January 31, 2008
. . . a serious study of the history of traditional governance on the continent confirms that democratic ideas are not new to Africa, and that the majority of precolonial systems of traditional governance in Africa had, and in many cases still have, strong democratic elements. The pre-colonial contact with Europeans and the colonial period itself rather disrupted the old systems in many ways, and have left behind situations which are the root causes of many of today’s problems.
. . .
. . . for the purposes of this presentation and in the interest of brevity, let me place the challenges into the following general groups:
- Political challenges
- The challenges of African Political Leadership, and
- Economic and social challenges.
Most of our peoples have already noticed that the new system of governance is being severely tested by the lack of good faith in certain leaders and administrations. What is more, it is clear that some of those very politicians who gained leadership positions as a result of the strict adherence to the norms of democracy are now, and at the end of their tenures, the very people trying to corrupt the democratic system of governance because of a selfish lust for power and money.
. . .
A second political challenge is how to avoid the politics of exclusion and the creation of a society of unequals. The ‘winner takes all’ mentality that we have inherited from the Westminster and other systems of western democracy . . .
This form of challenge has manifested itself in a number of countries, mine included, when an in-coming leader and his ministers have resorted to the vilification of the previous leader and his government and the purging of the military and civil services in the bid to garner support and loyalty for their style of governance. This conduct is particularly deleterious and contributes to political tension that eventually polarises the country because it needlessly excludes important actors and sows the seed of division or polarisation in society.
. . .
A third form of challenge to democracy in Africa is the refusal of governments to adhere to the ‘Good Governance’ Agenda. We are all aware that for democracy to succeed, there must necessarily be a role for the opposition, decentralization must also be equitable, the media must be assisted to be free, pluralistic and independent, civil society organisations must have the unfettered freedom to operate and lastly, there must be a strong commitment to anti-corruption. In all these areas, we have seen leaders fail badly as the opposition is openly hounded and denied any significant role in governance, as leaders have themselves become absolutely steeped in corruption and opulent life-styles, as the powers that be refuse to prosecute corrupt Ministers especially, as the purchase of the loyalty and bias of a large section of the press erodes the rights of opponents and as the use of radio stations to attack opponents is sanctioned in the hope of making opponents unpopular over time, and as decentralisation is destroyed by targeting districts and ethnic areas for discrimination. . . . African women still hang precariously on the lower rungs of the political ladder, in spite of many constitutions and United Nations resolutions urging all countries to pay attention to their status and roles. The youth continue to be largely illiterate, unemployed and disillusioned, and ethnic minorities continue to live in fear and obvious disadvantage.
These are political challenges that we ignore to our own detriment.
Challenges of Political Leadership
The lapses in the practice of democracy in Africa can be attributed to many factors, both internal and external to our respective countries, but there is the unquestionable evidence that the lapses are mainly as a result of bad political leadership. At the top of this failure of leadership is the scant respect that many of our leaders have for constitution and constitutionalism. The ease with which extra terms of office are pursued by certain leaders and the ruthless manner in which the illegal or unconstitutional objective is pursued has made this failing particularly objectionable and attributable to failed leadership.
A second challenge to African leadership is the tendency of leadership to foster ethnic or tribal ascendancy in political parties, the military and security situations. And so we are beginning to witness the creation of ethnic crimes and civil services. This deplorable tendency is one of the bagagges of our colonial period, when our peoples were not only identified in ethnic or tribal groups but also when in a number of colonial territories but certain tribes were preferred to others.
. . .
Perhaps the most current of leadership failures on the African continent is the manipulation of election results, described variously as ‘rigged election’ or ‘sham elections’ or ‘stolen verdict’. . . . Democracy is not only the observance of certain norms and traditions; its first requirement is the upholding of the integrity of the electoral process itself. An inseparable collateral to the respect of the electoral process is the assurance of a peaceful and constitutional transition from one government to another. As a leader whose political party has tasted defeat at the polls before, I can say that there should be nothing to fear in losing an election and therefore there should also be no need to tamper with the rotational principle in good governance.
. . .
I would be remiss in my responsibility toward our continent and its people if I fail to also draw attention to the unpalatable truth that more often than not, such deviant political behaviour is prompted and encouraged by certain outside powers who, for their own selfish national interest, prefer one African leader to another. It is a more daunting challenge as this patronising attitude of outside powers is more often than not predicated on the conscious corruption of leaders and the playing upon the abject poverty and ignorance of our people. . . . We must, Ladies and Gentlemen, strengthen our resolve to do away with such plain criminality in order to strengthen good governance in all parts of Africa.
