Uniting Against Boko Haram

In France, terrorist attacks killing 17 triggered a demonstration of support by dozens of world leaders and millions of marchers. In Nigeria, a new attack by Boko Haram terrorists killed hundreds and caused barely a shrug.

French President Francois Hollande called for national unity and ordered more than 10,000 security personnel to protect his country's schools, public buildings and critical infrastructure. In Nigeria, after the atrocity in the northeastern town of Baga, President Goodluck Jonathan was all but silent -– just as he stayed mute for weeks last spring after Boko Haram kidnapped more than 200 schoolgirls.

Hollande's call for unity was hardly necessary: In France, solidarity comes naturally in the face of such a crime. In Nigeria, it does not. History has carved deep sectarian, ethnic and economic fissures across the country. Governments, both military and civilian, have failed to close them. The parties contesting next month's elections must strive to change this. Boko Haram cannot be defeated otherwise.

The group has been ruthless in its efforts to carve out an Islamic republic in northern Nigeria and the surrounding region. The conflict has already claimed as many as 20,000 casualties, displaced more than 300,000 people and disrupted the lives of millions more. There are no bounds to the depravity of a movement that uses children as suicide bombers. Yet the brutality, venality and incompetence of Nigeria’s government and security forces have empowered the enemy.

Nigeria is Africa’s most populous country, its largest economy and its biggest producer of oil. It has vast economic potential -- but poverty is nearly three times more prevalent in the Muslim north than in the Christian south. Long-standing animosities divide followers of the two faiths, as well as herders from farmers, settlers from so-called indigenes, tribes of the oil-bearing Niger Delta from those of other parts of the country. “Corruption is so pervasive in Nigeria,” reported Human Rights Watch, “that it has turned public service for many into a kind of criminal enterprise.”

The head of Nigeria’s central bank once estimated that 10 percent of gross domestic product was lost each year to fraud. About the same proportion of the country's oil is simply stolen. The army and police are notoriously abusive. The U.S. State Department has compiled information about human-rights abuses that implicates about half the units in the Nigerian military.

Boko Haram’s emergence in Nigeria's poor northeast was no accident. Its origins lie in legitimate grievances, and its quest for an Islamic state with sharia courts began nonviolently. After bloody clashes between Christians and Muslims and growing repression by security forces, the movement took a more radical turn. In 2009, more than 700 were killed in a crackdown; the group's leader, Mohammed Yusuf, died in police custody. After that, the movement splintered and became more violent, burning schools and churches, and bombing railway stations.

Boko Haram aims to delegitimize next month's vote by suppressing turnout: Predictably, the violence has worsened ahead of the election. The parties contesting the vote can best respond by toning down their mutual antagonism and bloodthirsty rhetoric. The government must also try harder to provide security for polling places, especially in the north, and speed up its introduction of biometric voting cards. More international observers, deployed for longer, would help.

There's a limit to what outsiders can do, though. The U.S. and U.K. have curtailed cooperation with Nigeria's beleaguered army because of human-rights abuses. Specific, vetted units might still be receptive to training and assistance. Beyond that, strengthening the ability of Nigeria's neighbors to prevent Boko Haram's incursions might be the best outsiders can do.

After the election on Feb. 14, the winner must start to address the grievances that have fueled not just Boko Haram but also scores of other disenfranchised groups driven to violence by the impunities and inequities that have dimmed Nigeria's promise. In Nigeria, making common cause against violent extremism won't be easy, but there's no hope of peace without it.

Weiss Consents to Warren's Advice

Liberals are cheering Senator Elizabeth Warren for derailing the appointment of Antonio Weiss, President Barack Obama's nominee to be undersecretary of domestic finance at the Treasury Department. But by essentially spiking his nomination, she may have done him a favor.

Rather than endure the tough questioning (and predictable grandstanding) that comes with a Senate confirmation hearing, Weiss will waltz into the Treasury Department as a counselor to Secretary Jack Lew, a job that does not require Senate approval. There, he may have more influence over a broader range of issues than he would have had as an undersecretary. Whispering in the ear of the king can be more powerful than being one of his feudal vassals.

Yes, Warren gained a political victory. It comes at a cost, however -- to the federal government’s ability to attract talent. Obviously people who leave the private sector for the public are willing to accept less pay in exchange for more power. But their calculus may change if a prerequisite for a government job is a public flogging.

Of course the legislative branch acts as an important check on executive authority, and the Constitution subjects the president’s power of appointment to the “advice and consent” of the Senate. But it's reasonable to ask how far its advice needs to go, and how much of its consent is necessary.

