|
Bush: Don’t Send
Uganda To Somalia
Black Star News Editorial February 27th, 2007
The Bush
Administration wants to drive remnants of the Islamic
Courts Union government from Somalia—the White House is
so desperate that it’s anointed Uganda, a country whose
army was found liable for serious human rights abuses,
as regional policeman. The court ruled that Uganda's DRC intervention from 1998 to 2003 violated international sovereignty and led to the torture and killing of civilians and the destruction of Congolese villages. To this date, Uganda has not paid the Congo government a dime or apologized. Now, this same army is being financed and sent by the Bush Administration to bring peace to Somalia? Uganda’s army is set to deploy early March—the Democratic Congress, if it has any backbone --and there are many doubters-- must ensure that the US plays no role in this mind-boggling ill-fated participation by Uganda’s army in the Somali mission. The White House is merely confirming, again, that it doesn’t care about human rights when it come to Africans. To comment on
this article, or to advertise with us, or to subscribe
to New York’s favorite Pan-African weekly investigative
newspaper, or to send us news tips, please call (212)
481-7745 or contact
Milton@blackstarnews.com Uganda talks
to Islamic Court militia
PRESIDENT Yoweri
Museveni last night said Uganda is talking to the
Islamic Court militia in Somalia ahead of the UPDF
deployment in Mogadishu. Source: http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/12/551469 Court orders Uganda to
pay Congo damages Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uganda/Story/0,,1671176,00.html Are African peacekeepers
in Somalia to serve Western Oil and Gas interests? Source: http://www.nyasatimes.com/Features/296.html
Black editor in Detroit on Somalia and Sudan
Published Feb 20, 2007
11:16 PM
From a talk entitled “A review of developments in Somalia, Sudan, Zimbabwe and the role of the African Union and the Pan-African Parliament/Aspects of the politics of contemporary Africa in the era of continuing imperialism” delivered at a Detroit Workers World public meeting on Feb. 10 by Abayomi Azikiwe, editor of Pan-African News Wire.
Azikiwe is a co-founder of the Michigan Emergency Committee Against War and Injustice (MECAWI). He can be heard on radio weekly on WDTW, 1310 AM, on Sundays from 10:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m. in Detroit. In Toronto, he can be heard on Thursdays on CKLN, 88.1 FM, from 9:30 p.m.-10:00 p.m. This broadcast can be heard online at http://www.ckln.fm The talk was dedicated to the memory of the late Mama Adelaide Tambo, the African National Congress Women’s League leader and widow of the late Oliver R. Tambo, longtime acting president of the ANC while Nelson Mandela was imprisoned in South Africa. Go to www.workers.org/2007/world/colonialism-0222/ to read the first installment of this talk. Prior to the advent of European colonialism the center of world economic activity heavily centered on the so-called Indian Ocean basin. It was the necessity of Europe to break out of this isolation that provided incentives for the expeditions and the slave trade. Mogadishu, the capital of Somalia, was a major link in the Indian Ocean basin. This area was connected through trade, culture and transport with Mombasa, Beira and Aden, leading into Asia Minor, China, Malaysia and Japan. During the colonial era in Somalia, the people resisted the onslaught of several western European powers. The people of Somalia were eventually divided among five different nations: Italian Somaliland, British Somaliland, French Somaliland, Kenya—which was colonized by the British—and Ethiopia, as a result of the expansion of the Abyssinian monarchy. When the country gained its independence in 1960, it resulted in the unification of the sections that had been controlled by Britain and Italy. However, the areas controlled by the French eventually became Djibouti as an independent nation. Somalis living in Ethiopia and Kenya remained under the control of these states despite a longing for total reunification. In 1969, a group of military officers responding to popular pressure seized control of the government in Mogadishu. Their politics were left-leaning in an effort to break with the legacy of colonialism that was imposed by the British and the Italians. By 1974, a Mogadishu Declaration was issued pledging to pursue a non-capitalist path and expressing solidarity with the overall struggle against imperialism and neo-colonialism in Africa and the world. Meanwhile in neighboring Ethiopia a general strike beginning in early 1974 led to the eventual collapse of the monarchy under His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie. A group of young military officers called the “Dergue” seized power in the absence of a well-developed nationalist or socialist political party that was capable of taking control of the state. By 1977, the Dergue had declared itself socialist and moved towards an alliance with the Soviet Union and Cuba. The government sent students into the countryside to engage in a literacy and development program. A military base controlled by the United States in Ethiopia was abandoned as the country brought in advisers from Cuba to help build up its security. Unfortunately, when Jimmy Carter became president of the United States in 1977, a concerted campaign was launched to bring Somalia back into the Western sphere of influence. The government of Siad Barre was armed by the Carter administration and encouraged to attack Ethiopia in the Ogaden region, purportedly in support of ethnic Somalis suffering national oppression inside Ethiopia. In the early months of 1978, the Ethiopian military, along with Cuban internationalist forces, entered the Ogaden region and put down the rebellion as well as defeating the Somalian military troops who had crossed over into Ethiopian territory. Despite promises by the U.S. to intervene on behalf of Somalia, they did not dare do so, remembering the tremendous defeats during 1975 in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia as well as Angola. By the early 1980s, famine had swept through large sections of Somalia. In 1991, the government of Siad Barre fled, leaving the country stateless. When the administration of George H.W. Bush invaded Somalia in December of 1992, this appeared to many as an effort to exert American imperialist influence in the Horn of Africa. When Bill Clinton inherited this occupation under the guise of providing humanitarian assistance from United Nations coordinated sources, the stakes became greater due to efforts aimed at disarming political factions hostile to America’s desire to establish permanent bases in this region of the continent. After the United States military massacred over 50 Somali elders holding a meeting in Mogadishu on July of 1993, the Americans were on a collision course with large sections of the population. A clash on Oct. 3, 1993, in Mogadishu resulting in the deaths of many U.S. soldiers sent shockwaves through the country and led eventually to an American withdrawal from Somalia in 1994. Today the Americans have intervened once again in Somalia. They are using the pretext of the involvement of al-Qaeda or other Islamic so-called “terrorists” as the cause of their involvement. As anti-imperialists and organizers within the anti-war movement, we realize that any statement of cause for American military involvement must be held to strict scrutiny on the basis of the many falsehoods utilized to justify invasions and occupations. This is why the Michigan Emergency Committee Against War & Injustice has raised the question of American involvement in Somalia right alongside the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the role of the U.S. in the overthrow of the Aristide government in Haiti in February of 2004.