Economic and Social Challenges
. . . democracy will not survive for long unless the mass of our people are introduced to significant economic prosperity. The failure of a large number of African economies in the first three decades of their independence showed all of us that the economy is also doomed to failure if such internal and external mismanagement of the economy is not brought to an end and reform, based on certain demonstrable capacities of leadership, is immediately substituted. The first challenge of that economic goal is therefore the achievement of economic self reliance and independence.
. . .
The second economic and social challenge to democracy on our continent is the lack of efficient attention to our non-existent or poor economic and social infrastructure. The building of roads, railways, harbours, and communication as well as the rehabilitation of dams, electricity plants, water systems etc continue to be of top priority for all of us. The reason why only a few are able to emerge out of this particular difficulty is the pervasive and debilitating nature of corruption which make those involved see this need only in terms of what is in it for themselves. The erstwhile 10 percent syndrome of corrupt countries has now turned into an evil partnership between African administrations and representatives of developed country donors to short-change an already poor people. While it is also true that the all-too-evident shortfall in human capacity is also part of the challenge, I have come to the painful conclusion that corruption and political apathy are the main culprits in the slow progress at the provision of the infrastructure necessary for the development of African countries.__ . . .
Another critical challenge at this point in time is the absence of economic cohesion among African states when it comes to confronting the developed economic organisations, cartels and the chief controllers of the changing patterns of world trade.__ . . .
The challenge facing the continent here is to develop the economic and technical skills and the adequate human resource for negotiating with the developed world at the World Trade and other fora. Unless we show a collective resolve in negotiations, our future will continue to be decided by those who are in the race for the fast dwindling resources of our planet.
The last economic challenge to the survival of democracy in Africa which I wish to draw attention to in this presentation is the lack of resolve to empower certain important economic actors in the various countries.__ . . . There is no alternative to the economic empowerment of the masses through an investment directly in their collective abilities to produce and market. African governments must ensure the survival of their citizens by appropriate administrative, medical and economic policy interventions. Our peoples must of course live and enjoy good health in order to produce. They must be paid living wages and not wage that will put more money in the pockets of those who are already comparatively well- off. What is more, leaders must adopt economic policies that will teach the lesson that work pays as opposed to glorifying corruption.
In trying to find out why democratic governance is not working as well as intended, I have proffered certain reasons which I deem important, even critical, in our endeavour to succeed. The reasons are by no means exhaustive but have been advanced to assist the dialogue that is on-going on the matter. But, perhaps more importantly, let me advance a few ideas that I feel will assist in meeting the political, economic and social challenges. In so doing, it is not my intention to pontificate but rather to instigate discussions among our own peoples as to how to overcome the difficulties challenging us all.
In the first place, I believe that we must persevere and even fast-track the building of those institutions that will promote democracy and economic betterment on our continent. Our laws and institutions such as Parliament, the Judiciary and the Civil Service must be so reformed and strengthened as to make them extremely difficult to be subverted by politicians and political leaders. We must strengthen the judiciary and anti-corruption units in our countries so as to enable them join meaningfully in the anti-corruption war. Secondly, African countries need to develop the systems that will hold their leadership to accountability without fear or favour. This comes from strengthening institutions such as the opposition, parliament, auditing bodies and the general public to be able to ask questions and demand answers.
. . . Thirdly, it is also important that Africans undergo an attitudinal change towards leadership that does not meet their expectations. Unless the citizens learn to boldly reject fraud and criminality in leaders, wrong-doing will persist.
. . .
Fourthly, we need to co-operate among states in confronting corruption and waging war on other lapses. The continued existence and prospering of many of these challenges in one another’s country gives support and nourishment to the lapses themselves. In this regard, the example of the holding of today’s dialogue is a fitting lesson on how to begin the exchange of ideas and the subsequent determination of how African countries should find strength in cooperation against such the challenges as posed by outside powers. But above all, we must respect ourselves, for without this self esteem and respect for one another, we cannot teach any lessons to those who suffer from tyrants, incompetent leaders and economic exploiters. I hope we are successful in achieving these aims.
I thank you for your kind attention.
Read the entire speech here.
