxes in a pandemic era not just appalled the Republican senate leader Mitch McConnell, it might also exasperate Democrats, some of whom had already voiced concerns on staggering costs and higher tax rates.

Before the plan was floated in public, several moderate Democrats were skeptical about Biden's tax-and-spend plans. They said the U.S. administration should be careful not to do anything too big in the middle of a pandemic and an economic crisis that would slow economic recovery and drive residents out of some states.

Biden's ambitions aren't new. The U.S. presidents in the past promised to revitalize the aging infrastructure though their aspirations never came to fruition. For instance, former President Donald Trump vowed to address the widening infrastructure gaps, nonetheless ended up making a butt of jokes out of his many "Infrastructure Weeks."

Even as Biden focuses less on infrastructure and seems to turn a long-running Washington punchline into a legacy-defining policy achievement, the U.S. president is set to bump into the same fate that wrote failures of the prior American presidents over steadfast opposition on increased taxes, especially in Senate where Democrats have a very thin edge by virtue of Vice President Kamala Harris' tie-breaking vote.

In a crisis situation that would entrench the existing and future U.S. administrations for the coming few years on improving ravaged infrastructure – Biden wants to launch "essentially a similar initiative," like that of China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), to support those communities that "need help."

Despite years of unsparing efforts to undermine peace or even initiatives to rival the global infrastructure project for sustaining its geopolitical influence, Washington is yet to convince other countries that it can really offer an alternative project set forth by China in 2013.

Biden seeks to encourage private sector investment for overseas projects while he is urged to increase federal and private investments in infrastructure from 2.5 percent to 3.5 percent of GDP. As he is finding it hard to build consensus on overhauling domestic infrastructure, it is quite unclear how he would fascinate global nations toward his abstruse strategy.

Biden is trying to imitate the BRI through his "Small and Less Populous Island Economies (SALPIE) Initiative" to strengthen U.S. collaboration with island countries and territories in the Caribbean, North Atlantic and the Pacific. Then again, the lack of resource deployment and support from island nations doubts the success of the new idea.

The BRI continues to be seen in the U.S. as China's signature foreign policy undertaking that poses risks to American global economic, security and political clout. The reason behind U.S. opposition is the project's ravishing achievements through which China had reached out to more than 100 countries and completed over 2,600 projects worldwide with aids, loans and investments of $3.7 trillion by mid of last year, according to Refinitiv data, describing why the project is "unbound geographically" and has moved beyond traditional infrastructure.

While the U.S. president should stop seeing Chinese peaceful growth ambitions with traditionalist suspicion, he needs to orientate himself with the emerging reality.

The largest global infrastructure program is easing off critical connectivity deficiencies and creating jobs, boosting trade and reviving economies across the world. Truly a global endeavor, the BRI is now a global good for nations and people throughout the continents. Biden should focus on rebuilding nationwide exhausted infrastructure. Once the U.S. president makes up for the negligence of the past U.S. administrations, he may look to play a constructive role in international well-being.

*This is one of my opinion pieces that first appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":    
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-04-03/Biden-should-focus-on-rebuilding-U-S-infrastructure-Za3pfe9zy0/index.html

Australia’s ill-treatment of refugees and aboriginals

By: Azhar Azam

Australia is believed to be a country that has the most restrictive immigration control regime in the world. Canberra wielded the scepter of power through the “Pacific Solution,” which licensed the Australian military to capture aliens before landing and relocate them in widespread offshore detention facilities.

Canberra still holds the demonic crown of being an exceptionally intolerant state for migrants. It retains the title courtesy of private contractors – overseeing all the operations of the Australian offshore detention facilities – in addition to applying taxing detention measures and collaborating closely with other regional countries to boost their incarceration capabilities.

Over seven years from introduction of the controversial offshore processing policy in August 2012 to July 2019, Canberra shipped more than 4,000 refugees and asylum seekers – defined as “Illegal Maritime Arrivals” – to remote islands in the pacific, Nauru and Port Moresby, the capital of Papua New Guinea.

