Visit the new home of Crossed Crocodiles!

Crossed Crocodiles has a new home!

Please come by for a visit. Click here to visit the new home of Crossed Crocodiles.

Crossed Crocodiles has MOVED!

Coke as an economic indicator

Visit my new home to read the latest. Crossed Crocodiles has moved to WordPress. There are a variety of reasons, but one is WordPress provides much better tools to handle subjects and archives. Of course I'm still moving in, the archives are all here for now. All new posts will be at my new home. Regular visitors, occasional visitors, and first time visitors, all please come join me at the new home of Crossed Crocodiles.

The Vultures are gathering

I have a new post up on at the African Loft: The Vultures are Gathering - Mercenary Corporations look to AFRICOM for new Contracts. The IPOA, the orwellianly named International Peace Operations Association is looking to AFRICOM and Africa for their next contracts. Take a look.

Censored by Google Alerts - Crossed Crocodiles on AFRICOM

Starting in late February or in March, Crossed Crocodiles disappeared from Google Alerts on AFRICOM. From February 2007 through sometime in February or March 2008 the Google Alerts on AFRICOM included ALL Crossed Crocodiles articles on AFRICOM. Since some time in late February or in March 2008 NONE of Crossed Crocodiles stories on AFRICOM have been included in the Google Alerts. It was an abrupt change. First they were there, now they are not. That looks like censorship to me.

For awhile I thought they were just overlooking some posts, that Google was not as efficient as it would have us believe. But the stark contrast of all posts being included suddenly switching to none being included tells me the change is deliberate. This blog is not a large blog, but it has reported on AFRICOM longer and more consistantly than any other blog I know of. I use a number of Google Alerts to get news. Mostly I set the alerts for comprehensive, so I get notices of blog posts, as well as news articles.

Crossed Crocodiles began publishing posts on AFRICOM in February 2007, when the command was announced, and has been following its progress since then. For the first year of this coverage, February 2007 into February 2008, every blog post I wrote on AFRICOM was included in the comprehensive Google Alerts, News Alerts, on AFRICOM. Sometime in February this year, 2008, there was a flurry of attention to Crossed Crocodiles blog from .mil sites. I get fairly regular hits from the US military and the contractors. They are more than welcome and I hope they learn something positive for the citizens of the US and the citizens of African countries when they visit. So I didn't think too much about it. Then this blog got a visit from Google itself, google.com in Mountain View California, the first such visit to this blog to my knowledge. But I didn't think about it much or record the details. Soon after that, in late February or early March, Crossed Crocodiles posts on AFRICOM disappeared from the Google Alerts on AFRICOM.

It is not as if there are so many blog and news stories on AFRICOM that it would be difficult for Google comprehensive Alerts to be comprehensive on the subject. The AFRICOM Alerts do not even come every day, and mostly there are very few stories listed when they do arrive, sometimes only one.

More recently I set up a comprehensive Google Alert on the International Peace Operations Association, the IPOA, the trade association of the PMCs, private military corporations. I have recently written two posts, dealing with the IPOA. Neither post was picked up by the Google Alert on the International Peace Operations Association, although a couple of posts on other blogs that linked back to the two posts on Crossed Crocodiles did get listed in the Google Alerts on the IPOA. That made me wonder if Crossed Crocodiles is being censored from the Google Alerts on the IPOA as well.

And who knows what other subjects covered here, or on other blogs, may be censored from Google Alerts? If you subscribe to Google Alerts you may not be getting the most relevant results and information you need on your topic, especially if someone regards it as a politically sensitive topic. I will still subscribe, but I'm not relying on them to keep me informed.

So far, Crossed Crocodiles posts do turn up in Google Searches. Although if you want to be sure of getting the most relevant hits, I'd use more than one search engine. Ask.com has a Blog Search, and you can try Bloglines. There are a number of possibilities.

As I said in a previous post, I write about AFRICOM because I am old enough that I observed the post independence western interference, and the rivalries and proxy wars of the cold war in Africa, when the US and Russia poured "military assistance" onto the continent, and the death and devastation that created. Friends and I used to joke about applying to Reagan and Bush 1 for military assistance to help us in our petty arguments with each other. It appeared all you needed to get military assistance was to call your enemy a Communist (now call them a Terrorist.) AFRICOM seems designed to make it all happen again, only this time it could cause infinitely more suffering. This time it is driven far more by greed for oil than ideology. I decided this time I would record what I see, what I learn, and what I think, hence the focus on AFRICOM in this blog.


Here are a couple of posts that have received a lot of attention from .mil sites and the contractors:

AFRICOM, US military bases, and Ghana

US State Department recruiting mercenaries to work in Africa


You can read my article on mercenaries in Africa over at the African Loft: The Rising Mercenary Industry and AFRICOM.

Is Nigeria waffling on AFRICOM?

Is Nigeria now planning to cooperate with AFRICOM, or waffling about a decision?

Recently, the minister of foreign affairs, Chief Ojo Maduekwe, briefed reporters on the latest position of Nigeria with regards to the US Africa Command (AFRICOM).

… Maduekwe said that Nigeria had examined the US proposals on AFRICOM and found them suitable for the survival of the nation, arguing further that Nigeria should not "maintain a cold war posture by exhibiting old communist anti-West stance".

…
… "many of the pundits who have been engaged in the strident debate on AFRICOM have failed somehow to come to terms with the fact that AFRICOM is no longer a matter of hypothetical conjecture, but a reality….. In other words, AFRICOM is already a fait accompli and what ought to be Nigeria or Africa’s major preoccupation at this point is how to parley and make the best of this new initiative….."

"In this regard", according to Ambassador Hart, "Nigeria ought to consider herself as a strong ally of the US and give AFRICOM the required cooperation....It is pertinent to mention that the chosen country (or countries if there will be mini-bases) will enjoy the lucrative economic benefits traditionally enjoyed by those countries that host American bases around the world…..It is believed that the African country that comes out to host AFRICOM will be better off in the end".

This sure sounds a lot like the "joke" that got McCain in trouble for a fundraiser hosted by

Clayton ‘Claytie’ Williams, a Texas oilman who joked about rape when running for governor in 1990. Williams had compared rape to the weather, saying, “If it’s inevitable, just relax and enjoy it.” He later apologized.

If AFRICOM is inevitable, just relax, enjoy it, and take the money.

As Abba Mahmood, the author Still on AFRICOM in Leadership points out:

If President Yar'Adua is surrounded by a foreign minister who sees the AFRICOM issue not from the point of view of sovereignty but from the narrow perspective of a moribund ideology and a foreign affairs adviser who looks at the issue purely from short term economic gains of a few (pockets) without taking into consideration the long term security implications of exposing the country to sure terrorist attacks, then one does not have to wonder why Yar'Adua's position keeps oscillating between hypocritical neutrality and outright blind support for this dangerous enterprise.

The questions to be asked are: Will America contemplate establishing a military command in Africa to help the Africans?

Secondly, what military lessons can the US teach Africans in general and the Nigerian Armed Forces in particular?

Checkout the American military records: they were chased out of Somalia by a rag-tag militia under Clinton. They had to send UN troops, including Nigeria's, to that country to take charge in the early 1990s. The US invasion of Afghanistan is still inclusive as the president they imposed, Karzai, is in charge of only Kabul, the capital about six years after.

