The ‘War on Terror’ Spreads to Africa

[Orwellian_Ghost]

Africom: the ‘war on terror’ spreads to Africa

23rd November 07, Ken Olende

The US government is planning to take its “war on terror” into new territory – Africa. Plans to establish a network of US-friendly military bases and a cross-continent command structure are well underway. Many Africans believe that an enlarged US military presence will intensify existing civil wars and fan the flames of ethnic conflict, while strengthening the grip of Western multinationals which are clamouring for Africa’s oil and natural resources.

It is in this light that we should see the recent Ethiopian invasion of Somalia. It is a war being waged for the US by proxy, and has already led to hundreds of thousands of people being killed or displaced – many more, in fact, than in the much publicised conflict in Darfur.

The invasion was launched against the United Islamic Courts (UIC) government – the first in 15 years that appeared able to stabilise Somalia – primarily because it would not accept US control. The US pointed to a so-called “Islamist threat” and alleged the presence of Al Qaida, even though the UIC was not sympathetic to Al Qaida.

<edit>

http://www.stwr.net/content/view/2449/1/

[SharkSquid]

1. AFRICOM is actually a fairly decent idea

If anyone is not familiar or has not operated in the area, Africa is divided among three commands and it causes hell for our increasing operations, particularly the anti-piracy initiatives. Instead of EUCOM, CENTCOM and PACCOM having a pissing contest over forces and funding, ARFRICOM will take it all. It is not all about expanding bases.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

4. If this is not neo-colonialism, then what is?

AFRICOM: Wrong for Liberia, Disastrous for Africa

Ezekiel Pajibo and Emira Woods | July 26, 2007

Just two months after U.S. aerial bombardments began in Somalia, the Bush administration solidified its militaristic engagement with Africa. In February 2007, the Department of Defense announced the creation of a new U.S. Africa Command infrastructure, code name AFRICOM, to “coordinate all U.S. military and security interests throughout the continent.”

“This new command will strengthen our security cooperation with Africa,” President Bush said in a White House statement, “and create new opportunities to bolster the capabilities of our partners in Africa.” Ordering that AFRICOM be created by September 30, 2008, Bush said “Africa Command will enhance our efforts to bring peace and security to the people of Africa and promote our common goals of development, health, education, democracy, and economic growth in Africa.”

The general assumption of this policy is that prioritizing security through a unilateral framework will somehow bring health, education, and development to Africa. In this way, the Department of Defense presents itself as the best architect and arbiter of U.S. Africa policy. According to Navy Rear Admiral Robert Moeller, director of the AFRICOM transition team, “By creating AFRICOM, the Defense Department will be able to coordinate better its own activities in Africa as well as help coordinate the work of other U.S. government agencies, particularly the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development.”

Competition for Resources

This military-driven U.S. engagement with Africa reflects the desperation of the Bush administration to control the increasingly strategic natural resources on the African continent, especially oil, gas, and uranium. With increased competition from China, among other countries, for those resources, the United States wants above all else to strengthen its foothold in resource-rich regions of Africa.

Nigeria is the fifth largest exporter of oil to the United States. The West Africa region currently provides nearly 20% of the U.S. supply of hydrocarbons, up from 15% just five years ago and well on the way to a 25 share forecast for 2015. While the Bush administration endlessly beats the drums for its “global war on terror,” the rise of AFRICOM underscores that the real interests of neoconservatives has less to do with al-Qaeda than with more access and control of extractive industries, particularly oil.

<edit>

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4427

[SharkSquid]

5. Yeah this reeks of Journalistic Integrity

Op-ed pieces are not my primary sources of information though...

"This military-driven U.S. engagement with Africa reflects the desperation of the Bush administration to control the increasingly strategic natural resources on the African continent, especially oil, gas, and uranium. With increased competition from China, among other countries, for those resources, the United States wants above all else to strengthen its foothold in resource-rich regions of Africa.

Nigeria is the fifth largest exporter of oil to the United States. The West Africa region currently provides nearly 20% of the U.S. supply of hydrocarbons, up from 15% just five years ago and well on the way to a 25 share forecast for 2015. While the Bush administration endlessly beats the drums for its “global war on terror,” the rise of AFRICOM underscores that the real interests of neoconservatives has less to do with al-Qaeda than with more access and control of extractive industries, particularly oil."