Notwithstanding New Zealand’s offers to take some refugees since 2013, Australia has denied accepting the proposal. The Trans-Tasman relationship has plunged to low in years after deportation of New Zealanders including a 15-year old boy under Australian callous Section 501, urging the infuriated Green Part Party call its neighbor a “rogue nation” that should be complained to the UN.

As of 28-February-2021, there were yet some 240 transitory persons on the two islands where they are in limbo amid worse-than-jail conditions and poor access to health while being treated brutally and tortured physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually – termed as “The architecture of evil” by a former detainee.

In January, Kiwi authorities freed some of the migrants, routinely smuggled to the “luxury torture cells” by sea with electricity cut off, water tanks deliberately spoiled and medicine and food shortage. But the release took roughly 18 months during which the detainees were kept in abandoned hotels in Australia without sufficient meals, open space and medical assistance.

The Kiwi abomination for the refugees was earlier described in a leaked Donald Trump’s phone call to Malcolm Turnbull published by the Washington Post in August 2017. Then-Aussie prime minister admitted to the former US president they were not “bad people” but because he wanted to teach illegal migrants a hard lesson.

Mostafa Azimitabar is one of the lucky asylum seekers who got freedom after about eight years having been locked up in a detention center that he said was “brutal: a place of privation, of systemic debasement, of great and terrifying violence.” Azimitabar was fortunate to survive while seeing his friend killed by up to 15 detention center employees by a wooden post spiked with nails and a rock dropped on his head but perhaps not other stranded people facing Australian savagery.

It is not just refugees and asylum seekers that are vulnerable to the Australian deadly rage; there are a significant number of Indigenous Australians – Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people – who continue to be the victims of Kiwi’s racial injustice and discriminatory practices.

A Social Justice and Native Title report in 2014 revealed shocking Indigenous Incarceration facts in Australia. The study found that the Indigenous Australians were likely to be imprisoned or detained in juvenile detention by 15-24% more than those of non-Indigenous adults or adolescents.

The over-representation of Indigenous Australians in prison hasn’t changed much as they still have a high rate of deaths in custody and comprise 29% of the country’s adult prison population. Incarceration disproportionately is impacting children too, making their arrest 21 times more likely than non-Indigenous teens.

Last year’s report by the Queensland Health Ombudsman following an investigation of the killing 6-year-old child over gross negligence, exposed stark health disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians and raised serious doubts on sincerity of the government to address health issues of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.

Resolving wider Indigenous issues seems to have never been an Australian priority. The 12th Closing the Gap report, showing Canberra was way off track to meet five of its seven key objectives with a little or no improvement, exposed the government's nefarious approach to rise to the challenge.

The scheme in July 2020 was dubbed as a failure “to partner with Indigenous people to develop and deliver the 2008 targets” by Aussie Prime Minister Scott Morrison as he completely reset the objectives and expanded the scale of the plan to 15 goals in a bid to tackle Indigenous hardship.

But since the Victorian Aboriginal Affairs Framework confessed Aboriginal over-representation in criminal justice and Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody inextricably linked high rates of Indigenous deaths in custody with underlying factors of poor health and housing, low employment and education levels and government policies – the Morris government should coherently and scrupulously implement his strategy to ease up the fears and anxieties of downtrodden community.

Quite a few voices erupted within Australia last year when many nations and international leaders denounced George Floyd’s death in the US and left Indigenous families wondering why the global community was tight-lipped on Australian cruelty. Indigenous Australians surely deserve at least an even support from the world as they are just 3% of the Aussie population and account for 30% of the country’s inmates.

Decrying Canberra’s treatment of asylum seekers, use of offshore processing and prolonged detention of refugees and high incarceration rates of First Nations people– more than 40 member states during the UN Universal Periodic Review in January also raised concerns on Kiwi government failure to reduce significant over-representation of Indigenous Australians in criminal justice system.

While there are another hundreds of people experiencing inhumane Australian conduct in offshore detention centers and Morrison administration’s draconian behavior against Indigenous Australians hasn’t altered either – Canberra can no more hoodwink international world on its human rights abuses and has to obliterate the “walls of oppression” built around refugees and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.

*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared in "The Express Tribune":

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2292089/australias-ill-treatment-of-refugees-and-aboriginals