In Iraq, American troops are still battling the insurgents with many US casualties and billions of dollars in a lost cause. So, what will American soldiers teach our soldiers in this "long existing…..military relationship" that Maduekwe was referring to?

In comparison, the Nigerian Armed Forces have been excelling in all their international peacekeeping engagements around the world for almost five decades now. The Nigerian Armed Forces helped to stabilise our sister ECOWAS country of Liberia and even flushed out soldiers and reversed a coup in neighbouring Sierra Leone. In fact, the Gen. Malu- led ECOMOG in these two countries is still considered the finest peacekeeping model in the whole world!

And America may be a particularly weak reed to cling to right now, with an unpopular lame duck president who:

has so far brought untold hardship to his fellow citizens and made the whole world insecure by his military misadventures.

The US is not dealing from a position of strength:

Another issue is that the US is in decline economically. It is right now the largest debtor nation on earth. Investing in the US is now risky. Even oil transactions that were being done in dollars are now being diversified with many countries advocating for a basket of currencies due to the decline of dollar power. Real wages for the majority in the US have largely stagnated or declined and are now close to the lowest level among industrial societies.

The number of people who go hungry because they cannot afford to buy food rose to over 38 million in 2004 (12 percent of households) an increase of 7 million in the first five years of the Bush administration. How can we mortgage our interest to a power that is on terminal illness due to injustices perpetrated by their leaders across the world?

As Mahmood concludes:

If a nation cannot feed its population, it is not independent. Similarly, if a nation (or continent) cannot guarantee the security and territorial integrity of its area, then it is not sovereign.

AFRICOM - Petrol imperialism

Click here for the interactive version of this map.
Then, in the frame on the left you can view the list of these oil and military involvements in Africa.

Foreign Policy in Focus had an article by Antonia Juhasz titled AFRI(OIL)COM, speculating as to whether the next war for oil will be in Africa. Many of her points have been discussed here at Crossed Crocodiles at one time or another. She states:

Under the rubric of the Global War on Terror, the Bush administration has implemented the greatest realignment of U.S. forces since the end of the Cold War. With a map of Big Oil’s overseas operations, the world’s remaining oil reserves, and oil transport routes, one can now track the realignment and predict future deployments of the U.S. military.

And for a picture of this, click on the link below the map. In a frame on the left you will be able to scroll down a list of Major Oil Corporation and U.S. Military Activities in Africa. The list is by no means complete. But it provides a lengthy introduction.

Sniffing hard on the heels of the US military come the dogs of war, the mercenaries, the International Peace Operations Association, who are organizing to feed at the AFRICOM trough, feeding on the blood and the futures of African citizens.

The seven of crocs

Kotare kindly tagged me for the latest chain blog thing. Here's the rules:

Link to your tagger and post these rules on your blog. Share seven facts about yourself on your blog, some random, some weird. Tag seven people at the end of your post by leaving their names as well as links to their blogs. Let them know they are tagged by leaving a comment on their blog.

I won't tag anyone else, although anyone reading is welcome to consider themselves tagged.

(1) I can't reveal much about myself, because although I find anonymity a nuisance, I promised members of my family I would remain anonymous as a blogger, so that my opinions will not cause gossip or interfere with business.

(2) I have a home in Ghana where I hope to retire, but currently have a job I like, live in and am a citizen of the US.

(3) I am part of some start up small businesses in Ghana, and with another family member have several small farms, growing cocoa, chickens, sometimes pigs, and a variety of vegetables. We tried goats, but they didn't do well.

(4) I pay school fees for a number of elementary and secondary school students. It hurts me a lot when a young person wants to go to school and is not able to afford it. Unfortunately, what I can do is only a very tiny drop in a very large bucket.

(5) I take pride in paying people well who work for us, and try to help create opportunities. People being people, sometimes that works better than others.

(6) I have studied t'ai chi since the late 70s. I am not a particularly great student, but both my principal teachers take the martial origins and applications of t'ai chi seriously and have read and studied it as a martial art. Although I have no interest in fighting at my age, I find t'ai chi does develop useful psychological skills, even for the less distinguished student. It makes it easier to stay relaxed and calm when people get angry and upset. It is useful for negotiating. And it can help defuse potentially dangerous situations when you are cool and physically relaxed.

(7) I am old enough that I observed the post independence western interference, and the rivalries and proxy wars of the cold war in Africa, when the US and Russia poured "military assistance" onto the continent, and the death and devastation that created. Friends and I used to joke about applying to Reagan and Bush 1 for military assistance to help us in our petty arguments with each other. It appeared all you needed to get military assistance was to call your enemy a Communist (now replaced by Terrorist.) AFRICOM seems designed to make it all happen again, only this time it could be far more horrible. I decided this time I would record what I see, what I learn, and what I think, hence the focus on AFRICOM in this blog.

Curse of the Black Gold - photos of 50 Years of Oil in the Niger Delta by Ed Kashi

A young girl walks across the NNPC (Nigerian National Petroleum) pipelines that run through her town, Okrika near Port Harcourt, 2006.

From Artdaily:

This summer George Eastman House International Museum of Photography and Film presents National Geographic photojournalist Ed Kashi’s images of oil exploitation in Africa’s Niger Delta, in the powerful exhibition Curse of the Black Gold: 50 Years of Oil in the Niger Delta. The display of 37 photographs, on view now through Sept. 1, takes a graphic look at the profound cost of oil exploitation in West Africa. The work traces, in an original and compelling way, the 50-year impact of Nigeria’s relationship to oil interests and the resulting environmental degradation and community conflicts that have plagued the region.

“This exhibition provides a visual inventory of the consequences of a half century of oil exploration and production in one of the world’s centers of biodiversity,” said Kashi, who photographed the region from 2004 to 2006. “These images expose the reality of oil’s impact and the absence of sustainable development left in its wake. My eyes and heart were opened and my anger and disgust were ignited. To tell this difficult but profoundly important geopolitical story in a visual way became the focus of my work.”

… While the Delta produces 95 percent of the country’s wealth, it is the poorest region in the nation. The first oil wellheads were tapped in 1958, and since then $500 billion worth of oil has been pumped out of the fertile ground and remote creeks of one of Africa’s largest deltas and the world's third largest wetland.

Oil production has caused devastating pollution to the Niger Delta due to the uninterrupted gas flaring and oil spillage. According to Kashi, these operations have destroyed the traditional livelihoods of the Niger Delta. Fishing and agriculture are no longer productive enough to feed the area and the residents are lacking schools, proper housing, and clean water.

“From a potential model nation, Nigeria has become a dangerous country, addicted to oil money, with people increasingly willing to turn to corruption, sabotage, and murder to get a fix of the wealth,” wrote Tom O’Neill, in the 2007 National Geographic article illustrated by Kashi’s images. “The cruelest twist is that half a century of oil extraction in the delta has failed to make the lives of the people better. Instead, they are poorer still, and hopeless.”