January 30, 2008
Over at the African Loft I have a new article up on The Rising Mercenary Industry and AFRICOM. The Bush administration has created a huge industry of military and intelligence contractors. They are already operating in Africa, and looking to Africa for their next contracts. Drop by and give it a read.
January 29, 2008
There were two stories about African oil in the Financial Times today.
The new scramble for Africa’s resources:
The rise of Africa as an energy region is not a short-term trend
. . .
Yet the effect of increased corporate interest has not always translated to economic well-being for African countries. (an almost comic understatement)
Soaring oil prices have threatened to wipe out recent economic gains on what is both the world’s poorest continent and its fastest-growing oil and gas exploration zone of the past decade. According to the International Energy Agency, the increase in the cost of oil in 13 non-producing countries, including stable economies such as South Africa, Senegal and Ghana has since 2004 been equivalent to 3 per cent of their combined gross domestic product. This is more than the debt relief and foreign aid received during the same period.
. . .
The contrast between the multi-billion dollar international oil industry and the grinding realities of Africa is nowhere more apparent than in Nigeria’s Niger Delta, the most prolific zone in the Atlantic basin, from where the US expects to source up to a quarter of its oil imports in the next decade. There, armed militants using an anti-poverty rhetoric have cut a quarter of Nigeria’s production in pre-dawn raids on oil facilities and kidnapped scores of oil workers in the past two years, a potent symbol of the kind of disorder that can occur on the doorstep of huge investments.
Much of the capacity being added on the continent may be too far offshore to be affected by the kind of militancy seen in the delta. But US policymakers nevertheless remain deeply concerned about stability in oil-producing zones. In response to this concern, President Bush last year ordered the creation of Africom, a dedicated US military command centre for Africa which is expected to be situated in a yet-to-be chosen country on the continent.
The US military has recently started focusing on West Africa, with a $500m plan to help Saharan states eradicate Islamist cells linked to al-Qaeda that could otherwise threaten stability in oil-producing countries in the region, particularly Nigeria. The co-operation has drawn criticism from human rights groups which say the US is repeating its Middle East mistakes by cosying up to despotic and corrupt regimes on the continent.
Indeed, Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, typified US confusion on Africa policy when she described Teodoro Obiang Nguema, the president of oil-rich Equatorial Guinea where US supermajors Chevron and ExxonMobil have interests as a “good friend”, despite widespread concern over human rights abuses and corruption.. . .
Where Africa’s resources are becoming hot property, big energy producing countries are beginning to push for greater control of their own oil and gas industries, much to the chagrin of the traditional oil majors.
As you see above, the Financial Times flatly states that African oil is the reason Bush created AFRICOM, and the reason for the US military focus.
Energy producing countries should push for greater control of their resources and industries. Of course they also need to push for a more equitable distribution of the profits. How, and how much, will AFRICOM be used to push back and maintain US control?
The second article, Plenty of room for minnows discusses the proliferation and role of small oil companies in Africa.
With many of the oil majors in the past few years focused on the multibillion dollar deepwater investments in the Gulf of Guinea, and oil prices so high, the past few years have seen plenty of incentives for smaller companies to try to make it big in Africa.
. . .
If they develop their assets cleverly, or even discover significant oil finds, the rewards may be a lucrative takeover bid from a big company.
. . .
. . . “Essentially, the creation of a secondary market is just beginning to happen on the continent.”
Companies that are interested in Africa range from small start-ups that have snapped up speculative oil licences, to the likes of Tullow Oil, which has booked a relatively large discovery in Ghana and which today has a market capitalisation of more than £3.7bn. Medium- sized companies from the Arab world have also started expressing an interest in holding African oil and gas assets.
Some of the more successful companies have built up their reputations by leveraging their insider contacts in government circles.
Indeed, Afren’s founding board members include Rilwanu Lukman, the former president of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and Nigerian presidential adviser, which probably goes some way towards explaining why Afren was able to secure a $200m non-recourse facility from BNP Paribas, the largest loan the bank has ever made to a company with no cashflow.
. . .
But the share price volatility of such companies remain high because their assets are often concentrated in a small number of countries. Indeed half of small oil companies trading on Aim are now below their issue price.
. . .
But the share price volatility of such companies remain high because their assets are often concentrated in a small number of countries. Indeed half of small oil companies trading on Aim are now below their issue price.
. . .
