ASUU STRIKE EFFECT ON STUDENT

It cannot be denied that when the strike first begun back in July–it was a thing of relief to students especially the final year students who knows that project deadline was just around the corner. Then students would say let it just go on for few weeks after then should be called off; we will be energized to take any exhausting academic activity that comes our way again. Well, to their dismay, the federal government and ASUU have more in mind than the students had thought.

A month went by; student were still enjoying the stress free disguised holiday planned for them by the federal government and ASUU without complaints, rather fixing in their mind the time they feel the strike should be called to an end. Yes, there were meetings being held at that time between ASUU and the federal government which gave some students hope that the strike wouldn’t be going for so long, but could be called off within a short time. Meetings kept on holding at different times of several weeks till it got to a time that a protest was even initiated by the Joint Action Force which comprises of all educational association of the country meaning the strike is beyond ASUU’s 2009 academic infrastructures and fund implementation, rather it is about the increment of the education fund allocation that is around 6 to 7 percent to 26 percent. To further improve the standard of education in the country, the federal government should include in their annual budget 26 percent education fund allocation.

Two months now and still counting; some students already begun to grumble, complain, lament, clamour, rant, protest and say all sort of things about the effect of the strike on them psychologically, academically, mentally, financially, socially and physically. Some students have been affected negatively as their source of money has been halted and the time it will be resumed is yet unknown, therefore, engage themselves in several things that could get them money and satisfy them socially, financially, physically, psychologically, mentally or academically. Some, still are indifferent about the strike, because they have plans they had set for the summer holiday to carry out; so the strike is only a mere push for them to actually do more plans a for a better result or to kick start earlier for a more rewarding result. Even the final year students cannot deny their indifferent feelings towards the strike as it has prolonged project time for some if not all to start and finish their project.

More than the feelings of some students, the truth is then strike is of no benefit to the students in general rather has only rendered some if not most of the students useless due to idleness and some have even gone into shady deals that has caused the stains. The ladies have even been reported to be engaging in immorality as they haven’t prepared their minds to go on vacation which means going home, rather make use of the time given to them on platter of gold in the disguise of strike to carry out their immoral intentions. Some are moral actually as they marry and get pregnant. The immoral deeds of these ladies have got some of them into trouble; some got pregnant and aborted as they don’t see themselves fit to bare children yet and some that could not abort don’t know the father of their children to be is as there were more than one players that had their mark in their post. The ladies with moral intentions will have ASUU and the federal government to thank for the time given to them to achieve their aims at the same time may be pleading for more time as they will be looking to extend and enjoy their honeymoons, break and other activities they are involved in.

The men, in this case are not so bothered, but concerned. They are not so bothered because they have thought of what life will be for them after graduation, but with this strike they have time to plan and even start something meaningful. But not everyone is thoughtful as some are playing away the time and swaggering around doing all sort of things that is of no benefit to them academically and in every aspect of their life.  Due to this strike, some have become fathers, killers, criminals, etc. and many more is feared to be expected.

What then is the ideal thing about this strike; nothing I see, not anything meaningful. The reason for the strike initially was defeated by a greater one–even the greater one is yet to be met not to talk of the initial one to be implemented. Why the suffering? The government on one hand is not bothered as they are busy with their political selfish ambition, which they have placed above as their major priority while education as their minor one. The strike has not improved the students academically; instead it has taken from many. It is now a thing of “no private school no quality education” because there is no quality in what is done at intervals rather on a stretch and well done at once.

The strike should be called off, but on the basis of the government including 26 percent education fund allocation into the country’s budget and meeting ASUU 2009 implementation. The government should consider the students, because they are the morrow’s nation builder or destroyer depending on how they are treated and taught today.

Zakaria: World has problem with U.S. as prosecutor, judge, jury and hangman

CNN speaks with Fareed about President Obama’s speech Tuesday night on Syria, Russia’s proposal on the country’s chemical weapons, and why the international community is skeptical of military action. These remarks have been edited for length.