Even without Kashi’s powerful photographs, O’Neill’s words evoke images of despair: “Villages and towns cling to the banks, little more than heaps of mud-walled huts and rusty shacks. Groups of hungry, half-naked children and sullen, idle adults wander dirt paths. There is no electricity, no clean water, no medicine, no schools. Fishing nets hang dry; dugout canoes sit unused on muddy banks. Decades of oil spills, acid rain from gas flares, and the stripping away of mangroves for pipelines have killed off fish. Nigeria has been subverted by the very thing that gave it promise—oil.”

The exhibit at the George Eastman House starts today, June 14, and runs through September 1 2008. The museum is located in Rochester New York:
George Eastman House · 900 East Ave · Rochester, NY 14607 · 585-271-3361

Curse of the Black Gold is also available as a book you can purchase, or suggest your library purchase.

The text is written by Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka, plus prominent Nigerian journalists, human rights activists, and University of California at Berkeley professor Michael Watts.

From the description at Amazon:

Now one of the major suppliers of U.S. oil, Nigeria is the sixth largest producer of oil in the world. Set against a backdrop of what has been called the scramble for African oil, Curse of the Black Gold is the first book to document the consequences of a half-century of oil exploration and production in one of the world’s foremost centers of biodiversity. This book exposes the reality of oil’s impact and the absence of sustainable development in its wake, providing a compelling pictorial history of one of the world’s great deltaic areas. Accompanied by powerful writing by some of the most prominent public intellectuals and critics in contemporary Nigeria, Kashi’s photographs capture local leaders, armed militants, oil workers, and nameless villagers, all of whose fates are inextricably linked. His exclusive coverage bears witness to the ongoing struggles of local communities, illustrating the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty.

The Curse of the Black Gold book and exhibit add to the testimony that is finally coming forward about what the extraction of oil actually means, to people, and to the ecosystem.

Also look for the documentary film Sweet Crude.

Democracy, natural resources, and corporate governance

Nobody really believes in democracy. Everyone is for democracy when they are on the popular winning side. But when you are not winning, looking for a fix is overwhelmingly tempting. After all, you know you are right (whether you are or not.) And it is totally unfair when you lose. Look at the US, supposedly the premier democracy, trying to make the Justice Department an arm of the Republican party. Or look at them trying to bring "democracy" to Iraq and Afghanistan down the barrel of a gun. The means determine the ends. Justifying is irrelevant. Violent and oppressive means lead to violent and oppressive ends. Criminal means lead to criminal ends.

In addition, in the words of Vandana Shiva:

Centralized economic systems also erode the democratic base of politics. In a democracy, the economic agenda is the political agenda. When the former is hijacked by the World Bank, the IMF, or the WTO, democracy is decimated. The only cards left in the hands of politicians eager to garner votes are those of race, religion, and ethnicity … fundamentalism effectively fills the vacuum left by a decaying democracy.

And speaking of centralized economic systems, giant transnational corporations are dwarfing sovereign countries, even large and wealthy sovereign countries. I read the following over at Global Guerrillas:

There's a mountain of evidence that the global system is now so large, fast, and fluid that nation-states have lost control. The market is now in charge, and even the most powerful nation-states are merely participants. Worse, uncontrolled markets are prone to disruptions (price spikes, shortages, starvation, etc.), corruption (hollow states, predatory money, etc.), and melt-downs (economic, environmental, etc.).

He does mention that some, such as Thomas Barnett see it as a frontier. But adds:

In my view, the global system is an open source platform (in engineering speak, a bow-tie control structure). This type of platform grows very quickly due to simple rules of interconnection and is VERY resistant to upgrades after they are established. This simplicity is actually a design feature, not a flaw, since it enables a bewildering level of complexity to develop on the periphery (the two ends of the bow-tie, radiating outwards). Doesn't look like a frontier to me...

Now there may be an element of diagnosing the problem according to his area of specialization here, but what he describes is well worth considering.

here's michael klare, from his latest book

In the emerging international power system [energy-surplus vs energy-deficit], we can expect the struggle over energy to override all other considerations, national leaders to go to extreme lengths to ensure energy sufficiency for their countries, and state authority over both domestic and foreign energy affairs to expand. Oil will cease to be primarily a trade commodity, to be bought and sold on the international market, becoming instead the preeminent strategic resource on the planet, whose acquisition, production, and distribution will increasingly absorb the time, effort, and focus of senior government and military officials.
h/t to b real

One thing I wonder is, will the importance of controlling resources pit corporations and government interests against each other in the US? Up until now they have moved most of the time in lockstep since the founding of the country (see the quotations at the bottom of this page.) Or will the quest for resources tighten the lockstep? Partly this will depend on the voters. In recent years many US voters have been locked into the developed world version of the fundamentalism that characterizes a decaying democracy. Will it be possible for voters to break out of that pattern and realistically consider their economic interests, especially considering the way news is reported in the US? There are plenty of people and institutions that will be working hard to prevent democratic trends. Or will the desire of the government and the military to control resources lead to an end of democracy and to an even more autocratic state? That certainly seems the desire of the present US government.

Engaging AFRICOM - the annual conference of the IPOA

Africa is in the sights. The International Peace Operations Association has their annual "Summit" meeting in October. As recorded in Dogs of War: Back to Africa, with Iraq inevitably winding down, they need another focus for their contracts and their paychecks, and Africa is their target. AFRICOM provides the perfect enabler.

This does not promise improved peace and stability in Africa. During the first 6 years of this century, peace and stability, human security, has improved in Africa, largely due to pressures from within Africa, and with help from the UN. With increased stability, Africa has become a better prospect for investment, and business and markets are starting up and taking off. An influx of mercenaries, "peace and stability operations" could bring an end to trends towards peace and stability, and an end to business opportunity, except for the IPOA military corporations.

You can read my article on mercenaries in Africa over at the African Loft: The Rising Mercenary Industry and AFRICOM.

Wasis Diop - Sunday musical interlude

France 24 did a brief feature on Wasis Diop this week:
Wasis Diop in French
Wasis Diop in English with translator

Listen and watch Automobile Mobile on YouTube. France 24 had clips from this video on their feature.

Diop writes and performs some of the most beautiful and sophisticated music I have heard. It is hauntingly visceral, speaking to the heart and mind and gut. He has been around long enough and seen enough to understand what he is doing. As he says of the work he is doing with his colleagues "we have never created, all we have done is receive and transform." That is one of the best definitions of creativity I have heard.

You can read a biography of him at RFI Musique. He has travelled and worked with musicians from all over the world, including touring Japan with Japanese saxophonist Tasuaki Shimizu. The RFI biography mentions his visit to Jamaica in 1979-80, but does not mention he worked and recorded with Lee Perry. Throughout his wanderings, and with the multitude of influences he has experienced, it is clear he has been able to preserve a hard core of integrity that acts as a lens and filter. This is no small accomplishment.

The song I find most haunting among his works is Le Passeur, you can listen to a sample at Sterns.

He has a new album out this year that I have not yet heard, aside from the samples, Judu Bék.

Checkbook imperialism - AFRICOM bringing the mercenaries

In Dogs of War: Back to Africa, David Isenberg asks and answers:

Where does the future lie for the private military industry? (When) Iraq, the mother of all private military contracting opportunities ... draw(s) to a close
...
Most likely they will return to their point of origin, Africa. In fact, some are already there.