As the federal government has grown, so has Congress's reach into the agencies. There are now approximately 1,200 executive branch jobs that require Senate confirmation, mostly deputies and other underlings who report to bosses who also must be confirmed by the Senate. More than 30 positions at the Department of Defense, for instance, require Senate approval, including the assistant secretary for legislative affairs -- the poor soul whose job it is to deal with Congress.

The Senate has granted itself veto authority over nearly every agency’s senior staff, as well as those the president seeks to place on small commissions and offices, such as the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund or the Foreign Claims Settlements Commission. (No, senators probably don’t know what these boards do, either.)

In 2012, Congress trimmed the number of positions requiring Senate approval by 163. It was a good first step. Moving 1,200 appointments through hearings and votes is not a good use of the Senate’s time. Moreover, delays can hurt agency productivity and produce power vacuums that get filled by less qualified people exempt from Senate approval.

Limiting the use of advice and consent is consistent with the Constitution, which authorizes Congress to remove itself from reviewing the appointment of “inferior officers.” In a 1997 ruling, the Supreme Court defined such “inferior officers” as those whose boss is someone other than the president. Yet the president picks his executive-office staff without any advice and consent, while hundreds of agency staffers must endure Senate hearings.

Clearly this system is out of whack. Maybe further congressional oversight of White House appointments is not such a great idea; the president deserves a lot of leeway in choosing who works for him. But the Senate should certainly be more selective about where and how far its advice and consent applies.

Shocked by the Swiss Franc? Blame Europe

Anyone feeling wrong-footed by the Swiss central bank's surprise decision to stop holding down the price of its currency should consider placing part of the blame elsewhere -- on the abject failure of Europe's leaders to revive their sinking economy.

Global financial markets went into gyrations today after the Swiss National Bank announced that it would end its more than three-year effort to keep the value of the franc from rising above about 0.83 euro. The franc immediately jumped to about 0.96 euro, dealing a blow to the country's export and tourism industries, to traders who had bet against the currency and to foreigners who owe money in francs.

Switzerland's move is a kind of capitulation. With the European Central Bank on the verge of extraordinary stimulus measures that will probably weaken the euro, Swiss central bankers realized that the franc -- long a haven for investors fleeing the euro -- will come under renewed upward pressure. A voluntary appreciation now, they believe, will be less disruptive than one that's forced on them later.

Tiny Switzerland's travails underline the bigger issue: Europe's inability to restore economic growth. After the 2008 financial crisis and amid the subsequent European debt crisis, Europe's leaders -- Germany's policy makers, especially -- have erred repeatedly. They have forced too much austerity on the weakest members of the currency union, while the strongest have pared back investments needed to boost growth. They have been far too slow in forcing banks to recognize losses, raise capital and get back to business as usual. They have opposed much-needed monetary stimulus. As a result, the euro area has endured serial recessions and is now teetering on the brink of deflation.

It's widely believed that the ECB is finally about to start quantitative easing, announcing what could be as much as a trillion euros in bond purchases. A possible legal obstacle fell away this week. Whether or not QE works, it will put new pressure on foreign-exchange markets, as the outlook for interest rates in euros increasingly diverges from the rest. Switzerland is not alone in feeling the repercussions. The U.S. dollar has gained some 14 percent against major currencies since mid-2014 -- a shift that some economists worry could spell trouble for non-U.S. companies that have trillions in outstanding dollar-denominated debt.

Europe's leaders -- and particularly German Chancellor Angela Merkel -- can still make a difference by boosting investment, offering relief to embattled countries such as Greece and letting the ECB do its job. They should do this for the sake of their own economies. If they fail, the damage won't be confined to the EU.

1st ODI: Warner century sets up Australia's easy win over England

England's World Cup preparations suffered an early setback on Friday when they were beaten by three wickets by Australia in the first tri-series one-day international.

Opener David Warner crashed 127 from 115 balls to drive Australia past England's total of 234 with more than 10 overs remaining in an one-sided match at the Sydney Cricket Ground that began with England's decision to bat upon winning the toss.

England lost two wickets without scoring in the first over and depended on a captain's knock of 121 from 136 balls by Eoin Morgan to produce a total of 234 in 47.5 overs. Warner impelled Australia to their winning target with a century from 97 balls - his third in one-day internationals and his first since March 2012.

                                             

"It was obviously good to score a hundred, we won the game and it was good to get a bonus point in 40 overs," Warner said. "George (Bailey) said we'd go for it, we took the powerplay and played some cricket shots and we did that.