In the meantime, some companies, detecting wider investor scepticism, are busy looking to tie themselves more closely with African investors who may also have clout in government circles.
This is not the kind of situation that makes fighting corruption easy.
January 26, 2008
In the 19th century Europe claimed to be bringing the 3 Cs to Africa, commerce, christianity, and civilization. That certainly did not work out as promised.
The Bush administration claims AFRICOM will bring Africa 3 Ds, development, defense and diplomacy.
3 Fs look more likely, Foolery, Falacy, and Failure
A VOA article, New US Commander Prepares for Africa Assignment, announced:
Admiral Greene will head the Combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa, based in Djibouti, providing training for African military forces and conducting humanitarian missions in 13 nearby countries. He told reporters in a conference call the goal is to help improve security and governance, and end poverty, in order to indirectly fight terrorism.
Among Admiral Greene’s remarks:
I see our role as to enable African solutions to African problems
(The objective of the mission) the three Ds,” development, defense and diplomacy
The 3 Ds?. I thought they had dropped speaking about the 3 Ds. To anyone who knows enough history to have heard of the 3 Cs, 3 Ds sound like a joke, or some weird form of mockery or parody. When I mentioned them to Omotaylor in the comments on a post at African Loft, she made me laugh and nailed it with her comment:
I see the 3 Fs in their endeavour, – Foolery, Fallacy and Failure (as the end result from any unholy liason posed by anyone on Africa).
General Holman (current deputy commander of the U.S.-led Horn of Africa Task Force, Brigadier General Sanford Holman) says the Djbouti base facilitates some other military activities he won’t talk about. There have been reports of U.S. special operations forces working from the base on counter-terrorism missions in Somalia and elsewhere. But the general says those activities are not the base’s main purpose.
The activities he won’t talk about are probably ones he also characterizes as facilitating “African solutions to African problems”, such as the Ethiopian invasion of Somalia, accompanied by massive bombing of civilians by US forces coordinated out by CJTF-HOA. That “African solution” destroyed the “African problem” of the only working government Somalia had in 15 years, replacing it with the hated warlords, Ethiopians, violence and death, more people killed and displaced than in Darfur.
January 23, 2008
In Private military industry continues to grow, Rafael Enrique Valero describes the growth industry of people who fight and spy for private gain, mercenaries.
The mercenary corporations have a trade association and lobbying arm, with the Orwellian name of International Peace Operations Association. They held their annual convention in October 2007, attended by among others, Army Lt. Col. James Boozell.
. . . Army Lt. Col. James Boozell, a branch chief of the Stability Operations/Irregular Warfare Division at the Pentagon, said that the U.S. military was in fact experiencing a “watershed” moment in its 200-plus-year history — nation building was now a core military mission to be led by the Army.
. . . his presence at the association’s trade meeting sent a clear message — boom times for nation building are here to stay . . .
The Army understands this. Globalization has weakened borders and ratcheted up commerce even as it breaks down a country’s physical and psychological security. Transnational actors such as Al Qaeda are seeking bases in failed and feeble states worldwide. Africa is particularly vulnerable.
Of course there are a variety of transnational actors, including the oil companies. In Africa these actors are trying to co-opt African resources. That is why Africa is particularly vulnerable.
“Peace operations” and “nation building” are what the military and the mercenaries call their activities. But just like Bush’s “healthy forests” and “clear skies” initiatives, the names mean the opposite of what they do.
While African states are trying to put the culture of military rule behind them, the United States appears determined to demonstrate that most civilian activities in Africa should be undertaken by armed forces. – Samuel Makinda
Right now, the debate is about private security contractors — in particular, Blackwater’s shooting of civilians in Iraq — and how to control these corporate warriors in a theater of conflict. Maybe that’s the least of our worries.
. . . as stability operations become the norm worldwide, it is certainly possible that civilian and military interests could blur into a self-perpetuating, symbiotic relationship. Experts wonder if it could lead the United States into a period of “liberal imperialism” that oddly mirrors the British, French, and Dutch East India companies of the 1600s and 1700s — private entities sanctioned by governments to do their bidding.
. . .
MPRI advertises that it works only on international projects endorsed by the U.S. government, and that claim is true as far as it goes. But the company’s well-connected executives, most of them former military brass, know how to lobby Congress to get the contracts they want. Indeed, DynCorp, MPRI, and other private security contractors are heavily staffed and run by former officers who maintain close ties to the men they once led.