US contracts for PMCs in Africa are being set up and renewed now.

AFRICAP contracts have a ceiling of approximately $500 million, or $1 billion total. In February the State Department sent out a notice that it was looking to re-complete the contracts.

In Iraq the Bush administration is trying to extend the conflict by extending multi year contracts with the PMCs, as reported by Walter Pincus in the Washington Post:

The depth of U.S. involvement in Iraq and the difficulty the next president will face in pulling personnel out of the country are illustrated by a handful of new contract proposals made public in May. ... The proposals reflect multiyear commitments.

And in Africa Dyncorp is already training the Liberian Army under US contracts, and as Isenberg points out:

A more serious concern was noted by the U.S. Army's Strategic Studies Institute. In a study released in March, the institute concluded that "the image of DynCorp creating an armed elite is disconcerting to many Liberians."

The existence of an armed elite is alarming to many people in Africa across a variety of countries. Armed elites already exist. To make them better armed, better trained, and more elite, is a huge threat to security and safety. The money invested by the US in African militaries makes them elites. There is no similar financial investment in any other sector of African societies or economies. Money spent on capacity building for civilian government would be a positive investment, instead we have this destructive investment in militarization.

AFRICOM plays a major role in this privatized militarization:

The establishment of the U.S. military's latest regional command, the new Africa Command, has also played a role in opening up the market. Private contractors have been seen as an integral part of AFRICOM since its inception. This is not surprising, considering that in October 2003 James Jay Carafano and Nile Gardiner, both from the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank, proposed to the Bush administration the creation of a centralized Africa command for the U.S. military. Their proposal made clear that the objective was to preserve U.S. access to African oil and other natural resources on the continent. The Heritage report also points to the strategic importance of Africa in the global "war on terror."

A study published in spring 2007 by the Industrial College of the Armed Forces noted that "Africa may do for the (private military) industry in the next 20 years what Iraq has done in the past four, provide a significant growth engine."

Sarah Meyer has cataloged the activities and the histories of PMC involvement in Iraq:

Iraq: Security Companies and Training Camps

and updated at:

Security Company Death Squads Timeline

She quotes:

Dirk Adriaensens has been involved with Iraq for 17 years. He is on the executive committee of the BRussels Tribunal and is the coordinator of SOS Iraq. He writes:"

Security guys and gals don't have to abide by the Geneva Conventions. They do as they wish. No rules, no regulations. They can operate with impunity.

As such these "security companies" can be called "death squads". Not "Angels of Death" but "Devils of Death". For this, they make a lot of money. Privatization of war is big, big business."

This makes security companies uniquely unqualified to help build stability and provide peacekeeping. There are problems enough with legitimate peacekeepers with reports of child abuse by UN peacekeepers. But with PMCs, there is no accountability.

AFRICOM was dreamed up by the same people who promoted "Constructive Engagement" with South Africa to shore up and continue apartheid. In a brilliant article on the battle of Cuito Cuanavale, Horace Campbell writes:

In the second term of Ronald Reagan (1984-1988), and with help from the Thatcher government in Britain, [US] support was stepped up for the SADF, UNITA, Mobutu and the anti-communist forces in Southern Africa. It should be stated here that at this time all African freedom fighters had been deemed terrorists. Both Osama Bin Laden and Jonas Savimbi were at this time allies of the USA in the fight against communism. While Savimbi was called a freedom fighter, Nelson Mandela had been branded a terrorist by the USA and the South Africans. ... This period is most important in so far as the very same forces in Washington that supported Jonas Savimbi and Osama Bin Laden are the same political forces seeking to mobilize the world against today’s so called war on terror.

The Heritage Foundation, which initially proposed AFRICOM to Donald Rumsfeld, were the same people who supported and promoted Renamo in Mozambique, promoted funding them through apartheid South Africa, and and promoted funding and support for Savimbi in Angola. Both Renamo, and Savimbi's UNITA maintained long and brutal campaigns of terror. Considering the violence against civilians that characterizes the current involvement of the US and US contractors in Somalia and in the Great Lakes Region, there is no reason to think AFRICOM will be any improvement. A larger investment just means more harm.

Guinea-Bissau and Columbian Cocaine

In Route of Evil How a Tiny West African Nation Became a Key Smuggling Hub For Colombian Cocaine, and the Price It Is Paying, Kevin Sullivan of the Washington Post tells us how Columbian cocaine dealers are taking over a small impoverished country on the west coast of Africa. So far there does not seem to be any help in sight.

Guinea-Bissau, one of the world's poorest nations, has become a major transshipment hub and the epicenter in Africa for the cocaine trade, according to U.S., European and U.N. officials. The shift demonstrates how the flow of drugs adapts not only to law enforcement pressure but also to the forces of global economics.

Officials said some of the world's richest criminal gangs are exploiting barely functioning countries such as Guinea-Bissau, which has 63 federal police officers, no prison and a population that still lives largely in thatched-roof homes on dirt roads with no electricity or running water.

"West Africa is under attack," said Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, who recently visited Guinea-Bissau and concluded that it is so overrun by the cocaine trade that it could become Africa's first "narco-state."

The Colombian cartels are responding to the pressure for cocaine in nations such as Britain, Spain and Italy, where demand is soaring as the U.S. market has leveled off, officials said.

Costa described the strong currencies in Europe, where cocaine sells for twice as much as in the United States, as "a magnet" for the cartels. Police raids in Colombia are increasingly turning up suitcases full of euros instead of the traditional dollars.

… the country's 1.5 million people are suffering because of global currency fluctuations and because European "bankers and models want to snort …

"This isn't even our problem -- we do not produce cocaine here, but it is destroying our future," said Lucinda Barbosa, chief of the judicial police in the former Portuguese colony.

…
… the national budget of Guinea-Bissau is roughly equal to the wholesale value in Europe of 2 1/2 tons of cocaine.

… its main attractions for the cartels are its weak government and coastal waters dotted with scores of uninhabited islands.
…
"The traffickers have a paradise here," said Constantino Correia, a top Justice Ministry official who is coordinating the government's efforts against the traffickers.

"Justice does not work. The police do not work," he said. "A place where criminals can do whatever they want is not a state. It is chaos."
…
Without computers or other investigative tools, police have no way of telling which of the foreign "businessmen" in Bissau might be smuggling drugs. "It's a war without faces or borders," Correia said.

The Caretaker at the African Loft has written about the plight of Guinea-Bissau:

Guinea Bissau: The First African Narco-state?

and

Guinea-Bissau Battles Drug Barons with Little Hope

Guinea-Bissau desparately needs help. So far there is no sign of any effective assistance.

From the AFRICOM FAQ:

Africa Command is a headquarters staff whose mission entails coordinating the kind of support that will enable African governments and existing regional organizations, such as the African Standby Force, to have greater capacity to provide security and respond in times of need.

Guinea-Bissau is in great need. Security there has been completely destroyed. When the APS was touring West Africa and the Gulf of Guinea, there was no mention of Guinea Bissau. There is no talk I have heard or read anywhere of helping Guinea-Bissau. Without help, the drug smuggling will escalate and spread.