"It was good to have another record and we're all about records in our team at the moment. We've broken a few this summer. I've just got to keep doing my job at the top of the order and that's score runs."

England couldn't overcome the setback of losing two wickets to the first three balls of the match and struggled to set Australia a total that was likely to stretch it on a pitch Morgan called "a bit used" when he won the toss.

Morgan's seventh ODI century - his sixth for England and his first since he took over from Alastair Cook as captain - gave substance to their innings but the early blows struck by Australia's pace attack proved mortal in a match finally decided by the innings of Morgan and Warner.

The England and Australia innings were similar with both depending on a single innings - the centuries of Morgan and Warner — and no other batsman making a major contribution. But Warner compiled his innings under no real pressure, while Morgan was faced with a difficult situation when he came to bat and with his team's innings already in disarray.

Left-arm speedster Mitchell Starc produced two superb in-swingers to right-hand batsmen to trap Ian Bell lbw with the first ball of the match and James Taylor, identically, two balls later.

Joe Root was out for 5 and England was 12 for 3 when Morgan found himself at the crease in the fourth over. The England captain accepted the task of repairing his team's innings and went about that responsibility fastidiously, reaching his first half-century in nine innings from 88 balls. He eventually went on to his century - he has six for England and one for Ireland in one-day internationals - from 127 balls with nine fours and two sixes.

But few England batsmen shared Morgan's spirit and determination until wicketkeeper Jos Buttler, with 28 from 60 balls, came in and formed a partnership of 67 for the sixth wicket. Opener Moeen Ali watched from the non-striker's end as his first two partners vanished within the first three balls of his innings. His response was to try to hit England out of its early crisis and he hit two fours and a six before he was out for 22 from 21 balls.

Australia's bowlers, especially James Faulkner and spinner Xavier Doherty, contained England through the middle of its innings while Starc assumed a strike role at the start and at the death. After dismissing the first two England batsmen in the opening over he returned to remove Morgan and Steve Finn and to finish with 4-42 from 8.5 overs.

England went into the match without a spinner and with a bowling attack of noticeable sameness - Stuart Broad, Steve Finn, Chris Jordan and Chris Woakes - who are all right-armers and of similar pace.

Warner had no trouble against any of them, unleashing all of his scoring shots and finishing with 18 boundaries. The next tri-series match between Australia and India is at Melbourne on Sunday.

BJP spent over Rs.714 cr, Congress Rs.516 cr in 2014 elections

BJP and Congress spent over Rs.714 crore and Rs.516 crore respectively in 2014 general elections and recent Assembly polls in various states.

According to latest data of Election Commission (EC), both the national parties' expenditure in 2014 Lok Sabha polls and Assembly election in Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Odisha and Sikkim is way ahead of the spendings by recognised national parties like NCP (over Rs.51 crore) and BSP (more than Rs.30 crore).

While the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) spent a total of Rs.7,14,28,57,813, the Congress shelled out Rs.5,16,02,36,785.

Both the parties have recently submitted their expenditure statements to the EC, well beyond the stipulated deadline of August 2014.

The EC, in November last, had issued showcause notices to both the national parties and few other regional parties in this regard.

                                      

EC records state that while the BJP filed its statement on January 12 this year, the Congress submitted the same to the poll-panel on December 22, 2014.

The data pertains to six recognised national political parties of BJP, Congress, BSP, CPI, CPI (M) and the NCP. The NCP spent over Rs.51 crore while BSP stated that it spent over Rs.30 crore for the same polls exercise in 2014r.

According to the data, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) spent a total of Rs.51,34,44,854 in these polls followed by Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) with an expenditure of Rs.30,05,84,822. CPI (Marxist) incurred an expenditure of Rs.18,69,18,169.

The EC has not shared the expenditure made in this regard by CPI even though it said that the party had submitted the relevant information to it on September 15, 2014.

EC had on November 28 issued showcause notices to 20 political parties, including Congress, BJP and Aam Aadmi Party, for failing to file their poll expenditure statements for these elections within the stipulated timeframe.

EC had also warned these parties that it would withdraw their recognition if the statements were not filed and sent to it within the next fortnight.

As per rules, political parties are required to file their election expenditure statements within 75 days of Assembly elections while the deadline in case of Lok Sabha polls is 90 days.