Sudan:
legacy of British colonialism and U.S. interference
Sudan was also colonized by Britain during the late 19th century. The imperialists’ methodology of divide and conquer was employed where the peoples of the south, north and west were taught that they were separate entities. Some of the earliest nationalist movements on the continent took place in Sudan, with rebellions after the conclusion of World War I extending through the early 1920s. Some of the elements within the nationalist movement pushed for a unification plan with Egypt. Others sought a solution to the colonial problem through the breaking down of the barriers erected by British colonialism. On the eve of independence, which took place in 1956, the people in the south mutinied within the paramilitary colonial forces, hampering the potential for a national identity in the country. The conflict with the southern region of the country lasted from 1955 through 1972, when a negotiated settlement was reached. However, a decade later, the conflict reemerged in 1983 and lasted for 20 years until a peace agreement was reached in 2003. The Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement/Army led the southern rebellion under John Garang. A government of national unity was established with the understanding that the people in southern Sudan would eventually vote whether the people would remain in the unity government or establish an autonomous region in the south. It was after the agreement between Khartoum and the SPLA was reached that the conflict in the Darfur region erupted. Two rebel groups surfaced. The Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) had links with the National Islamic Front (NIF) that became an opposition force in northern politics. The NIF initially played a pivotal role in the Omar al-Bashir government inside the country. However, a split occurred, placing the NIF in opposition to the president and also the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/A) that appeared to be independent of northern influences. Since 2003, the Darfur rebel movement has further fragmented with splits inside the SLM/A largely over a peace agreement with Khartoum. The imperialist nations and their allied press agencies have sought to portray the conflict in Darfur as an African/Arab conflagration with fundamental racial dimensions. Nonetheless, Darfur is predominately Islamic, like the population in the north. There is no pronounced racial difference between the peoples of the country. It is the legacy of British imperialism and U.S. interference that is at the root cause of the current conflict. These divisions are politicized in an effort to provide a rationale for possible military intervention. Consequently, anti-imperialists should look at the struggle in Darfur in light of American and British imperialists’ aims in the region. China has stepped up its economic investments in Sudan. The country is rich in oil and consequently provides the American government with an incentive to seek dominance over the resources. The only true and lasting solution to the Darfur crisis lies within the Sudanese people themselves and does not require a military occupation by the West. Distributed by: The Pan-African Research and Documentation Center, 50 SCB Box 47, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202; e-mail: ac6123@wayne.edu Articles copyright 1995-2007 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved. Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011 Email: ww@workers.org Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php Intervention in Somalia sets stage for conflict Chandra Muzaffar Wed, 31 Jan 2007 The United States government has once again intervened militarily in Somalia. Its pattern of intervention this time is different from 1992. Last Dec 24, the Bush Administration chose to use the Ethiopian government to mount an invasion of Somalia. The Ethiopian army with its military superiority has for the time managed to defeat the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC), which in June 2006 had ousted the weak, effete and corrupt interim government of Abdullahi Yusuf and Ali Mohamed Gedi and imposed its rule over most of Somalia. Now the Ethiopian army has restored Abdullahi and Ali to power. They, in turn, have not only endorsed the Ethiopian invasion and occupation of Somalia but have also given their full support to US air strikes, ostensibly aimed at Al Qaeda suspects and bases in the country. Though Ethiopia, with US backing, appears to be in control of the situation at the moment, it is doubtful if it will be able to establish a viable, workable government with total jurisdiction over the whole of Somalia. The UIC has already begun re-grouping and is determined to launch a guerilla war to regain its lost power. Like a lot of Somalis, it views the Abdullahi-Ali leadership as a "puppet government" that is servile to a foreign invader that had fought two wars against Somalia in the late 70s and early 80s. Because Ethiopia is regarded as a Christian state - though more than 40% of the population is Muslim - resistance to Ethiopian occupation is going to assume an even sharper edge. Since the US is also militarily involved - and US intervention has an unpleasant history behind it - one can expect Islamic resistance to reach a crescendo. The ensuing strife and conflict will guarantee that Somalia remains trapped in the turmoil that has plagued the blighted land for more than 15 years. Seen from this perspective, the UIC had at least brought a degree of law and order to most of Somalia in the six months that it was in power. Using Islam as a rallying point, it managed to unite the warring clans which have been the Achilles heel of Somali politics for so long. The UIC also began to adopt some measures against corruption and abuse of power. But its