There is one US program connected with AFRICOM that might help the government of Guinea-Bissau. That is the African Coastal and Border Security Program (ACBS Program) However, the Bush government did not any request funding for it in the current budget request. It got about $4 million in FY2006 and the same in FY2007. But no funding was requested for FY 2008.

As described by Daniel Volman:

African Coastal and Border Security Program (ACBS Program)
This program provides specialized equipment (such as patrol vessels and vehicles, communications equipment, night vision devices, and electronic monitors and sensors) to African countries to improve their ability to patrol and defend their own coastal waters and borders from terrorist operations, smuggling, and other illicit activities. In some cases, airborne surveillance and intelligence training also may be provided. In FY 2006, the ACBS Program received nearly $4 million in FMF funding, and Bush administration requested $4 million in FMF funding for the program in FY 2007. No dedicated funding was requested for FY 2008, but the program may be revived in the future.

I don't quite know why Guinea-Bissau is being ignored. Is it just ignorance and neglect, a trademark of the Bush administration. The US certainly knows what is going on in Columbia. Of course this cocaine is going to Europe. Would the US prefer a "failed state" in Guinea-Bissau, providing a chance to intervene? In that case, would it help if the problem spreads first, to give more excuses for intervention in more places. Does Guinea-Bissau's lack of oil make it lack interest for the US.

In general, I suspect countries would be far better off if AFRICOM just left them alone. But if it is capable of actually being constructive, this would be the opportunity to demonstrate all the positive rhetoric has some meaning.

Human security in Africa

UN peace building

The Human Security Report Project has just released the Human Security Brief 2007 PDF. It contained two most compelling pieces of information:

Fatalities from terrorism have declined by some 40 percent, while the loose-knit terror network associated with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda has suffered a dramatic collapse in popular support throughout the Muslim world.

This is directly contradictory to the fear mongering of the Bush administration. Every day it seems to be adding new states to the list that either harbor or sponsor al Qaeda. This is particularly true in African countries where the US has an interest in oil, natural resources, or in blocking Chinese access. We constantly hear about al Qaeda threats in a variety of African countries.

The Brief also describes and analyses the extraordinary, but largely unnoticed, positive change in sub-Saharan Africa's security landscape. After a surge of conflicts in the 1990s, the number of conflicts being waged in the region more than halved between 1999 and 2006; the combat toll dropped by 98 percent.

The Brief (PDF) contains the following regarding Africa:

° There has been a major decline in the scope and intensity of conflicts.
° Refugee numbers have shrunk substantially.
° The share of global humanitarian assistance going to Africa doubled between 1999 and 2006—from 23 percent to 46 percent
. . .
Between 2002 and 2006 the number of campaigns of organized violence against civilians fell by two-thirds.
…
Why the Sharp Increase in Conflict Numbers in the 1990s?

The increase in new state-based conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa in the 1990s was not unique to the region and was clearly related to the end of the Cold War. Regimes and rebel groups that had long been propped up by the assistance given by one or the other of the two superpowers suddenly found that this support—political as well as economic—had disappeared. The result in many cases, not just in sub-Saharan Africa, was regime change and ongoing political instability.

However, in sub-Saharan Africa something else was happening: The countries of the region, to a greater degree than in other parts of the world, were undergoing profound and wrenching political change. In 1988 nearly 90 percent of sub-Saharan African states had autocratic governments. By 2006 there were just two autocracies in the region, while the number of democracies had increased sixfold, from three to 18.

Had the only change been a decrease in autocracies and an increase in democracies, it would likely have enhanced regional security, since democracies tend to experience fewer armed conflicts than do autocracies. But these were not the only changes.

… [There were] trends in "anocracies"—a third regime type, one that is neither fully democratic nor fully autocratic, but a mix of both systems.

The increase in the number of anocracies in sub-Saharan Africa between 1988 and 2000 is startling—far greater than in any other region of the world. In 1988 there were two anocracies and 37 autocracies in sub-Saharan Africa. By 2000 there were just four autocracies, but 30 anocracies. This change is an important part of the explanation for the sharp increase in conflict numbers in the 1990s.

…
So what then does explain the sharp increase in the number of conflicts that have been brought to an end since the early 1990s? A major part of the answer lies with the extraordinary upsurge in international activism in the region directed towards stopping ongoing wars and seeking to prevent them from starting again. From the early 1990s, the international community— including the African Union (AU)—was bringing real pressure to bear on warring parties to negotiate an end to hostilities rather than to fight on to the bitter end. The big increase in negotiated settlements during this period suggests that this strategy has been effective. with the UN, to help stop wars and prevent them from starting again.

Postconflict peacebuilding missions also expanded rapidly and have played a positive role in helping prevent negotiated peace settlements from breaking down. From 1950 to 1999 there were just 18 negotiated settlements—and nearly half broke down within five years. From 2000 to 2005 there were 10 such settlements—thus far not one has broken down. Postconflict peacebuilding’s critical security role lies in helping to make negotiated settlements more stable.

It looks like negotiated settlements, followed up by some peacebuilding activity works, particularly those efforts of the UN and the AU.

Before visiting Africa Bush proposed major cuts in the US contribution to UN peacekeeping.

ABC News: U.S. Slashes Africa Peacekeeping Funds

The Bush administration will request no more funding for United Nations peacekeeping efforts, leaving in place proposed cuts expected to be as deep as 25 percent, according to officials and budget documents. Among the programs facing sharpest cuts are efforts to quell violence in Africa.

When ABC News first reported the proposed cuts in February, the administration contended that it might seek additional funding later in the year. But officials confirmed last week that they requested no additional funding in their supplemental budget recently submitted to Congress.

"Unless you are expecting the emergence of peace worldwide," the cuts are hard to understand …
[Before Bush's trip to Africa] White House officials talked up the trip and Bush's commitment to the continent, telling reporters how the president "really cares about Africa."

… U.S. funding for U.S. peacekeeping operations this year could reach $2.1 billion, but the administration had requested less than $1.5 billion to cover its share of the costs of U.N. peacekeeping efforts for 2009.

But "US peacekeeping" in Africa is not necessarily the same as peacekeeping. Under George Bush, "US peacekeeping" is more about controlling oil and other resources for US needs. In fact, Bush's intentions have been described as trying to undermine and circumvent both the UN and the AU, and replace them with AFRICOM, using the US military, mercenary corporations, and African surrogates to protect US corporate interests, the latest colonial occupation.

Women in Rwanda and DRC - development vs military assistance

Section of a PDF map of the Great Lakes region, one of many maps available at ecoi.net, click on map to enlarge.

The Washington Post recently featured an article on how women are becoming successful entrepreneurs in Rwanda.

"We have overwhelming evidence from almost all the developing regions of the world that [investment in] women make better economics," said Winnie Byanyima, director of the United Nations Development Program's gender team.

…
For the worst of reasons, Rwanda became a testing ground for such theories after the 1994 genocide.

…

As both female and male survivors sought to rebuild coffee plantations with financial and technical assistance from international organizations, Maraba's women, most trying their hands at the business of farming for the first time, were by far the faster students. They showed more willingness than men, officials here said, to embrace new techniques aimed at improving quality and profit. Now, Maraba's female farmers are outdoing their male counterparts in both, numbering about half of all farmers in the village's coffee cooperative but producing 90 percent of its finest quality beans for export.