I am more going on my experience with and in several of the unit in the region and operating under the three different Join Commands in the area, somehow I think that Mr. Pajibo and Ms. Woods have served under neither.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

10. What factual material

are you refuting?

Why is the US military in Africa? (And elsewhere)

Simply protecting "national interests" which means resources for corporate gain.

What are your primary sources of information?

[SharkSquid]

11. Yeah I am sure us "leaving" Africa is going to go over

like a fart in church.

Security is Africa and our national interest is more than about "corporate gain" which is buzzword for liberal isolationist philosophy.

There is a vested interest in security in Africa,

My factual basis is that I have been part of the operations that this command will be part of and seen some of the good they are able to do if a unified command and control structure is secured.


in order to balance this account I add the following comments from the aformentioned link:

Name: F. Hney Date: Aug 10, 2007
I sincerely believe that Africom will be good for Liberia. It is an altruism that the terrorists are hell bent on destroying the U.S., but that doesn't mean that they (the terrorists) are going to destroy Liberia. It seems to me that some Liberians, especially those who oppose Africom's presence in our beloved country are anti Al Quaeda than Africom. If we continue to kow-tow to the whims of terrorists, we will enable them to do greater things, such as "damage". Let's give Africom a chance, people. The depraved mind of the terrorist is unpredictable.
Name: Cicero Date: Oct 11, 2007
Although I have not decided on the merits of AFRICOM, however, I find it interesting that those opposing the idea have so far only produced a biased, not a balanced view. The premise that everything AFRICOM is 'bad' is not a plausible argument. We need to look at the pros and cons of the idea to make our arguments credible. The question I would like to ask Mr. Pajibo et al is: Is there anything good about AFRICOM?

[madeline_con]

16. The "vested interest in security in Africa" that you speak of

is security for western economic interests. It's not "fighting them over there, so we don't have to fight them here" bullshit.

[SharkSquid]

20. Your g-d damn right it is our economic interest at stake

and a non radicalized, politically stable, economically viable Africa is crucial to our National Security, not in a fight them there so we dont fight them here sense but in a stable governments and full bellies dont breed religious nutjobs sense.

[madeline_con]

24. Puh-leeze!

The instabilty and starvation are the direct result of western interests.

[SharkSquid]

25. Got another talking point for me

Or can I go eat turkey leftovers now...

[madeline_con]

27. Eat, drink and be merry, pal.

It's not as if your google button is broken. Look it up.

editred for speeling

[SharkSquid]

29. Peace out

I hope you have a blessed weekend. I really do, I am deploying again soon, likely to the evil AFRICOM, so I am enjoying it while I can.

[madeline_con]

40. I hope you stay safe.

and off the side that's passing out machetes to the locals to kill "rebels". :(

[malaise]

36. BIngo! n/t

[spanone]

33. more bases = expanding bases.....we are not the world's police.

[Amonester]

2. The 'war on terror' itself is the biggest terrorist...

Who's gonna pay?

[Joanne98]

3. The Shock Doctrine!

[wuushew]

6. you want a real joke?

US to Set Up Military HQ for Africa in Germany

The US has announced plans to set up a new military command headquarters for Africa, reflecting the continent's increasing strategic importance in the war against terror. The HQ will initially be based in Stuttgart, according to media reports.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,464827,00.html



Has this been changed at all?

[SharkSquid]

7. It is in Germany until a good site can be found in Africa

Like Centcom has some staff in Quatar, Bahrain, and Tampa FL

[Lord Wortherington]

8. The United States knows franchising.

AFRICOM is the military's way of opening up a McDonalds on a street corner. Over 500 billion munitions sold!

[SharkSquid]

12. Nothing to do with arms dealing

Or the "proxy" war in Somalia.

It has to do with making the operations we are ALREADY CONDUCTING and HAVE BEEN conducting in Africa for 10+ years more streamlined and efficient including "comrel/hearts & minds" type ventures.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

13. Propaganda

"hearts & minds"

Sound familiar?





And by the way it's been much much longer than 10 years.

Again, who is "we?" "Who is this "our?"