rigid, dogmatic adherence to an atavistic vision of a virtuous Islamic society alienated quite a lot of Somalis. Like so many other Islamic movements of a similar orientation, it adopted a "prohibit and punish" approach to issues pertaining to personal morality. Nonetheless, even its critics acknowledge that apart from its ability to restore law and order, the UIC was determined to protect Somali independence and sovereignty. It was this assertion of independence on the part of the UIC, which, in the ultimate analysis, piqued the US government. Indeed, right from the beginning of the Cold War era, the US had, on various occasions, tried to thwart any attempt by any group, religious or secular, in Somalia and in the whole of the Horn of Africa, to pursue policies that were independent of US interests in the region. Invariably, it would accuse such a group of being "pro Soviet Union" and subvert its position. After the end of the Cold War, the US sought to use its superpower status in a unipolar world to exercise total dominance over the Horn. Its military intervention in Somalia in 1992 under the guise of the United Nations was part of that endeavor. It failed when Somali militias shot down two US helicopters in October 1993 in the famous "Black Hawk Down" incident that left 18 US servicemen dead. Now the Bush administration is trying once again to bring Somalia under its control. Why is the US so set on controlling Somalia and the Horn of Africa? The primary reason is strategic. The Horn provides access to the Red Sea and is a vital link to the Indian Ocean. It explains why the US has an aircraft carrier, the USS Eisenhower, in the region and a military base in Djibouti. But there is also the question of oil. A 1991 World Bank study of the petroleum potential of eight African states for instance " put Somalia (and Sudan) at the top of the list of prospective commercial oil producers". It should also be remembered that before Somalia plunged into chaos in 1991, American oil giants such as Conoco, Amoco, Chevron and Phillips were involved in oil explorations in an areaÊ covering nearly two-thirds of Somalia. It is mainly because of these two reasons that the Bush Administration does not want an independent minded Islamic group in charge of Somalia. Such a group, needless to say, would not dance to Washington's tune. Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is president of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST). Comments: feedback@thesundaily.com http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=16864 Somalia: An Oily Cliché
by David Barouski
| February 23, 2007
Today, it is a reflexive cliché to claim the United States (U.S.) is off on another oil-acquisition conquest anytime they invade an Arabic nation. In the case of Somalia, the cliché may neverless be true. While undoubtedly, the U.S. and its Ethiopian proxy conqured Somalia and “liberated” it from the clutches of Al-Qaeda primarily for geostrategic reasons (possible launching point to attack Iran, more friendly territory close to Arabic Sudan, more ports under their control, a possible regional base for the AFRICOM command post, potential launching points to protect the Strait of Hormuz [the primary shipping point of Middle Eastern oil], etc), Somalia is awash in unspoken oil and provides a tantalizing business opportunity.
Perhaps We Had Better Start From the Beginning… The story begins in 1990, just prior to the horrible famine of almost Biblical porportions that claimed thousands of innocent lives in Somalia. Mohamed Said Barre was in charge of the country. Barre signed of nearly two-thirds of his country to Conoco, Amoco, Chevron, and Phillips (this was prior to the Conoco-Phillips merger). Unfortunately for them, Barre was overthrown by Mohammed Farah Aideed of the rival Hebr Gedr clan in January 1991 and launched a civil war shortly thereafter. After Aideed started the civil war, the oil giants were unable to work their concessions for two reasons. One, the constant fighting, robbery, and pirating off the coast made it impossible. Second, it was technically illegal because Somalia did not have a recognized government. Since Somalia was run by a that it was illegal to do business with, the oil companies were out of luck. Either the U.S. had to legitimize Aideed in the eyes of the international community or remove him. Either way, the fighting had to stop. As one of his last acts as President, George H.W. Bush (who owned oil concessions across the Gulf of Aden in Marib, Yemen via Hunt Oil) sent the first wave of U.S. soldiers to Somalia to officially help deliver food to starving Somalis. Meanwhile, U.S. Special Envoy to Somalia Robert Oakley kept in daily contact with Aideed from December 1992 to May 1993. He was unsuccessful in his negotiations to end the fighting. President Bill Clinton then resorted to “Operation Restore Hope.” Conoco’s office in Mogadishu served as a de facto U.S. Embassy for the landing Marines after the original building was shelled and looted. Mr. Oakley and Marine General Frank Libutti wrote a letter of commendation to Conoco Somalia’s General Manager Raymond Marchand thanking him for his service. After a series of unsuccessful assassination attempts by U.S. forces, the Somalis struck back during a U.S. raid in the infamous “Blackhawk Down” incident (the U.S. Army dubbed it the “Battle of the Black Sea” while the Somalis’ called it “Maalinti Rangers” [Day of the Rangers]) on 3-4 October, 1994 that claimed the lives of 18 Americans and one Malaysian soldier. President Clinton pulled out of Somalia and the place was left to its own devices while the U.S. cultivated relationships with Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, Djibouti’s President Hassan Gouled, and Eritrea’s President Isaias Afewerki. Aideed was assassinated in 1996 by Osman Hassan Ali Atto.