. . . after MPRI requested a license to evaluate Equatorial Guinea’s defense department in 1998, the State Department denied the permit because of the West African country’s poor human-rights record. MPRI ex-generals then lobbied Congress and the State Department, arguing that engaging the country “rather than punishing it” would, Avant writes, “foster better behavior in the future and enhance U.S. oil interests.” The application was then approved but was quickly flagged by the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. MPRI executives again pressed their case to the right people; in 2000, although Equatorial Guinea’s human-rights record had not changed, State approved the contract.
“I think that the thing you’re pointing out with MPRI’s contract is the degree to which a company with a commercial interest can have influence on policy,” Avant said in an interview. “Now, of course, that happens all the time. But I think it nonetheless opens the question of whether U.S. foreign policy is in the pursuit of ‘U.S. interests’ by some objective definition, or whether it’s in pursuit of interests of a smaller number of people.
. . .
President Bush, . . . has directed the Pentagon to create the U.S. Africa Command by late 2008 to “help coordinate the work of other U.S. government agencies, particularly the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development” to assist African governments and their young rapid-reaction African Standby Force, meant “to provide security and respond in times of need” to troubled nations.
– private relief and development groups and other organizations might not want to work with the U.S. military. Relief groups are steadfast about their neutrality when they are working in war zones in unstable countries; they don’t want one side accusing them of helping the other. In an essay, Carolyn Bryan of USAID writes that contractors and NGOs may not want to compromise their neutrality, because “it increases their risk of being targeted by insurgents.” This separation between the military and the NGOs is called “humanitarian space,” Bryan says, “and is not always understood by the military, who would prefer to join forces with the NGOs and their activities.”
. . .
The private contractors “contradict the military culture’s foundation of sacrifice for the collective good,”
. . .
. . . in the blurry asymmetrical wars of the future, how long will it be before a president decides to “go off the books” and hire a small private army to fight a war. It wouldn’t be hard to do.
“The big risk is not what the companies are going to do in and of themselves,” Avant said. “The big risks are what the consumers are going to ask them to do.”
Of course presidents have already gone “off the books” to fight their wars. That is what Reagan’s Iran Contra was about. A lot of Bush’s Iraq war is off the books, look for the missing billions. It looks like this pattern could become a lot worse.
That is one reason why:
AFRICOM is not about large forces, or large military bases. “It’s not about troops. Its really about headquarter staff, military and civilians; people who oversee programs, they do planning and coordinate security assistance programs.”
AFRICOM can be the pass through vehicle for covert actions and “off the books” operations, “security assistance programs”. That is the reason Bush/Cheney want a huge and thriving mercenary industry. And when they are gone, the industry will still be thriving.
2/2008 – You can read my article on mercenaries in Africa over at the African Loft: The Rising Mercenary Industry and AFRICOM.
January 21, 2008
At Moon of Alabama b real has Coup In Kenya: Part II – Exploring U.S. influence in the Kenyan Elections posted. I recommend you read it. It is not a pretty picture. I saw Fareed Zakaria on a Daily Show last week, and he said “we (the US) like democracy in strategically irrelevant countries, anywhere important, we don’t like it.” US behavior in Kenya is a glowing example of this. Coup In Kenya: Part II went up today, and if it follows the pattern of Coup in Kenya – Part I, it will be worth checking back from time to time over the next week or so to read the comments.
You may also wish to read Countdown to Deception: 30 Hours That Destroyed Kenya by Kenyans for Peace and Justice, also available here. And you might want to read Anatomy of a Rigging by Kenyans for Peace with Truth and Justice, KPTJ.
This last is an hour by hour account -
drawn from the statements of four of the five domestic election observers1 allowed into the verification process the Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK) . . .
The account illustrates the list of anomalies, malpractices and illegalities that lay behind those results, raising questions as to the ethics, non-partisanship and professionalism of the ECK Commissioners and staff as well as to the validity of the supposed results.
In The Great Divide, authors Holman and Mills write about the political process in contemporary African countries, and say:
the best role that external actors can assume is to be honest in their deliberations about and with these countries, and not attempt to pick and back winners.
