Future historians of this period will one day note that the 2027 presidential election was one of the most remarkable in our national history, as it was the first campaign to begin even before the 2023 election was properly concluded. We know that in Africa, time ordinarily orbits around elections and electioneering. Since elections are the means to capture power—which is all about allocating resources anyway—all of our being cannot but revolve around the coming election. It is through the outcomes of elections that the worth of our respective tribal collectives is calibrated, and that is why we always fight to the finish. We often think of victory as a zero-sum game, even though past realities have repeatedly shown us that such victories rarely result in any meaningful difference in our lives. Following the outcome of the 2023 elections in Lagos State, its politicians began preparing for a possible repeat in 2027. However, they are not doing so by courting voters through improvements in their lives. They are instead stoking the emotional politics of revanchism. The latest controversy is the outgoing Chairman of Bariga LCDA, Kolade David, who announced the renaming of some public landmarks (some of which are named after Igbos) after Yoruba people. The import was, of course, to erase the legacy and public memory of people like Charles Oputa, the artiste popularly known as Charly Boy. But it is not just “Charly Boy” as a generic Igbo man, but Charly Boy as a hyper-visible and contrarian figure; Charly Boy specifically as a critic of APC politicians and their coterie of brownnosers. For the self-commissioned censors of political expression like David, the APC has become synonymous with Yoruba identity and non-Yorubas must either “put up or shut up”. But if David truly wanted to honour the “people who have put the name of our local council out on the global map through their respective God-given talents and craft”, as he stated at the event where he renamed those landmarks, could he also not have done so without dragging those people into the murky pit of his petty politics? By renaming the popular Charly Boy Bus Stop after the singer and rapper Olamide Adedeji (Baddo), he managed to achieve three things. One, he put Olamide in an unenviable position, where he can neither publicly accept nor reject a gift given in bad faith. Turning him into a mere substitute for the person you dislike is not honour. Rather than recognising Olamide on the strength of his contributions to his birthplace, they are drafting the social capital he has accrued to overwrite the legacy of a critic. Two, the substantial backlash that David’s little scheme of ethnic baiting generated should tell him that people are more likely to double down on calling the bus stop its original name. Names of places and landmarks grow organically around people’s lived experiences and cannot be easily swiped off through some administrative fiat. Three, this “honour to dishonour” move devalues Lagos as a cosmopolitan city that pulsates with the energy of its diverse populations. You can fight it all you like, but Lagos is only Lagos because of the creative tensions generated when people of diverse energies are thrown together in a space. But it would be naïve to think that Olamide is the only one being dragged into the sewer of this primal politics. One way or another, we are all being conscripted into a political formation that requires us to tribalise and wage a battle that distracts us from larger leadership failures. We have seen this movie before; we know how the plot unfolds. Given how Nigerians are aggravated by the hardships and the harsh hopes they have suffered through 16 years of the PDP and 10 years of the APC, they are understandably strained. The various economic constraints we have endured have severely tensed up everyone’s nervous systems, making already frustrated people hypersensitive. How else do you address the insecurities of your political base and redirect their frustrations away from you? You invent a common enemy and invite those within your ranks to bury their hatchet in its head. The tensions that follow such machination will generate a wellspring of sentiment to be resourcefully siphoned come next election. It is an old and dirty trick, and its deployment now is only remarkable because the 2027 electioneering started too soon. Several people in Lagos and the surrounding states are getting caught up in the sentiment of a politics that has nothing to do with improving their lives. They think they are being protective of their territories, and that this sort of revanchism is a must because liberalism makes one a dupe of intolerant others. But how far and how well has this politics worked for us? In what way have any of these shenanigans improved our lives? In situations like this, I remind people of Idi Amin’s Uganda, where Indians were kicked out because they held disproportionate economic power. Go to Uganda today, and you will not only still find those South Asians but even East Asians holding sway in their commercial sector. The irony of it all makes me wonder: if they had worked through their mutual fears, insecurities, and bigotry to cooperate instead of sending them away in 1972, would they not have built a greater and more prosperous country by now? Look at all the time and effort they wasted to arrive where they started. Does erasing others help us shine, or do we end up merely corroded by the negativity? Yes, we now live in a world that derides diversity, construes liberalism as a woke disease of the weak, and vehemently insists that openness to differences is naivete. All these are familiar troubles, and they recur because they are emotive issues. In societies yet to develop the competence to savvily manage differences, the issues can become a matter of life and death for the parties involved. We must not continue like this; we must move to that last stop where we no longer expend the valuable resource of time stoking the tensions that avidly consume our energy but yield no productive value. Of all the arguments I have heard about the issue of indigenous and collective ownership of Lagos, the two that stand out to me are those that highlight the differentials in interpretation by those who either want to heighten conflict or douse it. One, no human habitation is ever a “no man’s land”, but there are places in the world on which various peoples lay claim because they are joint contributors to its character and wealth. Cities like New York, London, and Singapore have become a collective heritage due to—not despite—the activities of their diverse populations; asserting a tribal domination will impoverish them. Two, claiming “we built Lagos” is part of what people say to inscribe their socio-economic relevance wherever they occupy. When Black people say their slave labour made America, or immigrants say they built the USA, it does not mean other races or non-immigrants had no part. The statement is no more preposterous than Bola Tinubu (also a non-indigene) being labelled as the “builder of Lagos”. If we must choose between ascribing that honour to either one man who uses it to gain political mileage or diverse groups of people who want an acknowledgement of their part in making a place what it is, please know I will always choose the latter.