Flash Forward…. Puntland had some lucrative
oil concessions, but the turnover of governments
left most of the contracts null and void. The
companies also faced a legal problem. Since
Puntland was not its own autonomous state, the
companies had to deal with the central government in
order to do business. The problem was…there was no
central government entity. That needed to be
changed. Somalia began toying with creating a government in 2001. Indeed, the French oil giant TotalElfFina signed an agreement with the Transitional Government for a concession in southern Somalia. After lots of jockying for power between the clans, the first government plan was signed in July 2003. Kenya was overseeing the process and the federal charter was signed in September 2003. Fighting broke out again in 2004, particularly in the south, and it reached Mogadishu by the end of May. As a result, the Somali Government was in exile in Nairobi. Despite the chaos, parliament members were sworn in during August 2004. They voted Abdullahi Yusuf (from the Darod clan, which is not liked in Mogadishu) president. Mr. Yusuf is a career soldier who served as Somalia’s mlitary attaché to the Soviet Union. When the U.S. backed Barre’s rise to power, Mr. Yusuf refused to turn on his Soviet Allies and was imprisoned. After he was released, he took part in a failed coup attempt on Said Barre. He fled to Kenya and befrended the Ethiopians. He later returned to northern Somalia and ran Puntland since its independence in 1998, making him a valuble ally to U.S. oil interests if he could shed his communist-supporting background. In December 2004, Ali Mohammed Gedi was appointed the Prime Minister. He hails from the Abgaal sub-clan of Mogadishu's Hawiye clan, one of the two largest clans in the country. The new government relocated to Mogadishu and by May 2005, Mohammed Qanyare Affrah, Osman Ali Atto, and Muse Sudi Yalahow united their militias as a de facto government army. By late 2005, the government’s transition process was derailed. Some factions were not happy the largest clans possessed all the power positions. President Yusuf and Prime Minister Ghedi both survived assassination attempts and retreated back to Kenya. By October 2005, the Transitional Government was purchasing large amounts of arms from Yemen and arming allied clans to defend Mogadishu and Baidoa to the south. Ethiopia was also suppling the Transitional Government with weapons. Contemporary History From the beginning of 2006 until July, fierce fighting between rival clans and political movements occurred. It culminated with the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) seizing control of Mogadishu, and in effect, the country, though most of the Transitional Government was still located in Baidoa. While Eritrea armed the UIC, the U.S. unsuccessfully backed the opposing forces, called the Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism (ARPC). The so-called warlords leading the ARPC, Mohamed Dheere, Bashir Raghe, and Mahamed Qanyare, had been spying for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) years. A U.S. diplomat at the Nairobi Embassy was even fired for criticizing the CIA’s policy. Once again, U.S. business interests were thwarted and the UIC’s leader, Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, was already on the U.S.’ official terrorist list for heading al-Itihaad al-Islamiya, a group supposedly linked to Al-Qaeda during the 1990s, making it illegal for them to do business with his regime. “Slick” Business Deals Beginning in 2005, Prime Minister Gedi demanded all business proposals go through the Transitional Government. He forbade anyone to approach the local administrations in Puntland, but he was willing to allow business there provided he approved of it. The Australian firm Range Resources Limited signed an agreement with the government of Puntland for exclusive rights to all their minerals, including oil, lead, zinc, copper, iron, manganese, tin, beryl, tantalum, niobium (columbium), uranium, coal, and gypsum. Range Resources obtained permission to exploit the land from Puntland President Mohamud Muse Hirse on 18 October, 2005, and from Prime Minister Gedi on 2 November 2005. They are also bidding to buy addition consessions from the Korea National Oil Corporation (KNOC). Range Resources is run by Non-Executive Chairman Sir Samuel Kwesi Jonah. Sir Jonah is a Board Member of: Lonmin, the Commonwealth African Investment Fund (Comafin), Transnet Limited, Anglo-American Platinum Corporation Limited, the Ashesi University Foundation, Equinox Minerals (Chairman), the uranium-producing nuclear power company UraMin Incorporated (Chairman), Anglo-American Corporation, Moto Goldmines Limited, Scharrig Mining (Chairman), Sierra Rutile Limited (Chairman), Sierra Resources Holding, Titanium Resources Group, Copper Resources Corporation (with George Arthur Forrest and George Andrew Forrest), Standard Bank Group of South Africa, Bayport Holding Limited, Transnet Limited, Equator Exploration Limited in Nigeria and São Tomé – Príncipe (with Baronness Chalker), and Mittal Steel (currently in the proverbial hot seat for a contract they signed with the government of Liberia). He is a Advisory Council member of the U.N. Secretary General's Global Compact, South African President Thabo Mbeki's International Investment Advisory Council, the African Regional Advisory Board of the London Business School, First Atlantic Merchant Bank, Defiance Mining, Ghanian President John Kufuor's Ghana Investors' Advisory Council, President Obasanjo Nigerian Investors’ Advisory Council, and serves as a Presidential Advisor to President Mohamud Muse Hersi of the Somali state of Puntland. He also holds an honorary British knighthood, the Star of Ghana and several other international awards and titles. Meanwhile, Perth-based Ophir Energy seeks to drill in Somaliland. Ophir is led by Alan Stein and is 50%-owned by South Africa’s Mvelaphanda Holdings. Mvelphanda is run by Tokyo Sexwale and its Board of Directors includes Michael Beckett (former Chairman of Ashanti Goldfields, a company prevously run by Sir Jonah), and Bernard Van Rooyen (former director of the Canadian firm Banro Resources). Ophir was reportedly introduced to Somalia by Mvelaphanda’s partner Dr Andrew Chakravarty, who’s wife is a well-connected Somali national. Mr. Chakravarty’s Rova Energy Corporation acquired offshore concessions formerly belonging to Equitable Life Investment Company and its U.S. partner Somapetroleum. Ophir currently is a 75% shareholder of Rova. The Rest, as They Say, is History Somalia’s Transitional Government desired to keep Puntland as a part of the larger Somalia. This fact, coupled with several nations’ unwillingness to work with the UIC (who may or may not recognize the contracts) led to a need to restore the Transitional Government in Mogadishu and remove the UIC. This line of thinking was directly in line with the U.S., who wanted to control Somali for the aforementioned geostrategic reasons and also to prevent the nation from becoming a “terrorist safehaven.” The U.S. backed Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia to stamp out the UIC once-and-for-all. They also supplied air support and Special Forces soldiers to aid in the mission. The UIC was run into Kenya, where many of its leaders were arrested. Others fled into hiding in southern Somalia. The U.S. officially continues to hunt Al-Qaeda in Somali. They are pushing for an African peacekeeping force to be deployed in the nation as soon as possible. Unsurprisingly, two nations with a history of acting as U.S. proxies in the region answered the call. The Ugandan People’s Defense Force (UPDF) pledged two battalions to enforce the peace and train the Somali army. The U.S. has pledged to provide logistics support for Uganda,which likely will include airlift support. If the private military contractor Military Professional Resources Incorporated (MPRI) gets involved in the logistics like they have in Darfur, the context of U.S. involvement in Somalia could take on a whole new outlook, especially if counterinsurgency operations become the norm. MPRI offers a perfect opportunity to embed U.S. operatives to do the illicit bidding of the Pentagon the U.S. Armed Forces cannot. The Somali Government has
been reinstalled in Mogadishu and though violence is
constant in the city, the government has moved
forward. Many of the cabinet members are dual
citizens, with the majority coming from Canada.