January 21, 2008
People from all walks of life outside the Ohene Djan Stadium
Supporters and street performers outside the stadium
Ghana supporters dancing outside the stadium
Flags of participating nations displayed at a traffic round-about
Ghana supporters dancing outside the stadium
Accra, Jan. 20, GNA – Midfielder Sulley Ali Muntari set Ghana’s campaign for a fifth continental glory on a smooth path when he delivered a “super strike” in the 89th minute to secure a 2-1 victory over Guinea in the opening match of the 26th Africa Cup of Nations at the Ohene Djan Sports Stadium, Accra.
Photos by Oluniyi David Ajao http://www.davidajao.com , who takes beautiful photos, and generously shares them on the web. See more of his photos on Flickr, or at his website.
I spoke to a friend in Ghana this evening. He said everyone was out in the street jubilating. The police came in a car and told people to clear the street, but the people just climbed onto the police car. The police took it with a good nature. They were celebrating too.
January 20, 2008
Over at Moon of Alabama b real has an excellent writeup of the post electoral Coup in Kenya – Part 1. I recommend you go and read it. In addition to the article, the comments have continued all week, and contain a lot of valuable information and observations, including some from David Barouski who has covered that part of the continent in depth, and for some time. Included is Kibaki’s visit to Uganda, and his use of Ugandan troops against Kenyan citizens to hold his coup in power.
You may also want to take a look at the remarks by Immanuel Wallerstein: “Kenya: Stable Democracy or Meltdown?”
January 17, 2008
US AC130 gunship which bombed Somali territory (January 2007) purportedly in pursuit of “terrorists”. The attacks represent an escalation of American aggression in the Horn of Africa.The United States proxy war against Somalia has escalated with the massacre of civilians by AC130 gunships. The resistance to American intervention in Somalia is growing despite the presence of thousands of western-backed Ethiopian troops which invaded the country.
The National Conference of Black Lawyers has just published a position paper on AFRICOM, written up in the pan-african news wire:
The National Conference of Black Lawyers (NCBL) concludes that the mission of Africa Command (Africom) infringes on the sovereignty of African states due to the particularity of Africa’s history and Africa’s current economic and political relationship to the United States.
Further, Africom is designed to violate international law standards that protect rights to self determination and that prohibit unprovoked military aggression.
Africom is also likely to become a device for the foreign domination and exploitation of Africa’s natural resources to the detriment of people who are indigenous to the African continent.
. . .
In the past Washington has aided reactionary African factions that have carried out atrocities against civilians. An increased U.S. military presence in Africa will likely follow this pattern of extracting resources while aiding factions in some of their bloodiest conflicts, thus further destabilizing the region.”
. . .
This raises special concerns because the threat to Africa’s political and economic integrity comes not only from the U.S. government, but also from the multi-national corporations that are the beneficiaries of government policies.
In recent years, this is seen most dramatically in Congo . . .
. . .
All of this raises critical questions of whether, with Africom, the U.S. is now positioning itself to become more directly involved – with or without proxies – in protecting corporate access to Africa’s resources. In many other parts of the world, the U.S. has engaged in “regime change” as a matter of course for more than a century as a method of protecting the interests of the corporate world.
. . .
With disturbing frequency, the U.S. has in recent decades launched unprovoked military attacks on other countries, or intervened in the internal affairs of other countries through the use of mercenaries or covert action designed to destabilize foreign governments or the economic, political or social order.
This article provides a brief and concise history of US intervention in Africa. It also touches on how the US has used mercenaries and proxies in the resource wars.
January 15, 2008
The US Africa Command now has an AFRICOM Dialogue blog. Having ignored African opinion in setting up AFRICOM, it now says:
As we build U.S. Africa Command, we want to talk to people about what the U.S. military is doing in Africa. Just as importantly, I want everyone on the staff to also listen and learn.
I am sure the intention is to listen and learn. But I wonder exactly what they intend to listen to, and learn about. One thing they may want to learn is to collect as much electronic and background data on the people commenting as possible. They can also collect data on the locations of opinions, and whether certain kinds of opinions are clustered or pinpointed in specific geographic areas, and specific computers.
AFRICOM was created by the same people who established Full Spectrum Dominance as the US military posture in the world, and is part of that policy.
Full-spectrum dominance means the ability of U.S. forces, operating alone or with allies, to defeat any adversary and control any situation across the range of military operations.
This is an imperial policy, a militarization of US foreign policy, and a danger to any targeted populations.
January 13, 2008
There is an article at the African Loft, Should Nigeria Welcome Gazprom?, the Russian oil company. Recently the Financial Times reported that Gazprom was making overtures to Nigerian government officials about developing gas fields in Nigeria.