The march of female entrepreneurialism, playing out here and across Rwanda in industries from agribusiness to tourism, has proved to be a windfall for efforts to rebuild the nation and fight poverty. Women more than men invest profits in the family, renovate homes, improve nutrition, increase savings rates and spend on children's education, officials here said.

It speaks to a seismic shift in gender economics in Rwanda's post-genocide society, one that is altering the way younger generations of males view their mothers and sisters while offering a powerful lesson for other developing nations struggling to rebuild from the ashes of conflict.

"Rwanda's economy has risen up from the genocide and prospered greatly on the backs of our women," said Agnes Matilda Kalibata, minister of state in charge of agriculture. "Bringing women out of the home and fields has been essential to our rebuilding. In that process, Rwanda has changed forever. . . . We are becoming a nation that understands that there are huge financial benefits to equality."

…

"I think that now, boys and girls are different than they were," said Eric Muhire, a junior in high school. "Today, woman are in business; before, if a woman had some money, she would have to give it to the man. They could not compete against a man. But now, they are competing and doing better."

This is a very positive and encouraging article. A lot of this was done by the use of micro loans. I hope that this trend continues in Rwanda, moving toward full participation by all citizens in the economy of the nation.

Right across the border, in North Kivu in the DRC, things are a lot uglier. Sexual violence continues on a scale that is unimaginable. Some have called it femicide, it is not just a matter of rape, in the Congo there is a medical term for it - vaginal destruction.

Dr Mukwege and others have said time and time again that the current saga of the Congo has been going on for more than a decade.

The sordid saga ebbs and flows. But it was brought back into sudden, vivid public notoriety by Eve Ensler’s trip to the Congo in July/August 2007, her visit to the Panzi hospital, her interviews with the women survivors of rape, and her visceral piece of writing in Glamour magazine which began with the words ‘I have just returned from Hell’

From Women left for dead - and the man who's saving them by Eve Ensler:

Before I went to the Congo, I’d spent the past 10 years working on V-Day, the global movement to end violence against women and girls. I’d traveled to the rape mines of the world, places like Bosnia, Afghanistan and Haiti, where rape has been used as a tool of war. But nothing I ever experienced felt as ghastly, terrifying and complete as the sexual torture and attempted destruction of the female species here. It is not too strong to call this a femicide, to say that the future of the Congo’s women is in serious jeopardy.

Dr. Mukwege has been fighting an heroic battle to save bodies and lives. But the odds are impossible, and not improving.

Stephen Lewis argues that the level of rape and sexual violence in the Congo is an act of criminal international misogyny, sustained by the indifference of nation states and the delinquency of the United Nations.

… suffice to say that in the vast historical panorama of violence against women there is a level of demonic dementia plumbed in the Congo that has seldom, if ever, been reached before.That’s the peg on which I want to hang these remarks. I want to set out an argument that essentially says that what’s happening in the Congo is an act of criminal international misogyny, sustained by the indifference of nation states and the delinquency of the United Nations.

Stephen Lewis goes on to say that even with the attention the violence in the Eastern Congo is beginning to receive, the recent peace commitment drafted by the UN hardly mentioned rape and sexual violence, and the amnesty provisions are a license to continue this violence without fear of accountability.

The same positive techniques that are rebuilding the economy in Rwanda can work in the Congo. In fact, they are already at work. But in places like North Kivu there isn't a chance until the violence stops. Nevertheless, there are small efforts all around:

Chingwell Mutombu has created First Step Initiative (FSI), a microfinance organization setup for women in Democratic Republic of Congo. And she is just one of many working to improve conditions at home. She says:

My inspiration comes from the women I saw growing up. The concept of microfinancing is not new to African countries. They have been doing it for centuries. It is similar to when the community gathers money and gives it to one person to do business, and when the person is done with the money they give it to the next person. FSI was started to continue in that type of practice but through microfinancing which is more formal.

She gets a repayment rate of 95-98%, but there is far more need than resources. Most all microfinancing efforts in the DRC are headquartered in or near Kinshasha, although much of the need is out in the provinces among the villages.

But the violence and displacement in the Eastern Congo makes development of any kind next to impossible. To US and international business, the place is made of money:

The DRC holds 80% of the world’s coltan reserves, more than 60% of the world’s cobalt, and the world’s largest supply of high-grade copper.

These minerals are vital to maintaining U.S. military dominance, economic prosperity, and consumer satisfaction. Because the United States does not have a domestic supply of many essential minerals, the U.S. government identifies sources of strategic minerals, particularly in Third World countries, then encourages U.S. corporations to invest in and facilitate production of the needed materials. Historically, the DRC (formerly Zaire) has been an important source of strategic minerals for the United States. In the mid-1960s, the U.S. government installed the dictatorship of Mobutu Sese Seko, which ensured U.S. access to those minerals for more than 30 years.
…
U.S. military aid has contributed significantly to the crisis. During the Cold War, the U.S. government shipped $400 million in arms and training to Mobutu. After Mobutu was overthrown, the Clinton administration transferred its military allegiance to Rwanda and Uganda, although even the U.S. State Department has accused both countries of widespread corruption and human rights abuses. During his historic visit to Africa in 1998, President Clinton praised Presidents Kagame and Musevini as leaders of the "African Renaissance," just a few months before they launched their deadly invasion of the DRC with U.S. weapons and training. The United States is not the only culprit; many other countries, including France, Serbia, North Korea, China, and Belgium, share responsibility. But the U.S. presence has helped to open networks and supply lines, providing an increased number of arms to the region.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank have knowingly contributed to the war effort. The international lending institutions praised both Rwanda and Uganda for increasing their gross domestic product (GDP), which resulted from the illegal mining of DRC resources. Although the IMF and World Bank were aware that the rise in GDP coincided with the DRC war, and that it was derived from exports of natural resources that neither country normally produced, they nonetheless touted both nations as economic success stories.

As noted above, the United States bears a fair amount of responsibility for the ongoing violence in the DRC. In Central Africa's Great Lakes Region:

Today, President George W. Bush supports corrupt, illegitimate regimes that will either cooperate in the Global War on Terror, provide U.S. companies access to vital natural resources, or both. If history is any indication, this infusion of wealth and military training is likely to be disastrous for the people of Africa.

…

As Kagame hosts President Bush this week, (February 21, 2008) Rwanda continues incursions across the border into the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), with support from the U.S. government.

…

From 1996-2003, the Congolese people suffered a great deal from two wars that pitted Rwanda and its allies against the DRC. A recent report from the International Rescue Committee estimates that 5.5 million Congolese have died as a result of this conflict. According to Inter Press Service journalist Tito Dragon, “to control coltan mines that was the principal, if not the only, motivation behind the U.S.-backed 1998 occupation of part of DRC territory by Rwanda and Uganda.” In fact, in 2004, after a three-year investigation, a UN Panel of Experts implicated three major U.S. companies (Cabot Corporation, Eagle Wings Resources International, and OM Group) for fueling war in DRC by collaborating with rebel groups trafficking coltan. In spite of major human rights violations, Bush administration assistance to Rwanda continues today largely due to Kagame’s willingness to be engaged in the so called War on Terror.