Others are former warlords. The Deputy Prime
Minister is Hussein Farah Aideed, the son of the
late warlord Mohammed Farah Aideed. In contrast to
his father, Hussein is actually a naturalized
American citizen and a former U.S. Marine who served
in the Gulf War. He even served as a U.S. emissary
during Operation Restore Hope, where he met with his
father several times.
2. “The Oil Factor In Somalia,” Mark Fineman. Los Angeles Times. 18 January, 1993. 3. Bowden, Mark. “Blackhawk Down: A Story of Modern War.” New York, New York: Penguin Putnam Incorporated. 1999. 4. “UN: Arms Pouring Into Somalia,” Al-Jazeera. 8 October, 2006. 5. “U.S. Secretly Backing Warlords in Somalia,” Karen DeYoung, Emily Wax. The Washington Post. 17 May, 2006. Note: A confidential U.N. Security Council report revealed several armed Islamic groups armed and fought with the UIC, including Hezbollah and fighters from several Islamic nations including Saudi Arabia. 6. “Somalia: Fighting in the Shadows.” Jeffery Bartholet, Michael Hirsh. Newsweek. 5 June, 2006. Note: One of the planners for these types of intelligence operations was Steven Cambone’s Deputy Undersecretary of Intelligence at the Pentagon, General William “Jerry” Boykin, who is known for his anti-Islamic comments. Boykin commanded the Delta Force team deployed in Mogadishu in 1993. 7. “Profile: Somalia’s Islamist Leader,” Joseph Winter. BBC News. 30 June, 2006. 8. Range Resources Limited. “Exclusive Rights to All Minerals in Puntland.” Company Announcements Office. 5 October, 2005. 9. President Mohamud Muse Hirse. “Letter to Consort Private Limited and Mr. Tony Black.” Office of the President. 18 October, 2005; Prime Minister Ali Mohammed Gedi. “Letter to Puntland State of Somali and Vice President Hassan Dahir Mohamud. Offic of the Prime Minister. OPM/251/05. 2 November 2006. 10. “Minnows See Oil Seeping Out From Fractured State,” Eleanor Gillespie, Jon Marks. African Energy. Issue 100. 20 July, 2006. 11. Ibid. 12. State House of the Republic of Uganda. “’US to Provide UPDF Support to (sic) Somalia’ - Frazier.” Press Release. 29 January, 2007. 13. Confidential Source. 2007. 14. Kevin Sites. “Son of Aideed.” Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone. Yahoo News. 29 September, 2005. http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs1077. Appendix I: Documentation Letter from President Hirse to Consort Private Limited Letter from Prime Minister Gedi to the Government of Puntland Source: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=2&ItemID=12190 Warlordism, Ethiopian Invasion, Dictatorship, & America’s Role
by Abdi Ismail
Samatar | February 13, 2007
Genesis of the Problem The Somali saga began about 37 years ago when a military coup ousted the last democratically elected government on October 1969. Somalia which was up to that time Africa’s most democratic country succumbed to a military coup. Military rule undermined and ultimately destroyed the nascent democratic institutions as well as the functioning quasi-meritocratic public services. Moreover, the regime developed an elaborate sectarian system which further politicized genealogical difference between communities as it divided citizens into friendlies and enemies, and rewarded its allies while it punished whole communities it considered anti-regime. This war against many segments of the population eroded public confidence in state institutions and the rule of law became the rule of the man with the gun. The military regime turned the state into the people’s enemy and most denizens became estranged from public affairs. Disaffected Somalis failed to organize a national movement to remove the dictatorship from power. Instead they became the foot soldiers of estranged members of the elite whose agenda was driven by personal ambition rather than a national cause. Opposition members of the elite turned to force as their preferred method of confronting the regime and mobilized the population on the basis of genealogical identity rather than civic belonging or a political program. The net result of the opposition’s strategy was to play into the hands of the regime by adopting the same tactic. Such a genealogy based political mobilization also fractured the various elements of the elite into enemies rather than allies. As a result, the regime’s life span was extended for almost a decade due the weakness of the fragmented opposition. When the regime finally collapsed under its dead weight no national political front existed to hold the country together under one authority. The first Prime Minister of the post-military government instructed the remnants of the national army to surrender to the sectarian militias and this was in effect the final act of literally killing the Somali state. Warlords and Dictators as proxies With the collapse of the state in January 1991, Somalia became the first country in modern history to become stateless. Consequently, lawlessness gripped the country and roaming militias terrorized the population. A little over a year after the regime disintegrated, violent confrontations developed between two competing factions in Mogadishu which ultimately led to one of them using food as a weapon against vulnerable population in southwestern region of the country in the vicinity of Baidoa. Farmers in the region were unable to cultivate their fields due to the fear induced by gangs and with warlords blocking food shipments to the region thousands of people began to slowly waste away. By the time the news media took note of the problem an awful famine was in full swing and tens of thousands of people were deliberately condemned to death through starvation. The United Nations which had a small contingent of peace-keepers was unable to clear bandits off the roads in order to deliver food aid to the needy. Life conditions became so ghastly that the first President Bush was moved to act and ordered thousands of American troops to enter Somalia in order to open the roads so emergency food aid can urgently get through to the people. The troops were able to accomplish this task with relative ease and as a result tens of thousand of lives were saved. By contrast, rebuilding Somalia’s government from scratch was more difficult, even under the best of circumstances, but the US/UN force had ill-defined mandate and solicited bad advice regarding the causes of Somalia’s disintegration. American/UN agenda of rebuilding the government was incoherent and led to a fiasco in which 18 American soldiers were killed by the militias of one of the warlords of Mogadishu. By then a new American President, Clinton, was so shaken by this singular event that he evacuated US forces from Somalia. Other nations who had contributed troops to the campaign and the UN followed and Somalia was left to the warlords. Warlord terror became the order of the day since 1995 and numerous attempts