[SharkSquid]

15. Well I am in the Military

So it really is my command now isnt it.

nice insinuation though...

[madeline_con]

19. That does not make you any more knowledgable than the

rest of us about U.S. motivations in Africa.

[SharkSquid]

21. It makes me fairly knowledgeable about the motivations for

the formation of AFRICOM being that I have operated in the AOR and seen what a disaster the COC is, yes I think I do have just a smidge of insight into the problem.

[Lord Wortherington]

30. Care to explain to me why Israel is in EUCOM

While all of it's neighbors are in CENTCOM?

[SharkSquid]

31. For the same reason that Egypt is in CENTCOM

and not EUCOM or AFRICOM.

Israel has stronger ties with "western" nations culturally and politically. CENTCOM is often considered to be "a problem child" area where nations with unstable governments and very few real ties with the US and Europe. However "Mideast" countries like Turkey and Israel are closer tied to Europe and quite frankly are not viewed as attacking us anytime soon (yes I know all about USS LIBERTY, spare me, please).

[SharkSquid]

23. In fact, just as a note, I once wrote a pretty extensive

thesis on the need for and AFRICOM live setup in a strategic studies course.

But know, I dont know shit about this stuff.

[madeline_con]

41. Yeah, and I could talk up "No Child Left Behind"

because I work at a school. What does that prove?

[Zorro]

46. Several DUers

have spent time in the Horn of Africa, and have kept up with the news from there for over 30 years.

I think those that have lived and worked in that area are probably more knowledgeable about US motivations than most people.

I think AFRICOM is a good idea, also.

[SharkSquid]

17. But you keep screaming propaganda everytime I make a point

gained from experience and use Op Ed pieces and Political Cartoons to make your point.

[madeline_con]

18. Do you have any clue what those "operations" are? n/t

[SharkSquid]

22. I "have a clue" about many of them yes

do you?

[madeline_con]

26. Petroleum interests are opening up in a big way.

We need more sources for our guzzling way of life. What the other posters have been saying is all true.

[SharkSquid]

28. Fine, you keep painting your hands red and crashing

Congressional hearings, and I will try and do my job in the best way possible and help as Africans help themselves as much as possible because it looks like I am going back there again fairly soon.

Hopefully you get results, I sure hope I do too.

[madeline_con]

38. That wasn't me.

I only wish I could get to where some of those neocon fools hang out. I'd be arrested all the time. :patriot:

[SharkSquid]

39. I remember my political arrest

It accomplished nothing and almost sunk my comissioning...

[madeline_con]

42. A lot of people are arrested lately for exercising free speech

and healthy dissent. They really shouldn't be going to jail at all. But DUH-bya, inspired by other "leaders" has suspended the Constitution.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

34. Major General Smedley Butler on Interventionism

Smedley Butler on Interventionism

-- Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.

War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.

It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second
Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

<edit>

http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm



War Is A Racket
By Major General Smedley Butler

Entire version here:
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

AFRICOM is just another tentacle of the grab for resources. Stabilization is just code for controlling the area for corporate interests. This is all about the oil and the minerals. Sometimes it is best to step back and take a look from the outside. From that perspective it is often possible to see things more clearly.

[SharkSquid]

37. MAJGEN Butler has his opinion

I have mine, I choose to look at things from a different perspective. You keep thinking whatcha want to though, whatever helps you feel better about yourself.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

44. These are not merely opinions

What we are talking about is a long and well-documented history and the reality of geopolitics.

Hopefully you will challenge your assumptions and take the time to study this history more deeply.

A Warning to Africa: The New U.S. Imperial Grand Strategy
by John Bellamy Foster

Commenting in late 2002 in Foreign Policy, John Lewis Gaddis, professor of military and naval history at Yale, stated that the goal of the impending war on Iraq was one of inflicting an “Agincourt on the banks of the Euphrates.” This would be a demonstration of power so great that, as in Henry V’s famous fifteenth-century victory in France, the geopolitical landscape would be changed for decades to come. What was ultimately at issue, according to Gaddis, was “the management of the international system by a single hegemon”—the United States. This securing of hegemony over the entire world by the United States by means of preemptive actions was, he contended, nothing less than “a new grand strategy of transformation.”3