UN agency says dozens killed after a boat carrying mostly Sudanese refugees capsized near the Libyan town of Tobruk. By Usaid Siddiqui and News Agencies Share Save The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Libya said that only 13 people survived after a vessel carrying 74 people, mostly Sudanese refugees, capsized on Tuesday off the coast of the eastern Libyan town of Tobruk. Dozens remain missing, it said in a post on social media on Wednesday. On Tuesday, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) said at least 50 people died after the vessel caught fire. The United Nations migration agency said that it provided medical support to 24 survivors. “Because safe and legal pathways are available to only a very small number of people, the real solution is to end the war in Sudan so families can return home in safety and not take these dangerous journeys,” UNHCR said. UNHCR is deeply saddened by a second tragic boat incident off Tobruk on 13 September where a vessel carrying 74 people Mostly Sudanese refugees capsized. Only 13 people survived & dozens remain missing. Our condolences to the families & loved ones of those who lost their lives pic.twitter.com/GaVSBiQtJU — UNHCR Libya (@UNHCRLibya) September 17, 2025 The war in Sudan between the army and paramilitary forces has pushed more than 140,000 refugees into Libya in the past two years, nearly doubling the number of Sudanese refugees in the country. The disaster was the latest to befall refugees and migrants making the perilous Mediterranean crossing from Africa to Europe. In August, at least 27 people died after two boats sank off the southern Italian island of Lampedusa, while in June, at least 60 refugees and migrants were feared missing and drowned at sea after two shipwrecks off the coast of Libya. At least 456 people died and 420 were reported missing along the central Mediterranean route between January 1 and September 13, according to the IOM. Libya, home to around 867,055 migrants, has emerged as a transit route for migrants or refugees trying to reach Europe since the fall of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. Since his overthrow, Libya has struggled to form a strong state after years of dictatorship. The country is currently divided between two rival governments, with rival militias frequently coming into conflict in the oil-rich country. Rights groups and UN agencies have documented systematic abuse against refugees and migrants in Libya, including torture, rape and extortion. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

When, about one year ago, the Jigawa State Government signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Europa Carbon, a carbon advisory and trading firm with operations in Nigeria and Canada, one could not help but celebrate the niche value of such a green milestone. The governor, Mallam Umar Namadi, said the MoU was a cornerstone of the state government’s agenda to reduce carbon emissions, enhance climatic resilience and promote sustainable development, as clean energy would be generated to support agricultural and industrial activities in the state. “Jigawa will be one of the first states in Nigeria to generate carbon credits, and we are committed to helping the state achieve this goal in partnership with the Ministry of Environment. First of all, it is to mitigate the carbon emissions that are currently happening within the state. Secondly, to create jobs for the teaming youths in the state and, thirdly, to generate revenue for the state,” he said. At that time, I was particularly enthused because I was acutely aware of developments in Jigawa’s environmental scene. For instance, in 2022, not up to one month after the commemoration of the International Day of Forests on March 21, a 25-year-old man of Taura Local Government Area stabbed his brother to death over firewood – he went to his brother’s farmland and cut firewood without his consent. Just like in the other frontline states of Northern Nigeria, deforestation is a central problem for Jigawa. Wood is a scarce resource, and as desertification and deforestation intensify, it is becoming more unaffordable. To me, that Jigawa firewood murder was a sign that the struggle against climate change was now a mortal combat, and I discussed it in this column in the article entitled, ‘Jigawa firewood murder, sign of things to come’. Nigeria’s forest area has been on a continuous decline from 10 to less than eight per cent, indicating that about 400,000 hectares of forest are lost yearly through human activities and other practices that are unsustainable. Hence, the need to incorporate carbon trading into afforestation and reforestation efforts, especially in Northern Nigeria. Therefore, I saw the Jigawa State/Europa Carbon partnership as strategic and forward-thinking. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Least Developed Countries have significant untapped potential for climate action in sectors like forestry and agriculture, which offer promising opportunities for generating carbon credits. This potential could equal 70 per cent of the CO2 emissions from the global aviation industry, or about two per cent of total global emissions. Currently, LDCs are only utilising about two per cent of this potential. Jigawa State is among the 11 frontline states of Nigeria’s Great Green Wall initiative, established to address land degradation and desertification, boost food security and support communities to adapt to climate change in Sokoto, Kebbi, Katsina, Zamfara, Kano, Jigawa, Bauchi, Gombe, Yobe, Borno and Adamawa. Further to the strategic importance of the state, aside from the normal operation of the Great Green Wall activities, projects like the Action Against Desertification were all executed in Jigawa State. Though there is nothing particularly new about Governor Namadi’s carbon market move. Lagos State has also initiated a robust carbon finance mechanism to generate carbon credits under the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism, distributing green wealth to its citizens. The real green magic happening in Jigawa State is not easy to see because it is ensconced in the bureaucratic space, which in the real sense is where power abides. As a green industry watcher, I had detachedly reviewed Namadi’s carbon emissions trading investment to ascertain the overall impact on Jigawa’s eco-scene. After all, the state is known for its decades-long imprints on the nation’s ecological sector, starting from biotech-award-winning Governor Saminu Turaki and climaxing under the defiantly green Sule Lamido. The Alternative Energy Agency, under the supervision of the state Ministry of Power and Energy, is the engine room of green energy development in the state. The agency was established in 2003 under Saminu Turaki and was able to electrify about four villages in partnership with JICA, the Japanese international development agency and a private firm.  Then, during Sule Lamido, it electrified about 26 villages. Instructively, from 2015 to 2023, the agency was not able to electrify any village because its budget was less than N50m. But after the advent of the current administration, the rural green energy electrification restarted. This is because in 2023, the budget skyrocketed from less than N50m to about N2.3bn. That is almost a 500 per cent increase. Hence, not only was the agency able to electrify two villages, including micro-enterprise shops, but it also introduced the electrification of Sangya/Almajiri schools. It also expanded to green energy installations in semi-urban towns, that is, towns that are not rural but not urban cities, and the fabrication of 10,000 clean cook stoves. I am convinced that our government and political leaders have not scratched the surface in leveraging the environmental sector for job creation and sustainable development. Nigeria’s population has exploded in the last century, from 36.7 million in 1950 to 158.3 million in 2010, according to data from the United Nations. But job creation has not kept pace with the population increase, forcing people to choose between forests and their families. They cut the trees, poach the animals, sell the timber, burn the wood and never even think of planting them back. Today, there are countless people jostling for a handful of woods. So, what will prevent a conflict that has now become inevitable, as manifested in Jigawa in 2022? The answer is now also coming from Jigawa, and it is in two words: Go Green. There are limitless possibilities for an economic quantum leap if the tables could be turned. According to a report by the Rural Electrification Agency, developing off-grid alternatives to complement the grid could create a $9.2 9.2bn-per-year market opportunity for mini-grids and solar home systems that will save $4.4bn per year for Nigerian homes and businesses. Let us also note that tree-planting, which is reforestation, is one of the most effective ways to fight climate change. Indeed, it is known as the first defence line against climate change. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is causing our planet to heat up; trees absorb this carbon from the atmosphere and convert it into oxygen. Essentially, trees breathe in carbon dioxide and breathe out oxygen. Scientists have estimated that if a global tree-planting were initiated, two-thirds of the carbon dioxide emissions made by humans could be removed. The more the trees, the lower the temperatures and the cleaner the air. It is that simple. Considering the intensity of sunlight in our resource-endowed country, there is no quantum of energy we cannot generate from solar power. The 4000 MW the government hopes to get from the proposed nuclear plant is a joke, considering the risk involved in the project. As a matter of fact, experts avow that we can generate more than 6000 MW just from mounting solar panels on the rooftops of designated houses in the country presently. This is why I see Namadi’s fiscal impetus to Jigawa’s green structures as a paradigm shift for Northern Nigeria. Other governors should emulate this gesture. In this column, I have always advocated for putting your money where your mouth is when it comes to climate action. For instance, what moral justification would we have in demanding that the developed nations vote $1bn for the Green Climate Fund when we cannot vote $1m for our Ministry of Environment? Via the Paris Climate Pact mechanism, carbon markets have now given us a concrete opportunity for economic prosperity. However, there can be no progress if the institutional players are not incentivised and the green ecosystem is not properly funded and fiscalised.