to form a national government failed. A most promising effort in this regard was in the neighboring state of Djibouti where representatives of nearly all Somali civil society groups were invited in 1999 excluding warlords. The conference successfully led to the establishment of a Transitional National Government (TNG). However, the Ethiopian government which had supported many of the warlords, particularly Mr. Abdullahi Yusuf, and supplied them with weapons over the years was not happy about the prospect of a civic order and worked against it from the start. The combination of Ethiopian sabotage and Somali leaders’ incompetence and venality destroyed this precious chance. At one point the Ethiopian Foreign Minister told the TNG’s Foreign Affair chief that Ethiopia will be able to support the Somali government on the condition that their ally, Mr. Yusuf, was appointed as prime minister. The Ethiopian minister was not pleased when he was told that the responsibility to appoint and confirm the PM rested with the president and parliament. In the meantime, Ethiopia used its diplomatic influence in Africa and elsewhere to call for yet another Somali reconciliation conference with the pretext of forming an “inclusive” government while it continued to supply the warlords with weapons. The proposal was accepted by the Intergovernmental Agency on development (IGAD) and there started another reconciliation process in which the mediators (Kenya and Ethiopia) openly favored the warlords. After two years of pretentious negotiations the conference was brought to a conclusion without any reconciliation among Somalis. The Ethiopian government successfully attained its goals of wasting the remaining time of the TNG’s tenure, enabled the warlords to appoint more than two-thirds of the members of parliament, and finally succeeded in having its clients selected as president and prime minister. American policy, during the long two years of negotiations in Kenya, was characterized by indifference at best and tacit support for warlords’ domination of the conference. In the main, the US representatives in Kenya watched the process from the sidelines and seemed disgusted with the quality of the output in the form of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG). For nearly two years after the formation of the TFG the American government remained disinterested in the affairs of the TFG. Instead it financed the formation of “anti-terror alliance” which consisted of the very warlords who have tormented the population for over a decade. America’s objective in supporting the warlords was to hound three people accused of being involved in the attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 and who were presumed to be hiding somewhere in southern Somalia. The warlords’ contract with the CIA also included capturing or killing those who were considered radical Islamicists. America’s warlord project backfired as the majority of Mogadishu’s population sided with the Muslim leaders and routed the warlords. American policy makers panicked with the formation of the Union of Islamic Courts (UICs) and the liberation of Mogadishu and surrounding region from the tyranny of the warlords. Shortly after UICs took over Mogadishu senior American policy makers began to speak about the “internationally legitimate” government of Somalia and actively used America’s diplomatic and other resources to bestow respect on what it previously considered decrepit operation. Meanwhile, Ethiopia activated its propaganda machine and accused the courts of trying to establish a fundamentalist regime which it claimed will endanger its security despite the fact that Somalia did not have an army. It immediately dispatched a “protection” force for its client Somali government holed in the regional center of Baidoa. As the Courts spread their reach into most parts of southern Somalia, Ethiopia increased its troop presence in Baidoa into several thousand heavily armed units. The US government encouraged this invasion and used its diplomatic muscle to shield Ethiopia from international criticism. The united American-Ethiopian propaganda machine completed the demonization of the courts as a fundamentalist organization in cahoots with Al Qaida. This joint effort led to US government sponsoring a resolution at the Security Council, 1725, which mandated the deployment of an African Union force in Somalia aimed at protecting the TFG and stabilizing the country. Other countries in the Security Council insisted and prevailed that those countries who share a border with Somalia must not be part of the African force. America and Ethiopia were worried that the Courts might overrun their client in Baidoa before the African Union force was in place. Consequently, Washington gave Ethiopia the green light to take on the Courts and openly invade Somalia, contrary to the tenets of the UN Security Council Resolution. Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia was accomplished four weeks after the UN resolution was passed in violation of two UN Security Council Resolutions. Attempts by some members of the Security Council to demand Ethiopian withdrawal was blocked by the American government. While most analysts knew that America was implicated in the invasion, it was the use of American airpower against villages in Southern Somalia in early January 2007 that confirmed how deeply the US was involved. About 73 nomadic individuals and their livestock were killed by the air raid and no one openly condemned this aggression, including the AU. More recently, it has been discovered that American, British, and hired mercenaries supported the Ethiopian invasion. Supplicant Tyranny versus Autonomous Legacy Somalia’s “internationally legitimate” government came to Mogadishu, the Somali capital, onboard Ethiopian military helicopters and guarded by Ethiopian troops. The Ethiopian invasion brought back the warlords who were defeated by the Courts and the latter took over their former fiefdoms. Some of Mogadishu’s roads are once again punctuated with checkpoints manned by young thugs. It is not certain how long the warlords and their fiefdoms will last but it is clear that insecurity has returned to the city and the country. The declaration of martial law by the TFG on January 13, 2007 gives utmost power to the TFG president who is known for his clanistic behavior and dictatorial practices. Such leadership does not bode well for the city and the country, and is unlikely to lead to just peace and stability. The imposition of martial law (the troops enforcing this law are Ethiopian) means that the TFG is no longer a government of reconciliation, if it ever was, as this act forbids public meetings and citizens’ attempts to organize political campaigns to challenge the TFG. Subsequently, the TFG ordered that the major radio and TV stations in