The article provides some good information and analysis, including:
What about Gazprom? What does it have to offer? The Financial Times report (referred to in the first paragraph of this write up) provides next to nothing on this, though it quotes a Nigerian government official as saying:
“What Gazprom is proposing is mind boggling. They are talking tough and saying the west has taken advantage of us in the last 50 years and they’re offering us a better deal.”
. . .
Gazprom, like any other energy conglomerate, is simply strategically positioning itself for global growth beyond the shores of Eurasia.
. . .
Gazprom doesn’t really need Nigerian gas. . . . But Gazprom needs access to strategically positioned gas. As a significant player in the global LNG business and with Africa’s largest gas reserves, Nigeria seems a good place to start. Gazprom would not go into Nigeria to save it from the perils of western oil multinationals. It would go there for business and strategic reasons. Forget the east-west jargon.
And I am sure Gazprom would be as exploitive as it could be, as exploitive as any other multinational corporation. There is no history that would indicate otherwise.
January 11, 2008
The Vanguard reports that Nigerian Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), General Andrew Azazi announced that 16 West African nations have established a West African Standby Brigade (WASB). This was something Yar’Adua spoke about in his somewhat confusing remarks about AFRICOM, after his visit to Bush in the White House.
Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Gen. Andrew Azazi, says that 16 West African countries have established a regional West African Standby Brigade (WASB) just as the Gulf of Guinea Commission has resolved to form a Gulf of Guinea Guards to safeguard the gulf region. Azazi said that the setting up of the brigade was designed to prevent political and other crises in the area from escalating into civil wars.
. . .
The CDS said that Nigeria was expected to play prominent roles in the training, provision of base and personnel, as well as funding and other logistics in the formation of the two forces.
“West African nations have agreed to establish West African Standby Brigade in the sub-region. Efforts have gone far in the formation of the West African Standby Force that will be organised and run by Africans themselves.
“The force will have five formations all over West Africa and Nigeria is expected to play prominent roles. The Gulf of Guinea Commission also intends to form the Gulf of Guinea Guards to police the gulf.
“Nigeria will play vital parts in the organisation of the two forces.
The Gulf of Guinea Guard, an extension of the Gulf of Guinea Commission, Angola, Nigeria, Cameroon, Sao Tome and Principe, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Congo Brazzaville and DRC, all oil producing states, has been partnering with USEUCOM, and now AFRICOM.
[USEUCOM originally, and now AFRICOM has been working on] developing a coastal security system in the Gulf of Guinea called the Gulf of Guinea Guard.
. . .
The Pentagon is thus moving aggressively to establish a military presence in the Gulf of Guinea that will allow it to control the western part of the broad trans-Africa oil strip and the vital oil reserves now being discovered there.
That is why the USS Fort McHenry, the African Partnership Station, APS, is in the neighborhood, training and partnering all along the coast of West Africa and the Gulf of Guinea.
General Azazi had earlier expressed some skepticism about AFRICOM, and said the US needed to explain the purpose and activities of AFRICOM a bit more clearly. This Day quoted him in November 2007:
. . . we feel is that nobody at the political level in African Union or ECOWAS knows enough about AFRICOM to make categorical statements . . . we (the ECOWAS CDS) are going to discuss AFRICOM if our advise is that it is not good for the continent it will be rejected and if it is good, it will be accepted. Otherwise, the general understanding is that AFRICOM is suppose to be good for capacity building, but what we are saying is that we should have a better understanding of all that is going to come about, let’s create awareness, let’s be a partnership that will help both sides.
It will be interesting and revealing to see how the West African Standby Brigade, and the Gulf of Guinea Guard work, how they interact, and whose interests they serve.
January 10, 2008
I originally published Origins of AFRICOM
at the African Loft, which is no longer available. So I have republished it here
. I have tried to connect the official documentation and historical path that led to the creation of AFRICOM, and provide links to the original sources. I’ve tried to keep it short and tie it all together. Plus, you can refer to the original documents, and other links, for more information. Give it a look
updated April 21, 2014
January 8, 2008
I ran across a blog that was new to me that has some interesting things to say:
ijebuman’s diary: The online ramblings of an Ijebu man in London
I found what he has to say interesting, and his style entertaining.