The New Scramble for Africa

If there is a New Great Game afoot in Asia there is also a “New Scramble for Africa” on the part of the great powers.12 The National Security Strategy of the United States of 2002 declared that “combating global terror” and

ensuring U.S. energy security

required that the United States increase its commitments to Africa and called upon “coalitions of the willing” to generate regional security arrangements on that continent. Soon after the U.S. European Command, based in Stuttgart, Germany—in charge of U.S. military operations in Sub-Saharan Africa—increased its activities in West Africa, centering on those states with substantial oil production and/or reserves in or around the Gulf of Guinea (stretching roughly from the Ivory Coast to Angola). The U.S. military’s European Command now devotes 70 percent of its time to African affairs, up from almost nothing as recently as 2003.13

As pointed out by Richard Haass, now president of the Council on Foreign Relations, in his foreword to the 2005 council report entitled More Than Humanitarianism: A Strategic U.S. Approach Toward Africa: “By the end of the decade sub-Saharan Africa is likely to become as important as a source of U.S. energy imports as the Middle East.”14 West Africa has some 60 billion barrels of proven oil reserves. Its oil is the low sulfur, sweet crude prized by the U.S. economy. U.S. agencies and think tanks project that one in every five new barrels of oil entering the global economy in the latter half of this decade will come from the Gulf of Guinea, raising its share of U.S. oil imports from 15 to over 20 percent by 2010, and 25 percent by 2015. Nigeria already supplies the United States with 10 percent of its imported oil. Angola provides 4 percent of U.S. oil imports, which could double by the end of the decade. The discovery of new reserves and the expansion of oil production are turning other states in the region into major oil exporters, including Equatorial Guinea, São Tomé and Principe, Gabon, Cameroon, and Chad. Mauritania is scheduled to emerge as an oil exporter by 2007. Sudan, bordering the Red Sea in the east and Chad to the west, is an important oil producer.

http://www.monthlyreview.org/0606jbf.htm">LINK

[tnlefty]

48. And perhaps you're looking at things from a different

perspective and keep thinking whatcha want to so that you can feel better about yourself? :shrug: Perkins and 'The Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" first crossed my mind.

[HooptieWagon]

9. War on Terror?

Don't you mean "War on other countries sitting on top of "our" oil?"

[madeline_con]

14. Can you say petroleum, kids? n/t

[dailykoff]

32. Heck we'd nuke 'em for their bananas.

War is good business.

[wuushew]

35. kick

:kick:

[HamdenRice]

43. A dreadful idea, appropriately rejected by the most important countries in Africa

This would be dreadful for African countries, because the US military and intelligence establishments have played destabilizing roles in Africa, and expanding the US military presence would only make matters worse when many countries are just beginning to experience stability.

It was, for example, CIA assistance that enabled the South African government to track down Mandela back in the 1960s; British trained Ghanain soldiers more loyal to Sandhurst than their own government overthrew Nkrumah; the CIA helped Mobuto track down and assassinate Lumumba and then kept Mobutu in power for decades; the US designated the African National Congress a terrorist organization before the South African government decided to negotiate an end to apartheid; the US supported South African support for guerrillas in Mozambique and Angola, which led to catastrophic, pointless wars in those countries; US special forces helped Sargeant Doe and stillborn democracy in Liberia in the 1980s after the overthrow of the True Whig oligarchy; it goes on and on.

Both South Africa and Nigeria have turned down any role in Africom. South Africa has gone so far as to threaten dire consequences to any country in its economic orbit -- which stretches as far north as Tanzania -- that decides to accept American bases.

Liberia is the only country so far that is likely to embrace a US military presence, but that's because Liberia was founded by freed American slaves, has an Americanize culture at the elite level and Liberians have long considered themselves a 51st state anyway, and their new democracy is so fragile that they basically have adopted the strategy of being a ward of the US.

[Hutzpa]

45. Emm not so sure about

This one, why Africa, this is another of Bushco type of strategy to control the World.Using Africa as an excuse....wow, well we just have to wait and see.

[Hutzpa]

47. Emm......,ot so sure bout this one

Why would they wanna build bases in Africa, is Africa the new place to dump the terraris now, are they trying to fuck up Africa for good now, this is a fucking outrage.