the capital cease their operation. This draconian law muzzles freedom of expression and association, and is therefore a throw back to the days of the old military dictatorship. Finally, the Ethiopian occupation force and the militias of the warlords have begun to scour the city for people who were opposed to their agenda and others suspected of being against the regime in Ethiopia such as Oromo refugees. The hunt is on and more bloodshed can be expected. Ethiopian military contingents continue to abduct businessmen, professional, and others who are opposed to the TFG and the invasion, from their homes in the dead of night. Senior leaders of the TFG and the majority of MPs are people not known for their public management skills and high ethical standards. Consequently, Somalis can not expect political relief from these leaders who are supplicants of the Tigray regime in Addis Ababa. The Union of Islamic Courts has ceased to exist as an effective organization and their last refuge in the acacia forests and swamps of south-eastern Somalia was devastated by air raid and shelling of American and Ethiopian military forces. It was clear that the Courts made serious strategic mistakes over the last three months of their tenure induced by the haughtiness of their military wing. Among these blunder were their rigid religious rhetoric and interpretation of Islamic texts, and the absence of serious and effective engagement with credible nationalist and skilled people. But the most damaging affair was their military hot-headedness. Such blind miscalculation suggest that the courts will not recover as an organization, but the message that earned them so much respect and following among the Somalis is more salient today than ever before. Among the principals they articulated were: Somalia’s independence, freedom from warlord terror, justice, and respect for the Islamic faith. Whatever were the shortcomings and mistakes of the Islamic Courts, they certainly had an independent mind which was not subservient to other countries or leaders. During their brief tenure the Courts began a process of returning looted property to their rightful owners using Islamic law and without advice from expensive outside consultants. Once the announcement of the restitution policy was announced people came from other regions of the country and from overseas to reclaim their properties. In addition, they nullified the clanist 4.5 formula and articulated the importance of a unified citizenry. The TFG has yet to make any declaration regarding any of these matters or any other vital issue central to reconciliation. Further, the Courts acted as independent Somali leadership which is in sharp contrast with the Ethiopian domination of the TFG. This comparison between the two reminds citizens of the country an earlier time when Somali authorities were accountable to their people and had an autonomous Somali centered domestic and foreign policy. Two interrelated principals that guided the Courts will have far reaching consequences for the future of the Somali people and their polity. These anchors were common citizenship unmarred by sectarian and clanistic identity, and Islamic values of justice and inclusion. One of the first things that attracted a majority of the population’s support was the courts’ emphasis on faith and justice and the containment of tyranny. Islam as a foundational principal of community affairs easily dovetailed with common Somali citizenship regardless of genealogical pedigree and that attracted popular support. These twin principals contradict the transitional charter which the warlords wrote in Nairobi and that marginalizes both of these values. The charter grounds public affairs on genealogy rather than common citizenship. Thus, citizens are divided into 4.5 clan units and all public institutions are staffed on the basis of such arithmetic. The immediate and long term consequence of this strategy is to balkanize citizenship and community. Such compartmentalized political order is driven by rent-seeking (corruption) rather than providing an efficient service to the citizens, and has no chance of leading to political stability and economic development. America’s Pledge: A Sectarian Dictatorship Finally, the American-endorsed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia and the imposition of sectarian warlord-dominated government on the country are unlikely to lead to a democratic development. The U.S. government’s absurd support for the warlords in Somalia and an Ethiopian government that is at war with its own people and American leaders’ anti-Islamic orientation has deepened that population’s antipathy towards the USA. America’s instrumental collaboration with other people’s terrorists (states and non-state actors) has undermined the purchase of its democratic rhetoric. In essence, the hallmark of America’s bankrupt policy is the conspicuous gulf between its democratic rhetoric and its support for thugs, warlords, tyrants, and venal politicians in the Horn of Africa and elsewhere. In the minds of most people in the region American foreign policy and practice has become synonymous with dictatorship and arrogance, and most people believe that those are the core values of the America government. Consequently, the US government has lost the hearts and minds of the Muslim people all over. America’s gifts to the Somali people in the last few years have been warlords, an Ethiopian invasion, and an authoritarian, sectarian and incompetent government. Recent discussions of a broad-based government and a reconciliation conference based on the TFG model will not deliver legitimacy for the occupation or produce the necessary peace and common Somali agenda. Supporters of the proposed conference to be held in Mogadishu can not seriously expect a genuine agreement since the capital is under Ethiopian occupation and is dominated by the sectarian militias of the TFG leadership. Participants of such a conference will be handpicked by the Ethiopian occupiers and their clients and therefore will be charade. The alternative positive sum game is a civic centered program which does not seem to be on the cards for now, but this is the only avenue to reconciliation, and through which the people’s hearts and minds could be won and which might eliminate all types of terror. Source: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=2&ItemID=12115 Somaliaby Ignacio Ramonet | February 18, 2007 THE United States, heavily engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq in its global war on terror, is now fighting on a third front in Somalia (1). Washington assembled an anti-terrorist coalition in the Gulf of Aden in 2001 and it is clear from recent air raids and the deployment of US battleships that it regards the Horn of Africa as part of the theatre of operations in its battle against al-Qaida.