A Journey to 1000 That Has to be Cherished

Roger Federer is no numbers man. But upon racking up his 1,000th victory on professional tour — bracketing him alongside three other giants of the game — the Swiss admitted he couldn’t but feel the lustre of the particular number. “All those (milestone) numbers didn’t mean anything to me, but for some reason 1,000 means a lot because it’s such a huge number,” he was quoted as saying. This coming from a man who has a record 17 Grand Slam titles. To watch Federer in his elements in itself was an ethereal experience, those gliding legs, flowing arms, more like an extension of his body, the caress of the racquet and mellifluousness of strokes that cajoled than forced mistakes out of peers.

It’s his journey to 1000 that has to be cherished than the statistical triumph. Ranked number two, aged 33, and father of two sets of twins, the master doesn’t move as fluidly as he did. His aura of invincibility left him some time ago. He chases with the pack he once led indisputably. But he still has a sparkling array of shots and a remarkable tennis brain. He has honed what already was a forensic serve. He seeks to curtail the attrition with a serve-and-volley game that conjures images of an era past. He has a bigger racquet engendering more power and fewer errors.

It is his love for the game, not to mention his enormous self-confidence that sustains him. He is fit and appears to have shaken himself out of the slump that meant he was vulnerable enough to lose to Sergiy Stakhovsky in the second round of Wimbledon the year before. He did not want us to remember him like that, flailing against a serve-and-volley challenger. He wants to go out on a high and when he does leave us, it will be on his terms. That will be a sad day. But it is time to stop pushing him towards the exit door. The 1000th win was a gentle reminder.

Odisha Must Revamp Its Water Supply System

The Hepatitis E outbreak in Sambalpur which has claimed 20 lives and afflicted more than 2,500, not only lays bare a grossly ineffectual public health monitoring and management system in the state but also the utter failure of the government in ensuring access to clean and safe drinking water to its people. The Western Odisha city was let to grapple with the outbreak caused mainly by contaminated drinking water supplied through dilapidated and leaking pipelines for over six months. With death count rising and realisation of its gravity finally dawning, chief minister Naveen Patnaik in December announced a `100-crore project to revamp drinking water supply system in the city.

While the situation in Sambalpur shows signs of abating – more due to the self-limiting tendency of the Hepatitis virus than belated interventions – virtually every city and town of the state epitomises the same malaise, lying exposed to waterborne disease outbreaks, thanks to years of neglect and disrepair. Even though ever increasing population pressure along with demand has led to fast-paced development of urban infrastructure, attuning  drinking water supply systems to the changes has been forgone. As a consequence, supply pipelines, aged and derelict as they are, now lay crushed under roads and entangled in drainage systems as sitting ducks for  leakages and contamination.

The millennium city of Cuttack, in fact, is the most vulnerable of all urban centres of the state with almost the bulk of its 550 km-long pipeline network dating back to more than half a century. The state needs to comprehensively re-examine the water supply systems and draw-up a strategy for complete overhaul of the aged ones. The task at hand, no doubt, is onerous but access to clean and safe drinking water is a human right of the people that the government cannot afford to absolve itself of.

United Effort May Yield Kerala Rich Dividends

In a rare show of camaraderie, Kerala chief minister Oommen Chandy and Opposition leader V S Achuthanandan together met prime minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday. The unprecedented message that came out was that the Congress-led UDF and CPM-led LDF could indeed join hands for the cause of the state, which had had otherwise got used to witnessing the two fronts at each other’s throats on issues and non-issues alike. Never willing to lose any chance to cast BJP as enemy number one, Modi’s trademark business-like approach would’ve played a significant role in getting the Kerala leaders to go calling on him in a renewed bid to find relief to issues such as a downbeat rubber plantation sector.

That the state leaders too meant business was evident as the issues addressed included the drastic fall in natural rubber procurement price, directly affecting about 11 lakh growers, with a plea to ban NR imports and also bring in other policy. Among the other issues taken up, the lone area with a distinct political footprint was the joint  plea for Modi’s personal intervention to prevail upon Tamil Nadu to maintain the Mullaperiyar dam water level at 136 feet, and to get the neighbouring state to agree to a new dam.

The united team took the initiative to another level by by broaching  critical areas such as the deteriorating fiscal scenario and the continued neglect by the Railways in scripting the state’s development when they met finance minister Arun Jaitley and railway minister Suresh Prabhu. The new-found mantra of having Kerala leaders talking business found a resonance from Delhi when the finance minister promised that all issues bogging down the ambitious Vizhinjam port project would soon be resolved. For the leaders from Kerala, often reconciled to indifference from the the central government even when politically sympathetic parties have been at the helm, the empathetic response of the NDA government led by the BJP could only have been a welcome change. Surely, the takeaway from this for Kerala can only be that it pays to build political consensus. Now, it is time to wait for results.