His post Criminal Politics – a report by HRW took me to this October 2007 report: Human Rights Watch has released an extensive report on the political situation in Nigeria, called Criminal Politics: Violence, “Godfathers” and Corruption in Nigeria, click here for the Pdf version
I’ve been reading in the report, and it does not paint a promising picture. Most of the governors are utterly corrupt and unaccountable to anyone. The youth are being manipulated and betrayed by their leadership. Just one example of this betrayal is youth training and employment programs being used to pay young men to act as political thugs on behalf of politicians. Considering the fact that a number of US Department of Defense and Pentagon planners consider Nigeria well on the way to being a failed state, and these same planners want Nigeria’s oil, prospects for the future are doubly discouraging. There has even been talk about redrawing African borders, and this from people who went into Iraq without knowing there is a difference between Sunni and Shia.
AFRICOM is already hanging around offshore, and partnering in the neighborhood. The HRW report makes a number of excellent recommendations, but it is hard to see how they might be implemented. There are a number of people in Nigeria who would like to turn the corruption around. But too many of the people who have the power and authority to do it, are enriched and advantaged by corruption. There may be some hope with the courts, which the report indicates are still for the most part trying to do their jobs. But courts alone can’t do it because their activities are by nature largely reactive. The situation also needs proactive measures.
Another post lists suggestions for How to keep your job (Naija style), which, with some slight alterations, applies just as well to all the corrupt and criminal cronies around Bush. I’ve certainly seen US versions of all 10 of these ploys in the news. I’ve copied some below. Substitute “the United States” for “Nigeria”, and there are only slight differences.
So you’ve been caught with your hands in the till (or in this case indicted for not following due process by awarding a contract to an unregistered company run by one of your aides).
No worries, here are a few tips on how to save your job;
1. The best form of defence is an attack, start by turning the tables on your opponents by accusing them of similar crimes.
2. Play the victim. Claim you’ve been set up and you know nothing about the allegations.
3. Employ a powerful Godfather to apply pressure on those in power6. Employ Spiritual methods. Call on all pastors and imams to pray for you and Nigeria. If you attend a Pentecostal church, you can organise night vigils, prayer requests or make a large donation to your pastor to ensure he is on your case 24/7.
. . .
. . .
9. Set up a fictional group called “concerned citizens of Nigeria“, get the “group” to put out a full page ad in the news papers claiming there is a conspiracy against you. They should also list your “accomplishments” and declare you’re the best ***** Nigeria ever had.
10. Employ good old “shakara“. Declare that “it’s God’s will” that you got to your current position and by “God’s grace” no one can remove you
January 6, 2008
Pambazuka News has several excellent articles on the aftermath of the recent election in Kenya. I’d like to quote three points that sum up a great deal about what has been happening. I have put these in bold. There are lessons here that need to be heeded in a lot of places, in Africa, and around the world, including in the US. From It is the Kenyan people who have lost the election by Firoze Manji:
That the elections results were rigged – of that there is little doubt. The hasty inauguration, the blanket banning on the broadcast media, the dispersal of security forces to deal with expected protests – all these have given the post election period the flavour of a coup d’etat. What was not expected was the speed with which the whole thing would unravel. The declaration of the members of the Electoral Commission that the results were indeed rigged only added to the growing realisation that a coup had indeed taken place.
People across the country took to the streets to protest and were met with disproportionate use of force by the police and GSU. Emotions ran high. And there is evidence that politicians from all sides used the occasion to instigate violent attacks against their opponents constituencies. . . . The western media has been quick to describe these as ‘ethnic clashes’ – but then they appear only to be able to see tribes whenever there are conflicts in Africa. What is ignored by them is that the security forces have been responsible for the majority of killings.
. . .
But the real tragedy of Kenya is that the political conflict is not about alternative political programmes that could address the long standing grievances of the majority over landlessness, low wages, unemployment, lack of shelter, inadequate incomes, homelessness, etc. It is not about such heady aspirations.
No, it boils down to a fight over who has access to the honey pot that is the state. For those in control of the state machinery are free to fill their pockets. So the battle lines are reduced to which group of people are going to be chosen to fill their pockets – and citizens are left to decide perhaps that a few crumbs might fall off the table in their direction.
And the electorate – the mass of citizens who have borne the brunt of the recent violence and decades of prolonged disenfranchisement from accessing the fruits of independence – are reduced to being just being fodder for the pigs fighting over the trough.
Next Page »