It is up against the Union of Islamic Courts, funded by Mogadishu traders who had had enough of Somalia's warlords and their multiple abuses. Union forces drove the warlords out of Mogadishu last June and began to bring order to Somalia after nearly 15 years of chaos.
The US takes a narrow view of the fight against terrorism. It had backed the warlords and was not prepared to accept the new order, especially as the Islamic Courts were rumoured to be receiving aid from Iran. The US had run a programme of military assistance to Christian Ethiopia since 2002 and the Pentagon encouraged it to launch an offensive against Somalia, providing aerial reconnaissance and satellite surveillance support.
The Ethiopian campaign was a blitzkrieg: the areas held by the Islamic Courts were occupied within a week, Mogadishu was taken on 28 December 2006 and 20,000 Ethiopian troops are now deployed in Somalia. The US-led International Somalia Contact Group, set up last June, met in Nairobi, Kenya, in January and called for the proposed United Nations peacekeeping force to be sent in urgently. So far only Ethiopia and Uganda have agreed to send troops. Washington has agreed to grant $16m in aid to the interim Somali president, Abdullahi Yusuf, as well as humanitarian aid and a further $24m, $14m of which is to be allocated to the peacekeeping force. The Bush administration has accused the Somali Islamists of sheltering terrorists Fazul Abdullah Muhammad and Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan, involved in the 1998 attacks on the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
Ayman al-Zawahiri, the al-Qaida number two, responded by calling on Islamist fighters to resist: "I appeal to my Muslim brethren everywhere to respond to the call for jihad in Somalia. The real battle will begin by launching your campaigns against the Ethiopian forces." He recommended "ambushes, mines and suicide bombs" and urged the Islamists to employ the tactics used by insurgents fighting US-led forces in Afghanistan and Iraq (2).
Abulrahim Ali Modei, spokesman for the Islamic Courts, claims his movement has not lost the battle (3). His men have regrouped south of the Juba river, on the border with Kenya, in a zone where the Ethiopians and US special forces have been pursuing the Islamists with backup from AC-130 fighter aircraft based at Djibouti. The capture of Kabul in 2002 and Baghdad in 2003 did not solve the problems of the Taliban or Iraq, and the capture of Mogadishu by the Ethiopians has not solved Somalia's problems. They are just beginning. ________________________________________________________
(1) Or possibly a fourth front. Bush declared that Lebanon was "the third front in the global war on terror" when Israel launched its offensive against Hizbullah in August 2006.
(2) BBC News, 5 January 2007.
(3) International Herald Tribune, 4 January 2007
Translated by Barbara Wilson
________________________________________________________
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © 1997-2007 Le Monde diplomatique Source: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=2&ItemID=12157 |
The American
sponsored UN Security Council Resolution on
Somalia in December 2006 prepared the grounds
for an Ethiopia invasion of Somalia. This
resolution authorized the deployment of an
African Union force, excluding Ethiopia, Kenya,
and Djibouti from participating in the force due
to their conflict of interest in Somali affairs.
Despite such a clear instruction from the
Security Council the US government gave Ethiopia
the green light to invade Somalia. The aborted
visit to Mogadishu, under Ethiopian occupation,
by the America Assistant Secretary of State for
African Affair, US air bombardment of southern
Somali villages, and the confirmation that US
and UK forces and mercenaries have worked with
Ethiopia over the last year all attest to
Washington’s collusion with Addis Ababa from the
start. These American direct actions and those
of its proxy once more demonstrate the disregard
the world’s dominant power has for international
law. Such an affront sends the message that
might is right no matter how illegal its
application. In addition to the
American/Ethiopian aggression against Somalia,
warlords who have terrorized the Somali people,
before the Union of Islamic Courts drove them
out, have returned with Ethiopian blessing.
These developments completely discredit
America’s claim of being the friend of democrats
in the Third World. This short editorial
examines four concerns: a) why the American
government endorsed Ethiopia’s illegal invasion;
(b) why does it support the deeply sectarian and
corrupt Somali transitional government which it
loathed until recently; (c) why is it silent
about the return of the warlords on the backs of
Ethiopian tanks if its rhetoric on democracy has
any validity; (d) and what all of this might
mean for the Somali people and American image
in the region.