Do you think the president needed to go ahead and make his speech last night? This was clearly a speech scheduled before, when military action seemed to be imminent.

I think he wanted to make it because clearly he needed to shore up his position – the position that this was serious, this was a threat to international security, this was a threat to American security.

I think at the end of the day, though, it has made his case much more difficult. And even though he made a very eloquent and intelligent speech, as he often does, I think it would be difficult for me to believe that three or four weeks from now if we are haggling with the Russians over the wording of a U.N. resolution, and the Russians say we don't want this phrase because it might imply the threat of force and the United States says, no, no, no, we must have that phrase because that is precisely what gives teeth to this resolution – and those talks collapse – the president can go to the world and the American people and say, let's go and use force.

You're saying he cannot?

I think it would be tough. There is now the possibility of a diplomatic path. It may be it will take weeks and months, and I think it will be quite difficult, because remember the Iraq inspections, UNSCOM. Those guys were going in there…[and] and the country was not at civil war. So all I'm saying is two or three weeks from now can you say ‘Remember that case I was making for war? Let's come back to that.’

I think that it may be true initially that people don't change their minds, because the moral case I think is one Americans understand. They feel Assad is a terrible person. What is happening is gruesome and barbaric. But of course he's killed people in an equally gruesome manner with conventional weapons.

More from GPS: Don't let Syria distract from Iran

What I think changed, what was very persuasive to me as somebody who's been cautious about getting engaged in a very complicated civil war, was the president's very disciplined way in which he said, this is not going to be Iraq, it's not going to be Afghanistan, it's not even going to be Libya.  In other words, this is going to be a very limited, curtailed strike that is meant to deter Assad from ever using these weapons again, because it would be a sign that he would invoke the wrath of the United States and strikes from the United States. So he was very clear about saying, we're not going to get involved in this war. We're not going to escalate. This is not open-ended. That would be I think quite unsatisfying...

What do you make of the Russian offer?

The most difficult piece of this could be whether the Russians and the Syrians will create so many roadblocks and obstacles in the negotiation…Won't the Syrians hide stuff? Won't they be unwilling to allow the kind of free rein across the whole territory and landscape that you had in Iraq?

You can make the case that this is a win-win for Putin. Assad stays in power. He has to provide access. He's the conduit for all this. And the weapons get taken away. And the Russians have always worried that these weapons could fall into the hands of jihadist Sunni militias, which would then use them in Chechnya, Dagestan, in Russia. Remember, this is the part of the world where the Tsarnaev brothers come from.

More from GPS: Syrians seem to be playing clever game

If the Russians are really serious that they would like to see Syria free of these chemical weapons because that removes the possibility of some kind of spillover, then they might actually cooperate. And they can press the Syrians and they can say you have got to get real inspectors. But I don't know if the Russians are serious.

The problem I think that he [Obama] faced is, and he faced it, and this was a tension in his speech, is he's trying to make the case that this is an absolute urgent necessity to do something. But what he's proposing is, what he keeps saying is a very limited military strike. Something that his secretary of state called unbelievably small.

And I think that tension, where you're trying to drum up a great deal of support, I think a lot of Americans look at it and say, yes, it's a terrible thing. Yes, chemical weapons are bad; Assad is bad. Is this in our national interests? The first principle of international law, as I understand it, is that you do not take military action except in self-defense, unless it is authorized by the U.N. Security Council.

So the problem which a lot of people around the world have is not with the cause, but the idea that the United States is prosecutor, judge, jury and hangman. And that is the problem. And I'm not saying this with any skepticism about the case. I think Assad did use weapons. I think that he is a terrible person. But this is the issue for me – how is it that the United States, when everybody else says no, they say yes? There is, to use John Kerry's phrase when he was running for president, there is a question – can we put this to a global test? And right now, that's the problem.

Post by:

CNN's Jason Miks