So who and what is the War on Terror fighting? The following, which has been repeated many thousands of times in the eastern Congo, certainly meets the definition of terrorism. From the conversations with Dr. Mukwege as reported by Eve Ensler:

Most doctors, teachers and lawyers fled the Congo after the wars started. It never occurred to Dr. Mukwege to leave his people at their most desperate hour.

He first became aware of the epidemic of rape in 1996. “I saw women who had been raped in an extremely barbaric way,” he recalls. “First, the women were raped in front of their children, their husbands and neighbors. Second, the rapes were done by many men at the same time. Third, not only were the women raped, but their vaginas were mutilated with guns and sticks. These situations show that sex was being used as a weapon that is cheap.

“When rape is done in front of your family,” he continues, “it destroys everyone. I have seen men suffer who watched their wives raped; they are not mentally stable anymore. The children are in even worse condition. Most of the time, when a woman suffers this much violence, she is not able to bear children afterward. Clearly these rapes are not done to satisfy any sexual desire but to destroy the soul. The whole family and community are broken.”

The US is funding this terrorism, rather than fighting it.

Although Kagame publicly denies any direct involvement, Rwandans acknowledge that their president funds renegade General Laurent Nkunda’s militia in the DRC – a militia whose primary purpose appears to be to keep Hutu rebels away from the Rwandan border. UN peacekeepers accuse Nkunda’s Tutsi faction of some of the worst human rights abuses of any rebel group currently operating in the eastern region.

Bush knows that Rwanda’s involvement in the armed conflict in the DRC delays peace in eastern Congo, but he continues to authorize military aid to Rwanda. In 2007, the United States armed and trained Rwandan soldiers with $7.2 million from the U.S. defense program Africa Contingent Operations Training Assistance (ACOTA) and $260,000 from the International Military and Education (IMET) program. At the same time, the United States is involved in facilitating peace talks between Rwanda and the DRC and the various rebel groups operating in eastern Congo. Not only does arming Rwanda contradict the peace process, but it also delays the recovery of Rwanda from its 1994 genocide.

During the Cold War, the United States provided military aid to African countries to counter communism. Many of those countries – Somalia, Sudan, and the DRC – have now become hotspots of violence and economic chaos. It is no surprise that lending arms and financial support to corrupt dictators and human rights abusers contributes to destabilization, but still the U.S. government has yet to learn its lesson. Today, the rationale for providing military aid to countries like Rwanda is to counter terrorism; the methods and outcomes will likely be the same as they were in the Cold War era.

The Department of Defense argues that training and equipping African military forces will bring greater stability and legitimacy to African governments. This argument for professionalizing militaries was also made during the Cold War to support a policy that ultimately failed. Yet the same justification is being used to mask U.S. corporate interests in Africa’s vast resources.

For "anti-terrorism" read corporate welfare, at the expense of the citizens of Africa's Great Lakes region, and ultimately, the citizens of the United States. Note in the Rwanda story at the beginning of this post, the military is conspicuously absent from the stories of development success. As long as the US leads its engagement with its military, the women, and all the citizens of the DRC will continue to suffer brutal terrorism. Only by leading with diplomacy and seeking political solutions will the US actually help rather than cause more harm. As Bahati Ntama Jacques points out:

Most countries have vehemently rejected the creation and implementation of a new U.S. military command for Africa (AFRICOM) and expanding the U.S. military footprint in Africa. Shifting U.S. policy away from defense toward human security, development, and diplomacy is the best path to long-term peace in the Great Lakes region and throughout Africa.

Sweet Crude - oil in the Niger Delta

Sweet Crude is the story of Nigeria’s Niger Delta – a story that’s never been captured in a feature-length film.

Watch the preview over at the African Loft.

In April filmmaker Sandy Cioffi and crew were detained by the Nigerian military JTF while traveling in the Delta, and turned over to the Nigerian State Security Services. They were held without being charged, and without access to counsel. Thanks to international efforts, they were released a week later. It seems obvious there are those who do not want this story told.

From a user comment at the Internet Movie Database:

The film calls for nothing more radical than third-party-led negotiations between the locals and the oil companies so the presence of the latter benefits rather than harms the former. Watch for this documentary. It is going to be astounding, and terribly important. Also compelling is the incredible irresponsibility of big American media in reporting this story, essentially calling those who organize peacefully to defend the people of the Delta "terrorists."

Keep in mind:

80% of oil wealth is owned by 1% of the population;

70% of private wealth is abroad whilst

3/4 of the country live on about $1 a day -

at least 15 million of those live in the Niger Delta (link)

What's Next?
Sweet Crude is moving ahead on several fronts. We're back in the studio and will be finishing the film this summer. Meanwhile, we are seeking a distributor and entering festivals. We will also continue to advocate for political solutions with U.S. lawmakers. Many people have asked where they can see the film or how to get a copy. We will let you know as soon as we know – so sign up for our email list to stay informed.

Insurgency, resistance, and AFRICOM's role

Resistance? Insurgents?

The US Army has fallen hard for counter insurgency, COIN. However, NPR reports:

An internal Pentagon report is raising concerns about whether the Army's focus on counterinsurgency has weakened its ability to fight conventional battles. The report's authors — all colonels with significant combat experience — say the Army is "mortgaging its ability to (successfully) fight" in the future.

…

The counterinsurgency doctrine emphasizes the use of minimal force, with the intent of winning the hearts and minds of a civilian population.

…

The idea in a counterinsurgency campaign, Nagl says (Lt. Col. John Nagl, one of the Army's top experts on counterinsurgency doctrine) is to drive a wedge between the civilian population and insurgents who live among them.

However, when we talk about counter insurgency, is it really counter insurgency we have in mind? In Iraq the "insurgency" looks a lot more like a resistance.

And what about AFRICOM? Is counter insurgency what the US has in mind for the combatant aspect of its latest combatant command? And what situations will be called insurgencies?

Over at Moon of Alabama b writes:

Insurgencies are, by and large, social movements challenging their own government because of some grievance. If the movement is small, it can be fought down through sheer brutality. If it is larger and backed by a significant part of the population, it can only be accommodated by social-political compromise. To achieve the compromise both parties usually fight until everyone is sick of it. The compromise does not necessarily need to be a change of government, but can be participation of the insurgency in the political process or simply a change in social-economic issues.

A resistance is also a social movement, but it is fighting primarily against an invading and occupying force. Its grievance is the fact of occupation, not some local social problem. If the resistance fights against the local government, then only because the government is seen as illegitimate tool of the occupation.

The difference of a resistance towards an insurgency is motivation and possible accommodation. While an insurgency can be accommodated by letting it participate in the general political process and alleviating its grievance, a resistance can only be satisfied by retraction of the occupation.

In Implementing AFRICOM: Tread Carefully by Robert Gribben, he writes:

… it is worth examining the premise that African military establishments merit American support at all. Even though national defense is regularly cited as their primary task, African armies rarely need to repel foreign invaders. Most African conflicts … arise from domestic issues. Only the unresolved Ethiopia-Eritrea border war, the recent Congolese wars and the Ethiopian presence in Somalia fit the mode of external aggression.