US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE, proposed the initiative, which has been criticised by Sudan’s government. By Simon Speakman Cordall Share Save A joint peace initiative proposed for Sudan by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates was only published on Friday, but it’s success is already looking uncertain. The United Nations estimates that approximately 40,000 people have been killed in the fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), but the number of dead could be far higher. A research group last November estimated that 60,000 had died as a result of the war – directly from violence, or indirectly from starvation and disease – in Khartoum state alone. Almost 13 million people have been displaced in Sudan, according to figures from the UN. And about half of those who remain are experiencing acute food insecurity, with famine identified in parts of the country and predicted by agencies to spread. Several attempts to halt the fighting have already failed. Could the latest plan be different? In their latest proposal, published on Friday, the so-called “Quad” countries – the US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the UAE – have called for a three-month humanitarian truce in the fighting followed by a permanent ceasefire and a nine-month transitional period during which power would be assumed by a broad-based civilian-led government. “There is no viable military solution to the conflict, and the status quo creates unacceptable suffering and risks to peace and security,” the statement read. The proposal also focuses on the Muslim Brotherhood, saying that Sudan’s future could not be “dictated by violent extremist groups part of or evidently linked to the Muslim Brotherhood”. Some forces within the SAF are considered to be loosely aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, whose members reject the assertion that they are violent or extremist. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the UAE all consider the Muslim Brotherhood to be a “terrorist” group. While the RSF has yet to officially respond to the Quad’s peace plan, it has been reported that an RSF-backed parallel government has welcomed elements of it. However, the government in Khartoum, which was established by the army in June, has criticised it. In a statement from its foreign ministry, the government said that, while it welcomed efforts to end the war, it would not accept “interventions that do not respect the sovereignty of the Sudanese state and its legitimate institutions, which are supported by the Sudanese people, and its right to defend its people and its land”. Yes, and they’ve all failed. Talks have run almost the length of the conflict. However, with mutual distrust rife, and accusations of violations commonplace, the ceasefires that were reached have been fleeting. From almost the outbreak of the fighting in April 2023 to May of the same year, there were a series of brief ceasefires and truces, all of which failed to hold. One of the first substantial efforts to halt the fighting came from Saudi Arabia and the US when they attempted to negotiate a ceasefire through what they termed the Jeddah Platform, which ran from May-June 2023. However, despite some gains, negotiations broke down amid mutual accusations of violations and disagreements over access for humanitarian aid. Later that year, the grouping of East African States known as the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) announced that both sides had agreed to a ceasefire pending direct talks, only for each side to either dismiss or contest the claim. In August 2024, Saudi Arabia tried again, this time through talks in the Swiss city of Geneva. The intention was for negotiations to lead to a nationwide ceasefire. However, the SAF objected to the involvement of the UAE as observers, accusing the Gulf country of backing the RSF, and talks faltered. The UAE has rejected accusations that it funds and arms the RSF, saying its involvement in Sudan is strictly limited to humanitarian matters. One of the largest countries in Africa, Sudan’s pre-war population of 50 million has been battered by the war between the SAF and RSF. In addition to the tens of thousands killed and millions displaced are the daily instances of what the UN notes are the “executions, torture, and rape” occurring in many communities already experiencing the spread of diseases, such as cholera, from a decimated infrastructure. While both sides are accused of committing atrocities, the UN has found that the RSF has committed “crimes against humanity”, including “large-scale killings, sexual and gender-based violence, looting, and the destruction of livelihoods – at times rising to persecution and extermination”. According to the World Food Programme, a total of 24.6 million people, about half of the population, are suffering acute food insecurity, while 637,000 face devastating levels of hunger. Famine has already been confirmed in areas such as Zamzam and el-Fasher, areas the RSF has besieged for months, with projections suggesting that, if support is not provided, its spread is almost inevitable. Follow Al Jazeera English:...