So instead of defense, the primary job of African armies is to protect the ruling regime by keeping the life president in power (by informal count some 15 current leaders initially came to power via military means) and to thwart threats to the status quo mounted by the opposition, democratic or otherwise.

…
… American attacks against purported terrorist elements in Somalia, for example, do raise the issue of if-you-have-the-assets how will you use them?

As to the humanitarian assistance and capacity building that AFRICOM claims to represent:

Obviously, military programming risks duplication where USAID, the Centers for Disease Control, Peace Corps Volunteers and others are already engaged. That said, host governments are quick to realize where the money is, so they will increasingly focus requests on U.S. military elements.

And here is the big question regarding humanitarian arguments supporting AFRICOM:

… The U.S. already does a pretty competent job of economic development and humanitarian relief. What additional benefits – besides money – can AFRICOM bring to those tasks?

So there are several questions here. Is counter insurgency a practical use of Army resources? And, is counter insurgency action actually counter insurgency? Is it really occupation? The places where it is being discussed or applied, or where it may be applied, such as the Niger Delta, are not part of the US. So US military involvement, including the use of mercenaries or surrogates, is effectively occupation. In the Niger Delta, MEND, Niger Delta Vigilante, and similar organizations are fighting the exploitation and occupation of their land by the oil companies. If AFRICOM becomes involved, it will be coming in as part of an occupying force, regardless of what agreements it may make with the Nigerian government. AFRICOM will assist the oil companies to continue their occupation.

Considering the traditional role of African militaries, protecting leaders who generally have not come to power through democratic processes, do these militaries merit American support? What will be the effect of developing only that military infrastructure, especially if the money is siphoned away from US institutions that have the structure and skill to spend it in support of peaceful development.

AFRICOM - Getting brown people to fight each other over there so we can bring their oil over here

Over at Moon of Alabama b real makes a couple of critical points about AFRICOM's purpose, and about Department of Defense talking points: Africom: Talking Points for Screwing Mother Africa:

(Brig. Gen. Michael A.) Snodgrass stressed the same message at a business expo hosted by AFRICOM near the German base on May 1st.:

“We’re going to take this one step at a time, we’re going to listen to the Africans and take their advice,” Snodgrass said. “At an appropriate time, we will be invited by countries to come to Africa to bring our presence, which then means (there) will be an increase in activity and an increase in effectiveness in our programs.”

As we have documented here off and on following the February 2007 public announcement of the creation of AFRICOM, one thing that its spokespersons, planners and transition team have typically not done is listen to Africans or anyone bringing up things they don't want to hear. It's hard to imagine that changing much at this point, other than trotting out those African representatives already on board and "advising" the U.S. on how to best to go about accomplishing their objectives.

Going from the lineups presented at the various thinktank conferences and seminars, a high percentage of these influential Africans are military officers, usually graduates of IMET or other U.S. training programs.

When General Ward testified before the Armed Services Committee in March, he used the phrase:

… "persistent engagement" five times throughout the 22-page text which emphasizes the long-term focus on building the capacity to help Africans help the U.S. take advantage of Africa's wealth in "human capital and mineral resources."

As would be expected, maintaining control of the perception of AFRICOM is very important in the initial stages of the new command. However, since the official public image of AFRICOM ("a new kind of command" combining humanitarian missions with the pentagon's soft power capabilities to help Africans help themselves) hardly matches up with the command's true mission (secure and guarantee U.S. access to vital energy sources and distribution channels while containing China's growing superpower status), AFRICOM, and everyone involved in promoting it, will remain beset by their own contradictions and weaknesses.

Read the whole article, as well as some of his coverage of what is happening in Somalia, which b real continues to document, providing detailed information and insight.

We see these contradictions over and over. The Pentagon and the State Department continue to deny any US interest in oil or China as reasons for the creation of AFRICOM, despite the documentary trail citing oil and China specifically as the reasons for the command.

The denials saying AFRICOM is not about oil and China are no more convincing than denials that the Iraq war is about oil (as has been openly stated by Alan Greenspan, and implied by John McCain in his statements on energy policy last week). The Pentagon is the largest single consumer of oil on the entire globe.

In his book Blood and Oil, Michael Klare describes the Pentagon's seldom acknowledged oil dependence:

The American military relies more than that of any other nation on oil-powered ships, planes, helicopters, and armored vehicles to transport troops into battle and rain down weapons on its foes. Although the Pentagon may boast of its ever-advancing use of computers and other high-tech devices, the fighting machines that form the backbone of the U.S. military are entirely dependent on petroleum. Without an abundant and reliable supply of oil, the Department of Defense could neither rush its forces to distant battlefields nor keep them supplied once deployed there. (p.9, ISBN 978-0805079388)

A friend sent me a link for a CBS segment about AFRICOM training Ugandans to fight in Somalia. The piece was entirely DoD talking points. I even wondered if it was one of the advertisements masquerading as news items produced by the Bush administration: U.S. Reaches Out In Africa Al Qaeda Fight.

American soldiers are training the Ugandans to combat terrorism, CBS News correspondent Allen Pizzey reports, preparing them to go to Somalia to fight Islamic insurgents so the U.S. doesn't have to.

…

Al Qaeda and other militants have expanded their operations to Africa. Across the top of the entire continent, rebel groups and discontented youth make ideal recruits-a situation made all the more dangerous by growing American dependence on African oil. It's something the U.S. cannot ignore.

…

The hardest job facing Africom is image-making. In the words of a senior American official, "It's open season on U.S. foreign policy. We have to convince people that this is not some diabolical George Bush plot."

…

To make Africom succeed, the general has to spend as much time being a diplomat as a soldier. If he does it well enough, the enemy gathering in Africa won't be America's alone.

People from Uganda and Namibia have been heavily recruited as mercenaries in Iraq. Many have been recruited for Iraq under false pretences. This is quite controversial in some places. There is much concern about how mercenaries will behave once they return home. Namibia recently closed down and evicted the operations of an American company recruiting mercenaries. This training the US is providing is also suitable for creating an ongoing supply of mercenaries and surrogates for US purposes. And the US will need mercenaries and surrogates if it attempts to control the world by force, as it seems inclined. In fact the rebel groups and discontented youth [who] make ideal recruits - a situation made all the more dangerous by growing American dependence on African oil that the CBS piece describes are far more likely to be ideal recruits for American military aims if they have the opportunity. Al Qaeda is not really popular. Nobody likes outsiders coming in and telling them they are inferior practitioners of their religion. And the Somalis have generally been cool to hostile to al Qaeda. The only thing giving al Qaeda any credibility is US behavior.

In Somalia the US is encouraging one country, Ethiopia, to invade another, Somalia, helping overthow the existing government and occupying the country and bombing civilians. That is not counter terrorism. It is imperialism. Much of it is run out the the CJTF-HOA, being held up as a model and template for the rest of AFRICOM.

But all the US news sources are lapping up the al Qaeda terrorist spin and spitting it back out again, letting Americans think they are being protected from a terrible enemy instead of themselves becoming a terrible enemy of peace, and being conned into endless war of imperial aggression. And the only African voices that will be heard are the ones that have been coopted to replay the Pentagon talking points.

The real promise of AFRICOM is foolery, fallacy and failure, for the US, and for Africa.